Homesteading Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,090 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Is there any dream mankind has bigger than finding an Earth-like planet, and reaching it in a reasonable amount of travel time?


Kepler is a space observatory launched by NASA to discover Earth-size planets orbiting other stars. Named after astronomer Johannes Kepler, the spacecraft was launched on March 7, 2009, into an Earth-trailing heliocentric orbit.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
The bigger dream is exploring the bottom of the ocean for the first time, and kicking out the profiteering gluttons that think they have a penchant for managing us. We don't need a new planet, we just need to fire the managers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts
At one time people thought it was a waste of time, money and safety to sail the seas. Glad more open minds prevailed.
Sadly misinformed opinion. Queen Isabella gave Columbus chump change for his 3 ships.....An expedition to a near-by asteroid to mine gold (if we could) would cost several $billion an ounce to bring back. Not a real good ROI.

We won't get into population math, but for a species such as H.sapiens, a breeding population of less than 5 or 6 hundred individuals is doomed to extirpation in short order. Unless out new found planetary home is close enough to allow regular replenishment of population, it's a colonial death sentence and certain doom.

Not much reason to go, unless you prescribe to the mountain climber's creed-- "because it's there." Illogical and inefficient philosophy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,090 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Minds stuck in the past dream of small futures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,970 Posts
Sadly misinformed opinion. Queen Isabella gave Columbus chump change for his 3 ships.....An expedition to a near-by asteroid to mine gold (if we could) would cost several $billion an ounce to bring back. Not a real good ROI.

We won't get into population math, but for a species such as H.sapiens, a breeding population of less than 5 or 6 hundred individuals is doomed to extirpation in short order. Unless out new found planetary home is close enough to allow regular replenishment of population, it's a colonial death sentence and certain doom.

Not much reason to go, unless you prescribe to the mountain climber's creed-- "because it's there." Illogical and inefficient philosophy.
And that’s a sadly misinformed analogy- on a couple levels.

What Columbus was proposing to do was not that revolutionary. The journey was seen as relatively high-risk/low-reward. It was an unproven route to a place (they thought) they could already get to. Also, Columbus was playing an old sport by that time. More important, to your point, would have been all the truly early explorers that we never heard of because they soaked up a bunch of money and found nothing... or never returned.

Second, resource harvesting in space is not likely to be for something we can already get here relatively easy (kinda like Queen Isabella being able to look at a map and see a known route to the East Indies). We’ve collected something like 200t of gold here on Earth. Every ounce brought back from space would deflate its value, and, given that any distant source we went after would likely be so vast compared to our stores here, its recovery would render gold nearly worthless.

If we put together an expedition to deep space to return with some resource, it’s going to be something we can’t find or make here; probably something we’ve yet to even hear of. It’s going to be some rare particle that allows us to create perpetual motion, or warp space time to the point to make time travel possible, and that would be worth whatever cost there was to pursue it.

If Columbus actually knew he was going to be able to “find” and claim a whole new continent, his asking price would have been much, much higher, and Isabella would have never even had a shot at it because the King of Portugal would have snapped up the proposal straight away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts
And that’s a sadly misinformed analogy- on a couple levels.

What Columbus was proposing to do was not that revolutionary. The journey was seen as relatively high-risk/low-reward. It was an unproven route to a place (they thought) they could already get to. Also, Columbus was playing an old sport by that time. More important, to your point, would have been all the truly early explorers that we never heard of because they soaked up a bunch of money and found nothing... or never returned.

Second, resource harvesting in space is not likely to be for something we can already get here relatively easy (kinda like Queen Isabella being able to look at a map and see a known route to the East Indies). We’ve collected something like 200t of gold here on Earth. Every ounce brought back from space would deflate its value, and, given that any distant source we went after would likely be so vast compared to our stores here, its recovery would render gold nearly worthless.

If we put together an expedition to deep space to return with some resource, it’s going to be something we can’t find or make here; probably something we’ve yet to even hear of. It’s going to be some rare particle that allows us to create perpetual motion, or warp space time to the point to make time travel possible, and that would be worth whatever cost there was to pursue it.

If Columbus actually knew he was going to be able to “find” and claim a whole new continent, his asking price would have been much, much higher, and Isabella would have never even had a shot at it because the King of Portugal would have snapped up the proposal straight away.
You've actually given more evidence to support my contention. There is no economic advantages to going and the logistics to achieve some imagined sociological advantage are prohibitive, ie-- it can't be done with anything even approaching convenience.

Your suggestion that we may find something out there not known here is not supported by empirical evidence--All laws of physics seem to hold everywhere in the Universe. We've already filled in the periodic chart of the "natural" elements and those supernumerary examples above atomic number 92 can only be made artificially in cyclotrons and last only split seconds, ie- theoretically important but of no practical value.

No reason to go except to say "we did it" and it would cost so much, why bother? Really poor allocation of resources.

It's a mistake to equate the exploration of space with the Age of Exploration here...Worlds apart (pun intended.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts

AIAA 2019-4288
Session: The Future of Nuclear and Breakthrough Propulsion
That's all BS..."Warp speed" is a science fiction concept with no basis in realty. It's a perversion of the concepts of relativity.

We discussed "nuclear rockets" here last year-- Not enough nuclear fuel to get anywhere if we're talking about ion engines, and cold fusion, if it's even possible, still requires the conversion of the potential energy to kinetic energy-- rockets don't go cuz they get hot, but because they eject matter in the opposite direction. Newton's 1st Law m(1)v(1) + m(2)v(2) = m(1)v(3) + m(2)v(4)

To put the concept in proportion-- escape velocity is only 25,000 mph....Relativistic speeds must approach 600 million mph....You need enough energy to ACcelerate it to that speed, but then an equal amount of energy to DEcelerate it so you can land.

Keep dreaming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,970 Posts
You've actually given more evidence to support my contention. There is no economic advantages to going and the logistics to achieve some imagined sociological advantage are prohibitive, ie-- it can't be done with anything even approaching convenience.

Your suggestion that we may find something out there not known here is not supported by empirical evidence--All laws of physics seem to hold everywhere in the Universe. We've already filled in the periodic chart of the "natural" elements and those supernumerary examples above atomic number 92 can only be made artificially in cyclotrons and last only split seconds, ie- theoretically important but of no practical value.

No reason to go except to say "we did it" and it would cost so much, why bother? Really poor allocation of resources.

It's a mistake to equate the exploration of space with the Age of Exploration here...Worlds apart (pun intended.)
Ummmm....
Check your posts, homes. You were the one that made that comparison. I just pointed out where your analogy was a poorly thought-out one after you snuggly dismissed someone else’s musings as “sadly misinformed”.

Get over yourself.

That's all BS..."Warp speed" is a science fiction concept with no basis in realty. It's a perversion of the concepts of relativity.

We discussed "nuclear rockets" here last year-- Not enough nuclear fuel to get anywhere if we're talking about ion engines, and cold fusion, if it's even possible, still requires the conversion of the potential energy to kinetic energy-- rockets don't go cuz they get hot, but because they eject matter in the opposite direction. Newton's 1st Law m(1)v(1) + m(2)v(2) = m(1)v(3) + m(2)v(4)

To put the concept in proportion-- escape velocity is only 25,000 mph....Relativistic speeds must approach 600 million mph....You need enough energy to ACcelerate it to that speed, but then an equal amount of energy to DEcelerate it so you can land.

Keep dreaming.
...and your position, now, is that because you don’t already know of the existence of something, it must not exist? Narcissism is often the nexus of bold expedition and discovery, but, in your case it apparently can also lead to an aloof disinterest in exploration.

According to the physics we understand today, warp-drive, just to use that one example, is possible. If it turns out to be a concept we can harness, it’s likely going to require manipulating an incredibly dense chunk of matter (perhaps a sample of neutron star?) that we couldn’t possibly find locally because it would have prevented our solar system evolving in such a way as to develop an earth-like planet in the first place.

That’s one example of many, and the real prize we go after is probably going to be something we couldn’t even conceptualize today, but there will be something, and folks who think as highly of themselves as you do will just watch it go by. And, shockingly, their presence won’t be missed by the expeditionaries- even a little bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts
You two present excellent arguments against Newton's Laws of Motion... Thank you. I learned something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,090 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
You two present excellent arguments against Newton's Laws of Motion... Thank you. I learned something.
Please elaborate. What did you learn?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,970 Posts
You two present excellent arguments against Newton's Laws of Motion... Thank you. I learned something.
What are you talking about? The concept of space-time didn’t even exist in Newton’s day. Had he lived to meet Einstein, Newton would have “learned something”, too.

Does it surprise you that you, the Great and Powerful doc-, could possibly learn something from Einstein’s theories about the nature of gravity?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
According to Ben Rich, CEO of Lockheed Skunkworks, this technology already exists. Has for some time.

“We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an Act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity…Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do.” At the end of the speech, Rich said, “We now have the technology to take ET home.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
To put the concept in proportion-- escape velocity is only 25,000 mph....Relativistic speeds must approach 600 million mph....You need enough energy to ACcelerate it to that speed, but then an equal amount of energy to DEcelerate it so you can land.
All of that changes with anti-gravity technology.

Keep dreaming.
Nothing wrong with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,970 Posts
To put the concept in proportion-- escape velocity is only 25,000 mph....Relativistic speeds must approach 600 million mph....You need enough energy to ACcelerate it to that speed, but then an equal amount of energy to DEcelerate it so you can land.
All of that changes with anti-gravity technology.
Exactly. The warp-drive concept doesn’t rely on propelling a vehicle with enough energy to send it to some destination quickly. It’s more akin to using gravity to warp space-time and bring the destination to your vehicle.

Don’t tell doc-, though. He’s certain the universe is only three-dimensional and that transportation technology topped out with the internal combustion engine, and he’s waayyy smarter than us peons.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top