275th Copley medal

[mfgoode]

"Stephen Hawking, Lucasian Professor of
Mathematics
at the University of Cambridge, has been [0]awarded the Royal Society's
275th Copley medal for his contribution to cosmology and theoretical
physics. Other notables to receive the award, established by Stephen
Gray
in 1731 'For his new Electrical Experiments', include Charles Darwin,
Louis Pasteur and Albert Einstein. In his remarks, Professor Hawking
reiterated [1]his previous comments that man must colonize other
planets.
The medal presented to Professor Hawking was sent into space onboard
Space Shuttle Discovery and spent some time on the International Space
Station in July of this year. Hawking has expressed an interest in
going
into space and commented, 'My next goal is to go into space, maybe
[2]Richard Branson will help me.'"

Links:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/1...eut/index.html


:

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by mfgoode

In his remarks, Professor Hawking
reiterated [1]his previous comments that man must colonize other
planets.

No disrespect to professor Hawking, but we haven't shown ourselves to be even remotely capable of responsible stewardship of our home planet - the *last* thing we should be thinking about is exporting our "talents" to other worlds.

[mfgoode]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

No disrespect to professor Hawking, but we haven't shown ourselves to be even remotely capable of responsible stewardship of our home planet - the *last* thing we should be thinking about is exporting our "talents" to other worlds.

Well you have a point Ernst.
It is not the case of exporting our talents to other worlds but our very perpetuation of the human race is at stake: our very existence !

As I interpret, Evolution has no motive or direction for perpetuation. It works towards more complexity. At the same time there are ample examples of evolution going in the reverse direction- towards annihilation.

This was one of the points brought up at a religious meet with Richard Dawkins et.al. There were photos, in the thousands, of deformed babies at birth- evolution going haywire. We dont really know when this trend will take dominance.

As I see it there is no motive for existence in evolution. If we have to return to dust some day with no hope of a further existence then why bother.? It might as well be on Mars or another world. What does it matter?

But if we see the human race as more than evolved beings then it matters why we should propagate our race else where.

Beside my ethical belief, there is the scare of extinction by natural disasters
That is what Richard Hawking , himself an atheist, is afraid of.

Quote:" Sooner or later disasters such as an asteroid collision or a nuclear war could wipe us all out," said Professor Hawking, who was crippled by a muscle disease at the age of 21 and who speaks through a computerized voice synthesizer.

"But once we spread out into space and establish independent colonies, our future should be safe," said Hawking, who was due to receive the world's oldest award for scientific achievement, the Copley medal, from Britain's Royal Society on Thursday "

Very conflicting indeed!

Mally

[mfgoode]

Theoreticians are now debating whether the anthropic principle is right after all. Stephen Weinberg was an ardent advocate of this principle and his calculations seem to be more accurate then modern estimates.
Read the pro's and cons.

Why Are We Here? Theoreticians Debate the Fundamentals
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ic_debate.html

Mally

[Maybeso]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

No disrespect to professor Hawking, but we haven't shown ourselves to be even remotely capable of responsible stewardship of our home planet - the *last* thing we should be thinking about is exporting our "talents" to other worlds.

Actually Ernst, your point argues for us getting mostly off of our home planet, and dependent on artificial - i.e. replaceable - environments. I do feel we should restrict ourselves to airless moons and space itself. At least until we demonstrate better management by cleaning up Earth. Which would be an easier job with most of us in orbit.

Alas, even in that scenario there are limitless opportunities for inequality and abuse. But no native species/peoples to exploit, or pristine wilderness to plunder. And no cascading extinctions while lawyers argue over the meaning of "unnecessary harm" or other silliness.

Bruce