Question

Assuming that we have the technology which allows us to travel fast enough, do you think that it would be feasible to gather the energy from the matter that is just outside the event horizon? It sounds like the perfect source of natural energy and if it is out of the black hole's reach, then it would be safe, too.

Answer 1

sure , it is. But when all the technologies become ready.....there won't be any human-beings down here on earth as they will quarrel each other, go for war and die out.....Machines might do it as in SCI-FI movies.
What we can do now is use carefully what nature is giving us now and make use of the available resources as they can be used for the most of the time possible and prevent human greed and war......to bring your thought to reality.....with a world with all life forms in it.

Answer 2

One can say that human nature is inherently flawed, but keep in mind that the same things that cause wars and quarrels also keep us going forward. Just think what we are talking about - energy, which means money and power... which can be used to gain even MORE money and power! Isn't it funny that technological development is the fastest in case of military technology, which then influences other fields? Just think how much behind we would be without it.

Answer 3

Newton,Edison, Faraday, .....those who made bigger contributions to mankind, never did it for war.... they did it for the mankind and to please their own mind. War by super powers now a days are mainly to get the control of most of the natural resources under their control so they can control the future....till these resources are available......when it gets depleted there won't be war...... there will be only mass killing by these powers only then even humans will be burned to power their machines......which will end us...Those with most power will remain.... We don't need war to prosper, if the money put into these is rerouted , it will be enough to feed a lot of people and built shelter for them.... for research........ for the good of mankind ....... so the world as one must stand together and think of a situation where nature stops providing us ....and take that situation as a war .....which we need to fight against.

Answer 4

Two major achievements of the XXth century - the Internet and the space missions - were the result of the technological, mostly military-orientated race between two superpowers. In fact, nowadays the technology helps us in preserving global peace, as there has been NO major war since the end of WWII. Even the nuclear weapons, although it may seem strange at a glance, help us to avoid major conflicts. Just think how much more likely wars between the USA and the USSR or India and Pakistan would have been if it were not for the mere threat of dropping nuclear bombs! Which other period in human history has been so peaceful? It's in nobody's interest to achieve mutual annihilation. Let's be realistic - there will ALWAYS be wars, even if they change their form and scope. What I think that is important to understand, though, is that the humanity's duty is to make them happen as rarely as possible and prevent GLOBAL conflicts from erupting.

Answer 5

PEACE........WHITE FLAG.......PEACE......

Answer 6

What if some thing like what happened in 1914 and 1939 happens again.......These technologies(these military incorporated space technology) will remove the third planet from the solar system.What remained here for thousands of years will be powdered by the technologies of a century.

Answer 7

Of course that some risk is involved, but that's the case in pretty much everything that is part of our lives. However, mutual annihilation is not in anyone's interest. Even if the Third World War erupts, it will most likely be a conventional war, in the modern sense, of course. The only real danger is associated with dictators in regional powers (like Iran or North Korea), but in that case it's more localised. It won't destroy our planet. Besides, technology is just a tool. It can be used in good ways or bad ways. You can use a hammer not only to build, but also to destroy.

BTW Imagine if the USA would be forced to invade Japan in 1945. Historically, they surrendered after two of their major cities were bombed, which killed thousands of people. An invasion of the Japanese isles could result in deaths of millions. Battles of Iwo Jima and Okinawa show that casualty rates were immense for both sides when the Japanese were determined enough and were fighting close to their homeland. They even intended to arm common citizens and order them to fight to the death. Just think about this bloodbath. Ironically, nuclear weapons potentially saved more lives that they took away.