Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
Right. What do you think is the best way for humans to reach Alpha Centauri, and other stars? I vote for Anti-Matter Annihilation thrusters.
Space, Science 'n' stuff
- Thread starter Leo Whitepaw
- Start date
zyther kaldrok
the strange hyena
cold fusion?
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
Other possibilities are (In order of favourites) Solar sails, Ion drives and conventional thrusters.
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
I'm not saying it's impossible, since I'm not a dumbdumb, but I am saying that the laws of physics prevent ftl travel for any conventional spacecraft. (Shut up about the Alcubierre Drive). The crap on earth needs fixing, but It's a reason to go out, because if things go to sh¿t on earth, we're stuffed because we only inhabit this planet and not any other.
D
Deleted member 82554
Guest
By warp drive, my dear boy.
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
I'm fairly certain I said 'Shut up about the Alcubierre Drive' ._.By warp drive, my dear boy.
It might work, but there are a bunch of issues with it, such as the warped bubble of spacetime catching and trapping quantum particles as it goes, and then releasing them in a volley whenever the ship stops, throwing them forward with enough force to destroy a star.
Joni
I'm a hot dog
No Star no thrust
You need gas and the energy. (It's very efficient though)
Are you kidding??
Last edited:
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
There is no friction in space, so you could speed up near the sun, and your velocity would carry you to the target. Solar sails have been calculated as being able to get to 25% Lightspeed. For comparison, The fastest object created by humans is less than 1% lightspeed. There is a problem with stopping though.
you can get the energy from solar panels, gas is light and can be compacted easily and Ion drives can get to hundereds of thousands of miles an hour, also, again, There is no drag in space. Get to a certain speed, you'll stay at that speed unless something alters it.
There's a reason they're on the bottom of the list.
Yakamaru
Woof? Woof
Our current understanding of the laws of physics, yes. Nothing is set in stone. Our understanding of the universe are constantly and exponentially expanding as the years go.
500 years ago people thought the Earth was the center of the universe. Now it's common knowledge that that's a load of crap. It'll only be a matter of time before Einstein is proven to be either not entirely correct or is lacking something in his equation. Or they find something outside of that equation.
Who knows. Only time will tell.
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
I'm not saying they are indestructible, but The equations of general and special relativity have 3 main problems for ftl travel.
1: Say your almost at lightspeed, like 99.99999999999999999283759% lightspeed. If you threw a ball forwards, it should be able to cross the light barrier, right? Wrong. The universe, as narcissistic as it is, won't let it happen. The ball stays under lightspeed. Where does the energy go then? Well, energy and mass are interchangeable, so the universe coverts energy into mass as you approach lightspeed, also known as C. The ball gets heavier. The closer you get to lightspeed, the more pronounced the effect is, growing exponentially with your velocity, which ties into the second problem.
2: You need infinite energy to reach C. You might think that, with rockets, the thrust to weight ration is linear. Ie, you have a rocket with 100 litres of fuel that can go to 100 m/s. In a linear relationship, to reach 200 m/s, you'd need 100 more litres of fuel, but in real life, you'd need something like 300 more litres of fuel because the faster you want to go, the more fuel it takes to reach that speed. The more fuel you have, the more thrust you need to move. The more thrust you need, the more fuel you need and so on, with fuel usage growing exponentially with your velocity, until at lightspeed, where the fuel required becomes unlimited.
3: Time dilation. The faster you go, the slower you percieve time as passing for an outside observer. The faster you go, the slower an outside observer will see your time passing. Say you had two watches, one in above earth going at, say 90% C, and one on earth with you, if you could somehow see both watches ticking at once, the one in space would be ticking at, I don't know, half the speed of the watch in your hand. This effect becomes exponentially stronger, the closer to C you get, and at lightspeed, your time would stand still. You could cross the entire width of the universe 27 times, and you wouldn't even be able to blink. Hundereds of trillions of years would pass around you and not even a single microsecond would pass for you. For eternity.
Last edited:
Joni
I'm a hot dog
The space is not a complete vacuum. But you're right you can get really far.
Who says that?
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
'Gas
The atoms and molecules in gases are much more spread out than in solids or liquids. They vibrate and move freely at high speeds. A gas will fill any container, but if the container is not sealed, the gas will escape. Gas can be compressed much more easily than a liquid or solid. (Think about a diving tank – 600 L of gas is compressed into a 3 L cylinder.)'
~The Internet
Joni
I'm a hot dog
Ok, I think it's not a problem for the industy today.
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
Is there any propulsion method I've missed?
Yakamaru
Woof? Woof
Our current understanding of physics make FTL travel impossible as far as human knowledge/understanding goes. However, that doesn't mean you should make them absolute laws. Our species is proven wrong too often to make it a viable mindset.
Our understanding is new at best. I intend to keep an open mind for if or when we discover new laws that doesn't fit our current understanding/knowledge.
But to be more on-topic as far as traveling to other planets go: I'd argue solar sails or ion drive.
Joni
I'm a hot dog
Leo Whitepaw
Irony man
That is fabulous
I do not know if this is a necropost, but I hope will be forgiven since I like this thread.
If we are discussing space travel and rocketry, there is a site that is fun yet informative on the topics. @Leo Whitepaw and @Joni , you will like this:
www.projectrho.com: Atomic Rockets - Atomic Rockets
You all listed many propulsion systems for space travel, some currently practical while others are more theoretical. One aspect of designing an interstellar spacecraft I do not see here is heat management. All the propulsion system mentioned here would generate an extraordinary amount of heat. In atmosphere, it is relatively to easy to dissipate the heat. Note that a jet engines on Earth cool eventually left to their own devices. This partially because the air helps immensely with heat radiation. In the near vacuum of space, it more difficult for rocket engines to cool themselves since the vacuum acts as a high efficient insulator around the spacecraft. As a result, the heat from the rocket engines and other technological processes keeping the spacecraft functional and habitable builds up since it can not be radiated away. Left unchecked, the heat will eventually damage the spacecraft's systems and fry the the crew alive. With more energetic propulsion systems like nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, or antimatter rockets, the heat may even cause the spacecraft itself to be vaporized.
To quote Atomic Rockets:
"Heat management is a vital part of the design and operation of a space vessel ... There are two options for dealing with waste heat ... radiators and heat sinks. If the waste heat is not dealt with, it would rapidly fry the ship and crew."
Internal heat sinks in spacecraft can only absorb but so much heat. Radiators make maneuvering the spacecraft harder and need to be proportionately bigger as your increase the heat output of the propulsion system. Cruising in space once your spacecraft has reached a certain speed as opposed leaving the engine on the accelerate throughout the entire journey to could help ameliorate some these difficulties, but some serious technological consideration would have to given to active heat management measures.
If we are discussing space travel and rocketry, there is a site that is fun yet informative on the topics. @Leo Whitepaw and @Joni , you will like this:
www.projectrho.com: Atomic Rockets - Atomic Rockets
You all listed many propulsion systems for space travel, some currently practical while others are more theoretical. One aspect of designing an interstellar spacecraft I do not see here is heat management. All the propulsion system mentioned here would generate an extraordinary amount of heat. In atmosphere, it is relatively to easy to dissipate the heat. Note that a jet engines on Earth cool eventually left to their own devices. This partially because the air helps immensely with heat radiation. In the near vacuum of space, it more difficult for rocket engines to cool themselves since the vacuum acts as a high efficient insulator around the spacecraft. As a result, the heat from the rocket engines and other technological processes keeping the spacecraft functional and habitable builds up since it can not be radiated away. Left unchecked, the heat will eventually damage the spacecraft's systems and fry the the crew alive. With more energetic propulsion systems like nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, or antimatter rockets, the heat may even cause the spacecraft itself to be vaporized.
To quote Atomic Rockets:
"Heat management is a vital part of the design and operation of a space vessel ... There are two options for dealing with waste heat ... radiators and heat sinks. If the waste heat is not dealt with, it would rapidly fry the ship and crew."
Internal heat sinks in spacecraft can only absorb but so much heat. Radiators make maneuvering the spacecraft harder and need to be proportionately bigger as your increase the heat output of the propulsion system. Cruising in space once your spacecraft has reached a certain speed as opposed leaving the engine on the accelerate throughout the entire journey to could help ameliorate some these difficulties, but some serious technological consideration would have to given to active heat management measures.
Joni
I'm a hot dog
This site is badly constructed and total overloaded with unnecessary information. The creators of the website have no idea how you introduce people in a topic and clearly too much time. Can you give me a brief crash course of how atomic rockets suppose to work.
WithMyBearHands
Smudge and arrogant
Reaching by way of physical contact or establishing communication?
That is the introduction page and, yes, they could step their web design game up a notch, but there is much technical detail there.
At the bottom of the page, there is a navigation menu/site map with topics listed below. Is there any specific topic you are looking for?
We are talking about physically reaching the Alpha Centauri system, which is about 4 light-years distant.
Joni
I'm a hot dog
This navigation menu is absolut garbage. I was at the "basic" rocket design page. They're just beating around the bush.
WithMyBearHands
Smudge and arrogant
Oh. Well in that case, just wait. It’ll collide with us eventually.
It’s basically just deciding whether to fold space, or use solar sails
It’s basically just deciding whether to fold space, or use solar sails