When people think
about rocket ships and space exploration, they often imagine
traveling across the Milky Way, landing on mysterious planets and
even meeting alien life forms.
In reality, humans’
drive to get off Planet Earth has led to tremendous technological
advances in our mundane daily lives — ones we use right here at
home on terra firma.
I recently walked
through Boston’s Logan International Airport; a NASA display
reminded me that GPS navigation, anti-icing systems, memory foam and
LED lights were all originally created for space travel. Other
inventions NASA science has created include the pacemaker,
scratch-resistant lenses and the solar panel.
These types of
advancements are one of the most important reasons I am hoping our
next U.S. president will try to jump-start the American space program
— both privately and publicly. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear
any of them are talking about the issue. But they should be. As we
enter the transhumanist age — the era of bionic limbs, brain
implants and artificial intelligence — space exploration might once
again dramatically lead us forward in discovering the most our
species can become.
Already SpaceX, led
by CEO Elon Musk, has announced it will be tackling an unmanned trip
to Mars in 2018. The hope, of course, is that within the next 10-15
years, astronauts will be stepping foot upon the red planet, too. If
indeed, humans can make it to Mars — and I’m sure we will —
much new tech would have to be developed for the mission. It’s safe
to say much of that tech would likely be something useful for us
eventually on Earth, as well.
For example, just to
even live in space for the journey — it’ll take approximately six
months to travel one-way to Mars — new ways of sleeping, recycling
breathable air and preserving foods and drink would likely have to be
developed.
Furthermore, the
technology to withstand massive dust storms, freezing temperatures
and a hostile environment on Mars would require new space suits and
maybe even totally new materials. Innovation like this will benefit
everyone — even if we don’t know all the uses yet for such
radical tech.
Of course, there are
other reasons for prompting a renewed and significantly larger space
program in America. One of the fundamental goals of my own
presidential campaign has been warning the world of the incredible
threat of existential risk.
The Atlantic
recently ran a story by Robinson Meyer that read:
At life-long
scales, one in 120 Americans die in an accident. The risk of human
extinction due to climate change — or an accidental nuclear war —
is much higher than that. The Stern Review, the U.K. government’s
premier report on the economics of climate change, estimated a 0.1
percent risk of human extinction every year. That may sound low, but
it also adds up when extrapolated to century-scale. Across 100 years,
that figure would entail a 9.5 percent chance of human extinction.
I think most people
are totally unaware at how high the odds are that we screw up our
species’ very existence. It’s so high, that the newly written
Transhumanist Bill of Rights has a mandate for space exploration as
one of its key six points.
The facts of
existential risk are simple: We may not be able to indefinitely keep
the planet habitable, stop a super virus from killing everyone, avoid
a mile-wide asteroid from crashing into Earth, elude a warmongering
Terminator-like AI or circumvent blowing ourselves up with our 25,000
nuclear warheads — but we sure can get off this planet and create
cool new places to live safely in outer space.
The movie Elysium
recently showed a dystopic but technologically plausible space
habitat, where paradise is engineered in the skies — and not on
Earth’s land or water. Now, no one wants to be forced into this
scenario, but massive space habitats are worthwhile projects to
pursue — and they could be possible to build in as little as 15
years.
Mega-space habitats
would also make an easier launch base for space mining, an industry
booming with interest. Experts say it will soon be possible to mine
asteroids from space — some that are worth billions of dollars
each. Clive Thomson at Wired recently wrote that the asteroid Ryugu —
partially made of up of nickel, iron and cobalt — could be worth up
to $95 billion.
As a science
advocate, I’m strongly pro-space exploration from a private
industry point of view. But just as importantly, I also passionately
support a U.S. government-sponsored space program — one that gets
approximately 10 times the funding it gets now (I’d get that extra
money from our military budget, which is ridiculously oversized
anyway). That would be nearly $100 billion a year, or about 5 percent
of the U.S. 2016 Federal budget.
Generally, my libertarian-minded self doesn’t want the government too involved in much of anything, but because space exploration involves defending against existential risk and pursuing medical innovation for citizens, I’d advocate for the U.S. putting dramatically more resources into space exploration. This wouldn’t mean entirely relying on federal programs to push forward the space industry, but also on government partnering with or investing in private space companies.
Generally, my libertarian-minded self doesn’t want the government too involved in much of anything, but because space exploration involves defending against existential risk and pursuing medical innovation for citizens, I’d advocate for the U.S. putting dramatically more resources into space exploration. This wouldn’t mean entirely relying on federal programs to push forward the space industry, but also on government partnering with or investing in private space companies.
Sadly, Congress will
likely put up a fight against spending too much on peacetime space
exploration — they do have that habit of being boring and
shortsighted. So, perhaps the best way to grow America’s space
industry is to sell Congress on the amount of benefits our nation
might gain from a meaningful and dramatically enlarged space program.
Generally, politicians — those directly responsible for funding (or
not funding) NASA — see no upside for sending astronauts to space
except national pride.
But if Congress
could be convinced that national security against existential risk,
money from space mining and precious tech innovation for U.S.
citizens would be gained by supporting space exploration, then maybe
they would vote to enlarge NASA’s programs. This in turn would spur
both the private space industry as well as transhumanism tech that
makes all our lives better. This type of thinking should be a
priority for whoever ends up in Congress and the White House come
2017.
http://techcrunch.com/2016/05/18/space-exploration-will-spur-transhumanism-and-mitigate-existential-risk/