That is an interesting POV, which i have considered too. But in order to reach Mars / Moon - don't we need resources from earth in order to build ? Resource extraction is energy intensive. It consumes a lot of energy here on earth. How much energy would it require to first build and then transport resources from other planets back to earth etc ? What would be the impact in case during re-entry with resource payload from other planets, a spacecraft propelled by nuclear energy bursts ? What are the other unknowns which we are willing to take for granted ?
I mean, we are already in sci-fi territory here, but it seems inevitable that industry and mining will be pushed off-world, no matter what the short-term ecological costs are. Natural resources on Earth are infinitesimally small compared to the vastness of the universe. It might take a few centuries, or even a millennium, but even on human timescales this isn't really a long time. Consider that the Roman Empire was at its apex 2,000 years ago, and then imagine the world in 4,000 A.D.
> How much energy would it require to first build and then transport resources from other planets back to earth etc ? What would be the impact in case during re-entry with resource payload from other planets, a spacecraft propelled by nuclear energy bursts ? What are the other unknowns which we are willing to take for granted ?
A lot, no doubt, but still probably less than having energy and industrial production on Earth, in the long term.
Right :) But all resources are finite regardless of how far we travel. Civilizations may collapse before we accomplish everything we set out to do on other planets. There are two aspects to be taken care of, one is the exploration of space and the other is maintaining the fragile environment (socio-political-economic) here on earth.
Also, if countries co-operate on space exploration it would be better, than making it a race to be first etc. Which will only lead to worse outcomes between nations if history is any indicator. :)
> But all resources are finite regardless of how far we travel.
Not in any sense which is meaningful on a human scale.
> Civilizations may collapse before we accomplish everything we set out to do on other planets
I still don't think it matters. A nuclear war could set back Earth by centuries or millenniums, but barring some sort of total worldwide wipe of electronic data, the information and knowledge will still be out there. I'd say it's inevitable that over time, humans will re-centralize and re-organize. Again, it may take thousands and thousands of years, but on the timescale of the universe, this is nothing.
> if countries co-operate on space exploration it would be better, than making it a race to be first etc. Which will only lead to worse outcomes between nations if history is any indicator. :)
This sounds ideal, but I don't think history actually supports it. The prime achievements of American space travel came during the peak of the Cold War. Civilizations seem to benefit from having competition, as long as they don't destroy / are destroyed by them. It's a fine balance.
Nietzsche writes about this a bit during his discussion of the Ancient Greek concept of agon:
