Space tourism?

Take a breather from the Mars rovers Spirit and Opportunity, Cassini, New Horizons, etc. and consider the future of something totally different in the form of recreational space activities. Is it feasible for millions of people to enjoy only what a select few now experience. There have been isolated situations where millionaires hop aboard a Russian spaceship and stay for a while at the ISS. Initially, would it be possible to offer low orbit trips or build a hotel in the sky for a weekend adventure? Romance in zero gravity? A few hours in a space suit, tethered to the space station, just floating and looking? Long range situations are just that...long range, but low orbit vacations may not be that far away.

And of course the pesky, ubiquitous attorneys will be present to spoil everything.

"The Legal Regime for Private Activities in Outer Space"

Space hotels? Sure. I wonder what R. Buckminster Fuller, Frank Lloyd Wright, or Antoni Gaudí would have contributed.

"Designing hotels in space"


Also see...

"General Public Space Travel and Tourism - Volume 1 Executive Summary"

"General Public Space Travel and Tourism - Volume 2 Executive Summary"

"Space Tourism/Personal Spaceflight for you ..."

"Star Trek" and cultural relativistic ethics

Gene Roddenberry...a cultural relativist [no absolutes]? It has been stated in many places that Gene Roddenberry embraced the varieties of all cultures that "[By the 23rd century, we] will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. [We] will learn that differences and attitudes are delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." I think this is quite evident in many episodes of the Star Trek saga and such a philosophy is even expressed in the Federation's bylaws--non-interference with alien cultures. This position is well expressed in the ethics of the late University of Alabama's Professor James Rachels who proposed six points of ethics; hence, to be part of cultural relativism. And they are:

1.) Different societies have different moral codes.

2.) There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another.

3.) The moral code of our own society has no special status; it is merely one among many.

4.) There is no "universal truth" in ethics - that is, there are no moral truths that hold for all people at all times.

5.) The moral code of a society determines what is right within that society; that is, if the moral code of a society says that a certain action is right, then that action is right, at least within that society.

6.) It is mere arrogance for us to try to judge the conduct of other peoples. We should adopt an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures.

Remember the "Prime Directive" which is functional only with non-members of the United Federation Of Planets. That being the case all unknown species [those to be discovered] and known species that refuse to participate in membership such as the Romulans would be subject to the principles of the "Prime Directive". Conversely, the Vulcans would be fair game?

"The Ethics of Star Trek"

The actual directive is full of ethical issues and to cite a current one is one episode from Enterprise. The primary story line involves an inferior species that is somehow genetically doomed to extinction [a scientific problem in itself]. Through the research of Doctor Phlox a remedy is developed. Nows here is the ethical dilemma: Should Captain Archer provide the materials for the salvation of the sentient [and inferior--no warp drive technology] beings. The "Prime Directive" dictated his decision. Was this an error? I think so. Parallel ethical philosophy on Earth would be unimaginable. Can one imagine wealthy and prosperous countries withholding economic, medical, and educational elements to our own species? No way! It would be our duty to assist other members of the species Homo sapiens and other different species. Now, it would appear that the "Prime Directive" needs to be quantified more in say a definition of consciousness.

Any thoughts about this or any aspects of the ethics of Star Trek. Cite as many episodes of the Star Trek phenomena as you like for support.

Virtual Reality--educational tool?

It's here to stay and far reaching possibilities already realized and for the future too: "Virtual Reality" technology. It's entertainment and a wonderful educational tool. I can't respond to the entertainment side for I don't get involved in the gaming part, but from an educational perspective there is a wealth of positive interaction. It shouldn't be used as a substitute for "real" experience but as an amendment or "in addition to". A couple of examples come into mind such as "flight simulators" and many of the sciences. My days in college are totally alien to current practices. Students used "grams" and real laboratory apparatus for experiments; bench top physics experiments ruled for every student, we all had frogs to dissect--now, everything is measured on the micro scale, bench top practices have disappeared to be performed by the professor, and there is the "virtual" frog. Now, some of this is good and stems from economics, safety, liability, environmental, etc. But, in the final analysis, there is no substitution for the "hands on" actual performance of scientific experiments. You achieve a "feel" for the experimental process: The set up of the procedure, the careful examination of the experiment in progress, cautionary clues of awareness, the sense of hearing, sight, and smell. None of the "virtual reality" science programs allow the sounds of physics experiments, the smell of hydrogen sulfide, the sting of a drop of nitric acid on the skin, or the pungent aroma of the formaldehyde preservative. Perhaps in the future all sensory experience will be available. Interesting to note that in the Fall 2004 of Sieman's Corporation report "Picture of the Future" is an article on "virtual reality"--"Living Mentor" by, Arthur F. Pease. This involves the use of hiptic gloves, 3D headsets, and navigation devices. It is dubbed as the "Center for Living Memory" whereby many venues may be explored. The specific example [Professor Carnadine's pet project] was a visit to an Egyptian room where there was complete interfacing and interlacing of the participants with the "virtual reality" scene: Objects were held with utmost reality, coffins opened and mummies came to life, and, best of all, there was dialog with Ramses II's principal wife Queen Nefertari [ca. 1290 B.C.] Real...you believe it? A simulated encounter in 2035...sorry, not yet available. Beyond the entertainment factor, what do you think of "virtual reality" as an educational tool?

Ethics: Robots, androids, and cyborgs

There may come a time when robots, androids, and cyborgs will be more than science fiction and develop "intelligence" and with intelligence comes decision-making, freedom, responsibility--ETHICS.

One of the local television stations last night dug into its vaults and aired "Westworld" [MGM-1973] written and directed by Michael Crichton and staring Yul Brynner, Richard Benjamin, and James Brolin. An inexpensive film shot on studio back lots, dessert, and Harold Lloyd's estate, the film exploits dreams of a perfect fantasy vacation [at $1,000 a day] at an amusement facility called Delos where the paying adventurer can choose from Roman World, Medieval World, and Western World. Sophisticated androids are the counterparts of the human visitors and bend at the will of human interaction with NO harm to the humans. Well, maybe. Minor glitches happen which are expected in the complicated computer setup...normal malfunction parameters as expressed by a review board. It isn't much longer when the "glitches" become more complicated and numerous until finally there ensues android revolt--utter chaos. Humans are dying. Not a good thing for the investors of Delos...paid realism with deathly results. Yul Brynner [the gunslinger from the "Western World"] runs amuck, the scientists/programers are sealed in their room with locked doors and perish from asphyxiation, James Brolin dies for real in a shoot out with Yul Brynner, and the rest of the film is a quest by the gunslinger to get Richard Benjamin at all costs. Human ingenuity and reason finally foil the gunslinger, but the whole film, beyond its entertainment value, is the question of the rise of mechanical machines driven by computer programs and the establishment of ethical values. The film neither revealed why the androids changed [substandard, untested components?] and why they took an "evil" and "destructive" stance. Why not a stance of superior intelligence. That would have produced a film of little interest for sure. But the question remains as to the nature of the relationship of androids and the development of the fostering of ethical principals. Is the first stage of quality societal norms a function of a pool of negativity, antisocial behavior; that given time the androids would have evolved into positive, functioning members of their own "species" and interact well with other species? Where do ethical norms originate?

How about the penultimate android with an attitude problem and unshakeable pessimistic disposition--"Marvin, the Paranoid Android" equipped with "GPP" [Genuine People Personalities], from the very popular British TV series and the film "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy". The story line is somewhat complex in this episodic tale but here is a good summation by Joseph DeMarco:

"Narrowly escaping the destruction of the earth to make way for an intergalatic freeway, hitchhikers Arthur Dent (Earthling Idiot) and Ford Prefect (Writer for the Guide) go on a crazy journey across time and space. They are read bad poetry which is considered terrible torture, and they are almost sucked out an air lock into space. After almost being killed many times, and narrowly escaping at the end of each chapter, they join forces with Zaphod Beeblebrox (A two-headed cocky alien), Trillian (another worthless earthling) and Marvin (the depressed robot) to search for the answer to the meaning of life, which may have been hidden on the recently demolished earth."

When you are contemplating this topic consider the character "Data" from "Star Trek: Next Generation", and recall the 1990 episode of "Star Trek: Next Generation" [#64] called "The Offspring" whereby Data has created a daughter called "Lal". Lal is capable of perception and feeling and given Data's "software" of ethics by "neural transfers". But Lal has some problems with citizens of the star ship. Befriended by Guinan she is introduced to the inhabitants of "Ten Forword" to broaden her social intercourse. Data and Captain Picard are embroiled in a discussion regarding Lal's removal from the star ship when they are interrupted by an emergency message from Counselor Troi. Lal is dying...her functions broke down after experiencing an extraordinary gamut of feelings in the counselor's presence. All attempts to save Lal fail and she succumbs to what we humans all must face--DEATH. Curiously, Lal's demise may have been contributed to a more advanced stage of sensitivity and she was unable to interface the new feelings with the supplied software. Consider Data's inability to experience the grief and emotion the crew feels at Lal's loss and must be content to have only memories of Lal. Data may well be equipped with a sense of ethics when dealing with human issues of loyalty, responsibility, self-sacrifice, etc., but he, and all androids of his caliber, may never fully integrate the full range of human emotions--well beyond the ethics.

Remember Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics" which I assume would be relegated to androids too? All is fine until something breaks down or a truly unique circumstance arises that confounds even the best mind's of mankind.

1. A robot may not injure humans nor, through inaction, allow them to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey human orders except where such orders conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence insofar as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second law.

Roger Clarke has written this detailed essay on Asimov's "laws of Robotics".

As I suspect...there will BE those unique events where Asimov's robot imperatives or any additional instructions will fail: "The freedom of fiction enabled Asimov to project the laws into many future scenarios; in so doing, he uncovered issues that will probably arise someday in real- world situations. Many aspects of the laws discussed in this article are likely to be weaknesses in any robotic code of conduct."

I suppose some wonder about definitions here. For example is there a clear cut distinction between robots and androids and another version--cyborgs. Maybe not, and all is a matter of semantics. And it may well be a fortuitous effort to make such a distinction other than what is common sense. Cyborgs and androids clearly take on the mantle of sentient beings whereas not all robots are merely drones of task oriented character such as Robbie the Robot [Forbidden Planet, "Lost In Space"] or "Marvin" ["Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy"]. And consider too that the discussion here is really existing within the realm of science fiction and certainly not correlated to any real life antecedents [yet], but is still worthy of discussion and analysis. The advent of sophisticated computers, biotechnology, genetics, etc. force us to become aware of the possibility of artificial devices becoming human like and subject to the same issues that humans face--those pesky ethical dilemmas. The development and integration of these new forms may just well be part of the whole picture of evolution as one writer suggested. Seeing the forest is impossible for us and thus humans may not realize that "humans" aren't the only form of life in a complex evolutionary scheme; that a carbon based sentient being is neither the end product of evolution nor the only species to embrace ethical issues.

Steve Mizrach offers this essay on cyborg ethics.

Now consider the notion that species ethics are non-transferable; that a species ethics is a category of one and implicitly forbids the overlapping of another category. In such a case the attribution [transfer] of ethical principles [involving servitude and safety of the primary or transferring species, i.e. Asimov's "Three Rules"] would be impossible for an android. This makes the ensuing comment: Each species is unique in its own ethics and only chance would afford similarity. Earth residents have one set of ethics while residents of some very distant planet would have theirs. A unique set for each species that except for chance could well exhibit diametrically opposed ethics. A learning bridge for the sharing of ethics just may not exist--or the simple transfer of ethics that ensures a species safety is impossible. Divergent species just may not have common grounds for mutual acceptance of ethics.

The notion of sound ethics stemming from religion/theology is not new and does carry some significance. [Unfortunately, on the whole, the implementation of such sound ethics has historically been short of world wide demonstration.] Now, whether an android community would adopt ethical norms [be they their own constructs or implanted or borrowed from other beings] to ensure the safety and perpetuation of their species is another mater. It would be arrogant, despite what may appear beneficial, to assume that mankind's ethical resolutions are the best for all species of intelligence or even the only set of ethics in the universe. Androids may discover that the "self" is the most beneficial status and one wonders just how long such a stance would last. Androids may have no community sense of ethics as we would understand. Ethics becomes twisted and inverted in substantial meaning to what we experience. You are quite correct in that survival of the individual and perpetuation of the species is what establishes a set of ethics. Most humans are guided by good ethics and do have a conscience. But you have to wonder just how far those great ethics are really understood and believed. There is no particular pleasure in killing another, but faced with a situation where food for one's survival is at issue, one would consider killing the intruder to sustain one's own existence. Maybe androids would have similar compunctions or maybe they have a different set of ethics that enable them to diffuse the life and death ethical situation.

"From the far horizons of the unknown come transcribed tales of new dimensions in time and space. These are stories of the future, adventures in which you'll live in a million could-be years on a thousand may-be worlds. The National Broadcasting Company in cooperation with Street & Smith, publishers of Astounding Science Fiction Magazine present: "X Minus One".

For you old time radio fans of yesteryear, X Minus One offered many episodes of robots, androids, humanoids, and the like, but one of the most delightful was an episode called "How To" [Episode #45 that aired April 3rd, 1956]. The story was by Clifford D. Simak, radio transcription was by William Welch, and stared Alan Bunce, Ann Seymour, Les Demon, Joe Bell, Jane Bruce, Santos Ortega, Ben Grauer. As the plot indicates: "A man orders a do-it-yourself robotic dog kit and is accidentally sent a kit for an experimental robot humanoid. The mechanical man is both a blessing and a curse." [Troy Holaday]. This has just about everything: Benevolent robots, counterfeiters, tax men, lawyers.

Let's suppose for the sake of the following argument that androids exist and that they have a set of ethics akin to man: A right to life [murder prohibited], mercy, altruism, etc.--including jurisprudence. Jurisprudence for androids?--yes. If they mirror human ethics of conduct, then they must also abide by the laws of human society and be subject to all of the ramifications.

Robert A. Freitas Jr. offers this essay on jurisprudence.

And finally..."Jennifer, an emotionally troubled whiz kid with obsessive-compulsive disorder, is desperate to find her birth mother in China. But she's also petrified to leave her house. So she uses her technological genius to build Jenny Chow, a surrogate devoid of dysfunction, to take the journey in her place."--New York Academy of Sciences.

A new play has opened called "The Intelligent Design of Jenny Chow" by Rolin Jones and is concerned with a lonely young woman's [Jennifer Marcus] acute agoraphobia and genius who builds a companion--an android called Jenny Chow. While reviewer Charles Isherwood is dismayed at the overall tone of the play especially the whimsical demeanor of the android, it nevertheless illustrates the value of, shall we say, an alternate personality--far more complex and interactive than the standard doll or teddy bear of childhood. For those individuals that find it difficult or impossible to relate to "real" people or the "real" world such an android is not without merit for such an item will offer comfort, lessen loneliness, offer interaction on that person's level of communication and may possess value of therapy. Chemical sympathy may not be needed--just someone to talk to would be far more beneficial. life, which may have been hidden on the recently demolished earth.

King Kong and the missing 35mm movie camera

Ask Auguste Dupin or Sherlock Holmes and they would agree that logical deduction [a part of doing good science] is most useful and assisted them in solving difficult cases. For some fun, follow the mystery of the missing 35mm camera that was used in the filming of the 1933 version of King Kong.

Read More

E=mc2...Einstein's idea?

Has anyone ever heard of Olinto De Pretto ? History of science scholarship by Umberto Bartocci [Professor of Mathematics at the University of Perugia, Italy] has revealed that the famous equation [E=mc2] attributed to Einstein was published two years prior to Einstein's publication in 1905 in an Italian journal ["Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti" (The Veneto Institute of Science, Letters and Proceedings) on February 27th, 1904 by Olinto De Pretto entitled "Ipotesi dell’etere nella vita dell’universo" (Hypothesis of the Essence of the Universe). Is this the making of an urban myth or the truth? It is difficult to determine for even though the Italian journals are available, they haven't been translated and I certainly don't read Italian. Furthermore, the elements of this material is potential for a miniseries on the "Discover" channel: Olinto De Pretto..."In 1921, a year before Einstein received the Nobel Prize, De Pretto was shot dead, murdered by a woman over a business dispute." Einstein was fluent in Italian and could have see the publication. True or not, it is interesting to read the cadre who wish to debunk Einstein for whatever their group or personal agendas may be. Does it really make much difference whether Einstein culled previous information to condense that data into more meaningful statements? It may well be true that there is over emphasis placed on one individual to arrive at the published conclusions in 1905 and better historically to acknowledge the contributions [including his wife Mileva] of predecessor's input. Umberto Bartocci has written a book about all of this.

Read More

SETI--ultimate loneliness?

I am glad that it isn't sponsored by a government institution and that it remains in the realm of private enterprise. SETI --an appendage of modern mythology? Certainly mankind would like to know if we are alone in the universe--something truly unique. And we would like to have a glimpse into the fate of our species. We would like to know the purpose of the universe and mankind's role...a plan or just a freak occurrence.

NASA and SETI:

Here is some background material of NASA's involvement with the SETI program before funding from congress curtailed the relationship.

"Searching For Good Science: The Cancellation Of NASA's Seti Program"

"The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence: Seti"

"PROJECT ORION: A Design Study of a System for Detecting Extrasolar Planets"

"LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE"

SETI commands a huge public interest--over two million hits a month at their web site. Popularity waxes and wanes. Nothing has been discovered regarding alien intelligence. It is estimated that only one billionth of the universe has been investigated. It is interesting to note that time is slipping away for the universe is expanding rapidly and thus decreasing our odds of communication. Also consider that even if we discern some significant radio signal, say something from a star system 50 light years away, the signal is 50 years old. Imagine setting up meaningful dialogue that require 100 years for two messages:

Year 2050--

"Hi. We are from...."

Year 2150---

"Hello there. We are from..."

Tedious and nearly worthless other than knowing someone else was out there 50 years past. And all of that based on the ability to even decipher the radio signal. But even knowledge of the presence of another intelligent life form would certainly alter much of mankind's philosophy.

Even Freeman Dyson has chimed in on SETI. He has offered a wager: "The first discovery of extraterrestrial life will be someplace other than on a planet or on a satellite of a planet"--that contact with other beings will most likely be via probes instead of our usual perception of alien contact. He may be correct. Consider Voyager1's plunge into deep space. The only drawback is that data [conversation of you like] will be so outdated that the species involved may have expired.

"Dyson's Long Shot"

A corresponder wrote:

"I think it is worthwhile even if it only confirms life out there, it would be profound. As you say, the possibility of two-way communication seems remote with few exceptions. Our first contact is likely to be someone's earlier radio broadcasts. Such as " The Wilslix Knows" or "The Lone Ramspok" and maybe later things like "Route ## " or" Days of Our Wifeers" on television broadcasts. Of course our earlier radio broadcasts have been going out at the speed of light for over eighty years now. Still any kind of reply could take quite some time. I hate to think what they might think of our survival shows when the television broadcasts hit them! Also even if they are more advanced they might learn a few things from us as well."

"Also even if they are more advanced they might learn a few things from us as well."...like stay away! It would be so arrogant for mankind to believe and perpetuate a philosophy of species solipsism. Oh deity!...species analysis based on the bulk of radio and television signals would be mankind's kiss of loneliness. And then again, there may be others like us or those that would find pleasure in emulating us--ARGH!

Kelic: "Hey Gort, check this out...some male of the species is eating grubs in a pit of vipers."

Gort: "Way cool!!!!"

Gort: "Set course for planet #4530949...warp speed."

Gleek: "Aye, aye Captain."

Robert Roy Britt of Space.com wrote an article the idea of "intergalactic messages" is mentioned. Essentially there are two methods in view: The current method of electromagnetic signals and, as the article states, the "message in a bottle" approach. Each method has failing features. The former to be successful would require way too much energy for signal propagation and may miss a potential recipient. The latter is slow and cumbersome since there is no way now known to propel such a "bottle" near speeds of light to have a successful means of communication.

"Researchers: ET Should Write, Not Call"

What about broadcasting the Internet?

The "Good, the Bad, the Ugly"? Scanning the universe [or at least a very small section of it] for signals of extraterrestrial signals is one thing, but a continual broadcast of Earth originated data is another, especially when it is proposed that the "world wide web" be transmitted. Is the "www" what we want aliens to witness of Earth's citizens? The web is filled with hate, violence, racism, pornography, bias, crackpots, bad reasoning and bad science. A lot is not in a single language which could be difficult for translation and understanding. Web formats of textual data and images could be inaccessible. Where will all the passwords come from? Could "Gortreon" from a distant galaxy use his Mastercard for subscriptions? I suppose "Gortreon" and his colleagues could hack the sites. Granted, the "www" does exemplify the "Good, the Bad, the Ugly" of mankind, but do we really want to display the whole package of the human race to potential friends in the universe without and explanation and defense? Wouldn't it be better to pick and choose the information prior to submission and put our best foot foreword?

"What Do You Say to An Extraterrestrial?"

Well, this is interesting: A reversal of the modus operandi of the goals of SETI. Instead of, or in addition to, "waiting" for a signal from extraterrestrial intelligence--send an "invitation" via the Internet. This novel approach ["Invitation to ETI"] is the idea of Allen Tough Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto, Canada. Dr. Tough has some unusual and optimistic ideas concerning extraterrestrial intelligence and man's position in the universe.

"Welcome to the home page for the Invitation to ETI"

Well, this could be a problem: Missed or misinterpreted potential alien messages. Compare the shortness in time of our listening apparatus and methodology to an alien civilization far advanced in sending messages through out the universe with peers.

"Would We Mistake Signals from ET?"

Maybe it "is" about time to re-evaluate the functions of SETI.

Abstract:

"Motivated by recent developments impacting our view of Fermi’s paradox (absence of extraterrestrials and their manifestations from our past light cone), we suggest a reassessment of the problem itself, as well as of strategies employed by SETI projects so far. The need for such reevaluation is fueled not only by the failure of searches thus far, but also by great advances recently made in astrophysics, astrobiology, computer science and future studies, which have remained largely ignored in SETI practice. As an example of the new approach, we consider the effects of the observed metallicity and temperature gradients in the Milky Way on the spatial distribution of hypothetical advanced extraterrestrial intelligent communities. While, obviously, properties of such communities and their sociological and technological preferences are entirely unknown, we assume that (1) they operate in agreement with the known laws of physics, and (2) that at some point they typically become motivated by a meta-principle embodying the central role of information-processing; a prototype of the latter is the recently suggested Intelligence Principle of Steven J. Dick. There are specific conclusions of practical interest to astrobiological and SETI endeavors to be drawn from coupling of these reasonable assumptions with the astrophysical and astrochemical structure of the spiral disk of our Galaxy. In particular, we suggest that the outer regions of the Galactic disk are most likely locations for advanced SETI targets, and that sophisticated intelligent communities will tend to migrate outward through the Galaxy as their capacities of information processing increase, for both thermodynamical and astrochemical reasons. However, the outward movement is limited by the decrease in matter density in the outer Milky Way. This can also be regarded as a possible generalization of the Galactic Habitable Zone, concept currently much investigated in astrobiology."

"Galactic Gradients, Postbiological Evolution and the Apparent Failure of SETI"

Below is an excellent overview of the SETI program.

"SETI Searches Today"

Now this raises a troublesome issue...the real possibility of never establishing contact with anyone else in the universe.

Larry King interviewed Stephen Hawking in 1999. [ full interview ]

KING: When, Professor, did the universe begin, and do you know when it'll end?

HAWKING: We have good evidence the universe began in a big bang, about 15 billion years ago. We are less certain how it will end, but recent observations suggest a universe will expand forever at an ever- increasing rate.

Respect for a brilliant scientist, yes, ...certainly Hawking doesn't hold the key to open the door to reveal the fate of the universe. But, one part of his answer is quite fascinating and equally baffling: "...recent observations suggest a universe will expand forever at an ever- increasing rate." The words "forever" and "ever-increasing rate" are words of merit, weight, insight, mystery, and doom. The current model of the "Big Bang" provided the initial outward force to propel the universe into existence, but yet there is "something" that is supplying energy to increase its speed. Counter force of gravity--hypothetical "dark energy"? Einstein's fudge factor--"cosmological constant"? The universe isn't static. The Chandra x-ray telescope checking on galaxy clusters some one to eight billion light years distant has illustrated the fact that the universe is expanding and rapidly. Maybe there is no "dark energy"--an unknown feature of gravity. Perhaps the expansion, unlike Hawking's stance, will slow down and reverse. The "Big Crunch"? The "doom" part is also fascinating for it can define man's relationship to the universe as being a truly unique species [by chance or design] in that the universe will expand and thus increase distance and communication with other potential species and space travel. On the other hand, if the "Big Crunch" is a viable model, then there may be a window of opportunity for communication and travel. Longevity and maturity of our species will be a paramount issue. The "Big Crunch" is certainly a better deal than an ever expanding universe resulting in human isolation and loneliness.

No contact with alien intelligence coupled with not a trace of a species existence--JEEZE. That is sadness. "Humility" may be the key word there. The ancient Greeks had a word for that: "Tyche"..."knowing ones place on the scheme of things" with humbleness and reserve. Maybe that is the only certainty we may ever know?

I seriously doubt that many citizens of the world contemplate the focus of this topic. Is this citizen pusillanimous in addressing this issue? No...they are more interested in survival, feeding themselves and family, coping with illness [short term and terminal], avoiding pain [mental and physical], paying bills, dodging the rebel's bullet, etc. [Of course there is overlapping.] It appears that it is the poets, philosophers, and scientists that are keenly interested in the role of mankind with the universe and the potential fears of species loneliness. Not an egregious situation for those are the ones that institute new thought and doctrines of belief. But that may not be all that detrimental. Striking a conflict between the positive and negative metaphorically producing fire and consummation, there will arise the legendary Phoenix. Humm--Hegel still lives. On the final analysis, for an individual, those "worry and despair" issues evaporate in but a few decades. Let the next one in line carry the torch of mankind's fate.