"Thus we have no lack of New Earths...
"-Noah Arkwright
"An Introduction to Sophontology"
-Poul Anderson, INTRODUCTION A SUN INVISIBLE NOTES TOWARD A DEFINITION OF RELATEDNESS IN Anderson, The Van Rijn Method (Riverdale, NY, 2009), pp. 263-265 AT pp. 263-265.
David Falkayn:
"'Any planet where men can live without special apparatus is Earthlike. They're not too common, you see. The physical conditions, the biochemistry, the ecology...never mind."
-"The Trouble Twisters," II, p. 100.
Having found no connection between Arkwright and Falkayn, we now find them in contradiction.
This discussion recalls a memorable line in another future history:
"If you go up on your roof on a clear night, the stars look so plentiful you would think that planets very much like Earth must be as common as eggs in a hen yard."
-Robert Heinlein, Time For The Stars (London, 1968), CHAPTER XII, p. 118.
Time For The Stars is not part of Heinlein's Future History. However, I regard his:
Red Planet
Space Cadet
The Rolling Stones
Farmer In The Sky
Time For The Stars
- as constituting a Juvenile Future History compatible with the The Green Hills Of Earth period of his (adult) Future History.
16 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And Falkayn was being more realistic than Arkwright. I thought of Altai as the kind planet David had in mind: no need of special apparatus to live there, but certainly different from Earth and not all that comfortable to live on!
We know planets are as common as eggs, we don't know if that can be said of TERRESTROID planets. Almost certainly not.
Ad astra! Sean
I think they're both right. No given system is likely to have a Terresteroid planet (not so common) but there are so -many- systems that there's no overall shortage.
Though there seems to be at least something of a taboo about settling on planets that have intelligent natives, and those are very common indeed.
As to what the real situation is, exoplanets are now definitely common.
But currently, we can't -see- planets the size of Earth very often, and we can't study their atmospheres.
The Webb telescope will be able to do both.
My other choice for the Poul Anderson tribute anthology was a Technic story, in which Flandry (or his daughter) stumble across a human colony that was planted in the late League era on a very desirable planet that -did- have intelligent natives.
It was kept hidden; then during the Troubles it was cut off from outside contact -- and it's a low-metals planet (bigger but less dense than Earth) so once high technology is gone, it's difficult to create again.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I hope you are right: about the large over all number of terrestroid planets. Some writers have speculated about it not really being necessary for humans off Earth to colonize other worlds, that giant O'Neill style habitats would do. But suitable terrestroid planets would still seem more satisfactory in many ways than such habitats.
But I don't deny O'Neill habitats would not also be good to have!
That "taboo" you mentioned came from Anderson's ethical views: that it would be wrong for humans to settle on and take over other planets which had intelligent natives. Examples from his works which touches on that idea being "Home" and "The Queen of Air and Darkness." The former shows us a small human scientific settlement which attempted to stay and expand on the planet Mithra, despite having intelligent natives. The latter shows a human colony founded on Roland, the twist being the Earthlings did not know it had an intelligent species.
"Home" shows us the authorities on Earth deciding it was time to close down, after a century, the scientific base on Mithras, and sending a ship there to remove the humans, willingly or not. Because the two species were too different, with different POVs, etc., to live permanently together. One or the other would be dominant and conquer or wipe out the other.
It was more complicated on Roland, a human COLONY had been founded there, not a small scientific base. And the colonists had not known the planet was inhabited. And, given STL travel, it was impossible for such large numbers of humans to be evacuated from Roland after so long a time there. The natives, who had been slowly and cleverly trying to subvert and undermine the human colonists, had to make their peace with the humans after being discovered.
And, in THE PEOPLE OF THE WIND, we see Anderson speculating about what might happen from a planet being deliberately colonized by both humans and non humans on more or less even terms. THE GAME OF EMPIRE, shows us Imhotep, which had a small colony in its highlands (where humans could breathe unassisted) being chosen by the Empire for resettling the surviving Tigeries and Sea People in the lowlands and seas.
And we see mention of planets in the Empire where small, often transient populations of many oxygen breathing species lived, usually at or near space ports. Or for reasons of business and travel (Admiralty Center, on Terra, being mentioned as having many non humans who worked there).
I'll be very interested to know what the James Webb telescope might discover once it finally starts operating!
Ad astra! Sean
Also, "The Green Thumb" in the Psychotechnic History.
Kaor, Paul!
That I had not thought of. I did have a far grimmer story in mind, where humans deliberately colonized a planet with its own native intelligent race, and wiped out those natives. I would have mentioned in my previous comment, showing how Anderson examines all possibilities, if I could remember the title.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Is it one about Venus?
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
No, not "Sister Planet," where we see a human taking drastic action to prevent Venus from being colonized. The story whose title I can't quite recall was set on the planet of another star.
Ad astra! Sean
"Terminal Quest"?
It's an odd viewpoint, given that every single square inch of inhabited territory on -his- planet is the result of multiple conquests, migrations, exterminations and do forth. This has always been obvious, but ancient DNA research has been illuminating it in detail.
For example, just to take Britain, there were massive genetic turnovers (listing only those discovered so far) at around 2500 BCE, around 1250 BCE, and around 400 AD.
That's not counting conquests that were "merely" political/military, like the Romans and 1066.
Or there's, say, the island of Mauritius, which was uninhabited when discovered in the Age of Exploration.
Since then (over approximately 400 years) it has had a Dutch population, a French population, a population of African slaves much mixed with the French, and a variegated Indian population.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: Yes, that's it! "Terminal Quest" was the story I had been trying to remember. In his stories we see Anderson examining the different ways humans might colonize other worlds:
1. Terrestroid planets without intelligent native species. E.g., Esperance, Aeneas, etc.
2. Humanly colonized worlds which, more or less accidentally, came to have substantial non human populations. E.g., Dennitza, Imhotep, and Daedalus (the latter two in THE GAME OF EMPIRE).
3. Terrestroid planets deliberately colonized on even terms by both humans and non humans. Such as Avalon.
4. Terrestroid planets colonized by humans without them knowing they had intelligent native species (Roland).
5. Terrestroid planets with a small human settlement only INTENDED to be temporary ("Home").
6. Terrestroid planets with intelligent races on which humans settled and who then proceeded to exterminate the natives ("Terminal Quest").
It was that sixth variation which Anderson regarded with horror and disgust as a monstrous crime. And there were still other variations, such as the humans stranded on Ikrananka by pirates ("The Trouble Twisters").
Mr. Stirling: I agree, the history of mankind on Earth has been exactly as you described: every inch on Earth has seen multiple migrations, conquests, exterminations of local populations by invaders, etc. It would be foolish for anyone to deny that. And that was certainly not the case with Anderson, who was a hard headed realist about human beings.
But I was touching on Anderson's view that it would be totally wrong for humans to seize terrestroid planets which already had intelligent races living there, and to exterminate those species (as seen in "Terminal Quest"). And that's a view I agree with. There are, or should be, some lines we should not cross.
But the mere fact Anderson wrote "Terminal Quest" shows how he acknowledges he would not be surprised some men would be that bad.
I think you called that viewpoint "odd" because of how violent and brutal human beings are or can be. That it would be "odd" if star traveling humans, on discovering terrestroid planets with intelligent natives, did not then proceed to settle on, conquer, and wipe out the natives of that planet. Unless, of course, those natives were strong enough to fight back.
It might be unrealistically idealistic of me, but my preference would be for human space travelers and colonists to agree some lines should not be crossed, that planets with intelligent species living on them were not to be colonized by them.
Ad astra! Sean
Roland in "Queen of Air & Darkness", Imhotep in "The Game of Empire", do suggest a perfectly fine way to have a multispecies planet.
Much of the planet is unpleasant or even lethal for humans, but has a native intelligent species that is well adapted to those conditions, while parts of the planet are fairly pleasant for humans & the natives are ill adapted for this section of the planet, so humans could settle those parts without conflict with the natives.
"A Message in Secret" shows such a situation. I would have to find the story to recall the name of the planet.
I recall a short story by Arthur C. Clarke in which the narrator finds a culture of intelligent cephalopod in the deep ocean. Or to be more precise the cephalopods find the deep end of a human built OTEC plant & damage it in the course of investigating it. As of the end of the story there could be conflict between the species, but there is not reason the 2 species could not benefit each other.
If a planet like this can exist with intelligent natives in the lowlands which are lethally hot for humans, the humans could settle the uplands without harming the natives & even benefiting the natives through trade.
http://www.worlddreambank.org/C/CAP.HTM
Jim,
Altai.
Paul.
Kaor, Jim!
I agree it might be possible for two different intelligent races to live more or less peaceably on the same planet if different parts of it are more suitable for one species than for the other. Which is what we see on Imhotep in THE GAME OF EMPIRE.
Ad astra! Sean
BTW the Clarke story I mentioned is "The Shining Ones", collected in "The Wind from the Sun"
Kaor, Jim!
I might have that Clarke story somewhere among my SF books!
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment