logoalt Hacker News

jacobgkauyesterday at 5:07 PM1 replyview on HN

If I understand correctly, you're just basing that statement on climate change or war destroying us before we can do any better than Voyager, right? Because if we don't assume the destruction of humanity or the complete removal of our ability to make things leave Earth, then just based on "finite past vs. infinite future," it seems incredibly unlikely that we'd never be able to beat an extremely old project operating far beyond its designed scope.


Replies

threethirtytwoyesterday at 5:30 PM

Many reasons why. The probability is based on many many many factors. What you mentioned is just a fraction of the factors.

If we do ever reach that distance again it will be even less likely we do it for a third time.

show 2 replies