Timeline for Would a civilization that is trying to colonize a landless world be able to do so?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 10, 2016 at 22:41 | comment | added | Draco18s no longer trusts SE | @user4239 The Japanese temples are both several hundred years old and have been destroyed (by various means) several times. It's all about perspective. To the Japanese it is the same building, even though to western minds it is not. It's a Theseus Ship problem. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 14:01 | comment | added | user4239 | @Lohoris - because you simply don't know if your own civilization will be around 1M years from now, to fly back and repair things. So you need something which can sustain in absence of your parent civilization - which (civilization) is a fragile thing. | |
| May 1, 2015 at 13:54 | comment | added | o0'. | @DVK I'm sorry, but every time you introduce some odd variable, you would have to explain why it is so, otherwise it's just random. If you build something, it is obvious and natural that you will also repair and mantain it. If you are not allowed to repair it, it's not obvious why, so you have to explain why you can't: the answer can't ignore that. | |
| Oct 7, 2014 at 11:49 | comment | added | user4239 | @Lohoris - if the premise of the question isn't interesting to you, there's this wonderful option of browsing on to other, more interesting ones. | |
| Oct 7, 2014 at 11:34 | comment | added | o0'. | If with "permanent" you mean "do some stuff at the beginning, then you aren't allowed to mantain/repair/do-it-again", then I don't see any point in such a bizarre requirement. | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 22:11 | answer | added | mechalynx | timeline score: 9 | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 18:16 | answer | added | Loren Pechtel | timeline score: 4 | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 15:00 | vote | accept | user4239 | ||
| Oct 6, 2014 at 15:00 | |||||
| Oct 6, 2014 at 14:42 | comment | added | Philipp | @DVK Europa isn't explored enough to say for sure. The oceans themselves are only a hypothesis for now and we know nothing about the composition of its core. | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 14:40 | comment | added | user4239 | @Philipp - Is Magnesium an abandant-enough element taht it can be used as fuel? (and easily obtainable by aquatic species living on Europa) | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 14:39 | comment | added | user4239 | @HDE226868 - for the purposes of this specific world building, terraforming isn't an option for a variety of reasons not related to the question. | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 10:52 | comment | added | user4239 | @ivy europa is fine. | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 9:04 | comment | added | Philipp | Your assumption that there can be no fire under water is wrong. There are materials like magnesium which burn pretty well even when submerged in water. They are able to do so because they burn so hot that they split the water into hydrogen and oxygen. | |
| Oct 6, 2014 at 0:55 | comment | added | mechalynx | @DVK I've got a good one brewing but I'm making the assumption the world is Europa-like, is that ok or should it be more generic? For example, Europa has about a tenth of Earth's gravity, not sure if that's the intention - it could make a difference as far as hydrostatic pressure is concerned. | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 22:34 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | By the way, is terraforming allowed? If so, I can add a lot to my answer. | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 22:33 | comment | added | Jay Vogler | Building domes to contain an atmosphere sounds way more plausible to me than keeping the atmospheric gases that the species needs dissolved throughout the entire planet-wide ocean. Could you elaborate on what the ocean is like, or is anything fair game? | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 22:32 | comment | added | dtldarek | Why not? If you see some building is in a bad shape, you demolish it and rebuild anew. The only constraint is to keep enough buildings in a good condition for your population to live in. | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 22:10 | answer | added | HDE 226868♦ | timeline score: 11 | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 22:00 | comment | added | user4239 | @ivy_lynx - change themselves and/or adapt their technology. Assume no future contact with said colony, however, e.g. they can't transfer resources/energy to the colony; and any technology will wear out and fail in time if replacement parts are able to be made. | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 21:58 | comment | added | user4239 | @dtldarek - water tends to destroy even mountains in sufficient time. Any domes could not last forever even with maintenance. | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 21:56 | comment | added | dtldarek | "Permanence matters - it means you can't simply build domes that contain atmosphere as they would not survive for millenia." They might, if are properly cared for. Perhaps such a civilization would develop fanatical devotion for maintaining their dwelling. | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 21:56 | comment | added | mechalynx | I need a clarification - are you asking about both how a species could change itself and colonize the planet by inventing appropriate technology, or only about how they could adapt themselves to the environment so that it's as natural to them as land used to be? | |
| Oct 5, 2014 at 21:48 | history | asked | user4239 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |