Cav's Place

Awful dream… My worst fear, in its worst form, perfectly realistic and in graphic detail… And these past few days I hadn’t even been thinking about it quite as much as I usually do, so it wasn’t caused by intense thoughts. Actually, I’m quite sure I never thought about it quite like this, never imagined it could go quite so wrong, be quite this bad. Not that there is any way in which it could happen and not be the worst disaster, but I guess… I guess something can be worse than anything else and still far from the worst it itself could be.
I’m just shocked. Woke up and could hardly move. Couldn’t scream, couldn’t hit something, couldn’t whimper (crying’s impossible, as usual). I’m just in a daze, can’t even believe I could dream that. Perhaps I’m hoping I didn’t really dream that. That maybe I just dreamed that I imagined dreaming it, or something like that. Though that’d be awful too…
Most of all… I wish I had some way of knowing it was just a dream, that it isn’t happening… That it won’t happen… That it can’t happen… Please…

Like a good part of the world, a few days ago I was watching Obama’s inauguration, which I keep meaning to call coronation since that’s what it looked like. I found myself rather annoyed by how pompous everything was. True, he wasn’t ostentatious himself and you can’t say there was a significant overall display of wealth for the sake of wealth itself, but the fact remains that the trouble and expenses were outrageous. But what’s much more upsetting is that such, or often even worse, displays are very common among us humans.
You have the desire to show off. You have traditions that appear to require fastuous displays. You have celebrations which are completely out of proportion to their cause or even have no real cause at all. You have displays of mourning which look more like partying. You have attempts to honor people or events with outrageous gifts or displays which have little, if anything, to do with what’s actually being honored. And perhaps I could continue… Why do we insist on such a waste of resources, time and, frankly, of ourselves?

Going back to Obama’s inauguration, instead of the advertised “peaceful transfer of power” I saw a huge national celebration when there was little reason for it. Yes, Bush and the Republicans are now gone, but Obama didn’t achieve that himself; it’d be better to say that he was just the means by which it was achieved. Yet a huge amount of people showed up to cheer as if their problems were already solved, apparently not realizing that the work is just starting and that, if he’s to be able to achieve anything, Obama needs their efforts, their direct help, way more than their cheering and adoration. And if that wasn’t enough, there was also the long parade, followed by the series of balls, all of which were directly or indirectly supported by the government. And if the fact that the vast majority of people are idiots is a given and unavoidable, the fact that governments endorse such actions, especially during such harsh times, is not acceptable.
Dictators and royalty tend to periodically benefit from such fastuous displays without, or at least before, doing anything to deserve them. In those cases the situation is indeed much worse because they, or at least the dictators, not only endorse them but actually tend to demand them. They also use to show off their wealth, either real or perceived, during such ceremonies, therefore pointing out the difference between them and their subjects. And yet those subjects keep coming and providing such dubious entertainment. Granted that some of those who are ruled by dictators do so out of fear and not out of loyalty, but I still wonder why does anyone put up with such expectations and what the point of it all could be… Other than stroking somebody’s ego that is, or even of creating a problematic ego in those who previously knew their place…
And, while I’m at it, I should also mention national holidays, since they also tend to require a lot of planning and use massive amounts of resources. There is usually a past event of great importance for that particular country which is the cause of the celebrations, which take the form of parades and speeches, but sometimes also more regular types of entertainment such as concerts. Sometimes the event happened a very long time ago and any available descriptions are quite inaccurate, sometimes willingly so. And, either way, wasting time and resources in ways which cause a disruption in the lives of those who’d actually intend to do something meaningful that day is far from the right way to honor those who fought and died (since that’s what the past event tends to involve) for your country.

Next come religious holidays and all the flashy celebrations associated with many of them. The fact that these days they have more to do with celebrating consumerism than anything else is also a major issue, but even if the celebrations are done for the right reason it’s still wrong for the state to get involved in organizing them. What happens around Christmas in countries where the majority religion is Christianity is a perfect example of that, with authorities setting up large trees in town squares and decorating the streets with lots of colored lights. All of that takes time and uses up a large amount of resources, which could be better used on many other things.
Somewhat similar are the carnivals. Granted that they are usually local events, not national, but they tend to paralyze the city in question and the surrounding area, so the amount of disruption they cause is massive. Still, if their impact would be limited to their actual duration it wouldn’t be that much of a problem since the tourists they bring tend to generate a lot of income for the host city and could therefore be considered an investment like any other, but the parades they tend to include are a different matter entirely. Those are usually not why tourists come, and yet lots and lots of people spend months preparing to play their part in them. They literally spend their time and use their skills just so they will be able to “properly” waste them for a day or three per year.
And then you have the ceremonies caused by sports events. I’m not talking about more or less spontaneous celebrations triggered by winning a trophy or other similar achievement, as those can be justified, are generally not prepared in advance and the state has little involvement in them. I’m talking about such things as opening ceremonies which are prepared a long time in advance and whose only purpose seems to be grandeur… Especially when they’re also fake, the one for the Beijing Olympic Games being a very good example of that. There could be a purpose for such ceremonies, if they’d be truly meaningful or at least very entertaining, but that rarely happens and all that’s left is mostly meaningless pomp.

Moving on to an individual level, we have the various ceremonies which are part of a person’s life, such as weddings or funerals. While it’s true that the rich and influential tend to be the most outrageous when it comes to these events, the only thing keeping most others from doing something similar is the fact that they have less resources to waste, since they tend to waste as much as they have anyway. I find it especially troubling when it comes to funerals, which end up turned into these ceremonies which can at times resemble parties, albeit subdued ones. You’d think that the deceased’s friends and relatives are actually celebrating the death, though that’s not usually the case. As for weddings, the amount of time and money wasted on the ceremonies and celebrations which are supposedly “required” for such an event often play a rather important part in why so many relationships become strained immediately afterwards.
I could also include other personal celebrations, such as birthdays and other anniversaries, here, but to a much lesser extent. In some cases the preparations for these are also quite stressful and the outcome is not worth it, but there’s far less pressure from society here so I can say that people have only themselves to blame if something doesn’t turn out right, which is not what this post is about. Still, some of the rich and influential do sometimes turn such personal celebrations into public events.

You might say that tradition demands that most of these things happen, but what is tradition? Isn’t it something somebody simply decided to do at some point? If so, why can’t we decide to do something else? Don’t all traditions have a beginning? If so, why can’t they also have an end? You have to keep in mind that most of these traditions started a long time ago, when there were far fewer people in the world, each of them used less resources and the ability to quickly travel from one place to another was rather limited. Traditions can become outdated, no longer being applicable in the current context. Not to mention that some of them are simply stupid…
You might say that many people need traditions and I might agree, but why can’t we use them to create something new and good instead of wasting even what we still have? Efficient traditions can also be created, though of course with much more difficulty than wasteful ones. But nothing worthwhile’s ever easy… And if you’ll invoke the fact that the entertainment potential of these events still makes them worthwhile, despite the inherent problems, for those who wouldn’t be able to obtain any elsewhere, I’m going to ask why aren’t we using the time and resources wasted on such ceremonies to come up with ways of making sure people will be able to have access to many different means of relaxing and having fun? Giving them the ability to choose means they’ll be able to find exactly what suits them and also that the state will be free to take care of more pressing issues.

I went to the CNN site today and noticed an ad on the right side asking me to take a survey about electronics. (It’s actually just about Nikon, especially their advertisements on CNN.) I like surveys, so I clicked it and saw that it says they’ll donate €2 if you’re from Europe or $2 if you’re not to the organization of your choice, out of the four options listed, if you complete it. After doing that, it took me back to the CNN site and I saw an ad for a different survey, about travel, so I did that too. I have to say that you really shouldn’t believe them when they say it’ll be short, because if you intend to do it properly it’ll take quite some time to complete. But at least there are five organizations to choose from at the end of it, since the part about the donation still applies.

Personally, I find it unlikely to be true, that donation made for every single survey taker. The expenses would be huge, considering the amount of visitors a site like CNN has, especially for the Nikon one, since I think that’s short enough for anyone to take. And the other one may be long and complex enough to make many potential takers give up at some point, but that doesn’t mean they won’t complete it; they could just give up on providing serious answers and just click through to the end.
But that’s less important. What I find interesting is the concept, attempting to motivate people to do something by donating money to a cause they support instead of promising them a chance to win something for themselves. It’d be nice if it’d work, it’d mean a fair number of people do care more for a cause than for themselves, at least when it comes to little efforts. Which is exactly why I say it matters less whether it’s true or not…

It’d be good news if this kind of incentive would have the desired effect, even if that would take away most of its “activist” value and leave only the marketing. It’d also be great if they’d keep their promise about the donations. But right now it seems good enough that such a large corporation is looking in that direction, and perhaps even trying to encourage people to get more involved by doing so.
Something like this doesn’t involve trying to educate people or attempting to make those who don’t care start caring. If true, it just provides an easy way to help a little bit. What’s more important, it provides a way to help unwittingly. The world truly needs that, considering how many ways there are to harm unwittingly…

It keeps being said that we need to do something about the environment before it’s too late. Unfortunately, recent signs show that we might have passed that point already. Studies have shown that even if humanity would completely stop harming the environment from now on, the destructive process would still continue. We have already pushed Nature too far for neutrality to be enough anymore. If we are to still have a chance, we actually must have an impact on the environment, but it must be positive, repairing the damage already done.

One more proof of that is a recent piece of news saying that Canada’s forests are so damaged by the effects of global warming that they’re now releasing more carbon than they absorb.
Explaining it very plainly, the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere causes an increase in temperature. That means the winters aren’t as harsh anymore, and harsh winters were what had so far kept the mountain pine beetle population in check. Since the mountain pine beetles now flourish, they kill more and more trees. Living trees absorb carbon dioxide, but dead trees just rot, therefore releasing the carbon they had absorbed during their lives. As a result of the extensive damage, the forests end up releasing more carbon than they absorb. In turn, that worsens the greenhouse effect, making the entire process more and more damaging as time passes.
If this is not clear evidence that we have passed the tipping point, I don’t know what is…

Yes, barring an extreme greenhouse effect as the one seen on Venus, Earth would likely eventually recover. But that would probably only happen after conditions would become too bad for advanced life forms to tolerate, possibly leaving only simple plants and bacteria to restart the evolutionary process. That means the reason we need to do something is not as much to save Earth as to save ourselves… Ourselves and all the other species we share this planet with, species we should care for, not exploit.

Science fiction couldn’t exist without a means of quickly reaching distant stars. Some authors accomplish that by using wormholes, hyperspace or any other method of reaching a destination without actually traveling through the space separating the point of departure from said destination. Many, however, use faster than light travel.
I’m going to leave the technological considerations aside for now. Whether it might or might not be possible to achieve such a feat is less important. I’ll just assume that it is possible, because this is about science fiction and therefore hypothetical.

In assuming that it is possible, I’m assuming that sufficient thrust can be generated and that there are means of preventing everything, including the crew, from imploding. Those are technical problems and therefore not my focus.
What I’m looking at are the logical problems. One would involve the time spent accelerating and decelerating, as it would make very little sense for these processes to be instantaneous even if it would be technically possible, but this is less important and perhaps less obvious than something else. I’m talking about the risk of collision, and that’s what this post is really about.

In the books and movies which use faster than light travel through real space, there is usually talk about setting or plotting a course before such a speed is reached. That’s supposed to mean telling the computer to figure out a route to the intended destination which avoids any bodies the ship could collide with. But this is where the problems really begin…
How do you know exactly where everything is? You’d need a constantly updated map of every single body in the galaxy, and that’s only if you confine yourself to this galaxy. At a glance, that means every single star, planet, satellite, asteroid, comet and so on. Of course, you could eventually have an accurate map of the galaxy, but how do you obtain it? You’d need to send ships to explore first, and those ships would need to travel slow enough to avoid any collisions with unknown bodies, making the task take an extremely long amount of time. There is the possibility of sharing star maps with other civilizations, of course, but you’d better be very sure they’re accurate before you rely on them!
Now let’s assume that you do have that perfectly accurate star map and run simulations to know where each body should be at that specific moment. But what if it isn’t? What of gravity fields interfering with smaller bodies? Up to a point these could be calculated I guess, but then it gets even worse. What of collisions between celestial bodies or, more importantly, the intervention of other species? How can you take that into account? What if someone decides to push an asteroid out of the way since was coming too close to their planet or space station? What if they were doing target practice on another? What if we’re talking of civilizations, such as our own, which are yet to establish contact with others? Those couldn’t let you know even if they wanted to, so you could never update your charts!
And speaking of other civilizations, what of the things they actually build? Space stations, probes, ships… You could assume that space stations are very close to planets, so if you avoid the planet you also avoid the station, but even civilizations which are barely taking their first steps through space could send probes anywhere, even outside their own solar system. Our own are certainly proof of that… As for ships, there is absolutely no way to know where those are. Advanced civilizations, capable of faster than light travel, could have plenty of ships which could be anywhere at any moment. Space may be big, but there is no way to be absolutely sure there won’t be two ships in the same place at the same time. The chances of that happening increase drastically when you near certain “popular” destinations, which multiple civilizations have a reason to visit frequently.

After establishing that you can’t avoid the dangers by simply setting a course, we have to think of the alternative: Being able to detect an object early enough to avoid a potential crash. After all, computers could react very quickly and therefore be able to steer the ship clear of surprising obstacles even at very high speeds, right?
Not quite, I’m afraid… The easiest things to spot are the ones which would be easiest to avoid by simply plotting the course. Stars should certainly be avoidable even at extremely high speeds, but as the size of the body in question decreases and its speed increases, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep the ship safe. Yes, if we assume that faster than light travel is possible, we could also assume that very powerful scanning systems might eventually be able to notice any celestial bodies in time to avoid a collision… But I doubt that any system could notice another ship which also travels much faster than light. That could require scanning an area with a radius of many light years every single moment and also correctly judging what the other ship will do next, since its own attempts to avoid a collision might actually cause it.

These are just a few thoughts I’ve been having these days. I’m sure there are also plenty of other problems, and that’s without even taking the technological ones into account.
For this reason, I dare to make the audacious suggestion of eliminating the concept of faster than light travel in real space from science fiction. Yes, it could be possible, but it’d be too risky to try over long distances. And since long distances are exactly the ones it’d be developed for, it seems quite pointless. There must be better ways and any race which is advanced enough to create ships capable of traveling much faster than light would have likely found them.
There are a lot of other paths to explore when it comes to traveling such immense distances… I mentioned wormholes and hyperspace at the beginning of this post and I believe those are the two main concepts, but they could take many forms and could be exploited in many different ways, so I don’t think anyone should feel limited if they need to remove the ability to travel faster than light from their works.