The US Should Build a Death Star

Status QuoCon’s flippant dismissal of extra-terrestrial life is just that, frivolous. An understanding of the abundance of planets we have found which do not even include the small rocky planets (which are most habitable for life within this universe) already provide a massive number of likely habitable systems within our local neighbourhood.[14]According to Murphy’s Law, anything that is possible to happen WILL happen given enough opportunity. However, our understanding of thermodynamics, abiogenesis and self-organization only makes virtually certain with what we know, as Jeremy English affirms:“..the origin and subsequent evolution of life follow from the fundamental laws of nature and “should be as unsurprising as rocks rolling downhill.” [15]To put this into application, wherever there is the opportunity for life (such as an Earth-similar planet), there WILL be life. Furthermore, we know life on Earth began virtually immediately after Earth became inhabitable (after the period of heavy bombardment), which heavily heavily suggests life is something that happens rapidly when given the chance.[16]It simply doesn’t matter if aliens *some* might not be hostile, it is inevitable that some, or many will be. Stephen Hawking said we only need look as far as our own race to see what happens when an ‘inferior’ race is chanced across. Furthermore, below graph describes the number of stars that will have received our radio signals over time:[17] By 2100, approximately ~200 stars will have received our signals, with at least as many planets. By 2200, nearly 1,000 planets will be aware, and this number increases cubically. Therefore it is imperative we take action NOW while the number of planets aware of our existence remains low, as it will soon be too late as the graph shows.Con concedes that we indeed have our pants down by our knees when it comes to interstellar combat capabilities, as well as no intrasolar travelling capabilities. It seems Con’s position is much the same as those of climate change deniers, who refuse to take action until they are knee-deep in mess. To take the famous English idiom:“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”The Death Star would be primarily a deterrent, in its alien combat capabilities. We only need to assess our nuclear deterrence projects in place today to see the effectiveness of mutually assured destruction programs (MAD). Furthermore, the Death Star would make for an effective large ship eliminator, as was witnessed with the Death Star II in “Return of the Jedi”[18]Another consideration, is that any aliens that exist will either be: 1. Millions of years behind Earth 2. Millions of years ahead of Earth This is simply a fact of human timescales being tiny compared to cosmological timescales. Therefore, any aliens that are capable of receiving our signals will have technological capabilities many years ahead of ours. We only need to consider Moores Law, the doubling of computing power every 2 yearsshows how fast things can change.Impact 1 - Sputnik MomentPro is comparing apples with oranges when he compares the 67P comet landings to asteroid landings, and is rather dishonest. Let the below table summarise the differences:[17] Comet 67P has a much, higher orbital eccentricity, and much higher orbital inclination, and is further away. This makes rendezvousing with the comet orders of magnitude more difficult than an asteroid, which we have sent countless probes to already.But, most importantly, is the mass, 16-Psyche has over a million times greater gravity than 67P, making landing six orders of magnitude easier!!!! We have in fact accomplished landing on asteroids with spacecraft that were never even build with landing capabilities!!![19]All the technologies I have listed are on the horizon of existing science, many or most are projected to be available within the next 50-100 years. An investment, such as the Death Star will obviously dramatically accelerate this process.During the Sputnik moment, manned spaceflight was completely impossible; it had yet to be attempted. Virtually all the technologies within the Apollo were unique, and designed for the mission. They were all ‘on the horizon’, and the Apollo program made them actualise. The same is the case here with the Death Star. We already have much of the background science for ion propulsion (which is already in use), space elevators, and lasers down. What is required is development and adaption for the project at hand.Note that we don’t actually need all technologies *fully* developed BEFORE initiating the Death Star, as we have projects we can begin within current capabilities that need to be performed anyway to make 16-Psyche (or another suitable asteroid) habitable (biosphere).Impact 2 - Jobs/HousingPro’s only objection to this appears to be the logistics of moving 2 million people. Con ignores the fact that this is a long-term project. The Death Star is not intended to be ‘just another ISS’, which is only designed to last at most 30 years. The Death Star will be an indefinite development. Staff will be born and raised on the Death Star. Therefore the immediate problem of moving that many people need not be a problem at all.Furthermore, rockets capable of exactly this type of interstellar travel from Earth have very recently been approved by NASA. The proposed craft is capable of lifting an enormous 130 tonnes (!!). By comparison, the Apollo missions only towed 44 tonnes. [20]The technology isn’t immediately here, but everything required for the biosphere, and transport, and self-containment is on Earth, and only requires additional development. Con doesn’t approve my option to use the Death Star as an ark. But who the heck cares, it still remains a valid reason to have a Death Star, even if it is not it’s primary role. The best ideas are multi-faceted, and versatile in their application. Oil refiners for example yields natural gas, bitumen, petroline, as well as chemical products. If refiners only produced gasoline, the overall project would be less attractive and less useful. The fact that the Death Star is so versatile can only be a point in its favour.Impact 3 - Launch Pad for Spacecraft“ Why not build a far more viable space port that is not the size of a small moon? ..“ “..on the Moon”Here’s why: 1. We aren’t ‘creating’ the platform, the platform already largely exists. We are simply functionalising it. 2. The asteroid is an M-Type asteroid. So spacecraft can be made from the raw materials on it. I.e. it will be both built AND launched in space, saving the need to launch from Earth 3. The moon has very limited & impractical natural resources to build spacecraft, due to its low metallicity [21] 4. The moon has 1,000x larger gravitational pull PlanI remind Con and the voters that the resolution depicts a comparable death star to the specifications given. Con complains that my plan entails a ‘weaponised asteroid’, not a Death Star, which is blatantly false. Who cares how the Death Star came to be, so long as it’s made, and is comparable to the one I linked to. Even George Lucas’ Death Star would have had a massive focus on living quarters and a biosphere, food, water and energy simply don’t ‘poof’ into existence even in Lucas’ world, nor should they in ours.It matters not what the Death Star is made from, but what it becomes. The plan is a progressive plan which converts the metal rich asteroid into a fully functional Death Star. Even a partially functional & complete Death Star was still regarded as such in Return of the Jedi.[2]RebuttalsEconomicsPro’s arguments here lack objectivity. In the plan I demonstrated that a Death Star can be built pragmatically and incrementally. Moreover we do not need to mine or launch the material into space as we can simply convert existing metallic objects into a functional Death Star. Why waste resources building something from scratch if you have virtually everything you need in something that has existed for millions of years.We already have thousands, millions of lasers on Earth. For example high-energy lasers have already been developed to the extent that can shoot down missiles from passenger jet planes.[22] Therefore a battery of 40,000 of similar calibre lasers is trivially within our capabilities. Microwave lasers, countermeasures, plasma cannons, etc. are no longer science fiction. We have real AND potent models of these already in use on Earth. Thus Con’s rebuttals fail.[23]US Citizens Con seems to have ignored all my arguments here. Everything I have argued so far is with the US Citizens in mind. Both national & international security, scientific and technological benefits, economic benefits (from increased employment and housing). I would have thought the benefits to the US Citizens here would be blatantly obvious.I could expand here too, the Death Star would clearly seat the US back as the undisputed superpower of the globe. This gives the US an increased grip on national security and community stability, since risk from war is mitigated. Moreover, it is within the self-interest of the US citizens to have Death Star purely from the virtue that “they want one”, as was indicated by the ~35,000 signatories on the petition.[1]Furthermore, just because the Death Star would be owned by the US does not preclude international investment and relations. It is easily expected that other nations will have a vested interest in the Death Star and will make contributions accordingly for research, defence, job and related relations. Pro’s talk of US debt exactly one thing: 1. The US have enormous spending power A Death Star would easily be absorbed into US’s spending capabilities. References 14. http://tinyurl.com... 15. http://tinyurl.com... 16. http://tinyurl.com... 17. http://tinyurl.com... 18. http://tinyurl.com... 19. http://tinyurl.com... 20.http://tinyurl.com... 21. http://tinyurl.com... 22.http://tinyurl.com... 23.http://tinyurl.com...