4 ms·

The project estimates are completely off. Building a 1gigawatt power plant costs 10billion. Let alone building 100 of them. Also making the laser array. Also yo

The project estimates are completely off. Building a 1gigawatt power plant costs 10billion. Let alone building 100 of them. Also making the laser array. Also you can't have reflection without absorption. Also we don't have solar sails that fit the bill. This project is barely physically and economically plausible. Its not a question of scaling, or engineering. The physics just don't work. We have a way to get a space craft to 20% of C. Its called Project Orion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propu...

gene-h 11y ago
You are putting out 100 gigawatts for 2 minutes. One does not need 100 one gigawatt powerplants, just some way to store and release a lot of energy really fast. Second, we have mirrors that can reflect up to 99.999% of a single wavelength of light(such as that emitted by a laser)[0]. There is a detailed analysis of the concept in [0] and the Breakthrough Foundation has a detailed list of challenges associated with this project at [1]. Getting the laser out of the atmosphere is probably one of the biggest challenges with this. [0] http://www.deepspace.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/A-Roadmap-to-Interstellar-Flight-15-u.pdf http://www.deepspace.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/A-R... [1] http://breakthroughinitiatives.org/Challenges/3 http://breakthroughinitiatives.org/Challenges/3
onion2k 11y ago
I realise this is an appeal to authority, which is bad and wrong in any argument, but I trust Stephen Hawking wouldn't back a project that falls down on the physics.
drx 11y ago
100 GW over 2 minutes is 3 1/3 GWh, or the equivalent of 37037 Tesla Model S 90 kWh batteries, or about $500M in batteries (in 2016).
Ankaios 11y ago
Do you seriously think these guys haven't heard of Project Orion or wouldn't use Orion's approach if they thought it was best? In case you didn't notice, Freeman Dyson is involved with Starshot. Freeman Dyson co-led Project Orion.

gene-h 11y ago

You are putting out 100 gigawatts for 2 minutes. One does not need 100 one gigawatt powerplants, just some way to store and release a lot of energy really fast. Second, we have mirrors that can reflect up to 99.999% of a single wavelength of light(such as that emitted by a laser)[0]. There is a detailed analysis of the concept in [0] and the Breakthrough Foundation has a detailed list of challenges associated with this project at [1]. Getting the laser out of the atmosphere is probably one of the biggest challenges with this. [0] http://www.deepspace.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/A-Roadmap-to-Interstellar-Flight-15-u.pdf http://www.deepspace.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/A-R... [1] http://breakthroughinitiatives.org/Challenges/3 http://breakthroughinitiatives.org/Challenges/3

onion2k 11y ago

I realise this is an appeal to authority, which is bad and wrong in any argument, but I trust Stephen Hawking wouldn't back a project that falls down on the physics.

drx 11y ago

100 GW over 2 minutes is 3 1/3 GWh, or the equivalent of 37037 Tesla Model S 90 kWh batteries, or about $500M in batteries (in 2016).

Ankaios 11y ago

Do you seriously think these guys haven't heard of Project Orion or wouldn't use Orion's approach if they thought it was best? In case you didn't notice, Freeman Dyson is involved with Starshot. Freeman Dyson co-led Project Orion.