Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,131 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 48,693
Pageviews Today: 149,220Threads Today: 43Posts Today: 944
02:30 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1477048
United States
08/22/2011 05:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
Oh poo, they got a plasma engine, numbskull
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1513427
United Kingdom
08/22/2011 05:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
if we crack stasis technology then it matters not how long it takes.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1131025
United States
08/22/2011 05:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
A reincarnate source just told me the atlantians just got there and are pissed it doesnt have livable conditions.
Anubis

User ID: 1446746
Canada
08/22/2011 05:14 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
So it makes perfect sense to wait until some better drives are developed.

Take a look at this table, if you like 'warp drives' idea:
[link to i.imgur.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1384172


that was pretty cool thanks!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 999224
United States
08/22/2011 05:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
Why would we want to do that anyway?
 Quoting: Vlad Tepes


using your thought process the earth would still be flat and at the center of the universe. Your ridiculous opinion would also be stuck within a short radius.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1510316
United States
08/22/2011 05:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
Yes. But thAt totally does not take into consideration the hyperspace
BrianMoran2

User ID: 1499468
United States
08/22/2011 05:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
Give me 1.3 billion dollars and a work force and I can build an unmanned vessel that can reach any of the stars found on this map: [link to www.atlasoftheuniverse.com] within 12.5 light years in 25 years from the start of the journey.

Give me 13 billion and it can be a manned mission.

I can get a man to any of those stellar systems and back with in his lifetime tapping into relativity.

BTW I laid out thermodynamic energy available in the solar system along with how to scoop up hydrogen as a fuel for your ion drive here: Thread: Nuclear Space Rockets and the Most Fascinating NASA Man You’ve Never Heard Of
 Quoting: Dr. House


Dr. House: If I had 13.5 billion dollars, you'd have yourself your $13 Billion and a contract.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1410622
United States
08/22/2011 05:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
Voyager 1 is NOT current technology.

We have ion drive now, and the ability to scoop matter from interstellar space.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Using an Ion drive coupled with a fusion reactor, means one can see at least 30 years of continued acceleration.

Even if you have an acceleration of only 0.05 meters per second, over 15 years (473040000 seconds) your final velocity is 23,652,000 meter/second.

The speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s

You are traveling at about 8% the speed of light.

Granted that isn't very fast, but in order to travel 4 light years it would only take 50 to 100 years.

It is feasible to construct a ship that can accelerate at 0.3 gee (3.33 m/s) using current ion engine technologies coupled with tapping the thermal differential of natural space.

Boosting constantly for only 2 years (63072000 seconds)

Means you would achieve a velocity of 210,029,760 m/s

That is 70.0583% the speed of light.

Assuming for the moment that relativity does not play a roll in the matter, it would take rough a decade (10 years) of accelerations, coasting at top speed and deceleration to reach the nearest star.

NASA and JPL and the rest make it much harder than it needs to be.

Even Einstein made a minor mistake that every one else follows through.

Einstein tells us that near light speed is not possible because mass (of the craft) becomes greater due to speed. however E=mc^2 (Energy = mass times the speed of light squared) gives us more energy from a mass of matter traveling at greater velocities - why? because the fuel attains a higher mass as well as the craft.

Relative to each other, the mass of the craft to the fuel remains the same. Relative to the rest of the universe the mass of the craft and the fuel increases. The fuel gives out more energy relative to the universe due to its greater velocity.

We cannot accept that mass increases as we travel at relativistic velocities without accepting that the energy strips from that more massive matter also increases due to more mass.

Give me 1.3 billion dollars and a work force and I can build an unmanned vessel that can reach any of the stars found on this map: [link to www.atlasoftheuniverse.com] within 12.5 light years in 25 years from the start of the journey.

Give me 13 billion and it can be a manned mission.

I can get a man to any of those stellar systems and back with in his lifetime tapping into relativity.

BTW I laid out thermodynamic energy available in the solar system along with how to scoop up hydrogen as a fuel for your ion drive here: Thread: Nuclear Space Rockets and the Most Fascinating NASA Man You’ve Never Heard Of
 Quoting: Dr. House


clappa
Except for the fact that no one is actually willing for anyone besides NASA freaks to see anything outside of what they tell us.
Bob

User ID: 1194423
United States
08/22/2011 05:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
Voyager 1 is NOT current technology.

We have ion drive now, and the ability to scoop matter from interstellar space.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Using an Ion drive coupled with a fusion reactor, means one can see at least 30 years of continued acceleration.

Even if you have an acceleration of only 0.05 meters per second, over 15 years (473040000 seconds) your final velocity is 23,652,000 meter/second.

The speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s

You are traveling at about 8% the speed of light.

Granted that isn't very fast, but in order to travel 4 light years it would only take 50 to 100 years.

It is feasible to construct a ship that can accelerate at 0.3 gee (3.33 m/s) using current ion engine technologies coupled with tapping the thermal differential of natural space.

Boosting constantly for only 2 years (63072000 seconds)

Means you would achieve a velocity of 210,029,760 m/s

That is 70.0583% the speed of light.

Assuming for the moment that relativity does not play a roll in the matter, it would take rough a decade (10 years) of accelerations, coasting at top speed and deceleration to reach the nearest star.

NASA and JPL and the rest make it much harder than it needs to be.

Even Einstein made a minor mistake that every one else follows through.

Einstein tells us that near light speed is not possible because mass (of the craft) becomes greater due to speed. however E=mc^2 (Energy = mass times the speed of light squared) gives us more energy from a mass of matter traveling at greater velocities - why? because the fuel attains a higher mass as well as the craft.

Relative to each other, the mass of the craft to the fuel remains the same. Relative to the rest of the universe the mass of the craft and the fuel increases. The fuel gives out more energy relative to the universe due to its greater velocity.

We cannot accept that mass increases as we travel at relativistic velocities without accepting that the energy strips from that more massive matter also increases due to more mass.

Give me 1.3 billion dollars and a work force and I can build an unmanned vessel that can reach any of the stars found on this map: [link to www.atlasoftheuniverse.com] within 12.5 light years in 25 years from the start of the journey.

Give me 13 billion and it can be a manned mission.

I can get a man to any of those stellar systems and back with in his lifetime tapping into relativity.

BTW I laid out thermodynamic energy available in the solar system along with how to scoop up hydrogen as a fuel for your ion drive here: Thread: Nuclear Space Rockets and the Most Fascinating NASA Man You’ve Never Heard Of
 Quoting: Dr. House



Yes, the fact that E=MC2 will result in more mass, thus more energy from the fuel is true. The problem is right now we can convert about 0.0001% of a fissionable material into energy. Fusion isn't much better, and we have no means of controling Nuclear Fusion currently, much less turning it directly into kinetic energy.

Now if you have a Matter to Kinetic Energy Converter, hell, yes, we can do this.

Oh, your calculations about the ion drive, while optimistic, are not far off. An ion drive is by far the most fuel effective engine we have. Since that thing can fire for years without slowing down, if you follow the gravity contours of Space-time, you can get some major speed doing. Going faster then 10% the speed of light starts to get weird. It isn't just interstellar dust that's a problem, but when you start to get up to relativistic speeds, even light photons can ruin your day.
If you see something, say nothing, and drink to forget.
Welcome to Night Vale.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1330567
United States
08/22/2011 06:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
still some of you believe in aliens and that they created us and stuff... morans
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1507655
Australia
08/22/2011 06:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: It takes 70,000 years to travel to closest star with our current technology...
 Quoting: Mustis


Time Travel will fix that.





GLP