Talk:Generation ship

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spaceflight Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

The section "Other methods of Colonizing Space" does not belong here.

Another mention of a world-ship or generational ship is the Koros-strohna in the Star Wars extended universe.

Olaf Stapledon[edit]

Do you think there should be a mention of Olaf Stapledon's "Starmaker," (1937) in which he suggests interstellar colonization by detaching entire planets from their orbits and propelling them through space? I realize this may be, strictly speaking, more of a "Spaceship Earth" concept, but it is nonetheless a form of generation ship, and the Spaceship Earth article doesn't really seem the place to mention it. Thoughts? Shelby Davis (talk) 01:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cosmic radiation?[edit]

there are several proposed methods to protect against cosmic rays. some experimental. some documented on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_threat_from_cosmic_rays#Shielding. the article contradicts this. this should be changed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.99.138 (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moral and Ethical issues?[edit]

The first thing I thought of when I read this article was the concept of the ethics associated with having people be born, live and die entirely within a synthetic environment. Surely there must be something on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HisSpaceResearch (talk • contribs) 08:35, 28 October 2006

People considering embarking on such a voyage would have to consider that they are making an irrevokable choice for their children. The children who lived in such an environment would, in some respects be similiar to those who in the past were born, lived and died in the same small village. A group of settlers who chose to be dropped off on a remote island would be making a similar choice for their children, as without a boat, leaving the island would be impossible. The difference is that a village and a remote island is that they are in natural environments. Is it unethical to choose an artificial environment? It is certainly something to consider, but I don't know that there is anything unethical about it, although I suppose someone can make the case. Another issue to the social structure necessary for life aboard the ship. It is likely that it would be highly structured and authoritarian, and the transition from such an environment to having an entire planet could be difficult.--RLent 06:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another problem is that the planet is moderately likely to be already inhabited — by humans who set out later with superior drives. Sort of a reverse Outside Context Problem. I can't think where I've read that, though, otherwise I'd be adding it to the article :-) --Sabik 15:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was a plot point in one of Fred Saberhagen's Berserker stories. The sub-light ship encounters an FTL Berserker, and after escaping decides to turn back to Earth since they know their drive system is obsolete. See also Interstellar travel and the Wait Calculation. --IanOsgood (talk) 22:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RESPONSE: no one asked if we wanted to live here, on earth, under these conditions. Simply we are here and make our best. Wouldnt it be the same for passengers of such a ship? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.138.43.1 (talk) 17:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks[edit]

Do we have articles on the ships described in the many science fiction stories listed here? All I could find was Rama, which I added to the See alsos. 75.35.201.48 23:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invention of the concept[edit]

Is The World, The Flesh, & The Devil a novel? It doesn't look like one to me - not fictional, doesn't have a plot, etc. PubliusFL 17:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Whoever mentioned the Rama ships. Thanks, you saved me the effort of writing it :) - NemFX 03:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How we get there[edit]

"It has been suggested that humans create large, self-sustaining space habitats before sending generation ships to the stars." Good thing somebody thought of this--I was going to send the generation ships out first, and then work on those pesky environmental issues, but you're way is much more practical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.236.134.75 (talk) 02:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rephrased it.--Patrick (talk) 07:39, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's too messy[edit]

The list of examples in fiction should be divided into books, TV and movies, instead of mixing it all together. It would also help if the release date was mentioned. 80.202.38.38 (talk) 23:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not all generation ships need their original crew to die-two generation ship[edit]

A two generation ship can have the original crew surviving the trip if it is to nearby star. Alastair Reynolds portayed such situation in Chasm City.--Molobo (talk) 21:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Errors / omissions in fiction ships list[edit]

"The Rama series of books by Arthur C. Clarke and Gentry Lee" - Ramas are not strictly multi-generational ships(they travel too fast and from that is told in books persons who come abroad are able to reach _some_ destination). But...it's idea is there is no specified 'destination' - idea is social research.

The ships that originally left Earth in the Firefly series were also sub-light generational ships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.149.241 (talk) 22:45, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Analogue: There is no evidence to support the assertion that the new society was modeled after feudal Japanese society 143.248.139.247 (talk) 01:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merger_proposal[edit]

I propose the questionable fork Cross generation ship be merged back into Generation ship where it ought to be. Help implementing the merger would be greatly appreciated, as not all of us fit in as "lone wolf" editors. Thanks!! —NickDupree (talk) 05:44, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gravity?[edit]

There is mention of the immune systems atrophying, but not muscles? Or other issues of lack of gravity, or attempts to overcome that with Artificial_gravity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.4.30 (talk) 02:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial gravity (either by centrifugal force or some other more advanced method) is assumed for any long duration in space in everything I've read (fiction or not). I suppose that could be explicitly mentioned.Nerfer (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Fiction section drastically cut[edit]

I see things mentioned on this talk page that no longer exist in the article. It appears two major edits have happened: 1) In Aug 2017 by Harizotoh9 and 2) July 2016 by Nikkimaria. Together these two edits cut nearly half of the original article. I personally am not opposed to the changes, it looks like the fiction section was overly extensive, but I feel major changes like that should be mentioned on the talk page as a matter of courtesy. Nerfer (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Generation ship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020407132242/http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/star_voyage_020319-1.html to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/star_voyage_020319-1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:48, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Generation ship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130124211710/http://www.icarusinterstellar.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/BISEnzmann-Talk-2011kflong.pdf to http://www.icarusinterstellar.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/BISEnzmann-Talk-2011kflong.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:58, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Graphic for article[edit]

I was wondering if this (highly fantasized) graphic would be appropriate for the article? I am the author and the license is already Creative Commons. Thanks. ➧datumizer ☎ 07:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is a specific concern or inaccuracy against it, I would say go for it! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 11:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"normal family life"?[edit]

That expression seems culture-dependent, what is normal family life? --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 21:24, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's intended to be that specific. That sentence is about genetic diversity, so I think it means "normal family life" as opposed to "being bred like livestock".

A biologist or a farmer could probably go into detail about what you'd have to do to keep a population going if it's not large enough for a "normal family life", but I don't think the article would benefit from going too deep on that subject. ApLundell (talk) 23:27, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]