2 ms·
Why not assume stasis for the journey? (http://philome.la/johnayliff/seedship/play http://philome.la/johnayliff/seedship/play) Advances are being made. (https:/
by Kaibeezy 8y ago
Why not assume stasis for the journey? (http://philome.la/johnayliff/seedship/play http://philome.la/johnayliff/seedship/play) Advances are being made. (https://www.nasa.gov/content/torpor-inducing-transfer-habitat-for-human-stasis-to-mars https://www.nasa.gov/content/torpor-inducing-transfer-habita...) The number of people needed for genetic diversity remains just as important once you land.
6300 years? Why not wait a while for propulsion tech that enables constant acceleration/deceleration at 1g? Transit time drops to 3.6 years. (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/Rocket/rocket.html http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/Rocket/r...) OK, there are serious engine efficiency, fuel load and radiation issues. Not sure what the current thinking suggests is possible. Links?