[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 65 KB, 800x400, 1354876297340.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5419692 No.5419692 [Reply] [Original]

let's go.

>> No.5419703

>>5419692
Add Earth to that list in about 60 years.

>> No.5419706

>>5419703
Earth is already on that list.

>> No.5419707
File: 261 KB, 697x2146, 1354879535520.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5419707

>>5419703
hue

>> No.5419710
File: 200 KB, 1440x1080, gliese667cc_earth_mars.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5419710

>> No.5419719

>>5419707

>greenhouse effect

Don't tell me they are assuming that that planet has GLOBUL WURMING on it

(USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST)

>> No.5419755 [DELETED] 

>>5419692
why are they so big?
i mean i know why, to hold a stable atmosphere but...
there HUGE
the smallest is twice the size of earth!

>> No.5419777

>>5419692
>>5419692 (OP)
why do they have to be so big to be habitable?
i mean i know why, we need heavy planets so it can hold in a stable atmosphere but...
there HUGE
the smallest is twice the size of earth!

>> No.5419779

>>5419719
'That'?
There are five planets in the post.

No, they are not assuming global warming for any of them; they cannot examine anything that fine.
But they are trying to identify qualities that could make planets habitable, and atmospheric composition, temperature, and density are all relevant to that.

>> No.5419780

>>5419777

Smaller planets are harder to detect I think

>> No.5419782

>>5419777

They don't have to be that big, it's just what we've found so far.

>> No.5419784

>>5419777
>why do they have to be so big to be habitable?

it's not that -- we simply haven't found many small planets yet.

>> No.5419786

>>5419777
>why do they have to be so big to be habitable?
They don't, they have to be big to be found
Big planet is easier to found > we found more big planets > we found more big planets that are in habitable zone

>> No.5419792

Four agreeable and similar posts answering the same question in the same way, all within about a minute?
Big day for /sci/

>> No.5419794

>>5419780
>>5419782
>>5419784
>>5419786
ok i get it
there hard to find

>> No.5419799
File: 106 KB, 396x385, sadfrog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5419799

>You'll never walk on the surface of an alien world

>> No.5419801
File: 245 KB, 476x365, 1337099311270.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5419801

How would we fix the gravity problem with a planet that is twice the size of earth?
2g's (Maybe less, maybe more, depends on the denstity of the matter) would do a lot of damage to our skeleton?

>> No.5419814

>>5419794

They are*

considering the technique they are using to find them, of course earth sized planets would be ridiculously hard to locate.

Kepler basically watches this same area of space and watches for slight dimming in a stars light. Based on the dimming they can determine the size of the planet.

Correct or incorrect?

>> No.5419818

>>5419801
a dapt tay shun
>original inhabitors (if any) would be close to the ground

>> No.5419822

>>5419719

The greenhouse effect/global warming can be induced by man (or other species I guess) but it can also come about due to natural changes. After all our own earth was once warmer, it was also once coated in ice from stem to stern. Meteors + volcanoes fucked the dinosaurs and nearly all life over on our planet at one point. There's no reason something similar couldn't/wouldn't/didn't happen to these bodies. I've heard it suggested that Venus used to be cooler than it is now but due to a greenhouse effect it's much, much warmer now.

Shit happens breh.

>> No.5419825

>>5419801
well that would be in the far future
by then we could probably just blast a huge chunk off and make a moon to satiable its rotation in the process
killing two birds with one stone

>> No.5419827

>>5419801

>our

We aren't talking about us. We are talking about possible alien life.

Life would adapt to the higher gravity if it evolved there. I saw a thing on this once, On the history channel I think.

They theorized that the animals would likely be slug-like in nature, since limbs would not be the most effective form of locomotion

>> No.5419830

Am I the only one who thinks it would be awkward as fuck approaching an alien race similar to humans?

>> No.5419839

>>5419827
Sawwy, i thought this thread was about where we could in theory live.
Sorry for misconception!

>> No.5419841

Why are these planets so light compared to earth? Lower iron content?

>> No.5419846

>>5419692
The problem with that is Venus is a habitable planet. Oh wait, no it got fucked over by its own runaway greenhouse effect.

So honestly we can't know at all until we can analyze the chemical makeup of their atmosphere and I think that's a long long way off.

>> No.5419847
File: 1.45 MB, 288x198, 1347727361815.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5419847

>>5419827
>I saw a thing on this once, On the history channel
>On the history channel
>history channel
>mfw
but no seriously, that would probably be the

>> No.5419851

>>5419799
yeah i will

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iYpxRXlboQ

>> No.5419852

>>5419822

except CO2 is not a pollutant, it is a naturally occurring gas in the atmosphere that makes up a VERY VERY TINY portion of the total atmosphere

an EVEN SMALLER percentage is produced by human beings, around 4% of all CO2 in the atmosphere is produced via human causes

CO2 is an extremely mild greenhouse gas, not enough to significantly effect earth's climate


in fact, the major greenhouse gas in our atmosphere, that accounts for around 95% of all greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere is actually

water vapor

yep

the mother fucking clouds nigga. they are white and fluffy, and you know what they do? they reflect light and heat from our earth.

>more clouds = colder climate
>less clouds = warmer climate

simple as fuck guys

>> No.5419861

>>5419847
case
that would be the case

>> No.5419869

>>5419861

the universe was a pretty good series while it was running

>> No.5419909

how could we get to these planets in the shortest possible time
>wormholes maybe?

>> No.5419912

>>5419909

Folding through the 4th dimension?

yes. this is the quickest way to get from place to place in our universe

>> No.5419922

>>5419912
well how can we do this with what we know?

>> No.5419948

>>5419922

Simple

we can't

I requires an enormous amount of energy to warp spacetime, and even more just to keep the wormhole open and stable

we don't even know what will happen once we go in one, never-mind where we would end up

We could use a warpdrive, but that is also still 2advanded4u

>> No.5419951

>>5419948
advanced*

>> No.5419963

>>5419814
That is correct, but there are at least two more analysis methods used these days.

>> No.5419971

>>5419827
All this time, I thought we were talking about Earth-like because of the potential for colonizing.
(Not that I believe FTL is possible, but...)

I guess it's the same subject if we're just talking about alien life, but it needn't be limited it to Earthlike as strongly.

And yes, gravity being higher would mean little as far as forming life, even though it probably makes birds less likely.

>> No.5419974

>>5419841
We can know nothing about it's interior.
We can know a little about its atmosphere, in unusual circumstances.
I don't know where they figured gravity relationships.

>> No.5419986

>>5419971

Not necessarily. With more gravity, the planet would have a thicker atmosphere.

It would actually make flying easier.

Flying creatures could evolve.

>> No.5419992

>>5419986
Well, that's correct, but I figured evolving lighter bones would be much less likely, making the threshold to gliding steeper than in Earth's case.

>> No.5420118

Wasn't there one recently discovered in a very nearby solar system, like only one or two dozen light years away?

>> No.5420177 [DELETED] 
File: 87 KB, 469x360, saganburg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420177

>>5419814
This is correct but it is one of only a handful of ways to detect extrasolar planets. The two most common are the transit and doppler methods.

The Kepler mission employs a technique called the 'transit method'. By monitoring a star and recording the decrease in the intensity of the light as a planet passes between us and the star, we can approximate the size of the planet. Another method called the 'radial velocity' or 'doppler method' involves looking at the slight red and blue shift in light from a star as it wobbles about a point in space, pulled by a massive planet in orbit.

The very first exoplanet was discovered using another method called 'pulsar timing'. Pulsars emit very regular pulses of radio waves, and by looking for faint anomalies in this period we can determine how the pulsar is moving and, like the doppler method, determine if a planet is pulling it around the center of gravity.

By using both the transit and doppler method on the same object we can determine a lot about a planet - it's size, it's mass, we can determine what kind of planet it is from its density, we can determine it's distance from the star and use this to estimate hot hot it is, and there is even research being done now among exoplanet researchers to see if we can determine information about the atmospheric properties of a planet using spectral analysis.

>> No.5420181
File: 16 KB, 584x329, carl-sagan_large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420181

>>5419814
This is correct but it is one of only a handful of ways to detect extrasolar planets. The two most common are the transit and doppler methods.

The Kepler mission employs a technique called the 'transit method'. By monitoring a star and recording the decrease in the intensity of the light as a planet passes between us and the star, we can approximate the size of the planet. Another method called the 'radial velocity' or 'doppler method' involves looking at the slight red and blue shift in light from a star as it wobbles about a point in space, pulled by a massive planet in orbit.

The very first exoplanet was discovered using another method called 'pulsar timing'. Pulsars emit very regular pulses of radio waves, and by looking for faint anomalies in this period we can determine how the pulsar is moving and, like the doppler method, determine if a planet is pulling it around the center of gravity.

By using both the transit and doppler method on the same object we can determine a lot about a planet - its size, its mass, we can determine what kind of planet it is from its density, we can determine its distance from the star and use this to estimate hot hot it is, and there is even research being done now among exoplanet researchers to see if we can determine information about the atmospheric properties of a planet using spectral analysis.

>> No.5420240

>>5419707
all those planet are habitable do you have any idea what is like living under 3.5 - 7 Gs?

>> No.5420255

>>5419869
try better with carl sagan
also if you want to learn about the universe buy a book of asimov with that same name, it explains everything

>> No.5420259

>>5419948
and the fact that you enter but the one that comes out isnt you because the first you got atomised and re esambled on the other side

>> No.5420260

These maps are bullshit those planets are probably just Venuses or bigger mars. Earth like planets are extremal rare probably 1 per galaxy..

>> No.5420268

>>5419707
bullshit if you enter the planet it will be almost imposible with rockets to get out you will be trapped there forever in hell

>> No.5420273

>>5420260
>one per galaxy
dude wat?

>> No.5420275

>>5420268
but..muh anti gravity ships

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NKt3oGGI2U

>> No.5420283

>>5420118
Gas giant, I think, but closer, yes

>> No.5420286

>>5420240

I'm not even sure I like 1g all that much, near the end of the day.

>> No.5420289

>>5419707

Seed them. NOW!


We know plenty of microbes that would survive the journey and a few animals.

Captcha: ikopea interfere

>> No.5420290

>>5420260
>These maps are bullshit those planets are probably just Venuses or bigger mars. Earth like planets are extremal rare probably 1 per galaxy..


Do you mean the images of planets?
Yes, of course they are bullshit; they are nothing but random paintings.
We don't have any information about any surfaces, not even a vague color.

>> No.5420294

>>5419948
Still stuck with that old mentality that FTL or teleportation is impossible huh?

>> No.5420298

>>5420268
If that shit was habitable with food. Fuck I would want to live there.

>> No.5420301

>>5420289
I would rather we improve terra and make it a homeland for humanity forever. Why fix what isn't broken?

>> No.5420302

>>5420260
>Earth like planets are extremal rare probably 1 per galaxy..


On what do you base this information, considering that only a few years of efforts shows us over 400 planets detected and at least 6 in a proper zone for habitability?

When someone writes 'earth-like' they do NOT mean all the same temperature ranges, climates, plant and animal life, including intelligent species.
It is a general term for being in the Goldilocks Zone, and rotating, and having liquid water and some other compounds available.

>> No.5420305
File: 6 KB, 197x200, 1356476294464s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420305

>>5420275
HAHAHAHAHAHA
my sides

>> No.5420306

>>5420290
>We don't have any information about any surfaces, not even a vague color.
>Discover planet with pink air and red trees
>Call it "Claire"
It could happen

>> No.5420308

>>5420289

but we have no craft that could get there,
no patience to do it
no politics to spend the effort
very few people interested
very little reason to, since we cannot see the before OR the after

>> No.5420309

>>5420294
>Still stuck with that old mentality that FTL or teleportation is impossible huh?

Why should anyone change that, given that we haven't done either?
You are responding as though our opinions of science should change like fashion; you have it backward.

>> No.5420311

>>5420302
Even if it was habitable the atmosphere and the local environment would probably be toxic to us. I would rather we focus on making Mars earth like than taking a gamble on some planet we know nothing about.

>> No.5420315

>>5419852
>>more clouds = colder climate
>>less clouds = warmer climate

That's why Venus is so cool, with it's planet-wide water clouds.

>> No.5420318

>>5420301
>I would rather we improve terra and make it a homeland for humanity forever.
"Rather" suggests you think we can only do one, and looking at other planets is what we choose to do instead of clean Earth or live here.
It's not either-or; nor does finding and colonizing another planet mean we ever leave Earth, or want to.

>Why fix what isn't broken?
But... you just implied it needed fixing.
What are you talking about that isn't broken?

>> No.5420319

>>5420311

Haha, nice try marsfag. Soon your pet project of terraforming that wretched planet will be left even more by the wayside.

>> No.5420321

>>5420301

Same reason you don't just build one city when you're playing Civ.

>> No.5420323

>>5420290
Yeah! Screw NASA's estimates, you're saying it so I believe it.

>> No.5420325

>>5420311
>Even if it was habitable the atmosphere and the local environment would probably be toxic to us.
>I would rather we focus on making Mars earth like than taking a gamble on some planet we know nothing about.

Well, no one was suggesting we go to one, we're just window-shopping.
Certainly we're not talking about colonizing a distant planet first; that would be stupid.

>> No.5420327

>>5420309
at some point it might become posible and we might sail space with them .

but that point might be in 100 years 1000 or 50000

>> No.5420331

>>5420315
>That's why Venus is so cool, with it's planet-wide water clouds.

Water clouds?
It's covered in a thick blanket of dense CO2, under high pressure.

>> No.5420336

>>5420327
>at some point it might become posible and we might sail space with them .

Absolutely; we just don't know how and do not have any physics that makes it possible
that means it is a fantasy, not a science topic.

>> No.5420341
File: 7 KB, 239x251, 1356674070123.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420341

>>5420319
there is not need of terraformation you can build under ground to prevent radiation from killing everyone and start there after that you could dome parts of it and once thats done the colony would be so far advanced politicaly and economicaly . that there would be popular presure to make the outside of the colony earth like.

you dont put a rover on another planet and go to the congress of one of the countries and say i want to fill that planet with air water and animals

>> No.5420352

>>5420341
>you dont put a rover on another planet and go to the congress of one of the countries and say i want to fill that planet with air water and animals

No, but only because that scale is not politically pragmatic.
What you might do is say you have a plan to seed bacteria that sequesters chlorine into salts, and that would make soil arable for the future.

>> No.5420357

>>5420341
Two questions:

How would you cope without earth-like conditions (Blue sky, sunlight, clouds, etc.) for extended periods of time, and

Why not terraform? Our most notable trait as a species is doing things because we can.

>> No.5420367

>>5420352
but the problem is bigger than that and bacteria cant fill that much space with air at the correct presure .

thats why im all in for colonization but terraforming rests on the people of mars

>> No.5420380

>>5420357
>How would you cope without earth-like conditions (Blue sky, sunlight, clouds, etc.) for extended periods of time, and

Just a psychological issue;
some psychologists think you'd be past that as soon as you learned to see beauty in it.
I presume people wouldn't take long to find beauty in a new world.
I personally see plenty in the large deserts I have visited, so I imagine it would be easy for me. (On the other hand, harsh direct light drives me up the wall; space travel might be harder than I suspect.)

>Why not terraform? Our most notable trait as a species is doing things because we can.
Because we may never be sure of the long-term effects, we may never want to try the self-proliferating methods like algae that seem most promising.
I'm quite sure someone would eventually do whatever they think is promising, but as a culture, right now, I think people would hold back.

And other than self-proliferating organics, I am not sure we can put that much effort forth. Atmosphere generator machines, Mag field poles, Polar caps melters... it all seems so huge.

>> No.5420385

>>5420367
>but the problem is bigger than that and bacteria cant fill that much space with air at the correct presure .

Oh, it certainly couldn't be done with just one bacteria.
It would have to be in stages, and the surface is going to soak up many gases along the way, so that has to be planned out.
But the pressure isn't that big an issue; it's just really thin now.
I suspect I'd be surprised if someone showed me how much the ground would absorb as bacteria went along; there is a lot of that ability in sands.

>> No.5420388

>>5420357
1- if we start living under ground i think life at first (50 persons) would be difficult and stressfull but once you have a big city i don think i would mind , you never notice the blue sky when you are at say wallstreet

2- you could terraforme but that takes a lot of money and time and i dont think the hopefully united people of earth would like to see that much money spend on things that doesnt affect them. politicians will take full advantage of this and the whole effort would end in dissaster in about 10 years

>> No.5420399

>>5420385
organics are never as efective as mecanics , if bacterias were enough there would be circles of cientists sending payloads of bacteria to mars ,
after all sounds really cheap of an answer

>> No.5420402

>>5420388
>1- if we start living under ground i think life at first (50 persons) would be difficult and stressfull but once you have a big city i don think i would mind , you never notice the blue sky when you are at say wallstreet

Oh, I see you are picturing a single large space.
The first people would likely live in robot-built tunnels (in spite of MarsX plan for sending shacks).
After that, tall caverns dug in, tented and cemented, would be very cool, but they'd require that we found it easy to dig. If the diggers have a hard time, narrower tunnels may be the thing for many generations.

>2- you could terraform
Oh, mechanical terraforming would never do; no one would even spend that kind of effort here.

>> No.5420411

>>5419692
Earth is potentially habitable? Can't we send a probe to find out or something?

>> No.5420414

>>5420402
you can even do that kind of effort here because the whole ecosistem is so fragile that any large-scale project you do will end up fucking everything up

but if terraformimng its imposible that doesnt depresses me the martians could always start building biospheres with controled temperatures and atmospheric pressure .

have you ever read the fundation series by Issac Asimov?

>> No.5420415

>>5420411
>Earth is potentially habitable? Can't we send a probe to find out or something?

We put out several billion, but none have reported back yet.

>> No.5420419

>>5420414

Never got into Foundation, even when a couple friends got to add to the series.
It was too dry, I guess, in the first chapter or two.

>> No.5420423

>>5420388
You're saying this through a system developed over decades and billions of dollars that any rational person in the early 20th century would've dismissed as absurd, expensive, and pointless.

>> No.5420428

>>5420419
well this is science fiction and 15000 years in the future but still they find that the more they construct and as the population grow inmense the planet weather becomes unstable so the start doming, the more they do it the worst it gets until they dome the whole thing and they live as though they were outside but its all really inside

>> No.5420434

>>5420423
because earthlings saw potential, but do you even know were mars is in the sky, could you espect the average joe to know?

im not against terraformation i just say leave it to the masterrace martians to get to it when they are able not us

>> No.5420452

>>5420434
The average Joe knows more than you give him credit for. And why should we leave this to others?
Are we not good enough?

>> No.5420471

>>5420452
as i said like parents our obligations to the martians is
1- to get them there
2- keep the supplied until the become self sutaining
3- protect them

its their job to do their infraestructure.
you dont go to haiti to build their shit .

mars if colonised will become a new country harboring the best of humanity if you want to see that build go there and build and help and build you own new world .

>> No.5420487

>>5420471
The biggest problem I see with that is that we're treating them as an entirely different type of people. A few decades down in that scenario and I think we would see something resembling Britain and America in the late 18th century.

>> No.5420489

>>5420452
further more the colonisation of mars seems to me (and i hope) that will start happening within 20 years thanks to private companies

if you want to like greatly or anyone for that matter one should get a degree in something that could be used in building that new martian nation engeniers arquitects , fisicist chemics
it will take a while to get started but it is posible .
what people here start doing is saying thing far fetched like full blown terraforming but that is imposible for US earth bound to do. imposible economicaly imposible politicaly imposible logisticaly

it is the martians that have the choice to start doing such a thing and its in their intrest too

>> No.5420501

>>5420487
maybe after all the sense of freedom in mars might be incredible, after all they can do what ever they want , beacuse there is nothing there, no ecological law nothing to protect hell you could mine the whole surface and there wouldnt be nobody to bitch about it

>> No.5420508

For everyone who asays we dont have the means to reach these planets, look at this
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

With technology available we could create an intergenerational, or purhaps a cryogenic starship capable of reaching around 0.05c. We could reach systems such as alpha centauri within 100 years.

>> No.5420517

>>5420487
im not against your idea but elaborate a reason that could convice earthlings

>> No.5420518

>>5420508
>asay
Say*
Sorry about the bad grammer and spelling i'm on my phone

>> No.5420520

>>5420508
Wouldn't it be weird if we developed something analogous to FTL during that time and colonized their destination before they arrived? They'd wake up and there'd be cities all over the planet.

>> No.5420523

>>5420520
>not meeting them half way

Wow, has humanity lost its attention span or are they all dicks now?

>> No.5420525

>>5420518
also building a ship capable of resisting several nuclewar explotions a second and still protect from radiation would be a mammoth task

>> No.5420526

>>5420520
hahaha i have already heard this one

>> No.5420529

>>5420302
786 planets*

>> No.5420530

>>5420523
Our sense of humor evolved

>> No.5420541

i think the once that will explore the galaxy and colonice the stars will be the martians, because they already were the product of colonization and wont have the problems of living in enclosed areas for to long , because they will already live in enclosed espaces

>> No.5420555

>>5420508
I think humanity should wait for medical and genetic technology to advance a bit before we undertake something of that magnitude. It will be much easier to achieve once we master genetic manipulation and other life extending technologies.

>> No.5420579

although ive been wondering who would be in charge of the colony aside from the local martian goverment, it may be the UN but..

>> No.5420649

>>5419801
If you had the infrastructure, couldn't you accelerate the planet's rotation so that some of the gravity is countered by centrifugal force at the equator?

>> No.5420661

>>5420315
Venus isn't cool, it's what, a thousand kelvin on its surface? Greenhouse effect gone overdose there

>> No.5420665

>>5420508
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard_ramjet
Buzzard ramjet is better, uses hydrogen ions already there and can get to nearly .1 c

>> No.5420674

habitable for us or capable of supporting life in any form? if the latter, i recently saw a tedtalks about enceladus, a highly volcanic moon of saturn which has good chance of fostering life.

>> No.5420720

>>5420674
By "capable of supporting life" scientists mean that there is a better chance than zero of finding the equivalent of primitive bacteria or maybe even some pond slime!

>> No.5420756
File: 304 KB, 2160x1080, HEC_All_Confirmed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420756

Currently habitable planet candidates. Gliese 581g still not fully verified though.

>> No.5420797

Can we finally get the Gliese 581 system out of that list already? Red dwarves are the least probable candidates for life-bearing systems

>> No.5420858

>>5419801
>>5420240

How do you know what surface g those planets have? They only state the relative mass in those pictures but the the relative radius.

>> No.5420870
File: 7 KB, 273x184, correction.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420870

>>5419719

(USER WAS WARMED FOR THIS POST)

>> No.5420875

>>5420649
Do you imagine the impact a faster day/night cycle would have on the local lifeforms?

>> No.5420896

>>5420240
if you lift its not that bad

>> No.5420911
File: 116 KB, 475x375, 1357361741007.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5420911

>>5420331
>>5420661
thatsthejoke.jpeg

>> No.5420931

>>5420858

Assuming the same density as earth, surface gravity is proportional to radius, so it's not THAT bad. Still 2 g is way the fuck too much for long term living.

>> No.5420939

>>5420931
>never need to lift weights
>calisthenics is now power lifting
>always jacked
>power level over 9000
>die of heart failure

>> No.5420941

>>5420939
By the time we get to our first habitable exoplanet I assume we'll fixed most cardiac issues

>> No.5420942

>>5419948
http://techland.time.com/2012/09/19/nasa-actually-working-on-faster-than-light-warp-drive/

>> No.5420946

>>5420941
like the fact that our blood has to be pumped twice as hard to get to our brain? or that blood will pool in our legs?

>> No.5421039

>>5420523
Once a self-sustaining colony, all management connections would be rejected.
Earth people may still be interested, there might even be valuable resources to trade between, but real interest would become very tough to maintain.

Think of it; they have their own concerns, celebs, short-term and long-term issues, etc.