Re: [FH] Colonisation again (was Re: Sa'Vasku Colours)

On Wed, 24 May 2000, Beth Fulton wrote:

> G'day Tom,
> 
>  >or if there is, get rid of it. the first step in colonisation is
scouring
>  >the planet, the next is terraforming it :). not popular with the
greens,
>  >i'd imagine....
> 
> If we learnt anything from colonisation of our own world I'd hope the
first 
> think we did was send a lead team/probe to discern whether the life
was 
> hazardous or not, rather than just straight avoid or straight 'zap em
all'. 
> (Yes the cynic in me does realise how unlikely that is).

oh, i'm assuming that colonisation is preceeded by a fairly thorough
survey by scientific types - if whole ecosystems were wiped out without
a
chance for study, scientists would go on strike. and, of course, there's
always the chance for a little bioprospecting, and the transnationals
would never pass that up :).

>  >no but seriously folks, my thinking is that if a planet has native
life,
>  >we won't colonise it. ....
>  >instead, we'd settle dead worlds....
> 
> I'm curious, what do you mean by dead worlds? Ones which could easily 
> support life and just don't or ones that don't have life because they
can't 
> (anymore or yet)?

the former: with the same insolation, gravity and elemental abundances
as
earth (more or less), but where life hasn't emerged. i mentioned later
on
in that post that i thought such worlds would be extremely rare, life
being the force of nature it is.

> Besides that I think you're setting a pretty stiff task 
> if you 'disallow' use of existing ecosystems (assuming they're even
part 
> way compatible with us), based on my current understanding (and a
little 
> supposition) I'd reckon most planets that can support life will
already 
> have some examples of it by the time we get there.

i strongly agree.

> OK it may not be 
> possible to coexist with it because we have no 'common ancestory' on
the 
> flip side it may be very possible that our lack of ancestory means we
can 
> live side by side with little or even no impact on each other than
resource 
> use (the most obvious being space, though any others aren't a given 
> depending on how the system is set up). There are two ways I can think
of 
> right now where this may happen...
> 1) The physiology and resultant interdependencies, resources and 
> interactions the organisms display are literally so alien that we can
both 
> be in the same environment without effecting each other -

space - and with it the right to capture sunlight - can't really be
shared, and is the basic common currency of all life on terran-like
worlds, i would guess.

> say, for 
> instance, their life was based on silica (I'm not sure if that idea is
now 
> out of favour, but silicon used to be thought of as a viable
alternative 
> for carbon based on chemical properties such as the way they form
lattices) 
> then there is nothing to say that our carbon based life will even need
the 
> same things as them beyond common needs for space (and most likely
liquid 
> water).

i get the impression that silicon can only do biology at very high
temperatures, where it gets the ability to form double bonds and do
other
useful things with its electrons. i'm not entirely sure about this,
though. i do know that there isn't anywhere near as much chemistry that
you can do with silicon as with carbon, so i would guess it's not as
good.
i don't think there are any other serious contenders for the basic
element
of life, although i have sometimes wondered about nitrogen-phosphorous
chemistry.

> 2) There may be vast tracks that are unexploited as nothing has
evolved to 
> use it, for instance (and if there's someone with a better knowledge
of the 
> early epochs than I please correct me here) say we came upon a planet
that 
> was in the same condition Earth was 500 million years ago, our land
based 
> needs wouldn't necessarily have any impact on the ecosystem as
everything 
> would still be in the seas, even if it was like 375 million years ago
you 
> still wouldn't have much animal life to compete with on the land.

well, apart from our impact on the atmosphere and water cycle, which
might
be considerable. this does seem like a good idea, though.

> OK you'll 
> probably have some purists who advocate leaving it alone, but there's 
> nothing to say that society and decision makers will agree with them
at the 
> time and maybe that in itself leaves the way open for an interesting 
> faction for someone to play (the militant greens out to cleanse the
galaxy 
> of misguided contamination of nature...actually someone has come up
with 
> something similar if I remember correctly(??)).
> 
> Right now any alien life seems of so precious to us, but I figure as
we 
> know more about how common (or not) it is then our attitudes may well 
> change. If it turns out life is fairly common (and especially if all
the 
> nicest most resource rich planets are already taken) and if it also
turns 
> out that way can live with it (even if it requires a monthly dose of
some 
> or other drug to neutralise the killer laserlight mosquito reaction)
then 
> I'm guessing we'll just push right on in. Regardless of all our higher

> ideals the forces behind our evolution dictates that you can't pass up
a 
> resource if its staring you in the phase and we are really still ruled
by that.
> 
> Guess it would make for an interesting mosaic (and even more of a 
> competitive pressure between nations for the early sites) if you ended
up 
> with a mix of planets along the lines of "can live here at a push, but
must 
> build the ecosystem for yourself" + "everything we need and it isn't 
> deadly, its just like home" + "life but not as we know it, so you must
take 
> your pills every other morning or turn purple keel over and drop dead"
+ 
> "there's life there, but when we saw what it could do we ran like
hell, 
> built a huge wall around it and threw away the key... and we still get

> nightmares". Make for some interesting DS/SG scenarios if you landed
on the 
> wrong planet...
> 
> Sorry for the ramble, probably got a bit carried away (as usual).

rambling's good - i just wish i had the time to do it more myself 8(.

tom