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

Skip to comments.

Incentive Trap 2: Minimizing the Wait Time (to reach interstellar targets)
Centauri Dreams ^ | 5/9/17 | Paul Gilster

Posted on 05/10/2017 1:33:26 AM PDT by LibWhacker

Incentive Trap 2: Minimizing the Wait Time

by Paul Gilster on May 9, 2017

When to launch a starship, given that improvements in technology could lead to a much faster ship passing yours enroute? As we saw yesterday, the problem has been attacked anew by René Heller (Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research), who re-examined a 2006 paper from Andrew Kennedy on the matter. Heller defines what he calls ‘the incentive trap’ this way:

The time to reach interstellar targets is potentially larger than a human lifetime, and so the question arises of whether it is currently reasonable to develop the required technology and to launch the probe. Alternatively, one could effectively save time and wait for technological improvements that enable gains in the interstellar travel speed, which could ultimately result in a later launch with an earlier arrival.

All this reminds me of a conversation I had with Greg Matloff, author of the indispensable The Starflight Handbook (Wiley, 1989) about this matter. We were at Marshall Space Flight Center in 2003 and I was compiling notes for my Centauri Dreams book. I had mentioned A. E. van Vogt’s story “Far Centaurus,” originally published in 1944, in which a crew arrives at Alpha Centauri only to find its system inhabited by humans who launched from Earth centuries later. I alluded to this story yesterday.

Calling it a ‘terrific story,’ Matloff discussed it in terms of Robert Forward’s thinking:

“Bob had a couple of concepts of technological advancement. He had a famous plot of the velocity of human beings versus time. And he said if this is true, and you launch a thousand-year ship today, in a century somebody could fly the same mission in a hundred years. Theyre going to be passed and will probably have to go through customs when they get to Alpha Centauri A-2.”

Customs! Clearly, we’d rather not be on the slow starship that is superseded by new technologies. What Heller and Kennedy before him want to do is to figure out a rational way to decide when to launch. If we make assumptions about the exponential growth in speed over time, we can address the question by adding the time we spend waiting for better technology to the time of the actual journey. We can then calculate a minimum value for this figure based on the growth rates we find in our historical data.

This is how Kennedy came up with a minimum figure of 712 years (from 2006) to reach Barnard’s Star, which is about 6 light years away. The figure would include a long period of waiting for technological improvement as well as the time of the journey itself. Kennedy used a 1.4 percent annual growth in speed in arriving at this figure but, examining 211 years of data on historical speed records, Heller finds a higher annual growth, some 4.72 percent.

From the Penydarren steam locomotive of 1804 to Voyager 1, we see a speed growth of about four orders of magnitude. Growth like this maintained for another 112 years leads to 1 percent of lightspeed.

manchu_starship

Image: A Bussard ramjet in flight, as imagined for ESA’s Innovative Technologies from Science Fiction project. Credit: ESA/Manchu.

But how consistent should we expect the growth in speed over time to be? Heller points out that the introduction of new technologies invariably leads to jumps in speed. We are now in the early stages of conceptualizing the Breakthrough Starshot project, which could create exactly this kind of disruption in the trend. Starshot aims at reaching 20 percent of lightspeed.

Working with the exponential speed doubling law we began with, we would expect that a speed of 20 percent of c would not be achieved until the year 2191. But if Starshot achieves its goal in the anticipated time frame of several decades, its success would see us reaching interstellar speeds much faster than the trends indicate. Starshot, or a project like it, would if successful exert a transformative effect as a driver for interstellar exploration.

We know that speed doubling laws cannot go on forever as we push toward relativistic speeds (we can’t double values higher than 0.5 c). But as we move toward substantial percentages of the speed of light, we see powerful gains in speed as we increase the kinetic energy beamed to a small lightsail like Starshot’s. Thus Heller also presents a model based on the growth of kinetic energy, noting that today the Three Gorges Dam in China can reach power outputs of 22.5 GW. 100 seconds exposure to a beam this powerful would take a small sail probe to speeds of 7.1 percent of c. Further kinetic energy increases could allow relativistic speeds for at least gram-to-kilogram sized probes within a matter of decades.

Usefully, Heller’s calculations also show when we can stop worrying about wait times altogether. The minimum value for the wait plus travel time disappears for targets that we can reach earlier than a critical travel time which he calls the ‘incentive travel time.’ Considered in both relativistic and non-relativistic models, this figure (assuming a doubling of speed every 15 years) works out to be 21.6 years. In Heller’s words, “…targets that we can reach within about 22 yr of travel are not worth waiting for further speed improvements if speed doubles every 15 yr.”

Thus already short travel times mean there is little point in waiting for future speed improvements. And in terms of current thinking about Alpha Centauri missions, Heller notes that there is a critical interstellar speed above which gains in kinetic energy beamed to the probe would not result in smaller wait plus travel times. His equations result in a value of 19.6 percent of c, an interesting number given that Breakthrough Starshot’s baseline is a probe moving at 20 percent of c, for a 20-year travel time. Thus:

In terms of the optimal interstellar velocity for launch, the most nearby interstellar target α Cen will be worthy of sending a space probe as soon as about 20 % c can be achieved because future technological developments will not reduce the travel time by as much as the waiting time increases. This value is in agreement with the 20 % c proposed by Starshot for a journey to α Cen.

We can push this result into an analysis of stars beyond Alpha Centauri. Heller looks at speeds beyond which further speed improvements would not result in reduced wait times for ten of the nearest bright stars. The assumption here would be that Starshot or alternative technologies would be continuously upgraded according to historical trends. Plugging in that assumption, we wind up with speeds as high as 57 percent of lightspeed for 70 Ophiuchi at 16.6 light years.

Thus the conclusion: If something like Breakthrough Starshot’s beaming capabilities become available within 45 years — and assuming that the kinetic energy transferred to the probes it pushes could be increased at the historical rates traced here — then we can reach all ten of the nearest star systems with an interstellar probe within 100 years from today.

Just for fun let me conclude with a snippet from “Far Centaurus.” Here a ship is approaching the ‘slowboat’ that has just discovered that Alpha Centauri has been reached by humans long before. The crew has just puzzled out what happened:

I was sitting in the control chair an hour later when I saw the glint in the darkness. There was a flash of bright silver, that exploded into size. The next instant, an enormous spaceship had matched our velocity less than a mile away.

Blake and I looked at each other. “Did they say,” I said shakily, “that that ship left its hangar ten minutes ago?”

Blake nodded. ‘They can make the trip from Earth to Centauri in three hours,” he said.

I hadn’t heard that before. Something happened inside my brain. “What!” I shouted. “Why, it’s taken us five hund… ” I stopped. I sat there.

“Three hours!” I whispered. “How could we have forgotten human progress?”

The René Heller paper discussed in the last two posts is “Relativistic Generalization of the Incentive Trap of Interstellar Travel with Application to Breakthrough Starshot” (preprint).



TOPICS: Astronomy; Science
KEYWORDS: interstellar; minimize; time; travel
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last
To: Vendome

Space is very, very empty even in the solar system. Interstellar space is far emptier. If I were inclined to go on such a trip I would be happy to launch tomorrow without a second thought. Average daily life on earth carries hugely bigger risks than the infinitesimal chance of a collision in deep space.


21 posted on 05/10/2017 3:45:49 AM PDT by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

For later.

L


22 posted on 05/10/2017 3:46:57 AM PDT by Lurker (America burned the witch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Radar travels at the speed of light so if your imaginary spaceship is going the speed of light then Houston there is a problem.


23 posted on 05/10/2017 4:03:46 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

bflr


24 posted on 05/10/2017 4:12:04 AM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

They’re only halfway done with Obama, then.

Help is on the way, Alpha Centauri!!!


25 posted on 05/10/2017 4:14:34 AM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: central_va

No, Houston, it’s no problemo. Even if our ship is going at 0.999999999999999999999999999999999c, any radar beam emitted by it will still pull away from it at c, the full speed of light. We know this because Einstein told us the speed of light is same for all observers, no matter how fast the observer is traveling. Second, our ship is not going to be going the speed of light. Nothing will mass can.


26 posted on 05/10/2017 4:15:44 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

You’ve never taken a physics class have you?


27 posted on 05/10/2017 4:22:13 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

L8r


28 posted on 05/10/2017 4:23:36 AM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
The time to reach interstellar targets is potentially larger than a human lifetime

The time to reach interstellar targets is potentially larger than a human lifetime the duration of written history. There fixed it.

29 posted on 05/10/2017 4:25:21 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Hahahaha! Many. Got ‘A’s too, usually.
A couple of ‘B+’s were in there, I admit. But I was a math major and didn’t like the way physicists did math.


30 posted on 05/10/2017 4:33:46 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Thank you for making us aware of this initiative.
Very impressive board leading this 20 year $100 Million dollar program.

https://breakthroughinitiatives.org/Leaders/3

This KickSat Sprite Satelite Kickstarter is interesting too:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/251588730/kicksat-your-personal-spacecraft-in-space/posts


31 posted on 05/10/2017 4:37:25 AM PDT by MarchonDC09122009 (When is our next march on DC? When have we had enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Physics 101. A vessel traveling at .99C emits radio waves traveling at C will see a relative speed of those waves at .01C.

A car traveling at C straight at you turns on it's head lights, will you ever see it's headlights turn on? No.

32 posted on 05/10/2017 5:02:02 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
any radar beam emitted by it will still pull away from it at c, the full speed of light.

Not exactly - consider object A is stationary with respect to an external observer. Object B is approaching object A at .99c and emits a radar beam toward A. How much faster than B does the radar beam travel from B to A because of B's initial velocity? Answer: .01c because B's velocity does not affect the speed of a radar beam emitted by B. It still goes at c.

Put it another way: B (ship) is moving toward A (rock) at .99c and B is 1 billion miles from A and emits a radar pulse. The radar beam gets to the rock in 89.61 minutes the ship gets to the rock in 90.51 minutes leaving .91 minutes for the beam to return. However the ship is still moving toward the rock, and will see the return pulse at about .46 minutes prior to impact. However to someone on the ship it appears that the pulse returns .062 minutes (3.6 seconds) prior to impact because of the time dilation factor.

33 posted on 05/10/2017 5:02:31 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

I thought the same thing!

The question is, at what point in the voyage of the slow vessel would the faster ship technology(ies) take place?

Relative to the slow ship, that is. 1/3? 1/2? 2/3? of the journey? Or maybe only in the last year of the slow vessel? Where real time is dilated by tens of years?

But yes, indeed—since they knew when the slow vessel left—they should have been able to track it, match its speed, and deliver the news!


34 posted on 05/10/2017 5:11:10 AM PDT by Alas Babylon! (Keep fighting the Left and their Fake News!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: central_va
A vessel traveling at .99C emits radio waves traveling at C will see a relative speed of those waves at .01C.
No, violates Einstein. The speed of light is the same for all observers. Therefore, a vessel traveling at .99c, will observe any light beam it emits (radio, radar, visible, etc.) travel away from it at c, not 0.01c, no matter which direction it "points the flashlight," forward, aft, starboard, port. Also, it will measure the speed of any light beam pointed at it by another vessel to be exactly c. It doesn't matter whether it is moving toward the other vessel or away from it. It doesn't matter how fast it's moving relative to the other vessel. And it doesn't matter what the other vessel is doing either, speeding up or slowing down. Nor does it matter what the wavelength of the light is.
A car traveling at C straight at you turns on it's head lights, will you ever see it's headlights turn on? No.
This can't happen because no car or spaceship or bullet or anything else with mass can travel at c. So the question is moot. However, you are tilting in the right direction; namely, if a car is traveling toward you at 0.9999999999c and it flashes its lights at you when it is, say, a million miles away from you, you will first see the light flash, then an instant later the car will slam into you because, even though it's not keeping up with the light, it is almost going as fast as the light and it's going to slam into you just an instant after the light gets to you. Note, your eye will see the light before the car hits you. Your brain may not have time to register it, but your eye will "see" it.

35 posted on 05/10/2017 5:32:48 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: central_va

everything that can be invented, has been invented.

Seriously though i’m sure it will happen in time, probably a LONG time... but it will, people will figure out things, if we dont destroy ourselves first...


36 posted on 05/10/2017 5:47:39 AM PDT by wyowolf (Be ware when the preachers take over the Republican party...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
any radar beam emitted by it will still pull away from it at c, the full speed of light.

Not exactly - consider object A is stationary with respect to an external observer. Object B is approaching object A at .99c and emits a radar beam toward A. How much faster than B does the radar beam travel from B to A because of B's initial velocity? Answer: .01c because B's velocity does not affect the speed of a radar beam emitted by B. It still goes at c.

Exactly correct and is what I said; namely B will measure the beam pulling away from him at the speed of light. It's not additive: to get the speed of the beam, you don't add B's speed to it (if B is moving in the same direction as the beam) nor subtract it (if B is moving in the opposite direction of the beam).

37 posted on 05/10/2017 5:56:16 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

I disagree totally.
What will happen is that we will enter a new ‘age” of technological advancement, that will increase our ability to travel beyond our wildest dreams.

For over a hundred thousand years the maximum speed a human could go was 40 mph, on a horse....then in a span of 200 years we went from 40 mph to over 24,000 mph (Apollo)and 157,000 mph (Helios). almost 4000 times faster!

If in another 200 years, the next jump is the same we could be going 600 million mph.(speedoflight is 671 million/hour)...it could be even greater....just as the men riding horses never thought they could travel as fast as today, we may not even imagine how fast or far a new technological age will let us travel.

And in 200 MORE years....400 years from today..ANOTHER 4000 FOLD INCREASE..we could be going
4000 light years in one year.
400 in 36 days.....
40 light years in 3 days.....
12 light years a day..

HALF A LIGHT YEAR AND HOUR.......NOT BAD.

VIVA TRUMP


38 posted on 05/10/2017 6:24:29 AM PDT by TomasUSMC (FIGHT LIKE WW2, WIN LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
The problem is by the time the radar returns from another object to the sender traveling at .99C you are almost at the point of impact. The radar did you no good at all.

Stick to math.

39 posted on 05/10/2017 6:26:31 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

A factor that’s missing from the incentive equation is human life span. If we developed a starship capable of reaching Barnard’s star in 700 years, we likely would be able to figure out “suspended animation” i.e. a Sleeper ship so the passengers could complete the whole trip. At my age, if such a ship were to become reality in the next ten years, I’d volunteer to be a passenger even if it were likely that later ships might get there first because I’d still get there eventually.


40 posted on 05/10/2017 6:29:01 AM PDT by Little Pig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next 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