We will never be able to leave the solar system. And I'll explain why
At the beginning of the 24th century, humanity left Earth for the stars. The
extensive ecological and climatic devastation that had characterized the last 300 years had
completely consumed our planet, turning it into a barren and inhospitable world. The
rapid melting of ice had caused the seas to rise, leading to the disappearance of
entire cities and coastal regions. Deforestation had brought about impoverishment, destruction,
and the loss of human and animal lives. Meanwhile, we continued to burn fossil fuels, knowing that
they were poisoning us, gradually transforming our world into one less suitable for our survival.
In the meantime, a small fraction of us looked to the stars in search of a place to start anew. But
where? What were our chances of finding a planet so similar to Earth that it could welcome and
protect humanity from the chaos it had created? Powerful telescopes were then constructed,
and hundreds of Earth-like twins were quickly discovered orbiting distant stars. After all,
our home wasn't that unique. The universe was full of Earths!
Hundreds of spacecraft, each as large as the ancient transatlantic ships, left the planet,
some headed towards the Alpha Centauri system, others to even more distant stars. Despite
traveling at relativistic speeds, propelled by warp engines, the journey would last centuries,
and only the descendants of the departing would perhaps see the promised land...
Okay... evocative, isn't it? But how realistic could this scenario be? Certainly,
once we consider all our current technological advancements, there is a strong temptation to
believe that we are approaching an era (more or less distant) of interstellar exploration.
But do you really think we will one day leave Earth and all our concerns behind,
or that we will begin to roam the entire galaxy, colonizing, and trading?
No... we firmly believe not, and with this video, we are here to reiterate
and demonstrate just that... that we humans will never travel beyond the boundaries of
our solar system. Follow us, and we'll explain! We can reasonably assert that the expansion of
the human species into interstellar space is driven by three important purposes:
1 - scientific research, 2 - the need to acquire resources, 3 - the search for new
habitable planets in the event of catastrophes that are about to make Earth uninhabitable.
The first point is one we feel compelled to share. Exploration as scientific research
should be pursued always and in any case. And it is also the least complex aspect of our
activity in space. Increasingly intelligent robotic probes can operate in our place,
without us having to descend onto planets like conquering demons or desperate colonists.
If, however, we turn our attention to the second point on the list, it is easy to
highlight that there is no need to leave our solar system. Not in the immediate future,
at least, especially considering that between the Moon, asteroids, and Mars, we still have plenty
of resources to exploit right where we are now. Even regarding the search for habitable planets,
what could be the catastrophe capable of propelling us among the stars? Overpopulation?
During the 1960s and 1970s, in conjunction with the peak of the space age, the migration
of humans and industry to other celestial bodies seemed like a possible solution to
overpopulation and environmental degradation. Why worry about too many people on Earth - was
the question - when we have the entire universe to expand into? Hadn't Europe already solved its
demographic problems by sending the excess population to the New World discovered by
Columbus? So, why can't we continue this process? Many scientists and proponents of space migration,
from Stephen Hawking and Robert Zubrin to Elon Musk, emphasized that becoming "interplanetary"
is the only long-term defense against extinction. Whether the cause is anthropogenic (climate
change, nuclear war, etc.) or due to the impact of an asteroid, a gamma-ray burst,
or some other cosmic phenomenon, being confined to one place makes human civilization vulnerable.
Okay, having a "Planet B" available to escape a cosmic danger seems like a good idea. But
it should be clear to everyone that not all Earth's inhabitants could be transferred to a
hypothetical new planet... It would only be a way to save - let's say - a thousand humans, giving
our species the chance not to go extinct, but it certainly wouldn't be the salvation of EVERYONE!
Similarly, we must unfortunately give up the idea that the problem of an overcrowded Earth can be
solved simply by a massive mass migration... To dismiss this possibility, it is enough to
consider that currently, the Earth's population is growing by about 80 million units every year...
This means that if we wanted to maintain the current number of inhabitants,
we would have to transport 80 million people to Mars or the Moon every year!
An absolutely unattainable task even with vastly more sophisticated technology than ours...
In short, just to understand, there is no escape; the solution to this enormous and
underestimated problem must be found within ourselves... in our willingness to change!
However, let's assume for a moment that, for one of these reasons, or even all three together,
humanity decides to leave the solar system and reach one of the nearest stars...
How could it do that? If we are talking about a
mission to be carried out with a human crew, and not by sending small mechanical probes,
there will obviously be a need to build spacecraft capable of accommodating tens,
if not hundreds, of people... And even this will not be a
very simple undertaking. And anyway, what type of propulsion would these ships use?
As we know, the main problem in space exploration is the enormous distance between stars and the
insurmountable limit of the speed of light. Unable to exceed this speed, travel times with
traditional propulsion methods - be it chemical or nuclear - can reach thousands of years or,
in the case of extragalactic journeys, millions. It must also be considered
that not only can the speed of light not be exceeded, but even reaching significant
fractions of its speed is a technological and scientific challenge of epic proportions.
With today's technology, it would take thousands of years just to reach Alpha Centauri (which,
let's remember, is only the closest star, and others are immensely farther away). However,
even if, with some magical device, we could instantly reach the speed of light,
it would still take 4.3 years to reach Proxima Centauri! This means that even traveling at
the maximum speed achievable in the universe, our species could at most explore the vicinity of the
Sun but certainly could not establish a network of commercial routes throughout the Galaxy!
"Before moving on, don't forget to subscribe to our channel if you haven't already...
make sure to hit the notification bell so you don't miss out on our daily videos!"
But let's assume that we want to colonize a suitable planet 50 light-years away, ignoring
all objections raised so far about the sense of the operation. How would we proceed? Given the
travel times, the only possible solution would be generational ships: these are hypothetical
large spacecraft capable of hosting hundreds or thousands of people and the corresponding
animals needed for food and the invasion of the planet's ecosystem to be colonized,
all in a self-sufficient environment. Given the travel times, one generation would replace
the old one until reaching the destination. Of course, problems abound. We have technological
issues, such as how to build a spaceship capable of traveling for centuries in space without
assistance or spare parts that are not already on board. Not to mention the energy source or
the propulsion system capable of moving such a large ship. Chemical rockets are out of the
question, and atomic energy is as well... the ridiculous idea of solar sails could only work
for micro-probes. In short, we have no cards to play. Then there are the risks of the journey,
such as micrometeoroids or radiation. And, finally, there is the human factor:
the first generation would be composed of volunteers, subsequent ones of forced individuals.
An alternative method would be to freeze the crew - assuming it is possible - or to send embryos
that will then be grown by AI educational programs once they reach their destination. But I'll
let you imagine the ethical debates of such an operation considering the risks and the absolute
futility of having a thousand children completely isolated on a planet 50 light-years away.
Moreover, ethical issues are not the only concerns. A planet suitable for colonization
is a living planet, inhabited by various forms of plant and animal life. Leaving
aside planets inhabited by a sentient species, even those without civilizations could prove
incompatible with our ecosystem, leading to the extinction of the indigenous life forms.
There is another problem: staying here on Earth, it would be challenging for us to
determine in advance which planets, identified by telescopes, are suitable for colonization. So,
what could we do? Would we be forced to embark on this journey blindly? Would we head towards
a star, hoping that the few indications of habitability on one of its planets detected
by space telescopes turn out to be accurate? Certainly not! Given the cost and risks of
interstellar travel, we couldn't embark on such an adventure without careful planning
for both the journey and the destination. The colonization mission would need to be
preceded by one or more probes capable of locating a suitable planet. Assuming that
a suitable planet is 50 light-years away from us, with the probe sent in the year 2100, the
planet would be located after 2600. A potential colonization expedition would only arrive after
the year 3100. This is enough to understand that circumventing Earth's destruction with the
colonization of another planet is not a feasible prospect. It's better to invest in technologies
capable of repairing environmental damage or changing our economic development paradigm.
But let's not give up so quickly. Perhaps we're overlooking something...
Yes, because mass is not the only quantity influenced by speed in space travel. Another
crucial factor in relativistic journeys is time dilation. Unlike what classical physics
postulates, time does not flow uniformly for all observers; it slows down the closer the observer
measuring an event gets to the speed of light! Skipping detailed physical and mathematical
explanations, we must trust the verified fact that on a spaceship leaving Earth and
accelerating at relativistic speeds, time passes more slowly than on the planet just left behind.
Imagine a spaceship traveling at 95% of the speed of light to a planet 9.5 light-years
away. A stationary observer on Earth would measure the journey time as 10 years. However, for the
spaceship's crew, experiencing time dilation, the trip would seem to last only 3.12 years!
In other words, between leaving Earth and reaching their destination,
the crewmembers age a little over three years, while 10 years have passed for people back on
Earth. If the speed reaches 99% of the speed of light, the time on board would pass 7 times
more slowly. At 99.99% of the speed of light, time on board would pass 70 times more slowly;
at 99.9999999% of the speed of light, aboard the spaceship, time would pass 22,300 times more
slowly than on Earth until at 100% of the speed of light, time would seem to... stop altogether!
These somewhat optimistic numbers about the possibility of freely moving within the galaxy
reveal something astonishing. Essentially, they tell us that for an observer moving with
their spaceship at about 100% of the speed of light, their journey to any destination,
whether it's 100 or 100,000 light-years away, would be virtually instantaneous! Incredible,
isn't it? If this were truly possible, we could realize the long-anticipated scenario akin to Star
Trek, where spaceships travel effortlessly from one point to another in the Galaxy!
So, does time dilation solve the problem? Unfortunately, no. As we saw earlier,
to accelerate a mass more and more until it nearly reaches the speed of light would require
an energy practically infinite in the end. No known form of propulsion could provide us with
this gift. Even if the energy problem were somehow solved using methods we currently cannot foresee,
there's also the fact that a spacecraft traveling at a speed very close to that of light
would be in a particularly perilous position. Space is not empty; it is filled with wandering
atoms, sometimes forming more complex structures like gas and dust clouds of interstellar nebulae,
galaxies, stars, and planets. At other times, there are solitary atoms traveling
towards nothing, probably not colliding with another atom for thousands of years. However,
the probability of a collision between two hydrogen atoms in a cubic centimeter of space
is one thing; the certainty of the enormous particle flux colliding with the spacecraft
during its journey is another matter. Particles, nearly harmless at low speeds,
transform into a deadly rain of projectiles and ionizing radiation with high penetrating
power when accelerated. This radiation can severely damage the spacecraft's hull and make
it dangerously radioactive for the occupants. Intercepting these particles at speeds close
to that of light would impart such high energy that it becomes lethal to any form of life on
board. Not to mention that at that speed, merely passing through a thin nebular veil could lead to
the complete destruction of the spacecraft. Some scientists believe that the presence
of interstellar matter alone would be enough to prevent a spaceship from reaching speeds
higher than a tenth of the speed of light. As we have seen, such speeds are
by no means sufficient to support a network of commercial routes and large-scale exploration.
Furthermore, even if all these difficulties were overcome, an insurmountable problem would remain:
time dilation would sever all ties between the spacecraft in transit and the home planet.
Astronauts would depart with the awareness of never seeing their families, relatives,
and friends again, unless they brought them along or had none at all. Upon their return,
they would find a society radically different from the one they left.
Not only that, but a journey of this kind would not allow for the formation and existence of
interstellar institutions, which rely on commercial and cultural exchanges between
different races, assuming a homogeneous level of technological and social progress.
This homogeneity is incompatible with the times required for such conceived interstellar travel.
What would motivate a commercial enterprise to send its goods to the other end of the Galaxy,
knowing that it can never see or communicate with the spacecraft to which it entrusted
its cargo? And what would prompt the government of a planet to finance an
interstellar mission about which nothing will be known, or that will return to Earth when
the financiers have been gone for millennia? Any spacecraft venturing into the realm of
Einsteinian Relativity would essentially become a world unto itself: without a homeland and without
a past. Such an endeavor would raise profound questions about its validity and utility.
In short, it's futile to think about it. In the present and in the future, there is no technology
or cosmological shortcut capable of making the giant leap toward the stars. Warp drive,
Alcubierre propulsion, wormholes... Believe us, they are all baseless nonsense. And if
something of ours reaches the stars, it won't be a representative of our species
but a robot or at most a transhuman. Our only heirs capable of traveling for millennia from
one star to another in the Galaxy. For what purpose, we cannot even imagine.