2 replies to this topic

[Michael Van Diermen]

Quotes from www.bjklein.com:
Post: http://www.bjklein.c...E=&TOPIC_ID=750

Bob you replys were very insightful, thank you, but to continue:

Quote Michael:
I think if astronomers spent half the time they do thinking about what made some kind of flash or asteroids or sightings of suns that planets are wobbling or something like this On technology development and finding ways to travel faster in space we would have got out of our solar system by now, in person as well.
They think so much, think about the number of them and the kind of thinking/processing power there is here. Invent, Think, and think more. Technology, not to much unuseful theory about things we are not gaining, sorry it’s getting on my nerves.
Sorry to much of what I hear reminds me of what I might hear about the world when people were describing the shape of it and saying it was flat. I have had a bit to much of some of their speculation, assumption and weird theory’s (although sometimes I can not get enough of some peoples theory’s, perhaps I am sometimes listening to the wrong people). We will find our answers when we see them, E.g. when we have traveled the world round and noticed it joins up.
Don’t think about what shape the world is, what is this going to give us, Think about how to get across it (is this our stage in comparison, am I wrong?), What in, Where to, Finding things of use. What kind of riches did some of the people that progressed in traveling the world get?


A much latter quote from bob:
Even if we look at the best conceivable performance that we could engineer based on today’s knowledge, say an Ion engine or an antimatter rocket whose performance was 100 times better that the shuttle engines, we would need about ten railway tanker sized propellant tanks.
That doesn’t sound too bad, until you consider that we didn’t bring along any propellant to let us stop when we get to the other star system...or if we want to get there quicker than 9 centuries. End Quote.

Based on “getting to Centauri in 9 centuries using ten railway tanker sized propellant tanks” That’s 16,000 light years away, Proxima Centauri Our nearest neighboring star is 4.2 Light Years, That means it would take 2.3 years in a much smaller ship.

Was that just a quick example with incorrect time?

[Michael Van Diermen]

If we had enough speed, What about using other planets for more propellant

[Lazarus Long]

Mining space debris is a question of first establishing the industry, for that the best place to start are comets and asteroids and also atmospheric scooping with rams.

We can also beam energy as laser and microwaves to the ships from large scale facilities based on the Moon and in various orbits to act as energy umbilicals rather than just slings. Carrying the fuel isn't always necessary if the fuel can be received under the principle of in flight refueling.

Water for life support is as critical as fuel. Slings and tethers are useful too especially once we possess a mass of sufficient mass to act as a fulcrum. Magnetic rails are useful for unmanned payload launching once we possess bases in the vacuum and the use of Mag/Lev as a field repulsion/attraction drive that takes advantage of our planets strong electromagnetic field as well as the Gas Giants is also under developed. At least computerized astrogation is pretty far along but there too there will be a need to establish a helio centric beacon system that allows for precise navigation at great distances, an extension the idea of GPS (Global Positioning System) now so common but focused outward rather than inward.

Orbital tethered elevators are still the subject of science fiction but as the material sciences theoretically possible with nanotech come into being these will become practical for testing on the Lunar Surface as well for the development of real space way stations for outbound colonists. If the cargo and passengers can be lifted to the ship without having to descend deep into a planetary gravitational well then the fuel demand on the vessel can be dramatically reduced.

An Interstellar launch will likely begin with a dive towards our own star to use its gravity well for initial acceleration and the climb out would take advantage of routing past the planets to offset the Sun's gravity after perihelion. Venus, Earth, Mars, as well as the Gas Giants can then be atmospherically mined as they are used as sling shots (both lever and fulcrum). The tech described already exists and could launch a probe to the stars but you still haven't got past the damn temporal distortion caused by Relativity. Even if Ship time were only ten years to reach Centaurus, based on the acceleration rate and percent of Cee achieved time on Earth could have a relative displacement of decades to centuries.

Unless those left behind were immortal its a one way trip relative to relatives. A twenty year *ship time* turn around could vary its *effective (Earth) time* dramatically up to centuries. This is why some theorize that even if this early generation of Starships were launched tomorrow that the discovery of FTL will get future generations to the destination ahead of the first ships to go out. This is no reason not to send out ships however, but it is the reason to design in a new principle of ship that I call the Famship and of late even NASA recognizes as more viable for long term exploration than the military model. But before we go to the stars the planets are beginning to beckon and very rationally so.

As I point out in "The Meme Makers" the viability of converting Asteroids into ships is way too good to be overlooked and I think we will do this before even a Mars landing. We are discussing a profit making venture not subsidized space development. Maybe it is time for business to take the lead and stop patting itself on the back saying how if they only could do it they would do it better. Talk is cheap.