Knowing humanity, just being denied the ability to travel somewhere we can see will just guarantee we do whatever it takes to get there, even doing the previously-thought-impossible like FTL.

Speak for yourself! I was planning to go actually. Until all of this Hubble-bubble-toil-and-trouble brewed up. Oh well. Physicists, astronomers, cosmologists.... who needs 'em?

"... for the entirety of forever" I like that.

Accepting challenges and developing genes to surmount that challenges is how life works. Imagine billions of cells in humanity creating emerging drive to conquer space based on those priniciples alone,

100 billion light years? Bro. That's the current size of the observable universe. It shouldn't seem small to you under any circumstance. We cannot begin to even imagine half of half of half of half of half of half of half of half that distance. A *single light year* is 6 TRILLION miles. Do you know how far a trillion miles is? Now multiply that by 100 *billion*. That is not small compared to anything we can understand, and our perspective and size truly is the context here, no other perspective matters. We are the size we are.

Isaac Arthur did an episode on colonizing the galaxy at 1% light speed.

startships are meant to flyyyyyy

If we were smart we'd send word to said ships that got out sped or even refit them in flight. Would be pretty funny to send out a ship and have it cruising along only to run into an FTL ship from home bringing all the upgrades and resources it needs to get a move on. :)

There's an old DOS game from the 90's called 'Alien Legacy', where Earth sent out a bunch of seed ships, you're the captain of one of these ships, and you emerge from suspended animation to a message informing you that another ship was launched several years after yours, but since it's a more advanced design, it will be arriving a decade sooner, and the other captain is now your boss. Of course, as you explore the system you can't see any signs of the other ship's crew, or habitations, so now you're left with a mystery to solve. (Eventually you do discover what happened to them, it's not pretty.)

@@Commanderziff I remember playing this game for hours and hours in my childhood. It was a great game; a good story and excellent mix of exploration, colony building, resource management, etc

No way to tell what type of technologies or events which might increase our travels in the universe.... so the PBS space time video is just a theory based on conditions of light speed travel

@@NTJedi Agreed. One can fairly assume that some sort of FTL travel will be available in the far future, which will change how this works. Also, if you travel close to the speed of light, there is relativity as well.

@@michaelvedal1907the more I read into it the more I think locally going faster than light probably is actually impossible. But I do think eventually we’d be able to create a warp drive or even travel through higher dimensions

​@@bradysmith4405 Travelling through other dimensions is how we will travel faster than light.

@@beringstraitrailway physicists aren’t even sure if there really are higher dimensions though. So that’s iffy too.

We used to be a different species, we’ll become a new species at some point no matter what happens. It’s just evolution.

Cats

*Chat GPT quietly sitting in the corner*

@@somethinglikethat2176 And the reason suddenly becomes clear…

Brown people with 80iq.

Yeah, until Star Trek's subspace is found!

Yes, it's almost a guarantee that if we can't figure out FLT communication then any future civilisations in different star systems and galaxies will be completely independent and not a part of some galactic/universal empire.

Only because we have n’t figured out how to move faster than light. Everything we think is immutable always dissolves. Light speed may be hard to crack but we really don’t know anything at this point. We’ve only be a “technological” civilization for a nano second as far as the universe is concerned. We are a single cell civilization at best

unless we can use Quantum Entanglement for communication in the future, then, regardless of our speed or where the end point user is, we should be able to instantly communicate

@@richardvivian3665I hope you're correct about the _"Everything we think is immutable always dissolves."_ bit. Until relatively (which is just a *blink* before us within _"nano second as far as the universe is concerned"_ period) the humanity has been living as city-states, with the hopes for a given person traveling beyond the visible mountain ranges were slim. In contrast to that, we can finally travel much further than that, now with the currently emerging technologies we'll be able to comfortably travel between the planets in our solar system. Maybe in a few *blinks* from now the humanity+ _(420.69$/mo \s)_ will be actually planning their travels across galaxies.

That's why we need to continue to fund public television (and its progeny like this) so this type of free thinking is accessible to all. Let's not let the MAGAts destroy this, our public libraries, public education, public health and more.

@@AndrewPonti This channel has NOTHING to do with public television. It depends on patrons and other donors. It is as private as it can be!

@@afonsodeportugal Not True. This is a PBS show. Look it up.

@@mikemccormick6128 Matt has said many time that the channel relies on donations. It has always been its primary source of funding. Also, it is very inadvisable to rely on pubic funding, as that sort of thing always ends on wokeness. Is that what you want? That Matt starts to talk about feminism instead of cosmology?

@@afonsodeportugal All I'm saying is that the original source is PBS. The program originated on PBS. It is absolutely incorrect to say that this video is unconnected to PBS. I have no idea whether or not the channel is connected to PBS and I don't care. This video originally aired on PBS.

My thoughts exactly. If we are doomed to heat death, exactly how much fuel (matter) can we accumulate before the rest slips beyond our reach? How much time can we buy ourselves through artificial stars or fusion generators or black hole batteries before the end of days? How much time will our science grant us to rage against the dying of the light?

@@Russo-Delenda-Est I'm sure legions of pessimists will immediately pile in here to scream at me about how wrong this is, but since dark energy already violates the *first* law of thermodynamics I'm pretty confident we can in principle exploit that to prevent the heat death of our local part of the cosmos indefinitely. My concern is more about capturing more information, staying in touch with more of the universe that we'd otherwise never be able to hang out with again.

​@@Pfhorrest Iirc Issac Arthur had a video on this, "Fleet of Stars" I think it was called. As for avoid heat death, who knows? We can't begin to imagine what discoveries post-human intellects 100,000 years from now will have under their belts, much less the ones billions upon billions of years hence.

@@Russo-Delenda-Est " ... to rage against the dying of the light" Wow!! That's so poetic .. and ... ragey!! but in a non-agressive way... totally!!

@@Pfhorrest 1. I'm not a pessimist. 2. You *are* wrong. Dark energy does not break the first law of thermodynamics. The first law of thermodynamics does not apply, because of the symmetry breaking of spacetime as it expands. (Emily Noethers mathematical theorem on symmetry).

then support FTL research

@@kanishkchaturvedi1745 absolutely

I think Anton should have a discussion with PBS spacetime regarding the calculation of inhabitable planets at 8:57. ukposts.info/have/v-deo/l4SbqW18mImXzoE.html

For someone like me who did a first year uni physics course but knows nothing more advanced than that, it's the absolutely perfect level of information to get all the good stuff in there without getting so complicated that I get lost in the equations.

@@normalmighty Weird, because I'm in my 3rd year of physics and I still have trouble wrapping my head around some of this stuff sometimes.

@@bertberw8653 Oh don't get me wrong, it's challenging, but I feel like he doesn't spend nearly as long diving into the complex math of the issue than other creator's I've seen talking at this level. ...plus I kind of skimmed past the string theory stuff lol, those videos were cool, but I couldn't really follow it all past the deeply simplified summary explanations. Maybe one day I'll reach the point where I can follow why exactly we think string theory might be real, but for now I'm just trusting the PhD holders on that one.

@@bertberw8653 that's actually really good to hear. Now I don't feel so stupid for not understanding some of the stuff. Did you see the episode explaining the equations of the standard model lagrangian? Hilarious ... sad ...

@@richardconway6425 Yeah, I just accepted that I'm less intelligent than most people in my major 😂 the good part is that accepting my place made me feel less pressure, and now I know I can just graduate on my own pace and terms

Plot twist, it was only perfect for you in your version of the universe. In mine, you missed the upload completely.

It's great that PBS is able to work around your schedule

@@doubleRprodutions oh god, the ripple of entanglement hasn't reached you yet, tell me, what is the world like if I didn't get to the video on time?? 👀

You're all in my universe, where I have the top comment.

Unfortunately the laws of the universe disagree,we were born here and we'll die here

@@blizzard1198 so true, a catchy phrase won't bend the harsh reality

⁠@@blizzard1198you never know. 125 years ago we thought it would be impossible for a human to fly, or such an investment that they’d never see it happen. 60 years later they’re sending satellites into space. Laws (or rather our understanding of them) change over time. We find ways to use them to our advantage, or discover new ideas that allow us to circumvent them to a degree (a human on their own can never fly, but we can create machines based off of principles we discovered that do it for us, allowing us to reach the skies). Our 2 biggest enemies for getting off of Earth is time and ourselves. Time in that, how long do we have to get off this planet before a natural disaster wipes us out? Ourselves in that, nuclear war, pollution, over indulgence on resources etc., will stop us in our tracks. Or resigning ourselves to “it’s impossible” and never actually trying, whether we view it as futile or not. Until the day I die, I will believe it possible as we’ve accomplished the “impossible” time and time again.

I disagree we will travel faster then light for sure @@blizzard1198

Or extra dims

It's never aliens.

Until it is.

This is a cool idea for a science fiction story

@@johnducan2487 It's never aliens... until it's aliens

People generally fail to understand that the great attractor is just a point we can't observe because it's behind the galactic plane, it's nothing mysterious, and it's almost certainly just a dense region of space with a large cluster.

You're goddanm right

I bet he's just consulted GPT on the topic for this video

@@generaltheory He is GPT

say my name

@@generaltheory I just tried chatGPT. After some coaching it came up with: "It's also worth mentioning that there are theoretical concepts, such as wormholes or other forms of faster-than-light travel, that have been proposed in physics, although their existence and practicality are still largely speculative and beyond our current technological capabilities. In summary, while the Hubble sphere is a theoretical boundary based on our current understanding of the universe's expansion, its status as a hard limit for human expansion in space is still a topic of scientific debate and speculation, and our understanding of the universe may evolve in the future."

We already have the tech for 20%, it's just that it's currently banned. But treaties like that don't last forever, no treaty does, really. We've got far longer than humanity has already existed to decide to break the treaty and use the technology we already have, not even to mention invent new tech that's even better. I see no reason why that couldn't be realistic.

@@physics_hacker a trading that even North Korea Iran China follows? Could be I'm truly ignorant and don't know what treaty you are. Are you talking about one of those conspiracies Nazis on the moon, the Nazi Bell, or the Nazi base in Antarctica?

@@physics_hacker If we manage to create permanent settlements on other planets then they won't care about earth treaties. A cultural drift is guaranteed. Over a few thousand years they could even become a new sub species.

@Ein Kunde because it involves detonating nukes in space

@@physics_hackermoreover these speeds are achieved by slingshotting and I have seen an idea using rotating black holes almost along an interstellar highway

Yeah especially when within our life time the most we can hope for is literally making it to the closest planet around, not even the closest star :D

It's called Hybris... or doom.

scify movies are always full of plot devices. And people take those too seriously.

We also forget that aliens don't speak with a British accent.

@@gabor6259 True, they speak with American accent

Movies exist to tell a story. It is called science FICTION. Old Science fiction used to imagine new worlds and amazing new things, but modern sci fi is just dystopian nonsense

@@martiddy Of course they speak English with an American accent. Why else do you think they always land in the US.

. . . I think if we ever figure out how to edit whatever the holograph stuff us made of, we can make a bunch of those screwdriver things from Dr. Who and do whatever we want.

PBS Vitals said the Earth Month playlist is the following: ukposts.info/slow/PLzkQfVIJun2J5q9CIXPAlL95FSb0tJul7

Not looking too good

​​@@mbolez humanity is pretty resilient. Even if nuclear war happen, probability of human extinction is pretty small. It's just hold back human civilization for several century. Also who want to nuke Africa and South east Asia? Tropical climate is stable enough in nuclear war.

@@royk7712 I’m not only worried about nuclear war, I’m worried about super intelligence

We probably will 😔

@@royk7712 I don’t think you understand what’s going to happen. Once the climate collapses, we’re doomed. We’ll straggle along for a bit but when there’s no way to grow food, and all the advancements we’ve made no longer pertain because nobody still alive knows how to do anything at all, it’s the end.

Also for point 2, that there is no way of reversing it ourselves. Not that I think that it's likely we'll find a way to do that (honestly I feel like we're likely to cause some false vacuum decay catastrophe if we try) but it is an implied assumption.

All scientifically feasible ways of FTL drive requires to first go to the destination conventionally, so all limits mentioned here still apply. If you are thinking about FTL drives based on pure fantasy (like Star Trek or Star Wars), then any such science based speculation is pointless. After all, in fantasies, anything can happen.

if FTL is only possible within the "achieved" endpoints, we still will be able to communicate with all our "achieved" endpoints, which is a bit less depressing

I agree, I work as a pilot and often have the chance to overfly beautiful landscapes, but I feel my true experience of nature happens hiking ankles deep in the mud of the lowest valley rather than flying over the highest mountains. I don't think a lifetime is enough to explore the physical Earth, let alone the people, arts, philosophy...

Well I can tell you exactly what they receive, nothing. One second out from earth and nothing can catch up to them 😋

imagine the ship is just the same as information. The ship is traveling as fast as information can travel.

An excellent question, really! Actually, the unit of isolation at this epoch is a gravitationally-bound cluster of galaxies, not a single one. Like, we'll merge with Andromeda Galaxy, even though deep space between galactic clusters will expand meanwhile. Sometimes they say about “open superclusters,” which are “open” because they are not bound enough to counteract space expansion at some point. Galaxies in such supercluster may be _currently_ attracting each other, but that will change as space blows up. Laniakea is one of these, quite close to being gravitationally-closed, but computations currently say that it's not forever. Or maybe we fail to account for all its mass; that's unlikely but not impossible. There is also no distinction between a “cluster“ and a “supercluster.” This is a murky concept, evading definition; there is not an obvious way to point to any part of the superclusters which is “just a cluster.” More of a tradition of naming than an astrophysically useful concept. As for what happens later, in the far, far future, we know too little to tell. The big unknown in the ΛCDM, the Standard Cosmology model, is the dark energy, determined from the Λ constant that is in the very theory name, which appears to have a tiny positive value, causing accelerated expansion of space outside of gravitationally bound masses. This discovery was what the '98 Nobel Prize in physics had been awarded for. It's too weak to overcome tight gravitational binding, like lifting you from the Earth and hurtling into space. The big problem here, is that the term pops up from maths alone, as a constant when solving a differential equation-integrals are defined up to a constant. (x²)'=2x, as you know, but (x²+Λ)'=2x is also true; this is how this constant arises in the solution. Its value does not follow from any theory and may only be measured. But, even more unfortunately, that's all we know about the physical nature of codename “dark energy” or whatever _is_ that which it physically represents, and we know nothing at all about this. Is Λ really constant? How do we know? True, it comes from solving the trusty old, confirmed and re-confirmed Einstein's GR equations, but they aren't set in stone, they possibly may need a future correction for accumulating observations-or maybe for the largest scales. There is the Big Rip scenario, when everything gets pulled apart by the accelerating expansion of space: galaxies, stars, planets, mountains, humans, plushies, mice, lice, atoms and elementary particles. I follows from the FLRW solution to Einstein's GR equations, a specific one that describes a whole Universe. The solution includes a term a(t), which blows up to infinity in a finite time, mathematically, if Λ>0. But infinities are always suspicious. Will it hold down to the quantum level, between the louse and the atom on this rough scale? I'd be rather surprised it we could reasonably extrapolate it that far, to the realm dominated by quantum effects. Can we even apply the FLRW metric when the Universe will separate into isolated islands of galactic clusters? The metric is derived with an assumption that the Universe is homogeneous, which means mass is spread evenly everywhere in space; but is the Universe of scattered peas of clusters still _homogeneous enough_ to even use the FLRW solution? It looks close enough from afar, not so much if you look closer... The further apart the peas separate, the less homogeneous it becomes. The metric may require a correction because of this inhomogeneity to be applicable within an acceptable error. Maybe a corrected solution will avoid an infinite blow-up of its parameter? Yes, its doable, and there is even more than one... But how do we tell which one is correct, when we don't know what dark energy _is?_ Before we have a _physical_ understanding of what the Λ _means,_ beyond just “shut up an calculate,” any answer is uncertain. We don't know. It's one of the greatest unsolved problems in our understanding of gravity at the largest possible scale, that of the whole Universe. Another big problem is, we don't understand gravity at the subatomic scale, the elusive Quantum Gravity. It's experimental study is far beyond the power of any possible particle accelerator on Earth; it may reveal itself only in truly magnificent cosmic-scale phenomena. But, even worse, there is as yet still no theory that we could try to confirm or refute by observations. And the third unknown, although unlikely, is a possibility that we don't describe gravity accurately at a single galaxy scale: is the dark matter really matter that only gravitates but refuses all other interaction? Or is it a tiny correction to Einstein's equations, significant only when gravitation is very weak, like between stars in a galaxy? Before we _observe_ the dark matter, we cannot be sure; although there is a body of circumstantial evidence in favor of it and against corrections to gravity, the ultimate answer is also missing. It does not matter what the majority of scientists believe; it's only a confirmed detection that can solidly close this question. This is as much as we know and know that we don't know. Then, throw some unknown unknowns to the mix, from possible future incompatible observations... And if you feel down that your question does not have a single, precise answer, think of this: not knowing is in fact the greatest thing there can only be! How ultimately boring it would be if we had answers to all questions? Scientific research exists only for its own sake, to satisfy our human curiosity. Technology is a fortunate byproduct of science, but creating technology is not among goals of science. If we knew everything, the science would cease, and with it new technologies that it produces. We'd be in a very bad condition then: nothing to satisfy our natural curiosity amidst technology that no longer advances. It's great to learn, and so it's great that there are things yet unknown!

@@cykkm I read this.

@@cykkm Thank you for your illuminating reply! The theory is a few bits over my head, but not too many bits, especially if I don't dig into the maths too far. As for my question not having a single, precise answer, that's awesome. It means I did indeed ask a good question! I suspect we'll never be done solving the universe, at least not with our current level of mental faculties. Even if my question had a single, precise answer, there's always asking why. Asking why is recursive, after all. Until we can perceive the infinite answers to that repeated question, there will always be more questions. And the universe hasn't given us evidence that any final answer is "because I said so" yet!

​@@queens.dee.223 You're very right, science never gives a final answer. And the “why” is really “whys all the way down.” We have theories, and can answer “why” by pointing at another theory. But theory to reality is what map is to territory. You can navigate using a map, but there is no point asking the map “why is there a hill?” Ultimately, the more we learn about reality, the more unanswered questions we find. “The theory is a few bits over my head, but not too many bits, especially if I don't dig into the maths too far.” - Yes, some of this stuff is from general relativity, and it has quite advanced maths as its language. But I think I didn't go further than mentioning an indefinite integral. You are thinking so clearly, and has so very good intuitive grasp on these complex concepts, that you should really get deeper into maths-I'm sure you'll like it, it's beautiful if taught right! Try Grant Sanderson's 3blue1brown channel. For example, his course on vector algebra: he is a simply _amazing_ teacher, and this stuff takes no more than +-/×! I have a feeling you'll like maths and will want more of it, really! Try it, please! Applied maths is the only real language of physics.

Yeah, I have read about this, and the sad answer is that all galactic clusters will eventually move farther and farther from each other. Our cluster is the Local Group, and it is small. It’s possible to travel to other clusters, as this video showed. But the longer you wait to begin going somewhere, the faster you have to go to get there. Descendants of humans might spread to several clusters of galaxies. I hope they will. But the civilizations within the clusters will eventually become permanently isolated from each other.

Don’t ask good questions

You would have to have 1 stellar engine per star. You couldn't use a single engine for an entire galaxy by tugging on the black hole. Remember that 80% of the mass of most galaxies is dark matter.

@@tr48092 Even if that's the case, as long as you accelerate a star, it will pull on the dark matter via gravity, just like how the gravity of the dark matter pulls on it. That's essentially the idea behind a gravity tractor, and if you build 1 stellar engine per star, you could accelerate entire galaxies, not quickly mind you, but over time, maybe quickly enough.

I believe Isaac Arthur proposed that as a way to merge galaxies.

Powered by starlight they're too slow. Kurtzkazart's stellar engine however could probably get a fair few back Not much point though when you could just live there instead.

Not without either changing in some very fundamental ways - or not without losing most of us along the way.

I personally believe we will have a base on the Moon, and probably at least send people to Mars, though realistically we won't colonize it as it just isn't worth the effort or the cost. I seriously doubt we will go any further than that. It's nice to dream though.

The nearest one, the Virgo Cluster, is huge. Our Local Group is really puny. If our descendants can travel to other clusters, they definitely will travel to Virgo. That cluster alone has more than 1,000 galaxies to explore. The Local Group and the Virgo Cluster are in the Virgo Supercluster. The nearest other supercluster is the Hydra-Centaurus Supercluster, which is closer to the Great Attractor. The Wikipedia article on the Laniakea Supercluster (which is more like a super-supercluster) has some diagrams.

But we will eventually lose contact with them, if expansion continues infinitely, we will eventually lose contact with everything.

@@foragreenfuture6030Wrong. Locally bound objects remain bound. So the local groups remain bound. Gravity is still strong enough to resist the expansion at that point. If we can get to a large gravitationally bound cluster we’re effectively safe there. Super clusters don’t count. The individual clusters aren’t bound to each other anymore, they’re clustered because the filament structure of the universe emerged early in its history. Space is too big now, only local groups are bound. Tl;dr; gravitationally bound objects remain together. Objects too far apart don’t have enough pull to resist the expansion. Eventually all the galaxies in each locally bound group will merge into one super galaxy.

@@Karlswebb No, you are wrong. foragreenfuture6030 is talking about the Virgo Cluster. Yes we will lose contact with the Virgo Cluster. Why do you need to be so oppositional.

What an odd thing to say. Considering this 'grand scale' is nothing more than a thought in your head, how can it put "life into perspective" for you? Life where you are at it he most important thing there is, as that is your life. What happens 'out there' has no affect on you, except as a metaphor for what occurs out there occurs down here, and what is above, is likewise below

@@pyropulseIXXI I think the simple answer to your question is that this person isn’t you and they have a different perspective and that’s okay lmao Have a good one

@@pyropulseIXXI OK, Obi Wan.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't work like that, you still need to decelerate, you're not slowed by the stretching of space.

@@nadsenoj8719 lol we'd be moving the whole galaxy to the destination at that point. :)

It doesn’t work that way. You don’t slow down. From your perspective the galaxy speeds up towards you the closer you get lol. Say you’re going half c towards a galaxy 5 billion light years away today. You start at 5 billion light years. Doing the math the galaxy is receding by 104,000 km/s from you. You’re going 150,000 km/s. You are gaining 46000 km/s. Boom; you’re 4 billion now. Galaxy is receding at 83,500 km/s. You’re still moving at half c. There’s been no force acting on you; you’re in an inertial frame. So now you’re gaining on it by 66,500 km/s. Now you’re 1 light year away. You’re gaining on it roughly 150,000 km/s. decelerate fast lmao.

Red dwarves are very very very good locations for colonies, if you have the sort of tech needed for giga-lightyear journeys.

As if colony administrations will gladly and happily send all their resources to the metropoly.

@@ShadeAKAhayate yeah, what can they even do about it? Send in debt collectors in, like, a billion years? That's a lot of time to prepare a "welcoming party"!

@@Darth_Niki4 That's one of the problems inherent to the imperial economy, especially when we talk feudal-like structure.

I don't think he was being very honest about communications. Communications would take 10s of millions to 100s of millions of years depending on how far away these galaxies are. I think it is extremely unlikely that we will ever go past our local group. I think it would be highly unlikely that we will get past the Milky Way before life on Earth will be unlivable.

You're just moving in the wrong circles. Many of us are wondering why laws and military exists, we don't need it, never did, never will.

And I bet there were people that thought that the idea of humans flying was grandiose. We possibly have only scratched the surface of how far technology will take us. It may be possible in the future to travel faster than light.

@@AORD72 intergalactic travel is so far past humans flying it doesn’t even seem comparable. Just the statement alone feels like an enormous understatement

@@tacituskilgore5396 Yes but look at the fast pace of technology. 200 Years ago we were throwing sticks at each other, now we are landing ships on other celestial bodies.

I think it is arrogant to state that, if we survive, "just" 1000 years future humanity would be totally alien to us.

I was thinking about some kind of quantum communicator aswell. If we could entangle the particles ourselves one day we might unlock a way for them to have reasonable communication over some vast distances. Who knows what the future has in store for us

In theory, it's called an ansible. Entangled particles, lightyears apart, that allow instant communication. Ender's Game had a good example of it.

Entangled particles can share information instantaneously, but attempting to manipulate them to send a signal breaks the entanglement. You can't use them to communicate.

​@@gunslinger2566yeah but impossible.

Sadly, no. You have to send regular additional information to decypher anything sent through such communicator, and that regular information can't travel faster than light.

It is not!!!

@@scottslotterbeck3796 it is!!!!

@@Aiel-Necromancer negative is just a question of reference you can go below 0 Kelvin sort of ;^)

You know, the fact they can move through the atmosphere silently is significant. I've seen a vast ship, a disc possibly miles across, travel at several thousand mph across the sky silently before disappearing into thin air. It's also the ability to become invisible l find interesting. Until we humans have such a technology interstellar travel as these guys seem to do will be impossible. But l think it's beyond us as it seems to inhabit a different dimension.

It’s a lot easier to make a human that can live for millions of years than it is to make a spaceship that can travel at a fraction of the speed of the light

Idk, there will always be hills people

humanity 2.0 will do it. leave the fleshsacks on earth

It depends. Maybe a hot colonization approach (where you send off parts of the fleet in front of the rest to disassemble stars for more fuel and resources for the fleet) could manage voyages of vast distances since adding a stellar mass to your arsenal evert few thousand years (or however long it is) from the odd intergalactic star gives you a lot of wiggle room that flying direct to your destination without refueling wouldn't.

When something travels at a significant fraction of the speed of light, time dilation occurs. Hence, the people on the ship will age slower relative to the people on earth. This means that a person can travel much much further in the span of a human lifetime than one would expect if they didn't take time dilation into account.

The actual truth is that all of this is pure fantasy, just like a belief in old religions. Except this 'we will someday travel the stars' is the new age religion amongst the scientifically minded.

The Drake equation is the mathematical equivalent of throwing darts in the dark at a dart board blindfolded on a spinning chair. We literally do not know what we don't know.

That is something already thought about, it's called the Wait Calculation en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel#Wait_calculation

@@Dsiefus nice, thanks!

No FTL. Stop the fantasy stuff!

@@scottslotterbeck3796 just because our current (wrong) understanding of physics doesn't allow for it, doesn't mean we won't figure it out in the future. (I assume we're wrong about a lot of things still, history proves this to be case)

@@scottslotterbeck3796 When the first trains reached 60mph (1 mile a minute !), people thought they would faint at that ridicolous speed...

No

If it's possible.

Moving faster than light through space is impossible. However, warping and moving the space itself faster than light is a different thing.

This concept of quintessence, a scalar field seems to be of interest in physics. I do hope dark energy is some sort of fundamental force we can find ways to effect as then perhaps c won't be our limiting factor. It's impossible to travel faster than c as it is the maximum speed but there seems to be more to our understanding of gravity, specifically in cases where it is repulsive rather than attractive. If we can find a way to bring spacetime closer instead of exchanging within it, that would be the way to go. But at the moment that seems to be beyond our understanding. If it is nothing but a dream 3 galaxies gone a year sounds pretty bad.

@@martiddy it is a tricky thing, too

No FTL. Sorry!!!

Been explored in science fuction. By the time the first gen starship gets there, there's already a thriving civilization.

If you are going 99.9999999% lightspeed, your cone won't look that much different from an actual lightcone.

Everyone thinks breaking causality is no big deal because we're all brainwashed by sci-fi.

We will not become a multiplanetary species. We are at the end of human history and the last human will gasp his last breath right here on Earth.

​@@HawkGTboy I bet you're fun at parties.

@@HawkGTboyshut up.

​@@HawkGTboy🌍 💥

@@undercoverbrother67 no youre just scared of the bitter truth

@Cancer McAids Not because we really, really want it... "In the box" thinking solves nothing when we (as a civilization) barely understand the details about what we are talking about.

@Cancer McAids Did you know we can generate 7 times more power than humans need with solar panels covering the Sahra Desert?

She's wrong, and doing clickbait, sadly.

@@scottslotterbeck3796 She supports her assertions with math, and you critique with "it's click bait". Why?

"for now" we are happy to reach Mars 😁

Time Dilation is such a kick in the balls >.

@Ein Kunde Not too bright...

@Ein Kunde Don't feed the airheads.

@Ein Kunde his content is comprehensive. How do you not get this? Just watch retroactively and take two Tylenol for the pain after you slap yourself.

Faster 👏than 👏light 👏 travel 👏 is 👏equivalent 👏 to 👏time 👏 travel

What you're describing is called an Alcubierre Drive - or simply Warp Drive And the "substance that produces the opposite effect of Dark Energy" is basically just normal matter; we don't yet know however what Dark Energy is nor do we know whether any other substance exists that creates a negative energy density like Dark Energy

​@@Astromath actually, no. The opposite effect of dark energy is just gravity. Ironically, if you want to make a warp drive, then it's dark energy itself that you want to harness, as it has exactly the kind of effects on spacetime that you are looking for- namely, the ability to create expansion or negative pressure. This is precisely why the cosmos is able to expand faster than light, we essentially live within a warp drive. The problem is that first of all, we don't know what dark energy is, so we can't manipulate it like we would want to in order to use it to make warp drives; and second, it appears to be distributed evenly throughout the entire cosmos, while we want to concentrate it in one small bubble of spacetime with a neat arrangement in order to create superluminal velocity. Until we know more about what dark energy is, the alternative is a bizarre thing called negative energy, which sorta does exist in certain conditions in quantum mechanics, but like all quantum effects, trying to make it manifest usefully in the macroscopic world is a pain and may not pan out. Maybe we can make a warp drive, but because of causality related reasons or hawking radiation, the best we can do is travel at exactly C. Which, in fairness, isn't possible any other way. The energy needed would be infinite.

@@formlessone8246 I mean, technically anything is a warp drive, since any massive object (an object with mass) can warp spacetime, just depends on what curvature you're looking for so, both of you are correct

@@formlessone8246 not all warp drive concepts require an expansion out of the back, some just have an extreme energy density in the front to compress spacetime and allow its natural elasticity to settle itself back out the other end. That'd presumably produce a much bigger disturbance of gravitational waves than a controlled re-expansion though.

Speciation in mammals takes about 4-5 million years naturally. Can also happen much quicker. Much faster if were to do some selective breeding.

it depends on a lot of things 1) how much quantum tunneling occurs per population member 2) how far away our colonies our 3) how many people are in our colonies 4) how gravity changes in the area, because mechanics vary an extreme amount based on gravitational forces in the area (I hate using newtonian terms, but I used 'gravity' for conciseness) 5) the decay rates of particles in the colony 6) the changes in the environment of the region, relative to earth calculate for all of the above, and you might have a decent picture if I missed anything, or got anything wrong, then feel free to change my list!

@@funnyman4744 #1 is the OP trying to sound smarter than he is. Also, see #5. #4 is again the OP trying to sound smarter than he is. #5 decay rates are not location dependent. Perhaps for #1 and #5 you meant the ambient ionizing radiation? #6 is just a blanket covering all environmental factors so it makes numbers 4 & 5 redundant.

What we send up is probably not humans of today. We are not very well suited for space travel. If we insist on humans, then an idea would be to terraform planets with ai before growing them

@@AlbertaGeek Yeah I'd be curious to know what effects radiation exposure over long (1000+ year) trips would be. I suppose by the time we can do that though, we will have likely have much better shielding technology.