Space Travel

[Anonymous No.4660970]

Do you think it will ever be possible to travel space. Not just travelling the Milky Way, but other galaxies. Do we need to find a way of going faster than light for this to happen? Is it even possible to hold enough food/fuel to survive a journey that long?

[Anonymous No.4660977]

[Anonymous No.4660991]

Type 3 civilization will be able to teleport from one side of the universe to the other side in a matter of seconds, the only problem is getting to type 3, we are type 0 atm. We need the technology, we need the understanding, basically we need to be way more advanced than we are today.

Then again, computer power has increased dramatically in the past few years, theoretically computers can get so powerful that we can be type 1, or 2 civilization but have type 3 computers. Basically highly upgraded computers may be able to travel us far distances, we just need the technology.

[Anonymous No.4660993]

if we ever it be will technology thats not been imagined yet

[Anonymous No.4661032]

If mankind keeps on wanting to travel space it will eventually be possible. Brittain in the 5th century wasn't able to sail to America but now it's relatively easily done.

[Anonymous No.4661042]

Yes its possible

If it does happen, it will probably take at least a few thousand years

[Anonymous No.4661054]

>>4661042
It's frustrating that it won't be any time soon :(

[Anonymous No.4661058]

>>4660991
Isn't that just a science fiction convention?

for serious though, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_theory_of_relativity#Superluminal_speeds
What I don't get about that article, though, is that it says that the group velocity of a signal can be greater than the speed of light, which doesn't seem right to me, since you could (probably) encode a signal onto the pseudo-waveform created by the group velocity, resulting in faster-than-light communication.

[Anonymous No.4661059]

For it to be possible to travel to other galaxies in any meaningful way would require our current understanding of the nature of the universe to be wrong.

So hope for a revolution in theoretical physics, otherwise nope.

>>4661042
Only if relativity is wrong, otherwise no matter how advanced we become or how powerful our ships we can’t go faster than light.

Ever.

[Anonymous No.4661077]

>>4661059

>only if relativity is wrong

Lol because its already been proven wrong and has tons of flaws

Relativity may keep us from space, but we may find that the solution was incredibly simple also. Basically, we dont know. Either way though, I think its important to start probing the universe to see exactly whats out there

[Anonymous No.4661078]

>>4660970
>Do we need to find a way of going faster than light for this to happen?

Nope

>Is it even possible to hold enough food/fuel to survive a journey that long?

Yes.

You can travel great distances at near light-speeds. You can explore most of the universe.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html

Here are some of the times you will age when journeying to a few well known space marks, arriving at low speed:

4.3 ly nearest star 3.6 years
27 ly Vega 6.6 years
30,000 ly Center of our galaxy 20 years
2,000,000 ly Andromeda galaxy 28 years

[Anonymous No.4661076]

>>4661058
>you could (probably) encode a signal onto the pseudo-waveform created by the group velocity, resulting in faster-than-light communication.

And how do you plan on receiving this signal faster than light?

[Anonymous No.4661081]

>>4661078

This is basic relativity, any physics grad student will know this shit.

\thead

[Anonymous No.4661087]

>>4661078
The realationship between the distance you can travel and the amount you age is a werid fucked up transendetal/exponetial like equation. You can basically travel to anywhere within the observable universe within your life time at sublight speeds.

[Anonymous No.4661089]

>other galaxies

Thinking a little big, aren't we?

Let's shrink it down to, say, our own solar system.

Just getting to Mars, the closest planet to us, presents a huge challenge. A much bigger challenge than landing on the moon.

Our biggest probles are the time it takes to get there, and keeping the astronauts alive and health (physically and mentally. I can't imagine being trapped in a confined space for months would do your state of mind or body any good)

With our current technology, Mars is pretty much our limit.

After that, the only way we will be sending humans any farther is if we discover some miracle fuel that will allow us to get there faster.

Really, getting anywhere isn't much of a problem. It's how long it takes to get there.

Even if we somehow manage to build a warp drive or something that allows us to go the speed of light, you're still talking several years to the closest star.

Another galaxy? Unless we develop teleporters, or can go like a thousand times the speed of light, it's not happening. Ever.

Oh and you know that thing where time slows down the closer you get to the speed of light? Have fun still being young while all your friends and family on Earth have died of old age.

[Anonymous No.4661093]

>>4661078
>Andromeda in 28 years
yeah ok, but to accelerate a 1000kg in that way would require energy approximately equivalent to the entire mass-energy of the milkyway.

[Anonymous No.4661101]

>>4661093
told
/thread

[Anonymous No.4661109]

>>4661093
Nope, you should keep reading the page. They do the energy/fuel calculation using conventional fuel. It is huge, but not that huge. Still magnitudes less then the mass of earth.

[Anonymous No.4661110]

>>4661077
>Lol because its already been proven wrong and has tons of flaws
like what.
reading one physics 1 book doesn't give you the authority to completely falsify an incredibly rock solid theory.

i wait some good research and evidence to your claims

[Anonymous No.4661111]

>>4661093
calculations to support that please.

[Anonymous No.4661116]

>>4661093
>can't do basic math
>makes huge inaccurate guess

[Anonymous No.4661117]

>>4661089
>thousand times the speed of light, it's not happening. Ever.
You don't know that it will never happen. No one knows. There are things that we have done in the last 20 years that people thought would never happen.

>Have fun still being young while all your friends and family on Earth have died of old age.
You could take them with you :P

[Anonymous No.4661123]

>>4661111
>implying he wasn't making that bullshit up

The citied webpage has the calculation. Anons number was bullshit.

[Anonymous No.4661126]

Sadly, I think we're getting farther from that happening every day. In order to make such a technological breakthrough, we need the "best and brightest" to be collaborating openly, we need massive resources, we may need the development of new infrastructures, and a great deal of oversight and coordination. Right now, we have a worldwide patent system that is eating itself, developed countries divesting in their educational systems, and a shift in focus in many of the major corporations from new ideas to parallel engineering for the sake of profit. Not to say that this wasn't the case in the past, only to say that there is no progress, and "big science" projects are no longer embraced in the way they once were.

[Anonymous No.4661127]

>>4661089
While we're on the subject: Does anyone know how to calculate delta-v for a transfer orbit between two bodies given a fixed maximum acceleration?

A lot of the (introductory) stuff I've seen only gives info for Hohman orbits, since they're the most efficient (ignoring slingshots and other gravitational transfer shenanigans), but is there an easy way to crunch less-efficient/faster routes?