My Assistant
Fast Interstellar Travel Issues |
Jan 12 2007, 02:01 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Merciless Robot ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 8791 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
If this thread's in the wrong place, please relocate...thanks!
Assuming for the sake of argument here that someday we'll have propulsion systems capable of propelling vehicles at a significant fraction of the speed of light, what kinds of technical challenges will be presented by the interstellar medium? Right out of the gate, I can't see how anything we might build could survive hitting so much as a dust grain at even 0.01C. Heavy forward shields have been proposed, but the jolts from such collisions even if the spacecraft isn't vaporized would seem a bit unsettling to the payload. Assuming that issue can be overcome and that we can actually go even faster (<0.5C), at what point would interstellar hydrogen become aerodynamically (or even hydrodynamically!) significant as far as drag? Would true starships actually have to look something like hypersonic aircraft, or even subs depending on relative hydrogen density? -------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Guest_Myran_* |
Jan 18 2007, 05:59 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Guests |
Some nice ideas have been presented here, but dividing a probe into several miniature ones doesnt solve one of the most important problems. And that is communication back to Earth.
Would those 'starwhisps' by some magical trick somehow pull a terrawatt laser and nuclear reactor our of their sleeve? (Yes the sail items might be modified to work as one dish for radio also, but again, that would add quite to the complexity of the sail and the number of things it should be able to do. Then the power needed for transmission would not be that much smaller and complex radio signals carrying megabytes of data will degrade more than laser in the interaction with gas, the stellar wind, galactic magnetic field etc etc.) Another misunderstanding with lightsails is that they're unable to break their speed. They actually are! One way would be to use the laser light itself and change to the opposite tack, so that the 'mirror' surface directs the laser light forward. (Anyone who knows a bit of sailing here? Its more or less the same thing as when you arrange the sails of a ship to go against the wind.) Its not as efficient as the acceleration but if you could charge the sail with quite a lot of electricity it would generate its own magnetic field and choosing the polarity the sail would be able to break. If the heliosphere around that star are as extensive as for Sol it could break for almost a lightyear in this fashion. Last and most risky would be to go very near the destination star breaking both by the light and stellar wind. One insterstellar probe might use not only one but two or all of these methods to either break enough to get a decent observation time at the target star or even come to a stop and so be able to explore interesting worlds one by one at closer range. |
|
|
|
Jan 18 2007, 09:45 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 402 Joined: 5-January 07 From: Manchester England Member No.: 1563 |
Some nice ideas have been presented here, but dividing a probe into several miniature ones doesnt solve one of the most important problems. And that is communication back to Earth. Would those 'starwhisps' by some magical trick somehow pull a terrawatt laser and nuclear reactor our of their sleeve? I would guess that this is where the self replicating probe idea comes into its own, as a probe that could build a copy of itself could build a reactor and transmitter on site as well- if it could find suitable resorces. -------------------- |
|
|
|
nprev Fast Interstellar Travel Issues Jan 12 2007, 02:01 PM
helvick Just to give you some simplistic ballpark numbers.... Jan 12 2007, 02:58 PM
nprev Thanks for the numbers, Helvick; interesting! ... Jan 12 2007, 03:24 PM
marsbug That would make much more sense than lugging tons ... Jan 12 2007, 04:35 PM
nprev Inefficient to be sure, but I was assuming that th... Jan 12 2007, 05:34 PM
Bob Shaw We've already seen effects back in the 1980s w... Jan 12 2007, 06:54 PM
nprev Points noted, Bob. Problem is, as Helvick so ably ... Jan 12 2007, 07:48 PM
marsbug Give it all of the above, lasers, layerd areogel s... Jan 12 2007, 10:04 PM
Bob Shaw Remember that Giotto didn't just encounter smo... Jan 12 2007, 10:44 PM
nprev QUOTE (marsbug @ Jan 12 2007, 02:04 PM) P... Jan 13 2007, 02:51 AM
Thu QUOTE (nprev @ Jan 13 2007, 09:51 AM) ...... Jan 13 2007, 11:02 AM

marsbug I've always liked the idea of propelling a spa... Jan 13 2007, 12:37 PM
Bob Shaw QUOTE (nprev @ Jan 13 2007, 02:51 AM) Tha... Jan 13 2007, 04:23 PM
nprev Well, Bob, if they were manned vessels then #1 wou... Jan 13 2007, 06:17 PM
Bob Shaw At EOM, when approaching the target solar system, ... Jan 13 2007, 11:39 PM
ngunn QUOTE (nprev @ Jan 13 2007, 06:17 PM) Thu... Jan 14 2007, 12:07 AM
nprev You know, I was thinking that too, but I also kept... Jan 14 2007, 02:10 AM
mchan QUOTE (nprev @ Jan 13 2007, 06:10 PM) the... Jan 14 2007, 03:06 AM
nprev QUOTE (mchan @ Jan 13 2007, 07:06 PM) If ... Jan 14 2007, 03:37 AM
Thu QUOTE (nprev @ Jan 14 2007, 10:37 AM) EDI... Jan 14 2007, 08:20 AM
marsbug QUOTE (Thu @ Jan 14 2007, 08:20 AM) Cons
... Jan 14 2007, 09:50 AM
deglr6328 I think we are neglecting a VERY important issue h... Jan 14 2007, 03:00 AM
Mongo QUOTE (deglr6328 @ Jan 14 2007, 03:00 AM)... Jan 14 2007, 07:20 PM
J.J. Lots of good ideas in this thread.
I also favor a... Jan 14 2007, 07:09 PM
deglr6328 Oops! I guess I did that wrong! Hey I was... Jan 15 2007, 01:00 AM
nprev Don't feel bad, Deglr; I was too lazy to do th... Jan 15 2007, 01:11 PM
Thu Nprev, I'm sorry for not mentioning it's a... Jan 15 2007, 02:39 PM
nprev Gotcha. But 0.1c translates into around 30,000 km/... Jan 15 2007, 03:16 PM
Bob Shaw Have a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki... Jan 15 2007, 09:48 PM
nprev Thanks, Bob. I had just barely heard of the Centau... Jan 16 2007, 02:26 AM
marsbug There seems to be no shortage of ideas and enthusi... Jan 16 2007, 12:30 PM
Bob Shaw QUOTE (marsbug @ Jan 16 2007, 12:30 PM) T... Jan 16 2007, 02:33 PM
helvick QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jan 16 2007, 02:33 PM) ... Jan 16 2007, 05:55 PM
tasp After the acceleration phase, one could simply fly... Jan 16 2007, 02:34 PM
edstrick It's abundantly clear from engineering concept... Jan 17 2007, 09:37 AM
djellison Several SETI related posts delete ( there is a thr... Jan 17 2007, 11:45 AM
marsbug also your bad to quote the whole of the preceeding... Jan 17 2007, 12:03 PM
Bob Shaw The big problem with 'tiny' probes is the ... Jan 18 2007, 11:11 PM
edstrick The other problem with tiny probes are diffraction... Jan 19 2007, 09:11 AM
nprev Sure would be nice to figure out a way to stay awh... Jan 20 2007, 06:46 AM
djellison Twice this thread has entered tin-foil hat ground.... Jan 20 2007, 04:10 PM![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 17th December 2024 - 04:17 AM |
|
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |
|