Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] OP t1_j90uvkt wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in ELI5 Why are we more interested in colonizing extremely distant, completely inhospitable planets and moons than we are in making more parts of our own planet livable? by [deleted]

[deleted]

2

Daftpunksluggage t1_j90vlgo wrote

  1. Because having all of humanity in one place makes it much easier to go extinct. See dinosaurs.

  2. if it were simply a matter of habitable land we'd focus more on planetside endeavors. But it's more about advancement and innovation. The advancement we need to live in the Sahara desert might be developed in our quest for Mars.

11

[deleted] OP t1_j90wyrb wrote

[deleted]

0

exhale91 t1_j90x9mx wrote

OP isn’t that exactly how the calculator came about? Advancements in computing? I don’t think a handheld calculator was the goal, it was a by product of computing advancements. Hey holy shit if you combine these circuits in such a way it does division crazyyy

5

[deleted] OP t1_j90xd6y wrote

[deleted]

−2

theGreatWhite_Moon t1_j90ypes wrote

and it might be valid, but it doesn't make sense in the sahara/mars desert case.

We might have theories working in some sort of simulation that would help us fix stuff, but technology hasn't caught up yet and innovation promises new viewpoints that open room for advancement towards testing and implementation of aforementioned theories.

We don't have that much control over where these innovative sparks of creation spawn and if a field is stale people search for inspiration elsewhere.

3