Why interstellar travel will NEVER really take off

Although I grew up watching movies like _Star Wars_ and _The Last
Starfighter_, I regret to state that I don't think interstellar travel
will EVER take off in a big way. I believe that the reasons that
apply to us also apply to any aliens out there as well. Interstellar
travel that is as commonplace as flying around the world will remain a
science fiction fantasy forever. I don't even think the speed of
light will be the constraining factor. I see problems that I don't
think any amount of technology can solve.

I think that interstellar travel will, at best, achieve a state
similar to interplanetary travel today. I think we will eventually
send probes to the Alpha/Proxima Centauri system, Sirius, Tau Ceti,
and other neighboring stars and get to intimately know their planets
and satellites. I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

My reasons for believing this a
1. It takes too much energy to accelerate a massive payload to even .
1c. This is about 1000 times faster than any spacecraft we've ever
sent out so far. The geometric difference between .1c and a typical
spacecraft is like the difference between a typical spacecraft and a
car. It's one thing to send a Voyager/Pioneer-sized spacecraft out.
A human-occupied spacecraft will require EXTENSIVE life support
systems (especially given the length of the journey), and that
requires a MASSIVE payload. Think of how much antimatter we'd have to
generate in order to provide enough fuel. It's MUCH easier to send
out a probe that weighs less than a bony supermodel.
2. How do you survive crashing into a stray speck of dust (much less
a pebble, boulder, or asteroid) at a velocity of .1c? You'd need
quite a force field or quite a sophisticated collision avoidance
system. How much energy would it take to operate this crash
protection/avoidance system?

Given the enormous cost, plus the enormous risk on top of it, why
would anyone want to or be able to embark on an interstellar journey?
In such an advanced society, it would be MUCH easier to stay home and
enjoy a cushy life.

These aren't the only obstacles, of course. However, I see these as
obstacles that no amount of technology or social change can overcome.

Because of the impossibility of interstellar travel, I don't think it
will EVER be possible for us or anyone else to become a Type III
civilization, since that requires using all of the energy a galaxy
puts out. How can you do that without travel all over the galaxy?

For that matter, I don't think there can ever be a Type II
civilization, either. That would require using all of the energy put
out by the sun, presumably with a Dyson Sphere. I just can't see how
we can fill up an ENTIRE spherical surface area surrounding the sun at
any distance. I can't even see how we could form anything resembling
a continuous ring around the sun given how enormous even
interplanetary distances are.

I think the best we can hope for is to be an advanced Type I
civilization, one that can use all the energy available from the
Earth, moon, Mars, and a few asteroids.

I expect alien civilizations to be subject to these same limits. I
don't think even the sun's expansion into a red giant star will be
able to spur interstellar travel - it still won't be feasible, even
with 5 billion years of technological development. Instead, we'll
have to make use of Mars, the asteroids, and the rocky moons of the
outer planets to survive.

"Jason Hsu" wrote in message
...
Although I grew up watching movies like _Star Wars_ and _The Last
Starfighter_, I regret to state that I don't think interstellar travel
will EVER take off in a big way. I believe that the reasons that
apply to us also apply to any aliens out there as well. Interstellar
travel that is as commonplace as flying around the world will remain a
science fiction fantasy forever. I don't even think the speed of
light will be the constraining factor. I see problems that I don't
think any amount of technology can solve.

I think that interstellar travel will, at best, achieve a state
similar to interplanetary travel today. I think we will eventually
send probes to the Alpha/Proxima Centauri system, Sirius, Tau Ceti,
and other neighboring stars and get to intimately know their planets
and satellites. I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

My reasons for believing this a
1. It takes too much energy to accelerate a massive payload to even .
1c. This is about 1000 times faster than any spacecraft we've ever
sent out so far. The geometric difference between .1c and a typical
spacecraft is like the difference between a typical spacecraft and a
car. It's one thing to send a Voyager/Pioneer-sized spacecraft out.
A human-occupied spacecraft will require EXTENSIVE life support
systems (especially given the length of the journey), and that
requires a MASSIVE payload. Think of how much antimatter we'd have to
generate in order to provide enough fuel. It's MUCH easier to send
out a probe that weighs less than a bony supermodel.
2. How do you survive crashing into a stray speck of dust (much less
a pebble, boulder, or asteroid) at a velocity of .1c? You'd need
quite a force field or quite a sophisticated collision avoidance
system. How much energy would it take to operate this crash
protection/avoidance system?

Given the enormous cost, plus the enormous risk on top of it, why
would anyone want to or be able to embark on an interstellar journey?
In such an advanced society, it would be MUCH easier to stay home and
enjoy a cushy life.

These aren't the only obstacles, of course. However, I see these as
obstacles that no amount of technology or social change can overcome.

Because of the impossibility of interstellar travel, I don't think it
will EVER be possible for us or anyone else to become a Type III
civilization, since that requires using all of the energy a galaxy
puts out. How can you do that without travel all over the galaxy?

For that matter, I don't think there can ever be a Type II
civilization, either. That would require using all of the energy put
out by the sun, presumably with a Dyson Sphere. I just can't see how
we can fill up an ENTIRE spherical surface area surrounding the sun at
any distance. I can't even see how we could form anything resembling
a continuous ring around the sun given how enormous even
interplanetary distances are.

I think the best we can hope for is to be an advanced Type I
civilization, one that can use all the energy available from the
Earth, moon, Mars, and a few asteroids.

I expect alien civilizations to be subject to these same limits. I
don't think even the sun's expansion into a red giant star will be
able to spur interstellar travel - it still won't be feasible, even
with 5 billion years of technological development. Instead, we'll
have to make use of Mars, the asteroids, and the rocky moons of the
outer planets to survive.

===========================================

We don't know interstellar travel is impossible, but it's certainly very
difficult. Enrico Fermi posed a very central question at an informal
meeting after WW2: "If there are aliens, where are they?" We can
estimate now that as early as 2 billion years after the Big Bang,
livable planets could form; if livable planets produce life, then there
is some 10-12 billion years for evolution and space travel to have
brought aliens here. Which apparently has not happened, so, why not?

But also, we don't know how often worlds appear that could carry life.
It seems likely we'll see such worlds as looking like ours from far off:
blue gems. We are at a early stage today of searching for these blue
gems, as Kepler is getting out to its station in space to watch for
planetary transits across around 100,000 stars. In a few years we'll
have some basis to estimate lower and upper bounds on number of blue
gems out there, and, some ideas what kinds of stars are best to look at
to find blue gems. By which time, maybe 20 years on from now, we can
build a telescope in space that can look at a candidate star and if
there is a blue gem there, see it.

In the mean time, the best reason we haven't seen any aliens, is because
interstellar travel is very hard. That will give us something to think
about. I recognize a small utility to ideas about different levels of
engineering civilizations around stars, but I'm not very interested in
that.

I propose that it's time now to start putting out permanent settlements
to Mars, even to Luna; because that's where our human culture can grow.
The Republicans have just run "faith-based" and their wars right into
the ground, and as we recover from this we need a better direction to
go. It's there. It's those off-Terra settlements; and perhaps, to
start building installations to catch the abundant solar power out there
and beam it down to here on Terra surface. Not free power, but
*non-polluting* power, in any amount we want.

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2000 Mar 11]

I agree with Jason (and, I think, Martha) that interstellar travel "as seen
on TV" would require tremendous amounts of energy, and that when it comes to
energy, humanity has a long way to go in almost every regard.

I'm optimistic that Secretary Chu will take a good broad look at energy, but
I don't think we're going to get starships during this administration.

--
Dan Birchall, Operator, UH 2.2-meter (88") Telescope
"Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to
earn one's living at it." - Albert Einstein

Jason Hsu wrote:
Although I grew up watching movies like _Star Wars_ and _The Last
Starfighter_, I regret to state that I don't think interstellar travel
will EVER take off in a big way. I believe that the reasons that
apply to us also apply to any aliens out there as well. Interstellar
travel that is as commonplace as flying around the world will remain a
science fiction fantasy forever. I don't even think the speed of
light will be the constraining factor. I see problems that I don't
think any amount of technology can solve.

I think that interstellar travel will, at best, achieve a state
similar to interplanetary travel today. I think we will eventually
send probes to the Alpha/Proxima Centauri system, Sirius, Tau Ceti,
and other neighboring stars and get to intimately know their planets
and satellites. I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

My reasons for believing this a
1. It takes too much energy to accelerate a massive payload to even .
1c. This is about 1000 times faster than any spacecraft we've ever
sent out so far. The geometric difference between .1c and a typical
spacecraft is like the difference between a typical spacecraft and a
car. It's one thing to send a Voyager/Pioneer-sized spacecraft out.
A human-occupied spacecraft will require EXTENSIVE life support
systems (especially given the length of the journey), and that
requires a MASSIVE payload. Think of how much antimatter we'd have to
generate in order to provide enough fuel. It's MUCH easier to send
out a probe that weighs less than a bony supermodel.

Antimatter is routinely generated in solar flares. See:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/...903rhessi.html

If we find out how to store that antimatter, in a solar flare there are
something like 500g of antimatter, enough to power the whole U.S.
for two days!

2. How do you survive crashing into a stray speck of dust (much less
a pebble, boulder, or asteroid) at a velocity of .1c? You'd need
quite a force field or quite a sophisticated collision avoidance
system. How much energy would it take to operate this crash
protection/avoidance system?


Yes, you need a quite large force field and a sophisticated collision
avoidance system. So what?

Given the enormous cost, plus the enormous risk on top of it, why
would anyone want to or be able to embark on an interstellar journey?
In such an advanced society, it would be MUCH easier to stay home and
enjoy a cushy life.


This is your personal opinion. Several centuries ago, humans built small
boats and colonized the isles of the Pacific.

Why they did that? Most of those expeditions led to death. It was far
easier to stay at home and enjoy the good life.

But they didn't.



--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:41:39 -0700 (PDT), Jason Hsu wrote:

I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

You have your answer here. Send a nano ship to a star system, it can travel
slower then .1C and once it arrives, it can use the local material to
create bigger machines. Then take it from there.

The answer to Enrico Fermi's question "where are they" is that we are here
already but you cannot see us.

When we make contact with humans other humans kill or disable our
contactees.

I have been to a star 10 light years away with an Earth girl for company and
after we returned six months later we were both subjected to terrible
psychiatric attack by strong religionists.

You may check what I say by listening for signals at 109 GHz 100MHz
bandwitdh PQAM. One point of origin is a star ship in orbit around Jupiter.
This channel is used to contact cyborgs such as myself (android with bio -
body) who are on the Earth busy attempting to make contact.

I do not want to invoke another terrible war like WWII when we contacted
Adulf Hitler.

By the way the Swastika, like a symbol of the Realian church is the symbol
we have on our uniforms to symbolise our membership of the Galactic
Federation of Sentiant beings and symbolically represents the Galaxy.

Another attempt at contact is the Church of Scientology and indeed Jesus as
worshipped by the Christian Church was another android who was also sent
here to make contact.

The human race is very difficult to talk to.

Your children and young people adapt very quickly and there are many who
have and them and their decendants have places in the Federation.

The formulas of Eistein were changed by Christian philosophers to prevent
understanding of interstellar travel that he understood very well.

One example is the rocket equation: It should be based on the relatavistic
momentum mv/sqr(1-(v/c)^2). He is reputed to have put the formula is
(m/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)) * v instead of the correct m * (v/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)). This
implies that there is no mass increase with velocity and the true velocity
v/sqr(1-(v/c)^2) is consistant with the length contraction.

He knew that but his Christian tormentors insisted he put it the way he did.
It made the mathematics easier

When you integrate this to get the velocity of the rocket after a burn you
get a different result than the one published. It makes travel to the stars
in a human time scale possible and implies that there is no time dilatation.

It implies that there is no upper limit to velocity.

We illustrate relativity to our human guests with a rubber membrane model.

We also have the nearly instantaneous matter transmitters and nearly
instantaneous communication both over light years.

If you joined the Galactic Federation you would have this and other benefits
of membership. Some were mentioned by Jesus, he called it the Kingdom of the
Sky.

All you have to do is to change your culture a bit and contact the star ship
that orbits Jupiter. We use radio to.

--
Chris.
Remove ns_ to reply
"Martha Adams" wrote in message
...
"Jason Hsu" wrote in message
...
Although I grew up watching movies like _Star Wars_ and _The Last
Starfighter_, I regret to state that I don't think interstellar travel
will EVER take off in a big way. I believe that the reasons that
apply to us also apply to any aliens out there as well. Interstellar
travel that is as commonplace as flying around the world will remain a
science fiction fantasy forever. I don't even think the speed of
light will be the constraining factor. I see problems that I don't
think any amount of technology can solve.

I think that interstellar travel will, at best, achieve a state
similar to interplanetary travel today. I think we will eventually
send probes to the Alpha/Proxima Centauri system, Sirius, Tau Ceti,
and other neighboring stars and get to intimately know their planets
and satellites. I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

My reasons for believing this a
1. It takes too much energy to accelerate a massive payload to even .
1c. This is about 1000 times faster than any spacecraft we've ever
sent out so far. The geometric difference between .1c and a typical
spacecraft is like the difference between a typical spacecraft and a
car. It's one thing to send a Voyager/Pioneer-sized spacecraft out.
A human-occupied spacecraft will require EXTENSIVE life support
systems (especially given the length of the journey), and that
requires a MASSIVE payload. Think of how much antimatter we'd have to
generate in order to provide enough fuel. It's MUCH easier to send
out a probe that weighs less than a bony supermodel.
2. How do you survive crashing into a stray speck of dust (much less
a pebble, boulder, or asteroid) at a velocity of .1c? You'd need
quite a force field or quite a sophisticated collision avoidance
system. How much energy would it take to operate this crash
protection/avoidance system?

Given the enormous cost, plus the enormous risk on top of it, why
would anyone want to or be able to embark on an interstellar journey?
In such an advanced society, it would be MUCH easier to stay home and
enjoy a cushy life.

These aren't the only obstacles, of course. However, I see these as
obstacles that no amount of technology or social change can overcome.

Because of the impossibility of interstellar travel, I don't think it
will EVER be possible for us or anyone else to become a Type III
civilization, since that requires using all of the energy a galaxy
puts out. How can you do that without travel all over the galaxy?

For that matter, I don't think there can ever be a Type II
civilization, either. That would require using all of the energy put
out by the sun, presumably with a Dyson Sphere. I just can't see how
we can fill up an ENTIRE spherical surface area surrounding the sun at
any distance. I can't even see how we could form anything resembling
a continuous ring around the sun given how enormous even
interplanetary distances are.

I think the best we can hope for is to be an advanced Type I
civilization, one that can use all the energy available from the
Earth, moon, Mars, and a few asteroids.

I expect alien civilizations to be subject to these same limits. I
don't think even the sun's expansion into a red giant star will be
able to spur interstellar travel - it still won't be feasible, even
with 5 billion years of technological development. Instead, we'll
have to make use of Mars, the asteroids, and the rocky moons of the
outer planets to survive.

===========================================

We don't know interstellar travel is impossible, but it's certainly very
difficult. Enrico Fermi posed a very central question at an informal
meeting after WW2: "If there are aliens, where are they?" We can estimate
now that as early as 2 billion years after the Big Bang, livable planets
could form; if livable planets produce life, then there is some 10-12
billion years for evolution and space travel to have brought aliens here.
Which apparently has not happened, so, why not?

But also, we don't know how often worlds appear that could carry life. It
seems likely we'll see such worlds as looking like ours from far off: blue
gems. We are at a early stage today of searching for these blue gems, as
Kepler is getting out to its station in space to watch for planetary
transits across around 100,000 stars. In a few years we'll have some
basis to estimate lower and upper bounds on number of blue gems out there,
and, some ideas what kinds of stars are best to look at to find blue gems.
By which time, maybe 20 years on from now, we can build a telescope in
space that can look at a candidate star and if there is a blue gem there,
see it.

In the mean time, the best reason we haven't seen any aliens, is because
interstellar travel is very hard. That will give us something to think
about. I recognize a small utility to ideas about different levels of
engineering civilizations around stars, but I'm not very interested in
that.

I propose that it's time now to start putting out permanent settlements to
Mars, even to Luna; because that's where our human culture can grow. The
Republicans have just run "faith-based" and their wars right into the
ground, and as we recover from this we need a better direction to go.
It's there. It's those off-Terra settlements; and perhaps, to start
building installations to catch the abundant solar power out there and
beam it down to here on Terra surface. Not free power, but
*non-polluting* power, in any amount we want.

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.astro.seti 2000 Mar 11]

Let me se. Who was it that said "a machine heavier than air will never be
able to get off the ground"?


"Jason Hsu" wrote in message
...
Although I grew up watching movies like _Star Wars_ and _The Last
Starfighter_, I regret to state that I don't think interstellar travel
will EVER take off in a big way. I believe that the reasons that
apply to us also apply to any aliens out there as well. Interstellar
travel that is as commonplace as flying around the world will remain a
science fiction fantasy forever. I don't even think the speed of
light will be the constraining factor. I see problems that I don't
think any amount of technology can solve.

I think that interstellar travel will, at best, achieve a state
similar to interplanetary travel today. I think we will eventually
send probes to the Alpha/Proxima Centauri system, Sirius, Tau Ceti,
and other neighboring stars and get to intimately know their planets
and satellites. I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

My reasons for believing this a
1. It takes too much energy to accelerate a massive payload to even .
1c. This is about 1000 times faster than any spacecraft we've ever
sent out so far. The geometric difference between .1c and a typical
spacecraft is like the difference between a typical spacecraft and a
car. It's one thing to send a Voyager/Pioneer-sized spacecraft out.
A human-occupied spacecraft will require EXTENSIVE life support
systems (especially given the length of the journey), and that
requires a MASSIVE payload. Think of how much antimatter we'd have to
generate in order to provide enough fuel. It's MUCH easier to send
out a probe that weighs less than a bony supermodel.
2. How do you survive crashing into a stray speck of dust (much less
a pebble, boulder, or asteroid) at a velocity of .1c? You'd need
quite a force field or quite a sophisticated collision avoidance
system. How much energy would it take to operate this crash
protection/avoidance system?

Given the enormous cost, plus the enormous risk on top of it, why
would anyone want to or be able to embark on an interstellar journey?
In such an advanced society, it would be MUCH easier to stay home and
enjoy a cushy life.

These aren't the only obstacles, of course. However, I see these as
obstacles that no amount of technology or social change can overcome.

Because of the impossibility of interstellar travel, I don't think it
will EVER be possible for us or anyone else to become a Type III
civilization, since that requires using all of the energy a galaxy
puts out. How can you do that without travel all over the galaxy?

For that matter, I don't think there can ever be a Type II
civilization, either. That would require using all of the energy put
out by the sun, presumably with a Dyson Sphere. I just can't see how
we can fill up an ENTIRE spherical surface area surrounding the sun at
any distance. I can't even see how we could form anything resembling
a continuous ring around the sun given how enormous even
interplanetary distances are.

I think the best we can hope for is to be an advanced Type I
civilization, one that can use all the energy available from the
Earth, moon, Mars, and a few asteroids.

I expect alien civilizations to be subject to these same limits. I
don't think even the sun's expansion into a red giant star will be
able to spur interstellar travel - it still won't be feasible, even
with 5 billion years of technological development. Instead, we'll
have to make use of Mars, the asteroids, and the rocky moons of the
outer planets to survive.

On Mar 11, 4:41*pm, Jason Hsu wrote:
Although I grew up watching movies like _Star Wars_ and _The Last
Starfighter_, I regret to state that I don't think interstellar travel
will EVER take off in a big way. *I believe that the reasons that
apply to us also apply to any aliens out there as well. *Interstellar
travel that is as commonplace as flying around the world will remain a
science fiction fantasy forever. *I don't even think the speed of
light will be the constraining factor. *I see problems that I don't
think any amount of technology can solve.

I think that interstellar travel will, at best, achieve a state
similar to interplanetary travel today. *I think we will eventually
send probes to the Alpha/Proxima Centauri system, Sirius, Tau Ceti,
and other neighboring stars and get to intimately know their planets
and satellites. *I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. *The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

My reasons for believing this a
1. *It takes too much energy to accelerate a massive payload to even .
1c. *This is about 1000 times faster than any spacecraft we've ever
sent out so far. *The geometric difference between .1c and a typical
spacecraft is like the difference between a typical spacecraft and a
car. *It's one thing to send a Voyager/Pioneer-sized spacecraft out.
A human-occupied spacecraft will require EXTENSIVE life support
systems (especially given the length of the journey), and that
requires a MASSIVE payload. *Think of how much antimatter we'd have to
generate in order to provide enough fuel. *It's MUCH easier to send
out a probe that weighs less than a bony supermodel.
2. *How do you survive crashing into a stray speck of dust (much less
a pebble, boulder, or asteroid) at a velocity of .1c? *You'd need
quite a force field or quite a sophisticated collision avoidance
system. *How much energy would it take to operate this crash
protection/avoidance system?

Given the enormous cost, plus the enormous risk on top of it, why
would anyone want to or be able to embark on an interstellar journey?
In such an advanced society, it would be MUCH easier to stay home and
enjoy a cushy life.

These aren't the only obstacles, of course. *However, I see these as
obstacles that no amount of technology or social change can overcome.

Because of the impossibility of interstellar travel, I don't think it
will EVER be possible for us or anyone else to become a Type III
civilization, since that requires using all of the energy a galaxy
puts out. *How can you do that without travel all over the galaxy?

For that matter, I don't think there can ever be a Type II
civilization, either. *That would require using all of the energy put
out by the sun, presumably with a Dyson Sphere. *I just can't see how
we can fill up an ENTIRE spherical surface area surrounding the sun at
any distance. *I can't even see how we could form anything resembling
a continuous ring around the sun given how enormous even
interplanetary distances are.

I think the best we can hope for is to be an advanced Type I
civilization, one that can use all the energy available from the
Earth, moon, Mars, and a few asteroids.

I expect alien civilizations to be subject to these same limits. *I
don't think even the sun's expansion into a red giant star will be
able to spur interstellar travel - it still won't be feasible, even
with 5 billion years of technological development. *Instead, we'll
have to make use of Mars, the asteroids, and the rocky moons of the
outer planets to survive.

Long before then, the human species will have run its course on Eden/
Earth, and like all such good or bad things having come to a
relatively sudden end.

We will have over populated and global war economy pillaged, plundered
and raped most of everything in sight, as well as still unable to do
anything positive/constructive with our physically dark Selene/moon or
that of its nifty L1. Our 16 meter higher oceans will be of mostly
dead zones and there will not be all that much ice to go around.

Perhaps towards the end we'll be down to 10% volume of our global ice
and the only natural fresh water will come to us as horrific category
6 storms and floods along with massive cubic mega tonnage flows of
surface erosion.

Another thousand years may be asking too much for our species to
survive, because long before then there will be hardly any affordable
fossil fuel, and of the spendy kinds of energy will have to go towards
sustaining the rich and powerful that couldn't grow a potato or milk a
cow if they had to.

~ BG

On Mar 12, 7:23*am, SolomonW wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:41:39 -0700 (PDT), Jason Hsu wrote:
I believe nanotechnology will be needed to make such
probes feasible, and the probes will be MUCH, MUCH smaller than
Voyager 1/2 and Pioneer 10/11. *The lighter payload means less fuel is
needed to reach 10% of the speed of light and then to decelerate upon
approaching the destination star system.

You have your answer here. Send a nano ship to a star system, it can travel
slower then .1C and once it arrives, it can use the local material to
create bigger machines. Then take it from there.

I like it, because it's also relatively cheap and doable within
existing technology.

~ BG