Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nearest Star System Might Harbor Earth Twin
space.com ^ | 03/07/08 | Andrea Thompson

Posted on 03/07/2008 5:44:45 PM PST by KevinDavis

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: AntiKev
Nope...you can do it in under 50 years. If you accelerate at 0.1g the whole trip (half would be acceleration, half deceleration) the trip takes about 10 years, at 5 years for signal reception and you’ve got a minimum of 15 years. Lower accelerations give you longer trip times. I have a chart in a book somewhere.

Unfortunately, the amount of fuel required to do things that way gets outrageous pretty quickly. Call the mass of the ship without fuel S, and figure that the mass of fuel required to accelerate an empty ship continuously at 0.1g for a week be the same as the mass of the ship. Then the mass of fuel required to provide one week's acceleration to the ship plus one week's fuel would be 2S. The mass of fuel required one one week's acceleration for ship plus two weeks' fuel would be 4S. The mass of fuel required for one week's accelleration for ship plus ten weeks' fuel would be about 1,000S. For twenty weeks, 1,000,000S. For 52 weeks, more than 4,000,000,000,000,000S. No even remotely-plausible improvements in efficiency are going to achieve numbers anywhere near useful.

21 posted on 03/08/2008 12:38:54 PM PST by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Fusion rockets, solar sails, Bussard ramjets. All near-term technologies that could be developed to do it.


22 posted on 03/08/2008 1:38:07 PM PST by AntiKev (Von nichts kommt nichts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis; All
Well, what I understand is that none of the problems mentioned on this thread is the biggest problem.

If I'm not mistaken, the Centaurus system is a system with six stars dancing nutzo orbits around each other. Two sets are inside the system and orbiting each other and the 3rd set is running outside of the system orbiting each other at the periphery.

THIS is the reason that it was always considered EXTREMELY unlikely that any of the Centauri stars could support a planet. They'd keep running over each others planets. Maybe not literally but gravitationally at least.

23 posted on 03/08/2008 2:48:31 PM PST by HeartlandOfAmerica (Don't blame me - I voted for Fred and am STILL a FredHead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Science in practice should use a lot of qualification in word choice.

While not necessarily in this case, the evidence for exoplanets is quite (there's a qualification) strong, and in the Solar System, water is common, although it is usually in solid form.

24 posted on 03/08/2008 7:29:07 PM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( What is your take on Acts 15:20 (abstaining from blood) about eating meat? Could you freepmail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HeartlandOfAmerica

And not to mention the problem of cosmic radition, too. The trip to the moon had the protection of the Van Allen belts, but outside of that...even to Mars...good luck.


25 posted on 03/08/2008 9:12:08 PM PST by swatbuznik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson