Transcript

Czy umiemy stworzy idealny wiat? | Justyna Pelc | TEDxPolitechnikaWroclawska

[Music] Good morning everyone, I hope that doing space things will go well for me. I mean, we're doing better than making presentations. I hope that today we're down. I wanted to talk to you about this very topic: can we create an ideal world? And I guess it's no surprise to anyone that the basis for these considerations will be space. Our greatest professional successes in space exploration took place decades ago. We flew to the moon, we stepped on it, and basically the topic stopped. Why, why, after that first step, we took the second, the third, the fourth, and a million more to continue exploring the moon? The answer is simple. We fulfilled our goal. We didn't want to get there, to lay the first paths, to actually win the space race. So what happened that now, after these decades, we're back to the topic of space again, saying that we want to go back there, that we want to go back to the moon, or that we even want to go to Mars. After all, something could have changed. Well, our approach has changed. We used to want to recommend you just to be there, we wanted to check if there was life on this planet or on the moon. Now we have a slightly different approach. We want to find out if we can live, and instead of having a goal, we fly and take the first step. We are starting to have a goal to fly and maybe stay permanently. It is in the context of this planet, like the mind of Mars, that we will consider today whether we can actually create an ideal world. Supporters of this toy-like space exploration where the human factor is an important factor are basically divided into two types: those who want to fly to the moon as a goal itself or as an intermediate goal on the way to Mars, or those who want to fly to Mars. And I belong to the latter. This probably doesn't surprise anyone anymore. I would love to go to Mars, but what can we do to create an ideal world on Mars? First of all, it would be useful to survive first, so we need to ensure protection. It's not on Earth, it 's difficult. There is radiation, the temperature is low, there is practically no atmosphere, and we have to survive somehow. And while sending, for example, the first astronauts to Mars, it won't be such a problem. We can take our base with us, we can, for example, create it with our own technology, 3D printing technology. But if we are considering colonizing the planet, meaning inhabiting a larger number of people, we need to find more effective ways, for example, to go down to Earth and make the Earth protect us from these things. We'll be living in an underground space city, but we don't need energy to protect ourselves from the conditions. I do n't think anyone expects us to be working on Mars, we'll be bathing coal and burning it. It's rather natural that we'll be moving towards renewable energy sources because it's more ecological. Take solar energy, for example, but everyone knows that solar panels are inefficient and won't produce as much energy as we need for our entire base. So what can we do? Regardless of how we look at it, we'll use the best source of such renewable energy, which is the energy side. I apologize for the different order, but it doesn't matter. The nuclear side, after all, pollutes our environment the least. The question is where we'll distribute it, but that's a different issue. But we also have our energy in the base. It would be useful to return to something else, namely our resources, and that makes me very happy. We're starting to think seriously about acquiring resources, but not with the aim of extracting as much as possible. We'll come to Earth and sell it, but with the aim of extracting it responsibly, so that if we're going to live there in the future, we'll keep these resources, not with the aim of convincing the entire planet to sell everything we can and actually return. So, more and more is happening on this topic. We 're even starting to shape something, so I think it's a great idea. Honestly, I hope we won't find anything valuable on Mars because I think then no law will stop them from taking it. But one important thing, or actually two, is what allows us to survive: water and air. And these are the people who are now unlimited on Mars, so we need to manage them even more responsibly, for example, by introducing a closed circuit and purifying 9,395, maybe almost 100. Thanks to this, we will need minimal resources to survive all the time, and we will need this technology on Earth. Considering how much we pollute our homes and how we have less and less drinking water on Earth, but that's not all, because we already have energy, shelter, water and air, it would also be useful to have food. I think it's no surprise to anyone that on Mars we probably won't eat hamburgers. I mean, meat isn't something we'll eat there for the simple reason that cooking meat is inefficient. Plants provide us with a much higher ratio of energy we get from them compared to what we create, so producing plants is much more effective, therefore such a plant-based diet will mainly or even exclusively be ours. The basis on Mars, but okay, not everything is great. We live responsibly, we clean everything we can, ecological energy, and does this look like an ideal world? Is there anything missing in the country? Is there still a problem in the colony? For example, a Mars colony of 2,000 people, because that's what we were considering. What's the big problem in such historical exploration? There's a problem in the knee of 2,000 people. Does anyone have any ideas on how to get there? Something else? Super management, managing who people are, because the biggest problem, which, for example, wasn't surprising as an engineer, I never considered it this way. The biggest problem in managing creating a Mars colony of 2,000 people, and exactly 1,000 people. As we well know, an ideal world isn't the only technology. We can create ideal people, but such people don't exist. So how do we create an ideal world with innocent people? So let's consider a few important problems. I like the topic of management here because this is one of such problems. Let's consider how we would manage such a colony. Let's assume this is a colony, I'll build one country, for example, the USA, taking into account that space law states that land, but they don't belong to anyone. Internationally, why would I want to pay hundreds of thousands of billions of dollars to create a colony that will never be theirs? It's not reasonable for someone to transport a piece of, for example, another planet. So maybe let's make it a truly Earth-based colony that will belong to all nations, for example, under some kind of United Nations organization that will manage everything. Great, but the problem is that you know very well how decision-making works in such large organizations where 1,100 countries govern. A decision in 7 years might be made on Mars. By that time, we'll probably all die and there wo n't be anything to collect honey. We need to simplify it somehow because decision-making in the crown of 100, 200, 1,000 politicians isn't the best idea. So maybe we should add management in the hands of specialists. Let scientists who know what to do to survive on Mars tell us what to do. And this also has one fundamental flaw: scientists can do everything Mary's will do to make us survive. But managing a queue is more than just about survival. It's a human aspect, and not everyone can demand 1,000 people. Let's agree to disagree. It's simple, so maybe let's give a voice to those who will receive much more than those who live there. Why do n't we introduce democracy on Mars? Let them be themselves. Since they live there, they know best what's going on there. This is the fundamental problem. Even though it's the best outfit we know, it has one fundamental flaw: we make decisions that the majority wants us to be, not those that are good. Considering that on Mars, every decision is ours to make or not to be, and with the majority, it's also more important not to be. However, giving a majority vote when not everyone knows what they're making isn't such a good idea. So what can we do? Some kind of king's viceroy, a ruler, a commander, whatever you call him, who isn't everything from the beginning. He's not in charge of this colony, and absolute power isn't a good idea either, as you've probably guessed. Because while he might have been a good candidate at the beginning, that's how the government treats people. What he does can have different outcomes. It doesn't make sense to give one person access to such people. So maybe those scientists who wanted to appoint experts on a given topic on Earth, appointed on Mars, should have specialists in a given field manage that topic. That's also good. The idea is, on the one hand, we have a group of people making decisions, and many of them can be urgent and serious because our lives depend on them, but they are prolonged. Secondly, they still don't know what we know on Earth, for example, overseeing the entire mission of the entire colony. Maybe I'll find a meeting for such questions. There are many, many more, but I believe that creating some kind of golden mean is impossible. But when we have family management, an important aspect, for example, economics and money, have the characteristic of solving many problems, but they also cause a significant one: some have more. And, for example, if those who don't have less than what we actually needed, we could have a homeless problem on Mars, which basically has no right to exist. Because if we don't have a home, we're not in the base, we're outside the base, we definitely won't survive. So, okay, the homeless problem solved itself, but that 's not the way we want to solve it, so I wanted to find a more humane way. For example, we could give everyone a comparison. Everyone has housing and food, it's only for access to education. That's all I need. But we also know that everyone has equal access. This won't work either. Besides, we have to motivate these people based on their work. How this colony will function depends on how it functions. So we need to motivate people somehow, but on the other hand, is motivating people with money a good idea because if they don't have something to ask for, because if they're going to be on Mars for 50,000 people, there won't be a shopping mall there for now, we won't have thousands of stores. We won't treat our rockets as couriers that deliver land from an online store. So our resources on Mars are also limited, and they are limited to the point that spending on the whims of a single person isn't wise. Of course, for mental health, sometimes it's necessary, but I do n't have enough stuff to get there. It's related to money. Secondly, do we need money on Mars? Can't we go back to these very basic methods of exchange, for example, the exchange of goods and services, or completely different methods? And such a column is related to the fact that we don't want to stop. These are very high costs, so we would like, for example, to be self-sufficient. This means that instead of sending money now, and even more so, taking resources from Earth, we would like to trade on a partnership basis, so there has to be something we can send to Earth for which, hello, that's what we need. But on the other hand, earning additional whims, i.e., creating something additional, will require a huge amount of work, so It may not be possible to shop on Mars, and these economic problems affect our society, and this is related to this society. Now let's imagine that for this March I would like to recommend a good question: if, for example, there are thousands of the greatest specialists in every field who will discover almost everything about the state, it is necessary. It wasn't a good idea. But if someone is working on the same subject, and in each of them, and there are these four astronauts, several thousand people are at least working, so we can have thousands of them. Most specialists won't stay here on Earth. Or will we limit ourselves to random people, at least not very significant at first? This is also not a good idea. However, if they are to go there and survive, do something, only people and develop them. They also need to have what they do. The criteria of age or health, whether they are healthy, are not good criteria. So where will we get these people? We have two options on Mars. We would like to have a homogeneous society, meaning one that is united. A divided society is not a good society. However, being far from Earth, so that they don't go crazy, kill each other, they need to feel connected to each other and attached to each other, so we could choose people from a similar group. But it is this diversity that is the driving force that makes That we are doing bigger things, more sublime, we are not investing in new ideas. For now, let's get back to the fact that this colony will actually belong to all countries. Each country must have its own side or its own people, colonists. And suddenly we have eight people from each country, so we have a million barriers. For example, the language barrier is not such a problem. We will learn the language, but each of us has a slightly different cultural background. However, these differences are how we were raised and what we believe in. All other beliefs can have a significant impact on how it will be difficult for us to get along. And yes, individuals will get along, but to create something completely different, people from different backgrounds, from different countries, different denominations, religions, everything different, to create one strong, small state on Mars. Well, then we have a much bigger problem. And in this society, it's also related to the fact that we have 1,000 people, we won't have specialists in everything, we won't have teachers in every subject, we won't have artists from every industry, actors, musicians, choreographers, anything, dancers. So to what extent are we able to replace, for example, education with culture in a virtual world? How much would we like a robot to teach us, and we would like to watch concerts and performances in such a virtual world? Well, from our own small ones. Research has shown that people are very reluctant, and while we really like such technological innovations, we really want this robot, this computer, to replace us and our relationships with other people. So this is also a problem that we have to solve if we want to consider an ideal world. And in fact, there are only a few problems. When we started to delve into this social issue, like a Mars colony, we found that these social problems are even bigger than technological ones, and that there is no single, given solution, and it may be difficult to achieve technologically, probably with a greater or lesser investment of resources. Eventually, we will achieve it with a lot of time. So, do we know how to create such an ideal world yet? Not yet, but we know how to approach it, how to start working on it. So I know that probably everyone who wants us to continue exporting such a human-like space using, so to speak, human astronauts also knows that we know how to create such a great space, or at least that it is a matter of finite, although enormous amounts of work, time is not 5, 10, 20 years, and above all, money. But the question I asked at the beginning was not whether we know how to create an ideal world, but whether we can create an ideal one, and the practice of ours your own planet shows that it can be different, so the question is whether to create this ideal world of mind, leave you alone, thank you [Applause]