Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Starships

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Will Davis - 04 Jul 2008 21:11 GMT
Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am reall
interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. Th
problems which you all have said I already knew, I'm trying to fin
solutions to such problems. For intance the problem of re-entry t
Earth. Instead of having the ship come directly to the plane
space-ports would be in orbit around the planet. Since there already i
a space station in orbit then the next logic step as far as space goe
is colonization of either the moon or general space. Then followin
that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel hopefully
Thoughts

--
Will Davis
Spaceman - 05 Jul 2008 00:35 GMT
> Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am really
> interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> following that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel
> hopefully. Thoughts?

The first step in space travel would be to map the
trip and all obstacles in an absolute way, otherwise
you will be crashing into things that were not foreseen.
Part of that step would also be to create an absolute time
clock so you would have no worry of hitting things that
were not supposed to be there according to a dilated clock.
Until those two things are done,
It would be pretty stupid to just blast off out into that
absolute wilderness that one spec could blow up your ship
before you knew it was even coming at you..
:)

Signature

James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

PD - 05 Jul 2008 01:43 GMT
On Jul 4, 3:11 pm, Will Davis <Will.Davis.2b46...@physicsbanter.com>
wrote:
> Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am really
> interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel hopefully.
> Thoughts?

Having a spaceport in orbit doesn't really help much. A low earth
orbit like where the ISS orbits means that the space station is
traveling at roughly 1000 mph, or Mach 16. Thus, to get down to the
ground from a spaceport still involves decelerating through the
atmosphere at high speed.

It is possible to orbit directly over a fixed spot on the Earth, but
that means putting the spaceport out in geosynchronous orbit, 36000 km
or 22,300 miles up. That's quite  a ways out there. If you do, though,
this raises the possibility of a "space elevator", a promising idea
originated by Arthur C Clarke. You can Google that to find out the
technical challenges of doing that, not the least of which is that a
trip up and down the elevator would take months.

PD
Sam Wormley - 05 Jul 2008 04:20 GMT
> Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am really
> interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel hopefully.
> Thoughts?

  The ISS is Low Earth Orbit (LEO) protected from the solar wind by
  the Earth's magnetic field... not anything close to the kind of
  thing you are envisioning.
Androcles - 05 Jul 2008 06:49 GMT
| Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am really
| interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
| that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel hopefully.
| Thoughts?

When the LGM (little green men) find out that you haven't even colonised
Antarctica yet with its abundance of water, Earth-like gravity, perfect mix
of atmospheric gases, six months of glorious sunshine all summer long,
absolutely ideal conditions to support human life without even needing
a spacesuit, a whole damn continent still unexplored, they'll be having
a good laugh at your idiotic attempts at "the possib[i]lity of interstellar
travel hopefully" and promptly exterminate you for your disease. Stupidity
is contagious. Oops, I just caught some... forget I mentioned the LGM
and hand me back my sanity.
G. L. Bradford - 05 Jul 2008 09:35 GMT
> Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am really
> interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel hopefully.
> Thoughts?

 We will create / adapt / improvise / expand and grow our way into the
universe at large.

 I wouldn't worry about the naysaying Dark Age physicists and Earth First
Utopians (Gibbon's mental "pygmies" updated) living today. Had Columbus and
everyone else listened to their types back in his day we more than likely
would not be advanced in energies, powers and capabilities much beyond 1492
even now. The Ottoman Turks would have conquered an inward looking, and
imploding, Europe and put its advancement back some 500 or more years. China
(less than a hundred years prior) had already been set back some 500 years
or so by its own naysaying and inward looking -- implosive -- elites,
schools and bureaucracies.

 The biggest problem is we should already have bases on the Moon, large
gravitied [general purpose] space stations in Earth orbit, capable mass
transportation system shuttles and ships plying the lanes to space and in
space, and at least the first space colony city-state complex coming on line
around L4 or L5. With all that expanding and growing frontier activity, our
(then) increasingly frontier-like economies on Earth would be doing a heck
of lot better than they -- increasingly implosively -- are doing now.

 About 230 years ago, an American farmer / writer named Crevecoeur
commented on how people immigrating into a vast new frontier environment
seemed to just naturally expand in mind, genius, energy and potential to be
creative and do, equally vastly. Edward Gibbon wrote of just the opposite
occurring in a tyrannically frontierless world imploding into itself.
Shrinking minds, genius, energy and potential producing, evolving, mental
"pygmies" -- savage mental midgets -- as the vast, the very vast, now
otherwise irresistibly immovable, mass.

 But maybe we haven't reached that point yet. A move to begin now what we
should have begun long ago (and were [tyrannically] kept from doing by
inward looking -- government, university and, in general, ideological --  
powers that be) might reverse civilization's decline and fall from the
accelerating growth of a [savage] mental midgetry. New (energetic) Worlds in
the making.....including a brand spanking new (energetic) Old World in the
making right here. Being in the presence, the environment, of an energetic
vastness expanding minds -- the mass mind and genius -- vastly, expanding
possibilities, potentials, capacities, capabilities, vision and creativity
vastly. It's not something new, it's simply the nature of the thing (simply
the nature of opening....of going nova).

GLB
Robert J. Kolker - 05 Jul 2008 15:05 GMT
>  We will create / adapt / improvise / expand and grow our way into the
> universe at large.

Only if we increase our lifespans greatly. The stars are far away and we
travel slowly.

>  The biggest problem is we should already have bases on the Moon, large
> gravitied [general purpose] space stations in Earth orbit, capable mass
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> be doing a heck of lot better than they -- increasingly implosively --
> are doing now.

I agree! The Moon is close enough to colonize without risking life and
health on long-time free fall voyages. In addition we can use the
backside of the Moon (where there is no earth glow) to build
observatories much larger than the puny Hubble Telescope. Moon
colonization is feasible and it is a better bootstap for constructing
long trip space craft, than orbital facilities. If there are metallic
deposits on the moon we can mine them, and if we find water, the problem
of long term colonization is mostly solved.

Bob Kolker
Uncle Al - 05 Jul 2008 18:15 GMT
> Ok thank you all that have replied to my post. Frankly I am really
> interested in the theory of space travel in the near future. The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> that there would be the possiblity of interstellar travel hopefully.
> Thoughts?

Thoughts?  We have some, yes.  You should get some.

Reentry heat is solved by coming in backwards.  Rocket exhaust is much
cooler than the apparent temp of the atmosphere at the viewed relative
velocity of reentry,

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/kinetic/kintem.html

Be clever and zoom in with not against the planet's rotation.  A blunt
ablative thermal shield bounces most of the energy back into the
plasma plume.  Sharp edges burn.  The Space Scuttle is an obscenity.

Space stations?  Conservation of enery, linear and angular momentum.
Don't be an idiot about path changing either - it doesn't.

There exist no solutions within extant physics for practical
interstellar travel,

"The Starflight Handbook" Mallove and Matloff.

There exist no solutions within extant physics for practical
intersystem travel, either.  Price 100 kg of xenon.  Mercury ion
engines short out and dissolve the spacecraft.  Solar sails are
bullshit when you go to make one.  Unless you want to ride a nuclear
reactor bareback, massive radiation shielding negates any propulsion
advanatge - and don't be one of the mainteneance crew.

Signature

Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

Larry Snyder - 05 Jul 2008 21:11 GMT
Why not build this?
http://www.pacificsites.com/~snyder/Space%20Drive/SpDrive.html
Larry
Androcles - 05 Jul 2008 22:50 GMT
| Why not build this?
| http://www.pacificsites.com/~snyder/Space%20Drive/SpDrive.html
| Larry

Q. Why not pick yourself up by your own shoe laces?
(If this doesn't make sense, go to B below.)

A. Quite right, it can't be done. Like your idea for a space drive, it will
not work.
Have a nice day. **

Androcles.

B.
Explain:
If  you don't understand physics, especially Newton's third law and the
principle of
relativity, don't feel bad. Other people do, they'll take care of it. You
can become an
actor or a singer or a cook or something. If you wish to LEARN, reading this
might help.

 http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PoR/PoR.htm

If you do not understand this page read it again until you do. Ask questions
if you
need to. In the meantime, picking yourself up by your own laces is as crazy
as your
space drive and if you still insist you can do it, go see a psychiatrist or
learn REAL
physics, not Einstein's, Lorentz's or Maxwell's drivel.

Androcles.

** For the intelligent only. Do not attempt this question if you are a kook.

Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

1/2[tau(A)+tau(A')]= tau(B)
where
A = (0,0,0,t)
A' =(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v) +x'/(c+v))
B = (x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v))
x' = x-vt

Ref:  http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img22.gif

Other answers by kooks.

"Easy: he did NOT say that." - cretin harald.vanlintelButNotThis@epfl.ch
According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation he wrote.

According to xxein:
It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.
Uncle Al - 05 Jul 2008 22:59 GMT
> Why not build this?
> http://www.pacificsites.com/~snyder/Space%20Drive/SpDrive.html
> Larry

Because it's bullshit.  Aside from the obvious, aside from spillover
on both ends, calculate beam divergence given emitter aperture and
transmitted wavelength for, say, 100 miles separation between emitter
and target.  It's bullshit.

Engineering aside, calculate available thrust vs. transmitted power at
100 miles separation (minimal orbital injection).  It's bullshit.

Signature

Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.