Interesting dissertation. One of the scenarios overlooked here is the fact that, to perform interstellar travel, we must have breakthroughs in physics and the attendant technology.
I would assume that this means something like wormholes or some other command of the space/time continuum. In order to make war, the attacking force must be able to project sufficient force to overcome defenses and/or be able to maintain sanctuary, whether through technology or the inability of defensive forces to reach them.
On Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:33:26 PM UTC+2, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> In article <65f6c411-10e1-41bd-9fa2-1740ae5d0351@googlegroups.com>,
> Interesting dissertation. One of the scenarios overlooked here is the
> fact that, to perform interstellar travel, we must have breakthroughs in
> physics and the attendant technology.
> I would assume that this means something like wormholes or some other
> command of the space/time continuum.
Negative. FTL is currently quite possible for the colonizing fleet, given constant - conceivable (antimatter-powered ion drive? Bussard ramjet?) acceleration over time. A 1g acceleration could get to near light speed in less than a year, and then they could travel hundreds (or thousands)of light-years in just a few years.
They'd have to leave their civilization (and relatives) permanently behind, of course. These would be hundreds (thousands) of years in the past.
A one-way trip. Blind colonization. Quite feasible. A quick victory, and a new planet.
> Negative. FTL is currently quite possible for the colonizing fleet, given > constant - conceivable (antimatter-powered ion drive? Bussard ramjet?) > acceleration over time. A 1g acceleration could get to near light speed in > less than a year, and then they could travel hundreds (or thousands)of > light-years in just a few years.
If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one light year, so to travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds or thousands of years.
Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it kind of assumes infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe
> > Negative. FTL is currently quite possible for the colonizing fleet, given
> > constant - conceivable (antimatter-powered ion drive? Bussard ramjet?)
> > acceleration over time. A 1g acceleration could get to near light speed in
> > less than a year, and then they could travel hundreds (or thousands)of
> > light-years in just a few years.
> If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one light year, so to
> travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds or thousands
> of years.
> Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it kind of assumes
> infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe
You are the observer. They are the travellers. They experience Newtonian laws all the way; you are constrained by Einstein. Time dilation makes the trip short and fast for THEM, not you.
> > > acceleration over time. A 1g acceleration could get to near light speed > > > in
> > > less than a year, and then they could travel hundreds (or thousands)of
> > > light-years in just a few years.
> > If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one light year, > > so to
> > travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds or > > thousands
> > of years.
> > Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it kind of > > assumes
> > infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe
> You are the observer. They are the travellers. They experience Newtonian > laws all the way; you are constrained by Einstein. Time dilation makes the > trip short and fast for THEM, not you.
You forget that they then have to decelerate by the same amount that they accelerated to in order to land. There is also the matter of encountering small (and large -- even planet-sized) objects while at light speed. The result is the total conversion of particles from mass into energy. A grain of sand has the mass energy of a nuclear weapon.
I'm not sure that a starship of this concept (or its occupants) would survive the journey.
In article <atlas-bugged-BD57A8.10554318112...@news.solani.org>,
"Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds" <atlas-bug...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> In article <0a8b8a62-e7ac-4397-ae9e-cde2a2b55ebe@googlegroups.com>,
> Grantland <grantlandsm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Negative. FTL is currently quite possible for the colonizing fleet, given > > constant - conceivable (antimatter-powered ion drive? Bussard ramjet?) > > acceleration over time. A 1g acceleration could get to near light speed in > > less than a year, and then they could travel hundreds (or thousands)of > > light-years in just a few years.
> If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one light year, so > to travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds or > thousands of years.
> > > If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one light > > > year, > > > so to
> > > travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds or > > > thousands
> > > of years.
> > > Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it kind of > > > assumes
> > > infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe
> > You are the observer. They are the travellers. They experience Newtonian > > laws all the way; you are constrained by Einstein. Time dilation makes the > > trip short and fast for THEM, not you.
> You forget that they then have to decelerate by the same amount that > they accelerated to in order to land. There is also the matter of > encountering small (and large -- even planet-sized) objects while at > light speed. The result is the total conversion of particles from mass > into energy. A grain of sand has the mass energy of a nuclear weapon.
> I'm not sure that a starship of this concept (or its occupants) would > survive the journey.
> > > Negative. FTL is currently quite possible for the colonizing fleet, > > > given constant - conceivable (antimatter-powered ion drive? Bussard ramjet?)
> > > acceleration over time. A 1g acceleration could get to near light speed > > > in
> > > less than a year, and then they could travel hundreds (or thousands)of light-years in just a few years.
> > If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one light year, > > so to
> > travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds or > > thousands of years.
> > Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it kind of > > assumes
> > infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe
> You are the observer. They are the travellers. They experience Newtonian > laws all the way; you are constrained by Einstein. Time dilation makes the > trip short and fast for THEM, not you.
a star 100 light years away and you travel SOL means it take a year to travel a light year...humbug on time dilation, you'll never make it, not to mention that you can only travel half the distance at SOL, you have to spend an equal amount of time or more to brake
> In article
> <orfairbairn-7A3672.15182418112...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>, > Orval Fairbairn <orfairba...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > > If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one
>> > > light year, >> > > so to
>> > > travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds
>> > > or thousands
>> > > of years.
>> > > Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it
>> > > kind of assumes
>> > > infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe
>> > You are the observer. They are the travellers. They experience
>> > Newtonian laws all the way; you are constrained by Einstein. Time
>> > dilation makes the trip short and fast for THEM, not you.
>> You forget that they then have to decelerate by the same amount that >> they accelerated to in order to land. There is also the matter of >> encountering small (and large -- even planet-sized) objects while at >> light speed. The result is the total conversion of particles from mass
>> into energy. A grain of sand has the mass energy of a nuclear weapon.
>> I'm not sure that a starship of this concept (or its occupants) would >> survive the journey.
> An expensive way to deal with grantlands
Where do I send my contribution?
-- Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
"Malcom "Mal" Reynolds" <atlas-bug...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:atlas-bugged-
> a star 100 light years away and you travel SOL means it take a year > to travel a
> light year...humbug on time dilation, you'll never make it, not to > mention that
> you can only travel half the distance at SOL, you have to spend an > equal amount
> of time or more to brake
On Sunday, November 18, 2012 6:18:21 PM UTC-5, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
> "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds" <atlas-bug...@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:atlas-bugged-51DC3E.14064618112012@news.solani.org: > In article > <orfairbairn-7A3672.15182418112...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>, > Orval Fairbairn <orfairba...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > >> > > If you get up to SOL, in one year you would have travelled one >> > > light year, >> > > so to >> > > >> > > travel hundreds or thousands of light years would require hundreds >> > > or thousands >> > > >> > > of years. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Not to mention that as you accelerate matter to light speed it >> > > kind of assumes >> > > >> > > infinite mass...not good for the other grantlands in the universe >> > >> > You are the observer. They are the travellers. They experience >> > Newtonian laws all the way; you are constrained by Einstein. Time >> > dilation makes the trip short and fast for THEM, not you. >> >> You forget that they then have to decelerate by the same amount that >> they accelerated to in order to land. There is also the matter of >> encountering small (and large -- even planet-sized) objects while at >> light speed. The result is the total conversion of particles from mass >> into energy. A grain of sand has the mass energy of a nuclear weapon. >> >> I'm not sure that a starship of this concept (or its occupants) would >> survive the journey. > > An expensive way to deal with grantlands Where do I send my contribution? -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
