Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread

[junk]

I think human technology is just at the cusp of where they could attempt such things, but I think it would take substantial effort and capital, and I can't imagine why any human government or organization during this time period would think it was a worthwhile investment. I think there would also be many people and groups who would have serious ethical objections to tampering with the genes of higher animals. Genetic engineering of humans is illegal in most human nations.

Ah figured similar projects would most likely get started before the discovery of alien sentient species. In part as a drive to make our own neighbours in a sense. Plus when you think about it, it's not all that far from some projects which have shown up already about trying to breed more intelligent primates or various experiments dealing with primate intelligence.

The former seem to be more of a ghetto thing, where few reputable people would be willing to go to, but the latter seems to be undergoing fairly commonly.

And I could see a number of less reputable people attempting just that, or even have it state sanctioned. Considering technology wwill probably only improve and the need for good genetic tech will only explode in the future it should be more and more accessible.

[Arioch]

Ah figured similar projects would most likely get started before the discovery of alien sentient species. In part as a drive to make our own neighbours in a sense. Plus when you think about it, it's not all that far from some projects which have shown up already about trying to breed more intelligent primates or various experiments dealing with primate intelligence.

I just don't see the benefit of such a program. "It would be cool" doesn't seem to me to be adequate justification for what I think would be a very expensive and ethically controversial program.

Ah, Proxima and Esperanza don't have breathable atmospheres? That's new to me. Thought they were colonized because supporting one. I suppose Proxima would have a mostly carbon dioxide atmosphere then? To help keep the atmosphere gaseous? What's the oddity with Aldea's atmosphere? Nitrogen narcosis?

Humans have pretty specific needs in terms of atmospheric pressure and composition, which most alien worlds are very unlikely to conform to. Oxygen and carbon dioxide are both toxic at levels only slightly higher than we're used to, and even a minor imbalance in gas levels can make long-term exposure problematic for someone not acclimated to the environment.

Proxima and Esperanza both have atmospheres with human-toxic levels of carbon dioxide, and Esperanza, having no native life, has only trace levels of oxygen. Esperanza was colonized specifically because it is lifeless (but otherwise Earthlike), as a test case for terraforming. Large-scale terraforming on Aldea or Proxima has not gone forward due to ethical objections, because of the native ecosystems that could be destroyed by such terraforming.

Aldea has a nitrogen-oxygen-carbon dioxide atmosphere, but it's at a higher pressure, with slightly different composition levels than humans are used to, and contains alien microorganisms. An Earth-born human could breathe it for short periods without ill effect, but long-term exposure would eventually result in sickness (from any of a variety of sources). I think over time, local populations would probably adapt (as populations in Tibet or the Andes have adapted to high altitude), but I'm guessing that would require more than the few generations the human settlers have been there.

[fredgiblet]

I just don't see the benefit of such a program. "It would be cool" doesn't seem to me to be adequate justification for what I think would be a very expensive and ethically controversial program.

I agree, I've never understood the value or focus on uplift projects in Sci-fi.

[Absalom]

I just don't see the benefit of such a program. "It would be cool" doesn't seem to me to be adequate justification for what I think would be a very expensive and ethically controversial program.

I agree, I've never understood the value or focus on uplift projects in Sci-fi.

It's much the same as FTL: nifty, but not commercially relevant. I have a setting that I've occasionally thought about, and the only reason for meaningful levels of civilization anywhere other than Sol system is a massive, sustained, and built-up-until-MAD war IN Sol system. Until then, FTL is used by science missions, people who like shiny gizmos, and the space-age equivalents of Pilgrims and FedEx, because there just isn't anything sufficient to push it to major use otherwise.

Same with uplift, though if you maintain the ability to breed, then in that case I can see it working in a gradual-design process.

[discord]

genetic engineering, not using it would imho be ethically comparable to not allowing the use of antibiotics because it's too technologically advanced or something.

there are lots of inheritable diseases that bloody well SHOULD be wiped out, that is genetic engineering, there are a few changed that overall just seem like a bloody good idea(better efficiency in the cardiovascular systems, removing stupid weakness like high probability of bad vision/hearing, diabetes etc.)

there's bloody well room for improvement.

[Arioch]

It's much the same as FTL: nifty, but not commercially relevant.

The ability to travel to other star systems, get access to resources that are scarce or nonexistent on Earth... meet alien civilizations, learn from them and trade with them... set up human colonies throughout the galaxy to increase the number of humans (and therefore customers and trading partners) exponentially... would not these things qualify as being commercially relevant?

[junk]

I just don't see the benefit of such a program. "It would be cool" doesn't seem to me to be adequate justification for what I think would be a very expensive and ethically controversial program.

I agree, I've never understood the value or focus on uplift projects in Sci-fi.

I think the answer to that is the same why a lot of sci fi starts having sentient human built robots and AIs as well as why a lot of sci fi gets populated by aliens in the first place.

We sort of crave there to be something next to us. And if it isn't we try to fill that void.

Plus I can see a lot of people feeling a certain obligation to help some of these fairly intelligent creatures to make that next step. Basically in the sense of - we were given intelligence, maybe our role is to give it on as well. In a sense it might not all be that different from the reason why Soia-Lindon species exist in the first place. The original species just wanted more of their kind around so set up to create a very long term project. We, as humans, on the other hand tend to much shorter viewspans.


But yeah, overall I guess I like the concept of uplift projects, so I asked mostly out of this reason.

[fredgiblet]

It's much the same as FTL: nifty, but not commercially relevant.

In addition to Arioch's points FTL is critical to the long-term survival of our species, eventually something is going to happen to Earth, whether it's an ecological collapse, asteroid strike or the sun going into crazy mode and crisping us all, whether it takes 100 years or a million years, sooner or later Earth will be a graveyard.

FTL isn't a luxury, it's necessity.

I think the answer to that is the same why a lot of sci fi starts having sentient human built robots and AIs as well as why a lot of sci fi gets populated by aliens in the first place.

We sort of crave there to be something next to us. And if it isn't we try to fill that void.

We do? I thought the robots were usually built so that we didn't have to work. Also the robots and aliens were meant so that we can have allegorical stories without the discomfort of making our stand-in evil people be humans, so that the people we're trying to reach don't immediately reject the story as propaganda.

Plus I can see a lot of people feeling a certain obligation to help some of these fairly intelligent creatures to make that next step. Basically in the sense of - we were given intelligence, maybe our role is to give it on as well.

That's assuming wee were given anything and didn't bust our asses getting it. We clawed our way to the top of the food chain using our intelligence, why would we want to make competition that shares our own biosphere? I suppose that dolphins and octopi may be useful and relatively indirect competition since they are aquatic, but we need the resources in the ocean as well, and making them more difficult to get at by populating the ocean with people who can argue with us seems like a really bad idea on it's face.

I see VERY little benefit to an uplift program on Earth, mostly it seems like it will introduce more competition and more headaches. An uplift program on a world that is uninhabitable to us and not worth the effort of remote exploitation is a possibility, but on Earth I think it's a net negative, possibly a severe one.

[icekatze]

hi hi

A lot of people tend to anthropomorphize animals, machines, and even inanimate objects sometimes. (Wiiiilson!) And so I would suspect that uplifting animals would be a thing at some point in the future, as it seems like the next logical (or psychological) step of that anthropomorpization. However, in order for that to happen, the technology probably has to develop to a point where the input cost is very low. If the only people who can pull it off are giant corporations, they're going to be looking at their bottom line. If anyone with a modest budget and a "Mr. DNA," can do it, then I suspect that special interests, such as environmental and animal rights groups, will make it happen.

Doesn't sound like thats the case with the tech level in Outsider at the moment though.

[projekcja]

In addition to Arioch's points FTL is critical to the long-term survival of our species, eventually something is going to happen to Earth, whether it's an ecological collapse, asteroid strike or the sun going into crazy mode and crisping us all, whether it takes 100 years or a million years, sooner or later Earth will be a graveyard.

FTL isn't a luxury, it's necessity.

This claim is a result of a mixture of impatience and lack of imagination. The sun will fry the earth in a few billion years, but indeed life on earth may be annihilated much sooner. Still, if we have thousands (or even millions) of years of advanced civilization, we may easily endure past the destruction of the earths' habitability in several ways:

1) Construct colonies in space. We do not need earth-like planets to live on, just build big closed structures in space, with atmospheres and agriculture in them (using redesigned plantlife). Build colonies on asteroids, on moons etc. The amount of food we could eventually grow on earth is ultimately limited by the amount of sunlight hitting it. In space, I expect we'd eventually far exceed that limit, and by this point, the people living on earth may be a minority.

2) Build a generation-ship that carries humanity to another solar system. FTL is all about getting to other solar systems now, but if you accept that FTL is impossible, as it might be, the possibility of sending a colony ship that will take 100,000 years to get to a star 10 lightyears away still exists. Colonists that want to get there in their own lifetime may opt for cryostasis, in which case they may not care that the journey will take 100,000 years.

If you have fallen to the pit of thinking "FTL has been shown to be possible", due to nonsense about Alcubierre drives, note that all these supposed warp-drives assume we will have exotic material that not only we never detected so far, but that the standard model does not predict to exist.

The universe is a huge physics laboratory, in which all kinds of material are constantly thrown into all kinds of situations. I would expect that if "artificial FTL" was possible, some natural phenomenon would have created "natural FTL", and that we would have detected that.

[halftea]

But we have observed superluminal (FTL) events in nature! Cherenkov Radiation anyone?

Or wait, did you mean superluminal in a vacuum? That's a whole different kettle of fish there...

-jk- I couldn't resist the temptation to tweak what exactly FTL was being applied to.

[Absalom]

It's much the same as FTL: nifty, but not commercially relevant.

The ability to travel to other star systems,

Scientifically interesting, commercially inconsequential. Probably my setting would realistically have had some sort of "dot com bubble" early on with the technology, but there was little economic use for it (moving dangerous research projects further away, some possibility of science, etc.), and it was slow (you take a shortcut, but it isn't that short, it's at least a few days to months to get to Proxima Centauri; I never settled on a speed, but it's far from instantaneous, and even then your initial velocity and proximity to masses along your course has an effect on your speed AND course... gravity leaks, after all). There were some outposts (e.g. several at the Centauri triad), probably some random long-distance missions, a few (mostly failed) attempts by neo-"pilgrims" to start a colony somewhere far from Sol system and it's civilization, major military ships would be capable in case of need for quick reaction, but without something spectacular (remember, we can create most or all of the valuable gems industrially, dragging gold out of a gravity well is unlikely to be cheaper than separating it from the several million tons of rock you used for your latest super-habitat, etc.), there just isn't much economic reason for FTL.

get access to resources that are scarce or nonexistent on Earth...

Earth is most lacking in light elements, due to the creation of the Moon. The rest either requires very energetic events (e.g. supernovas), is accessible enough in asteroids, is light stuff that can be trivially gotten from gas giants and comets, requires discovering that:
1) it exists, and
2) it exists in star system Y, at concentrations worth bothering with, in which case:
it's likely to be worthwhile to just mine it with a small outpost and send it elsewhere, rather than try to stick some huge population out wherever.

meet alien civilizations,

I never spent the effort to decide how large an area humanity spread out over after the apocalypse, but even then it was presumably a pretty small area, within a sparsely inhabited universe. Space is big, and I intended 0 subtlety about the matter. "second age" and "third age" settings presumably would have aliens (certainly they wouldn't have that rare of FTL), but those are somewhat vague, amorphous, derived settings, and if any aliens in the local region were serious about expanding, then we in the real world would presumably be a recurring contact of theirs, which I personally doubt. Besides, one of the "first age" post-diaspora populations managed to either transfer to, or outright create, another universe (I never decided which, since the only trace would be inexplicable leftovers), something which might (it's obviously too early to say "yes" or "no") be possible in the real world, and presumably removes all threat of equivalent competition, so...

learn from them and trade with them...

Only valuable if it's cheaper (or at least close enough) than buying locally. Pre-apocalypse, the vast majority of the population lived off-Earth, but the population that lived outside of Sol-system was miniscule for two reinforcing reasons:
1) It's hard to say no to that economic base,
2) It's hard to say yes to that lack of economic base.

Besides, my FTL required constant energy inputs to "hover" in jump/hyper/whatever -space. Output rises with surface area while capacity rises with volume, so it's not like it couldn't be improved, but if you don't have any justification for that, then you don't build the massive miles-on-a-side ships, or at least don't equip them with the over-priced and never used (for energy reasons) FTL drives.

set up human colonies throughout the galaxy to increase the number of humans (and therefore customers and trading partners) exponentially...

Only justified if it's cheaper doing it like this than to do it where you already are... which in my setting, it isn't. In my setting, you can source most things locally (you have a habitat, where you can grow things, and various auto-factories are standard equipment) so there's relatively little need for fast turn-around: most shipping is bulk, even populations (via cyclers, since it's, you know, affordable), so there's just not much economic space for rush-shipping.

Even in Outsider, you've said that something around 80-90% of the human population is still in the Sol system. And this is with a sort-of kind-of pulp setting.

would not these things qualify as being commercially relevant?

Either unachievable with the available technology (traveling long distances cheaply), unachievable due to lack of known sources for said things (aliens, quark matter, whatever), or achievable just as easily without leaving the system (just about any practical materials: if magnetic monopole material were common, it would likely be in Sol system too).

In short, I just don't assume an exciting universe, especially in the absence of the "second tier" of the relevant FTL technology. "Second age"? Yeah, plenty of FTL travel, but you also have large populations moving to uninhabited systems because a local barren-world would be just perfect for a implausibly-large-volume bio-reactor, given that you have a lifeless world that they can terraform without dealing with competition; and a planet that got roasted for quite some time by the pulsar that it orbited, leaving goodness knows what types of heavy elements to mine; and the simple fact that the several-hundred years of the regional "we'll maintain FTL contact because near destruction turned every society slightly paranoid" diplomatic missions intentionally dumping small amounts of terraforming material in worthwhile planets produced plenty of small oases that didn't exist when the area was first settled.

It's much the same as FTL: nifty, but not commercially relevant.

In addition to Arioch's points FTL is critical to the long-term survival of our species, eventually something is going to happen to Earth, whether it's an ecological collapse, asteroid strike or the sun going into crazy mode and crisping us all, whether it takes 100 years or a million years, sooner or later Earth will be a graveyard.

FTL isn't a luxury, it's necessity.

I'm with projekcja on this one. I wasn't assuming that Earth (and maybe the other planets) held the majority of Humans in Sol system, and I was assuming very-long-term viable space habitats, so yes, FTL is a luxury in my setting (and, appropriately, used for fast transport, etc.). For that matter, FTL in the real world would be a luxury if we had it, as it would almost be guaranteed to be very expensive due to energy requirements (you either have to create or simulate the negative matter to hold open the wormhole, or breach space-time, or...).

Honestly, long-term survival of the species (or rather descendants) depends on the ability to create "fresh" low-entropy compatible universes, but not on FTL. For everything else, long-term living in space is enough. This is a subject where "think like a human" is the wrong stance, and "think like an anthropomorphized civilization" is the right stance. Forget about our lifetimes, look at the three-century perspective at a minimum. If we started working on cheap spacelift in a serious way today, then I expect that in three centuries time we'd have major habitation areas at least as far away as Saturn, at least a few out around Pluto, and at least one mission at least under construction to head towards Proxima Centauri.

A lot of people tend to anthropomorphize animals, machines, and even inanimate objects sometimes. (Wiiiilson!) And so I would suspect that uplifting animals would be a thing at some point in the future, as it seems like the next logical (or psychological) step of that anthropomorpization. However, in order for that to happen, the technology probably has to develop to a point where the input cost is very low. If the only people who can pull it off are giant corporations, they're going to be looking at their bottom line. If anyone with a modest budget and a "Mr. DNA," can do it, then I suspect that special interests, such as environmental and animal rights groups, will make it happen.

Depends on the environmentalists and animal rights groups in question. A number would presumably shy away due to the "sacredness of nature". I think that the "crazy pet owner" type is likely to be the only major "greenie" source of such actions.

Doesn't sound like thats the case with the tech level in Outsider at the moment though.

True.

1) Construct colonies in space. We do not need earth-like planets to live on, just build big closed structures in space, with atmospheres and agriculture in them (using redesigned plantlife). Build colonies on asteroids, on moons etc. The amount of food we could eventually grow on earth is ultimately limited by the amount of sunlight hitting it. In space, I expect we'd eventually far exceed that limit, and by this point, the people living on earth may be a minority.

Indeed. O'Neill had his students assume steel and similar materials that were available then. We're working on carbon nanotubes capable of building a hanging-rope space elevator today. As far as I know, small Ringworlds might be achievable with that. I personally wouldn't want to build a open-topped station even if I could make it work, but an enclosed design at the planet-side of an appropriate tether with all of it's airlocks and other utilities coming in from the "bottom" should do the job fairly well: all of the outgassing will tend to fall to the planet, where you can just retrieve it.

[fredgiblet]

This claim is a result of a mixture of impatience and lack of imagination. The sun will fry the earth in a few billion years, but indeed life on earth may be annihilated much sooner. Still, if we have thousands (or even millions) of years of advanced civilization, we may easily endure past the destruction of the earths' habitability in several ways:

I suppose a more accurate statement would be that space exploration is essential, not necessarily FTL. FTL was the topic though so that's what I used.

[Jericho]

I don't see how FTL is not relevant in any way shape or form when it comes to our future in space. FTL is what allows you to have a interstellar civilization to begin with. In fact it's so relevant that entire fictitious universes are build around it (star trek, mass effect, babylon 5 etc...). Merely it's absence will pretty much define how our civilization will progress in to the stars in the first place.

[Absalom]

I don't see how FTL is not relevant in any way shape or form when it comes to our future in space.

If you go back and read those posts again, you'll see that it was entirely about commercial relevance. For FTL traffic to be commercially meaningful, you need relatively large volumes of materials that are profitable enough to worth going to the expense of transporting them with an FTL drive.

For precious materials that you simply can't duplicate this can be justified, but those will be purchased in fairly small amounts, since, you know, precious == expensive. They won't matter unless you've intentionally designed your setting to in some way need or justify large volumes of traffic for those materials.

For bulk materials, you need the FTL method to be cheaper than just obtaining it locally. If you discover a planetoid of mag-matter in some star system and it doesn't exist in Sol system then you could (especially longer-term, once you've figured out what to use it for) justify FTL to get at it, but iron? Aluminum? Titanium? Even the precious metals like gold? You're going to have to find a very cheap method of FTL indeed for those, for the simple reason that they're going to be cheap to obtain for any legitimately space-faring civilization.

FTL is what allows you to have a interstellar civilization to begin with.

Uh, no. If we for some reason genetically engineered a space-butterfly that was at least as intelligent as a crow, could talk in some meaningful way, and grew huge solar-sail wings that it was able to travel between star systems with, then these "interstellar butterflies" would still have an interstellar civilization of some sort, even if they took several lifetimes to make the trip.

Civilization as we know it is highly interconnected, but before the American Civil War, most Americans hadn't been outside of their state, and many likely hadn't been outside of the area of their birth. The same goes for the ancient Chinese, Japanese, whatever those desert red-heads that lived north-west of China were, etc. Civilizations can span areas far wider than individuals cross in a lifetime, or even several.

In fact it's so relevant that entire fictitious universes are build around it (star trek, mass effect, babylon 5 etc...). Merely it's absence will pretty much define how our civilization will progress in to the stars in the first place.

Now this is accurate, while the other bits are off: the absence of FTL will shape how our civilization travels to the stars, but will not shape IF it does so.

[discord]

Civilization as we know it is highly interconnected, but before the American Civil War, most Americans hadn't been outside of their state, and many likely hadn't been outside of the area of their birth. The same goes for the ancient Chinese, Japanese, whatever those desert red-heads that lived north-west of China were, etc. Civilizations can span areas far wider than individuals cross in a lifetime, or even several.

not entirely correct, civilizations can span areas far wider than individuals WILL cross in a lifetime, or several, but CAN cross in a lifetime will not work, top limit for it to function is about a month single trip, do note that this is for information to cross that distance, for the army the number can be slightly higher.

do note that is for a single empire/political entity. but the same logic is actually true for civilization as a whole, without communication it is not a single civilization, it is several that do not connect with each other. western/asian/central america/australia before 1000 AD comes to mind, even if australian is questionable as civilization at all in that era.

[junk]

Civilization as we know it is highly interconnected, but before the American Civil War, most Americans hadn't been outside of their state, and many likely hadn't been outside of the area of their birth. The same goes for the ancient Chinese, Japanese, whatever those desert red-heads that lived north-west of China were, etc. Civilizations can span areas far wider than individuals cross in a lifetime, or even several.

not entirely correct, civilizations can span areas far wider than individuals WILL cross in a lifetime, or several, but CAN cross in a lifetime will not work, top limit for it to function is about a month single trip, do note that this is for information to cross that distance, for the army the number can be slightly higher.

do note that is for a single empire/political entity. but the same logic is actually true for civilization as a whole, without communication it is not a single civilization, it is several that do not connect with each other. western/asian/central america/australia before 1000 AD comes to mind, even if australian is questionable as civilization at all in that era.

A civilisation can probably be larger as long as it can keep enforcing it's power. The information halflife was probably a month or so in the british Empire I'd wager, but the time it took to London was most likely larger. Which is why so much power tended to be vested into governors, with constant movements of armies and forces.

Depends on the environmentalists and animal rights groups in question. A number would presumably shy away due to the "sacredness of nature". I think that the "crazy pet owner" type is likely to be the only major "greenie" source of such actions.

Honestly, I'd wager the first groups that might be interested in uplift projects would be the military. There's a big distinct advantage over having a purely biological nontypical spy or saboteur at times over a drone for instance. And I'd wager this is the place where cephalopods might shine.

Now the question is what happens after a project like this might accidentally leak out to the public.

[GeoModder]

Now the question is what happens after a project like this might accidentally leak out to the public.

Horror movies.

[Jericho]

If you go back and read those posts again, you'll see that it was entirely about commercial relevance. For FTL traffic to be commercially meaningful, you need relatively large volumes of materials that are profitable enough to worth going to the expense of transporting them with an FTL drive.

For precious materials that you simply can't duplicate this can be justified, but those will be purchased in fairly small amounts, since, you know, precious == expensive. They won't matter unless you've intentionally designed your setting to in some way need or justify large volumes of traffic for those materials.

For bulk materials, you need the FTL method to be cheaper than just obtaining it locally. If you discover a planetoid of mag-matter in some star system and it doesn't exist in Sol system then you could (especially longer-term, once you've figured out what to use it for) justify FTL to get at it, but iron? Aluminum? Titanium? Even the precious metals like gold? You're going to have to find a very cheap method of FTL indeed for those, for the simple reason that they're going to be cheap to obtain for any legitimately space-faring civilization.

I did read your post and i still don't agree with you... imagine that. Here's why:

Materials alone do not constitute all commerce. There is also intellectual capital that can be traded. Individual ideas and geniuses will become invaluable for high technological societies. Are they not of commercial value? Science is the engine of the economy in an modern civilization, ours included. Science creates jobs, opportunities, solutions etc and has ever increasing commersial value to our civilization. I belived you said that FTL has scientific value. Well trust my word on this one if it has scientific value, it has commercial value.

It’s also important to note that on a local level the universe is not infinite if that was the case we wouldn’t have to leave the solar system at all we can all just sit here until the end of days. As our civilization grows so will our demands, internal conflicts, abilities, etc. sooner or later that pot is going to boil over and we’re going to have to move.

FTL allows for us to maintain ties over interstellar distances which are the basis for an interstellar market. That is the importance of FTL in our universe. If it’s available it produces opportunities to grow our civilization. If it’s not available it forces us to find alternative ways to grow. So its significance works both ways in my opinion but this could just be philosophical view of things.

If FTL is irrelevant it wouldn't be so widely used in science fiction or so heavily debated in the scientific community. Entire universes are made up with this in mind and that includes their commercial aspect. If FTL was irrelevant than it's presence irregardless of how cheap and available could be ignored. This is in my opinion not the case

Civilization as we know it is highly interconnected, but before the American Civil War, most Americans hadn't been outside of their state, and many likely hadn't been outside of the area of their birth. The same goes for the ancient Chinese, Japanese, whatever those desert red-heads that lived north-west of China were, etc. Civilizations can span areas far wider than individuals cross in a lifetime, or even several.

No…. no civilizations were an individual has been unable to cross the territory in sufficient time has ever existed. In fact the speed of travel has been one of the major reason why our earthbound empire’s collapse they grew too large to manage this is the reason why it’s impossible to have a civilization of more than one star system if you don’t have FTL the distance become’s to great and the people will lose contact with one another and splinter becoming star faring nomads that may settle a bit of a system at a time but never two at the same time. I suppose in the broadest sense that is a civilization but not an interstellar one. They will be bound by one star at the time isolated and unable to maintain a homogenous presence in the galaxy. Meaning we will have many stellar civilizations but never one interstellar.

A civilisation can probably be larger as long as it can keep enforcing it's power. The information halflife was probably a month or so in the british Empire I'd wager, but the time it took to London was most likely larger. Which is why so much power tended to be vested into governors, with constant movements of armies and forces.

Good luck enforcing your power without proper communications and rapid deployment in sufficient numbers. The british, mongols, romans etc tried it and didn't succeed.

Now this is accurate, while the other bits are off: the absence of FTL will shape how our civilization travels to the stars, but will not shape IF it does so.

What do you mean? Did you think I said we needed FTL to travel the stars? .

[discord]

junk: you could in 1890 travel from london to hong-kong in a bit over 20 days(quite possibly by civilian liner though military might be faster) although admittedly 30 was more likely, not to mention that radio telegraphy was up and running by then...might have been a reason for the increase in size of the British empire as ship speeds went up greatly during the latter half of the 1800.

so hong kong was ceded to te british in 1839(about as far away as you can get from london and still be inside the empire at the time) ship speed at the time could average about 10 knots. going around the cape would give a travel time for a single way trip of about 54 days.
not to forget the suez canal opened for business in 1869, making that particular trip about 30% faster and less likely to require repairs.

the more stable and powerful your system of government is the longer response times are allowable, in human history i do not think ANY empire has managed to keep it working with longer than 60 days response time, many outlying colonies where paying lip service and taxes to the british....basically "protection" money.

so two months is doable, barely, i just do not see how you are supposed to manage 50+ years.(assuming 0.1 light, which is REALLY hauling ass, and sol to alpha centauri, our closest neighbor)

just no.