Having Already Learned Enough From How the Solar System Operates -It's Time to Go Interstellar

The environments of both Mars and Venus are way too impossible for developing their own organic growth and organic self-organization globally, without inducing huge cost overruns, and these locations lack anything reasonably habitable enough within our common-sense technological capacity to make them any kind of worthwhile outpost, unless Mars could (retrospectively) support the protection of planet earth, along with the rest of the solar system, against foreign attack, galaxy-wide.

http://zeropoint.dreamstation.com/Go...terstellar.htm

Here is a review of a proposed nuke-pulsed fusion propulsion system similar to what Project Orion had envisioned. Using the fusion bomblet principle, a ship consisting of 476,000 tons of fuel, combined with 100,000 tons of payload, reaches a velocity of 0.1c over a period of 1 year of acceleration. The calculated values are 6090 terrajoules of thrust PER SECOND.

To give an idea of the amount of thrust we are talking about, one Hiroshima bomb equals 63 terrajoules, so the amount of thrust would be equal to 6090/63 = 96 Hiroshima bombs per second. How this could become feasible is anyone's guess, yet the idea for having 100,000 tons of payload on board for an interstellar operation, might just mean that others might consider increasing the period of acceleration 4X, yielding a thrust that's not-so-explosive.

Reducing the thrust 1/4 the value, yields 1522.5 terrajoules, or 24.16 Hiroshima bombs per second. Following through using 1/4 thrust, increases the [acceleration] flight time by 4X. Using 3 thrust domes, each dome would subdivide the thrust into 8.05 Hiroshima bombs per second. Dividing the thrust even further by 1/8 would also multiply the acceleration time to achieve 0.1 lightspeed accordingly. This acceleration flight time adds another 8X towards 0.1c lightspeed, which would lower the thrust for each dome to 1.07 Hiroshima bombs per second. Thus if the total acceleration flight time increases To [8][4]X, where X= 1 year, would equal 32 years, so then the total [acceleration/de-acceleration] flight time is equal to 64 years, given the de-acceleration period of another 32 years.

If Alpha Centauri at 4.37 LY distance adds at least 43.7 years of travel [at 0.1 lightspeed] to the acceleration/de-acceleration time period, then this amount would be reduced by the distance covered during the acceleration/de-acceleration periods, which amounts to 64 years. This distance remains negligible to the overall distance between star systems - 1.3229842 x 10^10 meters compared to 4.1343 x 10^16 meters, is only 0.0000003199 the distance of 4.1343 L.Y. So basically, 43.7 years of travel is still being added to 64 years of travel, yielding a total of 107.7 total years of travel.

This type of interstellar transporation would only be good for at least 2nd generational occupancy, based upon the values given.

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:01:11 PM UTC-7, wrote:
The environments of both Mars and Venus are way too impossible for developing their own organic growth and organic self-organization globally, without inducing huge cost overruns, and these locations lack anything reasonably habitable enough within our common-sense technological capacity to make them any kind of worthwhile outpost, unless Mars could (retrospectively) support the protection of planet earth, along with the rest of the solar system, against foreign attack, galaxy-wide.



http://zeropoint.dreamstation.com/Go...terstellar.htm



Here is a review of a proposed nuke-pulsed fusion propulsion system similar to what Project Orion had envisioned. Using the fusion bomblet principle, a ship consisting of 476,000 tons of fuel, combined with 100,000 tons of payload, reaches a velocity of 0.1c over a period of 1 year of acceleration.. The calculated values are 6090 terrajoules of thrust PER SECOND.



To give an idea of the amount of thrust we are talking about, one Hiroshima bomb equals 63 terrajoules, so the amount of thrust would be equal to 6090/63 = 96 Hiroshima bombs per second. How this could become feasible is anyone's guess, yet the idea for having 100,000 tons of payload on board for an interstellar operation, might just mean that others might consider increasing the period of acceleration 4X, yielding a thrust that's not-so-explosive.



Reducing the thrust 1/4 the value, yields 1522.5 terrajoules, or 24.16 Hiroshima bombs per second. Following through using 1/4 thrust, increases the [acceleration] flight time by 4X. Using 3 thrust domes, each dome would subdivide the thrust into 8.05 Hiroshima bombs per second. Dividing the thrust even further by 1/8 would also multiply the acceleration time to achieve 0.1 lightspeed accordingly. This acceleration flight time adds another 8X towards 0.1c lightspeed, which would lower the thrust for each dome to 1.07 Hiroshima bombs per second. Thus if the total acceleration flight time increases To [8][4]X, where X= 1 year, would equal 32 years, so then the total [acceleration/de-acceleration] flight time is equal to 64 years, given the de-acceleration period of another 32 years.



If Alpha Centauri at 4.37 LY distance adds at least 43.7 years of travel [at 0.1 lightspeed] to the acceleration/de-acceleration time period, then this amount would be reduced by the distance covered during the acceleration/de-acceleration periods, which amounts to 64 years. This distance remains negligible to the overall distance between star systems - 1.3229842 x 10^10 meters compared to 4.1343 x 10^16 meters, is only 0.0000003199 the distance of 4.1343 L.Y. So basically, 43.7 years of travel is still being added to 64 years of travel, yielding a total of 107.7 total years of travel.



This type of interstellar transporation would only be good for at least 2nd generational occupancy, based upon the values given.

You have little faith in what applied physics and use of science can do with the likes of Mars, Venus or even our moon.

If others have already managed to deal with Venus, then where's the big-ass insurmountable problem?

Are you looking for only a nasty bug, germ and lethal virus infested Eden planet like Earth, with 1.9 billion species of mostly unfriendly life existing, and whereas otherwise only 5% of its surface area is truly naked Goldilocks worthy?

If so, you've eliminated perhaps at least 99.9% of viable planets that could be adapted to, and/or otherwise dealt with, because on average each star could provide a viable planet or sufficiently large moon for us to exploit, not to mention the large number of wandering/nomad planets that should exist as also capable of having sustained complex life w/o a sun.

We have perhaps at best a few centuries before we run ourselves out of terrestrial options, and as for going to other solar systems in order to disrupt and trash those other planets, is simply not a valid option, unless we go along with the likes of what William Mook and yourself have to offer.

Can you demonstrate even .1 c travel, and sufficient retro-thrust energy for braking upon arrival at whatever exoplanet?

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 7:28:34 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:01:11 PM UTC-7, wrote:

The environments of both Mars and Venus are way too impossible for developing their own organic growth and organic self-organization globally, without inducing huge cost overruns, and these locations lack anything reasonably habitable enough within our common-sense technological capacity to make them any kind of worthwhile outpost, unless Mars could (retrospectively) support the protection of planet earth, along with the rest of the solar system, against foreign attack, galaxy-wide.







http://zeropoint.dreamstation.com/Go...terstellar.htm







Here is a review of a proposed nuke-pulsed fusion propulsion system similar to what Project Orion had envisioned. Using the fusion bomblet principle, a ship consisting of 476,000 tons of fuel, combined with 100,000 tons of payload, reaches a velocity of 0.1c over a period of 1 year of acceleration. The calculated values are 6090 terrajoules of thrust PER SECOND.







To give an idea of the amount of thrust we are talking about, one Hiroshima bomb equals 63 terrajoules, so the amount of thrust would be equal to 6090/63 = 96 Hiroshima bombs per second. How this could become feasible is anyone's guess, yet the idea for having 100,000 tons of payload on board for an interstellar operation, might just mean that others might consider increasing the period of acceleration 4X, yielding a thrust that's not-so-explosive.







Reducing the thrust 1/4 the value, yields 1522.5 terrajoules, or 24.16 Hiroshima bombs per second. Following through using 1/4 thrust, increases the [acceleration] flight time by 4X. Using 3 thrust domes, each dome would subdivide the thrust into 8.05 Hiroshima bombs per second. Dividing the thrust even further by 1/8 would also multiply the acceleration time to achieve 0.1 lightspeed accordingly. This acceleration flight time adds another 8X towards 0.1c lightspeed, which would lower the thrust for each dome to 1..07 Hiroshima bombs per second. Thus if the total acceleration flight time increases To [8][4]X, where X= 1 year, would equal 32 years, so then the total [acceleration/de-acceleration] flight time is equal to 64 years, given the de-acceleration period of another 32 years.







If Alpha Centauri at 4.37 LY distance adds at least 43.7 years of travel [at 0.1 lightspeed] to the acceleration/de-acceleration time period, then this amount would be reduced by the distance covered during the acceleration/de-acceleration periods, which amounts to 64 years. This distance remains negligible to the overall distance between star systems - 1.3229842 x 10^10 meters compared to 4.1343 x 10^16 meters, is only 0.0000003199 the distance of 4.1343 L.Y. So basically, 43.7 years of travel is still being added to 64 years of travel, yielding a total of 107.7 total years of travel.







This type of interstellar transporation would only be good for at least 2nd generational occupancy, based upon the values given.



You have little faith in what applied physics and use of science can do with the likes of Mars, Venus or even our moon.



If others have already managed to deal with Venus, then where's the big-ass insurmountable problem?



Are you looking for only a nasty bug, germ and lethal virus infested Eden planet like Earth, with 1.9 billion species of mostly unfriendly life existing, and whereas otherwise only 5% of its surface area is truly naked Goldilocks worthy?



If so, you've eliminated perhaps at least 99.9% of viable planets that could be adapted to, and/or otherwise dealt with, because on average each star could provide a viable planet or sufficiently large moon for us to exploit, not to mention the large number of wandering/nomad planets that should exist as also capable of having sustained complex life w/o a sun.



We have perhaps at best a few centuries before we run ourselves out of terrestrial options, and as for going to other solar systems in order to disrupt and trash those other planets, is simply not a valid option, unless we go along with the likes of what William Mook and yourself have to offer.



Can you demonstrate even .1 c travel, and sufficient retro-thrust energy for braking upon arrival at whatever exoplanet?

The idea for interstellar fusion propulsion is not just for whatever political campaign can be stirred up to create jealousy among interplanetary scientists. It is an idea that has come to represent a restoration to what earth used to be, before all of the weapons of war destroyed nearly half the planet - and you can include Chernobyl and Fukushima on that list.

At the current rate of nuclear fallout, the earth will be uninhabitable in 50 years. Since there doesn't seem to be any technology being propagated at the present time - to remove and/or neutralize the fallout coming from places like northern Japan or Chernobyl, then it's plain to see that there are certain people that are keeping the technology from escaping into mainstream science, as this would lead directly to non-lethal nuclear propulsion, which is something whose time has already come, and not just "theoretically".. People like Stanton Freidman has his own website dedicated to this kind of mission:

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index...09.02.03&prt=2

These kinds of secrets are so capital-threatening to the controllers of our "prison warden" economy, that the Apollo Program may have been a ruse so as to prevent nuclear propulsion from ever happening - even in the longer term. So instead of long-term approaches of the kind that would make gold out of anything extra-orbital, there are the short-term globalists, banksters, and purported derivatives fraudsters, who probably would have already become insanely paranoid about what problems a "new earth" might represent to the common man, let alone an asteroid worth $2 trillion.

We've already learned enough about the moon, Mars, and the rest of the planets. Now it's time to get out of here, and prepare to get out of here.

Distance to Alpha Centauri = 4.37 LY = [4.37] 9.4607×10^15 m = D

Distance traveled during periods of acceleration/deacceleration =

(Vf_acc + Vi_acc)*t/2 + (Vf_deacc + Vi_deacc)*t/2 = [([4.37] 9.4607×10^7 m/sec + 0.0000)*32 years / 2] + [(0.0000 + [4.37]9.4607×10^7 m)*32 years / 2] = 661.49214 x 10^7 meters + 661.49214 x 10^7 meters = 1322.9842 x 10^7 meters

Intermediate distance of no acceleration/de-acceleration = [4.37] 9.4607×10^15 meters - 1322.9842 x 10^7 meters

Now anyone can see that the intermediate distance is practically equal to the total distance between the sun and Alpha Centauri. The energy released from 2 Deuterium nucelii yields 3.82 e10^-12 Joules, so the standard form of the kinetic energy desired is 1/2 m v^2. Plugging the values for the mass of 2 Deuterium nucleii yields (1/2)(6.64e-27kg)v^2 = 3.82 e10^-12 Joules, so the velocity of the alpha particle is v = sqrt[(3.82 e10^-12)/1/2*(6..64e-27kg)], which yields 3.39e7 m/sec. Since the speed of light equals 299,792,458 m/sec, or roughly 300,000,000 m/s, then .339/3.00 = 0.113 light velocity.

Using Tsiolkovsky's equation v_rocket / v_exhaust = loge (Mass_rocket+fuel / Mass_rocket(no fuel)) with the delta V equation, we're deciding on using a craft the size of an aircraft carrier such as the Nimitz, weighing in at 100,000 metric tons. The kinetic energy of a ship this size, moving at 0..1 lightspeed, equals:

1/2 (100,000,000 kg)(2.99e7m/sec^2) = 4.47e22 Joules

The number of fusion interactions is given by dividing the above kinetic energy, by the energy of 2 deuterium nucleii given above, or
4.47e22 Joules/3.82 e10^-12Joules = 2.34e34 Deuterium nucleii. Since a deuterium mass is equivalent to 3.34e-27kg, the total mass is then equal to (2.34e34)(3.34e-27) = 7.815e6 kg, or ~782 metric tons DT.

Plugging in the values to achieve the proper Delta-V, we find a mass of rocket + fuel = 2,400,000,000 kg., mass of rocket (no fuel) = 1,000,000,000 kg., and the ISP = 33,900,000m/s (velocity of alpha particle), yielding 29,678,390.2 m/sec, which gives approximately 0.1c.

Therefore, the amount of fuel required to achieve 0.1c would be about 140,000 metric tons of DT.

Since the multiplier is 2.4 in the expression 2.4 x (mass of payload, or 100,000 metric tons) = rocket + fuel, we multiply 240 metric tons by 2.4 to get the total full mass of 576,000 metric tons, and 100,000 metric tons by 2.4 to get the total dry mass of 240,000 metric tons. A total full mass of 576,000 metric tons means that at the start of the trip, we'll need 476,000 tons of DT to achieve 0.1 lightspeed.

The math for accommodating a thruster design that stretches out the journey a bit, that has to achieve a top velocity of 0.1c, has to expend 0.03125, or 1/32 of the amount of thrust equalling 32X the time, or 1/32 the thrust for each dome that divides the total thrust of 96 Hiroshima bombs per second, down to 1 Hiroshima/second/dome.

This would be equivalent to (0.03125)(336,000,000 kilograms DT)/31,536,000 sec. = 0.33295 kilograms/sec DT. The energy release would be (0.33295 kilograms/sec)(3.82 e10^-12Joules/(3.34e-27kg/DT)=3.808e15J/sec per thruster..

There are scaled down versions of bomblet size, that depend upon pellet size and laser intensity. I have worked out a limited version that scales the energy output to a minimum fusion requirement of 2.25 X 10^13 Joules per second per dome, which differs by a factor of just under 100X the interstellar requirement. I suspect that this would enough for building an asteroid mining facility/rotating space station, which is enough in proximity to Europa, and yet far enough away to remain protected from harmful Jovian radiation.