scientists find `habitable` planet near Urf

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Paul91785, Sep 29, 2010.

  1. Yeah, I read the article. Posting it doesn't make it more applicable. You don't need to accelerate at 20 G, because your trip is going to be several years anyway. You accelerate at 1 G or less with an engine that can continue indefinitely. More than that is superfluous. Interstellar engines are things like photonics and ion drives. These things produce shit-all for thrust, but they're ideal because they're more efficient and more sustainable.

    Liquid breathing is a solution to a problem that does not exist.
     
  2. I don't see why it can't slow down in the exact same way it sped up?
     
  3. um, I wasn't aware the solar sails could act as brakes too. Even if they CAN, why not just #$%#ing brake with retro rockets or the equivalent at the maximum survivable G to save some time?
     
  4. Let's say (optimistically) that you're on a 50-year trip to a planet 20 light years away. Do you want your only means of decelerating to be a couple of rocket motors that have been exposed to space for the last five decades?

    Also, how much rocket fuel would be required to decelerate from a viable interstellar speed? I'm going to guess somewhere between a shitload and a metric #$%#ton.

    EDIT: Also, as long as your destination is in orbit around a star, solar sails would work just fine for deceleration.
     
  5. I don't see why they can't. Consider: as the solar sail-powered craft travels farther and farther from our home star, it receives less and less light to use as thrust. Eventually, this thrust becomes negligible, but it continues on its path through inertia. As it approaches its destination star, it receives more and more light to use as braking thrust, a solar-parachute. As well, solar sails are not the only method I mentioned. Photonics and ion drives can be easily aimed to use for braking.

    You don't brake with rockets you carry with you because they're massive, heavy, inefficient, and complex. And they're not very useful, either, since your flight will be in the realm of many years, the time you save with their use will be a very, very small fraction of your total trip (saving a couple months over the course of a century is not significant, for example, and would not warrant the significant effort required).
     
  6. "or the equivalent"
     
  7. I guess that makes your stance indomitable, then? High impulse is not in any way the name of the game, here. The tortoise shits all over the hare's breakfast in this one.
     
  8. You mean move temporarily. We could probably get humans to another planet permanently within our lifetimes, but the ability to planet-hop like in Star Trek/Wars it wouldn't be.
     
  9. What is the equivalent of a rocket booster that is not a rocket booster?
     
  10. It acts as a brake when you arrive at your destination star.
     
  11. ya but u have a hardon for squalor <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/tongue.gif"></A>
     
  12. You'd float around a spaceship travelling at a constant 0.9c relative to earth just as you'd float around a ship at any other constant speed in interstellar space.
     
  13. please fund more space shit, America...
     
  14. Whatever we happen to have as a high-g spaceship braking technology when we're sending people to planets in other solar system. Anyway, people who know more than me have shown that this kind of shit isn't needed, so pointless.
     
  15. I mean not enough people could be moved to avoid inbreeding with solar sails.
     
  16. I bet it could be done, that's just an issue of scale. You could move ten people at once in a hundred ships and be fine. It'd just take a while. Flying at 0.9c it would take the occupants of the craft 1 year and 10 months to get to proxima centauri. That's a long time to even the closest star. The nearest star with a habitable world might be radically farther away.
     
  17. So we agree :p
     
  18. curious: how long would that feel for the people on the craft?
     
  19. Pardon my error, it would take them almost exactly two years, neglecting time spent accelerating or braking. From our perspective at home on Earth, they would take four years, eight months.

    Proxima Centauri is 4.2 LY distant.
     
  20. awesome.

    my goal in life (I mean this STRAIGHT UP. like it WILL #$%#ING HAPPEN) is to make it to outer space. If I had to sacrifice everything but my friends/family, I would do it if it meant I could touch the stars, even for a minute.

    My pants just went camping thinking about that. UGH I WANT SPACE SO BAD.
     
  21. #71 ANP, Oct 1, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Russians are already preparing for a manned mars mission<A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>

     
  22. I want to move there because Earth sucks.
     
  23. You and me both, look on the bright side, you're going to be financially cabable of it at some point.
     
  24. you take frozen sperm and frozen eggs selected for genetic diversity and then when you arrive you create offspring like crazy, at first naturally then never using the same combinations. You can continue to diverisify even with future generations until the frozen genetic material runs out, which can easily hit diversification goals.
     
  25. IVF creates dumber, shorter, and sterile humans.
    Won't work.
     

Share This Page