The most important issue that must be solved in space exploration area

a reply to: dragonridr

600000mph is like 0.09% of light speed if my math is correct.

Call it 0.1% if you wish dragonridr but thats not 80/90% now is it.

And you are suggesting we could do this now with the current technology we have at our disposal.

Its a pipe dream mate, not that those engines are not a wonder to behold, but for going to Mars or possibly a Moon of Jupiter.

Next star(Proxima Centauri) is 4.2 light years away, and you simply are not going there at 600000mph anytime soon.

I could imagine technology in the future which might allow man to travel in space at 600,000 mph. Even 1m mph is not out of the realm of possibilities in the future. Possibly even 2m mph.

Unfortunately though, this still won't be anywhere near enough to travel to another star from Earth. The nearest star to Earth is 4.3 light years, and even if we could travel 1m mph it would still take 2,883 years to get there. 2m mph would get you there twice as fast, but it would still be (14) generations of humans.

For interstellar travel to be realistic we would need to be able to get someplace in roughly 10 years. And, in order to accomplish this we'd need to be traveling at 576,000,000 mph (or roughly 86% the speed of light).

Interestingly though, in 1994 a Mexican physicist by the name of Alcubierre put forth an idea for a real life 'warp' drive which could, in theory, travel faster than the speed of light. The spaceship itself wouldn't actually travel faster than light, but rather would warp the space-time around such that it appeared to travel faster than light. The net result was traveling between two points at faster than C. It was a novel idea.

The challenge with Alcubierre's idea though is it has some prerequisites. One, matter would need to be placed along the way between the two points of travel, and during the journey this matter would need to be set into motion. Imagine setting up a train track and then setting the track in motion while the train travels on the track. It's a crude analogy, but it works for this example. Two, this presents a paradox. In order to lay the 'track' you need the Alcubierre warp drive. The 'track' makes the warp drive possible. In other words, you need the Alcubierre warp drive in order to create the Alcubierre warp drive.

It's an interesting theory though and one you might look into if interested.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

My bets on the Alcubierre drive or something similar.

a reply to: andy06shake

The theory rests upon the notion that tachyons exist. Tachyons are the 'track'. Tachyon theory is way out there on the edge of physics theory. The likelihood of tachyons ever being proven to exist is doubtful.

One of the other challenges with Alcubierre's theory is you'd have to be real careful you didn't create a singularity in front of the spaceship. Creating a black hole right in front of your spaceship could really wreck your day!

ETA - Some mind-bending stuff to think about though, warping space-time.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

My understanding is although Alcubierre drive is consistent with the Einstein equations.

Construction of such a thing may not be possible down to the proposed mechanism of the drive.

Which implies negative energy density is a requirement hence will most lightly also require exotic forms of matter or manipulation of whatever dark energy turns out to constitute.

The black hole thingamabob could be interesting considering mathematics and physics break down and contradict one another once you pass the event horizon.

Who knows where they may end up and in what condition. LoL

originally posted by: james00
What are the most important issues we have now in the space exploration area?

getting people to understand we need to spend more money on it..

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

My understanding is although Alcubierre drive is consistent with the Einstein equations.

The apparent FTL travel part is. Tachyons on the other hand are not, or minimally they would raise some serious questions were they found to exist.

Construction of such a thing may not be possible down to the proposed mechanism of the drive.

Construction of the 'track' is harder than construction of the drive itself, but yes.

Which implies negative energy density is a requirement hence will most lightly also require exotic forms of matter or manipulation of whatever dark energy turns out to constitute.

Indeed, exotic material such as tachyons.

The black hole thingamabob could be interesting...

Could definitely spoil your day, that's for sure!

...considering mathematics and physics break down and contradict one another once you pass the event horizon.

Can you be more specific? Which mathematics and physics do you feel is contradicted past the event horizon?

Who knows where they may end up and in what condition. LoL

They'll likely be pretty skinny and their watch probably will be pretty wacky. LOL!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

My understanding is certain mathematical equations intended to mirror our so-called real world produce nonsensical answers that involve infinites where singularities and event horizons are concerned.

Apparently something to do with the metric tensor connection or curvature of the tensor going off to infinity.

Above my nut all the same.

As to the condition of anything that enters the event horizon of a blackhole/singularity, that's spaghetti is it not, and stretched to infinity.

I suppose if white holes are a thing, that process could quite possibly be reversed at the other end all the same when you are being spat back out.

I certainly would not relish the prospect, and just like whatever came before the universe its not something we are ever going to be able to measure or observe i suppose.

a reply to: FinallyAwake
Yeah, I guess if humans invent a spacecraft that can travel at the speed of light, we will be able to visit many planets from other galaxies, find some new forms of life or even find a planet that might be like the second Earth.

a reply to: james00

Need to be multiples of the speed of light else it will still take a while to travel to the likes of another galaxy.

It would take 200,000 years for a spaceship traveling at the speed of light to go across our own galaxy.

originally posted by: james00
a reply to: FinallyAwake
Yeah, I guess if humans invent a spacecraft that can travel at the speed of light, we will be able to visit many planets from other galaxies, find some new forms of life or even find a planet that might be like the second Earth.

what if we expanded to some of the planets in our own solar system then see what happens from there. we'd give ourselves several hundred more years to explore at least

a reply to: Emit1

Thing their is all the rest of the planets/moons in our own star system want to kill us in no time sharp.

Far as we can establish humanity in its present condition cant survive anywhere else but Earth without severe technological innovation and/or modification.

Look at what it takes to keep our astronauts alive up there in the ISS and thats only in low earth orbit for a start.

Fact of the matter is we will never really know until we go, but colonisation of low Earth orbit and our Moon will need to be in the post before we realistically consider anywhere else of significance just down to the experience and understanding it will give us, that's a given.

Even our Moon dust is toxic, nasty, and rather abrasive all the same.

a reply to: Emit1

The other planets in our solar system aren't habitable.

We are nowhere near having the technology and resources to go there and terraform them.

And if we could terraform them wouldn't we also be able to halt the climate change that is occurring here on earth?

Interplanetary travel is beyond our abilities at present let alone talk of interstellar or intergalactic travel etc.

We're stuck here for the foreseeable....which given the pigs ear we are making of things here may not be a bad thing!

a reply to: andy06shake

Personally, I think the Moon is a far better near-term objective over going to Mars. I think we'd have a lot better chance of doing something relevant on Mars if we did so from the Moon, instead of trying to do it from Earth.

I've never fully understood why we just dismiss the Moon as much as we do. Yes, it's a hostile place, but so is Earth's gravity and atmospheric resistance. On the Moon you have no atmospheric resistance and 1/5th the gravity of Earth to contend with. Almost like we consciously are avoiding the Moon for some reason.

a reply to: Freeborn

Yeah, our other two choices besides Mars are Venus and Jupiter, and neither of those are very hospitable places. Plus, we won't likely possess the technology to go to Jupiter in our children's lifetime.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Plenty of conspiracy orientated reasoning offered up as to why we avoid return to the Moon.

Our Moon is our best bet imho, and also a not half bad staging area where launching, and even building ships, to explore the rest of our system is concerned.

Two way communication is also somewhat viable as is travel time to and from the place.

What holds us back is the same thing that stops us colonising low Earth orbit, that being a cost effective means of reaching such, and the will to do so.

Put it this way, if the Moon was made of c*ca*ne or gold we would probably have been up there by now and mining away to our hears content.

Once they require the Helium-3 or Titanium ore they will be up there sharpish i imagine. LoL

Longevity is the main issue if we do not focus on heath and living alot longer Space travel of any significance is impossible and for that matter even the Human race will eventually go extinct if we do not stop and direct our research into Longevity.

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

I would argue our limited longevity is also the reason we refuse to learn from past historical mistakes and have a penchant for repetition where past generations transgressions are concerned.

Seems to me we are only just beginning to learn what true wisdom and experience are all about when we are forced to shuffle off our mortal coil, or worse end up senile.

Thing is entropy has to increase and biology dictates we cannot exist forever or anything more than about 150 years tops in our present condition.

We need to build a better Human, and that terrifies a significant portion of the Human race when they stop to think about it because it may make us semi intelligent monkeys rather redundant or obsolete.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Ravenwatcher

I would argue our limited longevity is also the reason we refuse to learn from past historical mistakes and have a penchant for repetition where past generations transgressions are concerned.

Seems to me we are only just beginning to learn what true wisdom and experience are all about when we are forced to shuffle off our mortal coil, or worse end up senile.

Thing is entropy has to increase and biology dictates we cannot exist forever or anything more than about 150 years tops in our present condition.

We need to build a better Human, and that terrifies a significant portion of the Human race when they stop to think about it because it may make us semi intelligent monkeys rather redundant or obsolete.

Think of what some of the great thinkers could have done with 80 more years .

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

Think of what they could do with a thousand?

Psychological speaking all the same, that kind of time span might be optimistic.

Our minds just might not be build to coup with existence for that kind of span, even if the implication is that our souls are eternal.

Aye another 80 years sounds good.