/sci/ - Science & Math

EK and the rest, I hope you realize that these:
>>4203753
>>4203714
>>4203678
are not made by OP, and are just shit trolling.

Also, EK-basher, stop acting like an eight year old that has recently been weaned off breastfeeding.
Because you're fucking ten times more annoying and less informative than EK.

Deep Ocean Exploration

pros:
-close by
-can be done more cheaply

cons: PRESSURE
-colonization will be VERY hard, if not outright unfeasible due to immense pressure
-same with large scale mining operations

Deep ocean exploration will likely stay as exploration, nothing more.

Deep Space Exploration:

pros:
-colonization will be possible, and even feasible at some point (could be now, and would've been, if Project Orion had received funding instead of Apollo program)
-near endless resources (which we could actually get access to)
-when we can produce/gather enough anti-matter to propel spacecrafts at relativistic velocities, or a breakthrough happens which will allow us to get around C (warp drives etc.) and not requiring ridiculous amounts of energy, the possilities will then become practically endless.

cons:
-COST
-chemical rockets are no good for anything except lifting
-large distances which makes trips beyond our own solar system (to Alpha Centauri for example) a near impossibility at our current state of technology (well, nuclear pulse propulsion could get us there, but it would still take around 40 years at minimum).

>>3341935

>>Well do we need to colonize other planets?

In order to survive certain threats to the Earth, yes.

>>I am working under a premise that interstellar travel will never happen for humans(unsafe,too expensive,no capitalistic gains)

We've had nuclear powered interstellar capability since the later 1960s. We have foregone its use for political reasons. Since then we have worked tirelessly on politically acceptable alternatives that match or exceed Orion's performance. Some promising candidates now exist, and it's mainly a question of getting the public to pay for it.

>>3302882

>>I know about orion its total bullshit. Generating thrust from ablating a shield just wont cut it.

According to who? You? I'm inclined to think George Dyson knew better, as well as the NASA engineers who designed a deep space vessel based on his ideas. (Pic related)

>>(Also that shield is supposed to move tens of feet in milliseconds its all just total bullshit and no real agency is going to seriously ever going to work on it again because they all know its bullshit.

NASA is a real agency.

>>What will work is a closed life support multi generational star ship powerd by thorium ractor with Vassar engines. Expect the jurny to take sevral hundred years.

This will also work. Both are valid solutions. It seems what has happened here is that you have a preferred pet solution that you feel my proposed solution threatens the practicality of. Either would work. An orion vessel would just get there faster.

>>3302882

>>I know about orion its total bullshit. Generating thrust from ablating a shield just wont cut it.

According to who? You? I'm inclined to think George Dyson knew better, as well as the NASA engineers who designed a deep space vessel based on his ideas. (Pic related)

(Also that shield is supposed to move tens of feet in milliseconds its all just total bullshit and no real agency is going to seriously ever going to work on it again because they all know its bullshit.

NASA is a real agency.

>>What will work is a closed life support multi generational star ship powerd by thorium ractor with Vassar engines. Expect the jurny to take sevral hundred years.

This will also work. Both are valid solutions. It seems what has happened here is that you have a preferred pet solution that you feel my proposed solution threatens the practicality of. Either would work. An orion vessel would just get there faster.

>>3068543
>magic bullshit
If you mean some kind of energy fields, then yes.
But a staggered defense of light nuclei, heavy nuclei and electromagnets.

Googled it and it seems satellites use something called Graded-Z shielding, with progressively heavier nuclei materials are layered to produce a 60% improvement over solid single-material shielding.

>>2392234
Why go into space you ask, well one 4 mile diameter iron/nickel bolide contains more iron than the has ever been mined in history with 26 trillion dollars. And with a 500 ton nuclear pulse propulsion vehicle you could retrieve one and bring it back to a lagrangian point for less than 100 billion dollars. Now before you say that would flood the steel market, remember that it will take a very long time to refine all that steel. And you can use it as cheap mass to build stuff in space. Or you could drop it on anyone you don't like and hit them with a total kinetic energy of about 5 teratons, you know whatever.

I thought we solved this problem 50 years ago.

>>2224476
100 year latter we end up with the "Red's Mars" novel situation.

Private enterprise use the absence of any law in space to exploit asteroid, raise price artificially, make UN it's bitch and bring to another level the meaning of "competition".

Enjoy your space war when they'll declare themselves independent.

Nobody?

>>2081196
Or rather, at the very least, SETI shouldn't do so until we've established ourselves on more than just this one planet.

And preferably only once we are established on multiple planets and have the technology to send a relativistic care package back at anyone who attacks us from at least some of them.