5 ms·

This sounds appealing but there are a couple of major problems. The first is that you have to get to a significant percentage of light speed for this to manife

by cletus 5y ago

This sounds appealing but there are a couple of major problems. The first is that you have to get to a significant percentage of light speed for this to manifest itself. Even at 0.95c time is only traveling at 1/3 of normal speed [1]. Second, the energy cost for this is truly mind-boggling. Doing so when you carry the fuel seems highly impractical. The best bet are laser highways [2]. But, you need to build that first. The upper limit of laser propulsion isn't really high enough for that level of time dilation. Third, traveling at these speeds makes any potential impact within even a speck of dust potentially fatal. Lastly, fun fact: such a ship actually needs to be aerodynamic. Why? Above 0.95c the drag of hydrogen atoms in the interstellar medium will start to slow you down. [1]: https://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/timedial.html https://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/timedial.html [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDR4AHYRmlk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDR4AHYRmlk

Myto 5y ago
You could get to the nearest star in a few years and to the other side of the galaxy well within a human lifetime with "just" constant 1 g acceleration. Obviously this is far from easy but it doesn't seem like it is necessarily out of reach given a few thousand more years of continued technological development.
- actually_a_dog 5y ago
  Yes, and there are at least 76 stars (i.e. potentially interesting destinations) within 100 light years of us [0]. So, assuming you can set an arbitrary course at 0.95c, and decelerate without turning the humans inside your ship to organic goo, you can reach quite a few interesting places. --- [0]: http://www.solstation.com/stars3/100-as.htm http://www.solstation.com/stars3/100-as.htm
- aardvark179 5y ago
  The quotes you put round just are doing a lot of heavy lifting. If you had a perfect photon rocket you’d only need 1000000000 kg of fuel for each kg of payload to do 1g to the centre of our galaxy and slow down again. Okay, maybe you can use a laser or something so you don’t have to carry the fuel with you, but you’ll still need a staggering amount of energy because the rocket equation is a harsh mistress, and the relativistic version is even worse.
shkkmo 5y ago
Absolutely, there are huge problems and it may not ever be feasible. However, I find it far more likely that we will find a way to solve these concerns than that we will develop FTL travel.
m4rtink 5y ago
The thing will also be a weapon of mass destruction of plannet cracking potential, one "parking accident" away from making planets uninhabitable. On the other hand a civilisation producing such things should hopefully be technically immortal with lots of distributed backups for each individual potentially affected by such accidents & resources to fix up any affected infrastructure. So still, totally worth it, go fo it! :-) (Less advanced neighbors might still be a bit on the edge, so please be considerate.)

by cletus 5y ago

Myto 5y ago

You could get to the nearest star in a few years and to the other side of the galaxy well within a human lifetime with "just" constant 1 g acceleration. Obviously this is far from easy but it doesn't seem like it is necessarily out of reach given a few thousand more years of continued technological development.

actually_a_dog 5y ago
Yes, and there are at least 76 stars (i.e. potentially interesting destinations) within 100 light years of us [0]. So, assuming you can set an arbitrary course at 0.95c, and decelerate without turning the humans inside your ship to organic goo, you can reach quite a few interesting places. --- [0]: http://www.solstation.com/stars3/100-as.htm http://www.solstation.com/stars3/100-as.htm
aardvark179 5y ago
The quotes you put round just are doing a lot of heavy lifting. If you had a perfect photon rocket you’d only need 1000000000 kg of fuel for each kg of payload to do 1g to the centre of our galaxy and slow down again. Okay, maybe you can use a laser or something so you don’t have to carry the fuel with you, but you’ll still need a staggering amount of energy because the rocket equation is a harsh mistress, and the relativistic version is even worse.

shkkmo 5y ago

Absolutely, there are huge problems and it may not ever be feasible. However, I find it far more likely that we will find a way to solve these concerns than that we will develop FTL travel.

m4rtink 5y ago

The thing will also be a weapon of mass destruction of plannet cracking potential, one "parking accident" away from making planets uninhabitable. On the other hand a civilisation producing such things should hopefully be technically immortal with lots of distributed backups for each individual potentially affected by such accidents & resources to fix up any affected infrastructure. So still, totally worth it, go fo it! :-) (Less advanced neighbors might still be a bit on the edge, so please be considerate.)