/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15912532]

Which is the better way of reaching and colonizing proxima centauri?
orion drives or solar sails pushed by lazar arrays?

[Anonymous No.15912888]

>>15912532
Laser arrays, so that the Kzinti telepaths won't read our warlike intent.

[Anonymous No.15913183]

>>15912532
i guess nuclear pulse propulsion because it seems to be better for deceleration so it isnt just a fly-by where you have just a few days to collect datas.

[Anonymous No.15913476]

fpbp

[Anonymous No.15914067]

>>15912532
Positron ablative propulsion would be my best bet.

[Anonymous No.15914073]

one of the things I always wondered is why you couldn't catch asteroids on the way to help slow down instead of doing that me flip and burn 50% of the way in

[Anonymous No.15914265]

[Anonymous No.15914554]

>>15912532
Space colonization in general is a retarded idea that will only result in more planets being filled with pointless suffering.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7nsv4n_Bgk

[Anonymous No.15915035]

>>15912532
Glorious crusade against the proxima centaurian xenos for the ensured prosperity of mankind?

[Anonymous No.15915040]

>>15912532
QI thruster

[Anonymous No.15915048]

>>15914554
I pointlessly suffered watching the first 2 minutes of your video. Space colonization is a good and important idea if we want to survive long term.

[Anonymous No.15916129]

>>15915035
real talk, how likely is life on proxima/alpha centauri?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlUR_RDtQmo&list=PL6xPxnYMQpquNuaEffJzjGjMsr6VktCYl&index=2

[Anonymous No.15916145]

>>15916129
Given that those are both stars, I'd say it's extremely unlikely.

[Anonymous No.15916148]

>>15916145
there's less life in your humor then there are on the surface of stars

[Anonymous No.15916165]

>>15916129
Not likely based on what we know right now. Proxima b is interesting because it's earth-sized and ostensibly the right distance from Proxima, but it's so close to its sun that it probably doesn't have an atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.15916233]

>>15912532
Laser arrays scale much better, have more graceful bootstrapping phase with ChipSats and can be used for many, many payloads instead of just the one on that particular craft. Still going to want some kind of nuclear drive on the other end.
Another advantage is that you can send a laser deceleration unit(s) ahead of any payload stopping at a destination star.

[Anonymous No.15917089]

>>15916233
I could see laser arrays being useful in the preliminary phase where small <1ton probes are sent en mass to scout out potential areas for ground zero of colonization

but i cant see it being used to transport all the industry and machinery needed to kickstart a self sufficient colony

theres probably a point at which the infrastructure needed for a large laser array good enough to launch colonists over + deceleration unit, which would also need to be massive, probably as large or much larger then the cargo sent

an orion drive really just needs bombs, which are pretty cheap to mass produce on a global industrial scale

[Anonymous No.15917577]

>>15917089
The difference is the laser arrays can be used for other payloads while any particular interstellar payload is coasting between destinations. The real power is in moving very large payloads in-system while performing relativistic boost for interstellar payloads.
I like Orion as a concept but it has some real operational issues, too. Mostly in vibration and timing between explosions. The laser receiver can have no moving parts or just gyros.
Some of this depends on the scale and approach to interstellar travel. If the trip is one way, one time, perhaps an Orion drive makes sense. If it's part of developing a broad travel system and industrial base, laser probably makes more sense.