So, in conclusion: To efficiently colonise the universe, take your time. Do research. Think things over. Go to the pub. Saunter like an Egyptian. Write long letters to mum. Complain about the immorality of the youth of today. Watch dry paint stay dry. But when you do go… go very, very fast.
Your general argument that speed is more important than starting time seems plausible, but this paragraph (despite being well-written!) is a bit misleading. As you imply, colonising “the closest galaxies” gives us far more resources to put towards research.
Actually, it seems odd to limit it to just the closest galaxies. If spreading is pretty easy (as you say), and more resources means more research, we should still be trying to colonise pretty fast.
Presumably our colonisers should be programmed to use the resources they find to both replicate and research more efficient propulsion (before converting to running emulations/simulations at the heat death of the universe or doing the hedonic shockwave or whatever).
colonising “the closest galaxies” gives us far more resources to put towards research.
The closest galaxy is more than 11 million light-years away. If after 10 million years of research you still didn’t reach high enough speeds to get most of the universe, you’re not doing it right.
ETA: Sorry, that’s about 1.6 million, not sure where I got that 11. And of course there are dwarfs that satellites of the Milky Way which are a bit closer. I think my point stands.
Interestingly enough, the universe tends to have clusters: Colonize the planet first, and study how to move fast enough to colonize the solar system, then the local group, then the galaxy, then the local galaxies...
Your general argument that speed is more important than starting time seems plausible, but this paragraph (despite being well-written!) is a bit misleading. As you imply, colonising “the closest galaxies” gives us far more resources to put towards research.
Actually, it seems odd to limit it to just the closest galaxies. If spreading is pretty easy (as you say), and more resources means more research, we should still be trying to colonise pretty fast.
Presumably our colonisers should be programmed to use the resources they find to both replicate and research more efficient propulsion (before converting to running emulations/simulations at the heat death of the universe or doing the hedonic shockwave or whatever).
The closest galaxy is more than 11 million light-years away. If after 10 million years of research you still didn’t reach high enough speeds to get most of the universe, you’re not doing it right.
ETA: Sorry, that’s about 1.6 million, not sure where I got that 11. And of course there are dwarfs that satellites of the Milky Way which are a bit closer. I think my point stands.
Interestingly enough, the universe tends to have clusters: Colonize the planet first, and study how to move fast enough to colonize the solar system, then the local group, then the galaxy, then the local galaxies...