5 ms·

Even without FTL travel, on galactic timelines, we could presume to see colonization spread very rapidly through the galaxy. For example, this answer on quora s

Even without FTL travel, on galactic timelines, we could presume to see colonization spread very rapidly through the galaxy. For example, this answer on quora shows with some pretty conservative timelines, the galaxy should still be riddled with life: https://www.quora.com/Could-the-answer-to-the-Fermi-paradox-be-that-travelling-faster-than-light-is-just-not-possible-If-you-have-to-spend-500-000-years-traveling-to-Earth-your-ships-would-have-to-be-extremely-comfortable-Why-would-you https://www.quora.com/Could-the-answer-to-the-Fermi-paradox-...

mcbits 8y ago
Those timelines don't seem very conservative. 1% sounds like a nice, small number, but 1% of the speed of light is insanely fast. It's about 200 times faster than our fastest craft to date. We might envision launching a probe 200 times faster in the future, but a colonization ship would also weigh millions of times more and have to slow down somehow. It's not clear that we'd be able to do that in 10,000 years (or ever) with "shoot stuff out the butt" propulsion, so we'd probably need propulsion based on different physics which may or may not actually exist. We'd definitely need new physics for constant 1g acceleration into relativistic speeds. Maybe we could hitchhike on progressively faster interstellar asteroids or something, but that would void the assumption of having the ability to reach all parts of the galaxy.
pixl97 8y ago
Eh, the slow travel still has lots of issues. You have to travel with a massive amount of mass. Space is really dangerous. There are high energy particles that want to mess up your 'ship'. Even worse things like neutral hydrogen are hard to block with energy style shields. Then you have the issues of long times without high gravity. Then you have to carry enough 'stuff' and energy to recycle absolutely everything you need, ever.

mcbits 8y ago

Those timelines don't seem very conservative. 1% sounds like a nice, small number, but 1% of the speed of light is insanely fast. It's about 200 times faster than our fastest craft to date. We might envision launching a probe 200 times faster in the future, but a colonization ship would also weigh millions of times more and have to slow down somehow. It's not clear that we'd be able to do that in 10,000 years (or ever) with "shoot stuff out the butt" propulsion, so we'd probably need propulsion based on different physics which may or may not actually exist. We'd definitely need new physics for constant 1g acceleration into relativistic speeds. Maybe we could hitchhike on progressively faster interstellar asteroids or something, but that would void the assumption of having the ability to reach all parts of the galaxy.

pixl97 8y ago

Eh, the slow travel still has lots of issues. You have to travel with a massive amount of mass. Space is really dangerous. There are high energy particles that want to mess up your 'ship'. Even worse things like neutral hydrogen are hard to block with energy style shields. Then you have the issues of long times without high gravity. Then you have to carry enough 'stuff' and energy to recycle absolutely everything you need, ever.