A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 22nd 17, 07:44 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 11:00:25 AM UTC-8, Gary Harnagel wrote:
On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 6:09:47 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:

On Saturday, 31 December 2016 10:48:33 UTC+1, RichA wrote:

Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built):
120,000mph. 25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed.
14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn


Since the distance is effectively unmanageable one needs to "fix" the time
factor. It can only be a matter of time before time becomes malleable to
our devices.


Take a black hole with us and stay really, really close to it?

Develop Alcubierre warp drive?

Create a wormhole?

Develop Forward gravit0-magnetic slingshot technology (slowing down at the
other end may be a problem)

Find a brane where Alpha Centauri is only a few billion miles away?

Whether the rocket will "have time" to avoid high velocity dust particles
is another matter.


Or asteroid-size bodies in the Oort cloud!

Perhaps it won't matter since the journey would never involve covering
the entire distance at relativistic velocities.

One can only hope that an advanced civilization takes pity on us and gives
us a helping hand with interstellar travel.


The Vulcans require that we develop warp drive on our own. Perhaps the
Overlords? But that would happen only if our civilization were ending.

The question remains which factors are denying us this information already?
Imagine an advanced civilization looking at us now:
What could possibly convince you of our worthiness to be allowed off our
small, blue blob?


Cosmic censorship.

Take me to your leader?
Putin? Trump? Assad? Kim? Xi?
I wouldn't.


I'm afraid we'll just have to muddle through ....


No, attach a rocket to earth and move it to another solar system! LOL!
But, we can **** up earth so bad with human greed, soon we can't even live here anymore.
  #22  
Old February 22nd 17, 08:14 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:41:02 -0800 (PST), StarDust
wrote:

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built): 120,000mph.
25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed.
14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn


We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar system.
We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination , maybe some thing exist in another solar system.


And sending people to Mars remains a pretty silly idea, IMO. But just
as we have been successful in sending robots to Mars, it is quite
feasible (scientifically, if not politically) to send robots to nearby
stars in reasonable time periods.
  #23  
Old February 22nd 17, 08:40 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 11:14:33 AM UTC-8, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:41:02 -0800 (PST),

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built): 120,000mph.
25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed.
14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn


We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar system.
We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination , maybe some thing exist in another solar system.


And sending people to Mars remains a pretty silly idea, IMO. But just
as we have been successful in sending robots to Mars, it is quite
feasible (scientifically, if not politically) to send robots to nearby
stars in reasonable time periods.


Really? Like what, 10,000 years?
Humans might be gone by than!
  #24  
Old February 23rd 17, 01:32 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:40:57 -0800 (PST), StarDust
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 11:14:33 AM UTC-8, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:41:02 -0800 (PST),

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built): 120,000mph.
25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed.
14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn

We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar system.
We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination , maybe some thing exist in another solar system.


And sending people to Mars remains a pretty silly idea, IMO. But just
as we have been successful in sending robots to Mars, it is quite
feasible (scientifically, if not politically) to send robots to nearby
stars in reasonable time periods.


Really? Like what, 10,000 years?
Humans might be gone by than!


No, in a few decades. For instance, the Starshot proposal. Not
politically feasible, but the science is here and the engineering
would only require money. Technically, it's a low risk project. And
there's a pretty good chance that variations on ion drives will have
the capability to deliver very low mass craft with peak speeds of 0.2
c or better. There are, of course, interesting and tricky
technological problems, but none of which would be unlikely to prevent
a serious impediment to a dedicated, well funded effort.
  #25  
Old February 23rd 17, 08:34 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.B[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,001
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Thursday, 23 February 2017 01:32:52 UTC+1, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:40:57 -0800 (PST), StarDust
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 11:14:33 AM UTC-8, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:41:02 -0800 (PST),

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built): 120,000mph.
25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed..
14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn

We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar system..
We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination , maybe some thing exist in another solar system.

And sending people to Mars remains a pretty silly idea, IMO. But just
as we have been successful in sending robots to Mars, it is quite
feasible (scientifically, if not politically) to send robots to nearby
stars in reasonable time periods.


Really? Like what, 10,000 years?
Humans might be gone by than!


No, in a few decades. For instance, the Starshot proposal. Not
politically feasible, but the science is here and the engineering
would only require money. Technically, it's a low risk project. And
there's a pretty good chance that variations on ion drives will have
the capability to deliver very low mass craft with peak speeds of 0.2
c or better. There are, of course, interesting and tricky
technological problems, but none of which would be unlikely to prevent
a serious impediment to a dedicated, well funded effort.


I'm not sure the human desire to walk to the South Pole with one red sock, one blue sock and a red nose for the Guinness Book or Pointless Irritations remains valid. We are becoming increasingly dependent on remote communication. [We are doing it now on this very forum.] Only politicians and salesmen consider themselves so vital to the human race that they need face to face contact to make a difference.

Emulating Star Trek is becoming ever more irrelevant. We have absolutely no idea how remote sensing will improve with our rapid technological advances.. Sending people to distant objects is not a valid goal. It narrow minded, parochial, historical arrogance and ignorance. From a time before there was any other way to discover new lands and peoples to be slaughtered and looted.

There is never any shortage of available funds. Only the lack of wisdom to use those funds to the long term benefit of humanity. There are loads of Hubbles pointing downwards. But only one pointing outwards. Contemplating one's human naval? Or maintaining the status quo for the obscenely rich and powerful elite to destroy our _only_ world? All for another ten billion in their offshore, tax avoidance accounts? They don't seem to be looking too hard for another [private] lifeboat for their global version of the Titanic!
  #26  
Old February 23rd 17, 09:55 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 4:32:52 PM UTC-8, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:40:57 -0800 (PST),

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 11:14:33 AM UTC-8, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:41:02 -0800 (PST),

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built): 120,000mph.
25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed.
14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn

We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar system.
We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination , maybe some thing exist in another solar system.

And sending people to Mars remains a pretty silly idea, IMO. But just
as we have been successful in sending robots to Mars, it is quite
feasible (scientifically, if not politically) to send robots to nearby
stars in reasonable time periods.


Really? Like what, 10,000 years?
Humans might be gone by than!


No, in a few decades. For instance, the Starshot proposal. Not
politically feasible, but the science is here and the engineering
would only require money. Technically, it's a low risk project. And
there's a pretty good chance that variations on ion drives will have
the capability to deliver very low mass craft with peak speeds of 0.2
c or better. There are, of course, interesting and tricky
technological problems, but none of which would be unlikely to prevent
a serious impediment to a dedicated, well funded effort.


Major Tom came back too!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Hs2AQwDgA
  #27  
Old February 23rd 17, 10:25 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Martin Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,707
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On 22/02/2017 18:41, StarDust wrote:
On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel
time:

-Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built):
120,000mph. 25,000 years to get there.

-Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak
speed. 14 years.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn


Slight problem of how many nukes and blast plates it would take.

We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar
system. We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not
even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination ,
maybe some thing exist in another solar system.


We don't yet know that there is no other life in our own solar system.

Extremophiles inhabit some pretty impossible places on Earth so there is
still a chance to find life on Mars - its atmosphere has traces of CH4
which are out of equilibrium and the larger moons of Jupiter and Saturn
with deep water under thick ice may yet prove to be interesting.

Naica caves crystal inclusions demonstrate clearly how exotic and robust
some life can be.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39013829

The trick will be to look for life on other solar system bodies without
contaminating them with terrestrial DNA.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #28  
Old February 23rd 17, 03:35 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 7:21:04 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 03:27:37 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote:

If you believe that, you are a genuinely scary person. I hope they
don't let you be around other people unsupervised.


I feel the same way about YOU because you have one less restraint on your
behavior than I do.


I have excellent restraint on my behavior- restraints that are
grounded in objective reason. You, on the other hand, are perhaps like
Abraham- willing to commit any crime if a voice in your head requires
it. That is scary.


The "voice in Abraham's head" also told him to stop.

I have "supported" AGW? Not sure what that means.


Oh, come on, Peterson! You know EXACTLY what I'm referring to. Google
keeps a record. Your one-less-restraint is raising its ugly head.


I can guess. But your comment isn't coherent enough to be certain what
you mean.

In any case, your ranting on about AGW when it has nothing to do with
my comments above simply reveals obsessive fixation on me or my ideas,
and makes you look pretty foolish here.


But an important point has been brought up that you refuse to address:
Why do you browbeat those who don't accept AGW when you believe humanity
is doomed anyway? That's the _real_ question that inquiring minds want
to know and that you are avoiding like the plague.
  #29  
Old February 23rd 17, 04:46 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris L Peterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,007
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 06:35:33 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 7:21:04 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 03:27:37 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote:

If you believe that, you are a genuinely scary person. I hope they
don't let you be around other people unsupervised.

I feel the same way about YOU because you have one less restraint on your
behavior than I do.


I have excellent restraint on my behavior- restraints that are
grounded in objective reason. You, on the other hand, are perhaps like
Abraham- willing to commit any crime if a voice in your head requires
it. That is scary.


The "voice in Abraham's head" also told him to stop.


A moral person wouldn't have let his god tell him to do something like
that in the first place. Of course, most of Abrahamic scripture is
about people doing awful stuff because they preferred to follow the
dictates of their god over their own, rational morality.

In any case, your ranting on about AGW when it has nothing to do with
my comments above simply reveals obsessive fixation on me or my ideas,
and makes you look pretty foolish here.


But an important point has been brought up that you refuse to address:
Why do you browbeat those who don't accept AGW when you believe humanity
is doomed anyway? That's the _real_ question that inquiring minds want
to know and that you are avoiding like the plague.


I don't discuss it because its irrelevant to the discussion. Do you
ever seek medical care? Do you bother to eat and drink? Why do you
bother to do these things when you're going to die anyway?

In this forum, I challenge those who don't believe in AGW because they
are factually wrong and making pseudoscientific claims in a science
forum. It has nothing to do with the survival of our species, and
everything to do with the problems created by the science denialism
and the inability to use reason and critical thinking.
  #30  
Old February 23rd 17, 07:04 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)

On Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 8:46:20 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 06:35:33 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 7:21:04 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

I have excellent restraint on my behavior- restraints that are
grounded in objective reason. You, on the other hand, are perhaps like
Abraham- willing to commit any crime if a voice in your head requires
it. That is scary.


The "voice in Abraham's head" also told him to stop.


A moral person wouldn't have let his god tell him to do something like
that in the first place. Of course, most of Abrahamic scripture is
about people doing awful stuff because they preferred to follow the
dictates of their god over their own, rational morality.


Now you seem to be the one doing the ranting :-)

In any case, your ranting on about AGW when it has nothing to do with
my comments above simply reveals obsessive fixation on me or my ideas,
and makes you look pretty foolish here.


But an important point has been brought up that you refuse to address:
Why do you browbeat those who don't accept AGW when you believe humanity
is doomed anyway? That's the _real_ question that inquiring minds want
to know and that you are avoiding like the plague.


I don't discuss it because its irrelevant to the discussion.


We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Do you ever seek medical care? Do you bother to eat and drink? Why do you
bother to do these things when you're going to die anyway?


That's a poor argument. A better one might be, "Why do you bother
doing those things when you're going to be ressurected and live forever?" :-)

In this forum, I challenge those who don't believe in AGW because they
are factually wrong and making pseudoscientific claims in a science
forum. It has nothing to do with the survival of our species, and
everything to do with the problems created by the science denialism
and the inability to use reason and critical thinking.


So it's not "irrelevant" anymore? :-)

I get you: You believe in Truth at any cost. So why do you believe in
Truth when you're just going to die anyway and the human race is bound
to become extinct? Inquiring minds really do want to know.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proxima b is a science fiction planet Double-A[_4_] Misc 0 September 10th 16 07:24 PM
Planet of Proxima Centauri? Mike Collins[_4_] Amateur Astronomy 99 September 2nd 16 04:05 PM
Alpha Centauri has a planet granite stone Astronomy Misc 32 December 3rd 09 04:50 AM
proxima centauri flares dangerous Bernhard Kuemel Misc 4 August 23rd 09 09:58 PM
If one of our neighboring stars like Proxima Centauri went nova... Jason Macadamia Amateur Astronomy 21 January 31st 05 01:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.