I scanned the article and I agree with most of the conclusions. I believe that without some means to get around the speed of light as a speed limit that interstellar manned space flight will only be attempted in the form of generation ships serving as life boats if and/or when the earth for whatever reason(s) becomes uninhabitable.

If mankind discovers or invents some form of FTL travel then all we will need is the will to travel to the stars.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Oh, possibly a little shorter trip, but still some interesting stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=_tWqh7OuLWE

Especially the first part, Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin being interviewed.

Possibly the man performing the interview is associated with Serendip, only what I am able to hear from the interview.

But the interview is not going very well. Apparently some patience is needed.

If astronomers do not always agree, how then when it comes to the relationship between astronomers and astronauts (people who have had the opportunity at visiting space and making personal experiences from such trips)?

If anything more than the earth and and the moon was ever visible in the heavens they were visiting (besides the stars), probably blame the observers psychological mind.

Perhaps dizziness was one of the main points?

One very important factor missing from that article and that for such a journey to happen then some form of artificial gravity will be needed as the human body deteriorates in anything less than standard gravity with zero gravity being the worst (ie; loss of blood, muscle and bone mass).

Cheers.

---

Which is why I question all these sci-fi stories using stasis for long journeys, although .....

Stasis (fiction) implies, especially in science-fiction, an artificial pause that stops all physical and chemical processes, including those of life; they resume as if uninterrupted as soon as the stasis is ended.

I'd say that some kind of hibernation is more likely.

I have brought this up before but whenever a thread about interstellar space travel gets going it bears repeating. Interstellar space travel as depicted in most Sci-Fi movies and TV shows totally ignores space/time. Leaving earth and travelling to, say, Vega might only take from a few hours to a few days depending on the type of propulsion used but time here on earth will have passed at a different rate and upon returning the voyager will have aged say a month or a year but depending on how far he travelled earth will be many years older. So two way travel to the stars may never be a reality

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

I have brought this up before but whenever a thread about interstellar space travel gets going it bears repeating. Interstellar space travel as depicted in most Sci-Fi movies and TV shows totally ignores space/time. Leaving earth and travelling to, say, Vega might only take from a few hours to a few days depending on the type of propulsion used but time here on earth will have passed at a different rate and upon returning the voyager will have aged say a month or a year but depending on how far he travelled earth will be many years older. So two way travel to the stars may never be a reality

Two way travel is still possible, of course, though you may be greeted by your aging great-great-great grandson upon your return...which might be a problem for some.

Another consequence, life on Earth will continue to evolve, including the Sciences. Just look where recording media has gone in the last 25-35 years, from reel-to-reel, 8-track, cassette tapes to Blue-Ray DVD's.

Space travellers will almost certainly be 'locked-in' to the science they took with them when they departed. They may hear of new developments happening back on Earth somehow, but how could they fashion/manufacture anything new?? That's where a Robbie Robot would come in real handy, but he/it doesn't exist, AFAIK. :)


Lt

How do you come to the conclusion that interstellar travel makes you old in the meantime?

Definitely, if I had the opportunity at traveling to another star, I would choose to travel with the fastest speed possible, meaning the speed of light.

But as Lint trap correctly concludes, or at least assumes, if I said goodbye to my parents when departing in the space ship bound for Vega, I would come back home and possibly would have to visit my parents graves, if I was happy to locate their place of burial at all.

If you should be so happy to be able to travel somewhere else by the speed of light, how do you assume that such a journey involves time travel at all? Isn't such a journey bound or destined for Vega assumed to take 26 years one way and another 26 years the other way. My parents definitely do not live forever. Not me, either.

Anyway, I returned from my fictional journey maybe two weeks older. My parents were gone a long time ago.

But if I for some reason went down into a wormhole, I possibly could return back and greet my parents as being only children. You can only travel one way in time, namely back since time stops up when you are traveling at a speed approaching light speed. In any case, the speed of light itself can not be obtained, the energy needed for a particular mass in order to obtain the speed of light would not become attainable.

This whole light barrier thing is a tough nut to crack. Anyone have any ideas? Any thoughts at all? Anyone? Please?! SOMEONE SAY SOMETHING BRILLIANT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!! I need a drink.

---

Yes. Why is time always being associated with the speed of light and the possible barrier even this speed implies?

I wrote "if I was happy to locate their place of burial at all" here previously.

I rather could have said "able" instead of "happy", but so it goes.

But there is generally thought you may only be able to travel back in time.

What if you did so and wanted to return back to the present time?

For this to happen it means that have to travel forward in time in order to be able to catch yourself again.

Time travel is not pure science fiction. It is a proven fact.

A couple of years ago, two very exact atomic clocks were brought on two different planes and traveled the opposite ways the whole globe around.

When arriving back at were they departed, both these atomic clocks were compared with a third clock which had been stationary all the time. It was found that the time being shown for the two clocks which had been on a journey were showing a different time than the stationary one.

Whether both clocks differed from the third one equally much, I really don't know. But in any case there was a time difference or discrepancy noted in this example.

I guess it's because it's fundamental in the current theories like relativity that time, distance and the speed of light are all tied together in such a way that prevents our disassociating them from each other.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

I've always imagined gravity, light, and time being closely related.

I think interstellar travel may be a myth. When we look at the most energetic events in the univerwse, supernova, what we see follows Einstein's laws. When we crash protons into eachother, the particles flying out follow Einstein's laws. If everything we observe at these very high energy levels seems to follow Einsteins laws, then those laws become the governing principle of just how fast a ship can travel, and how much energy it would take to accelerate it there.

Wormholes are the size of atoms if they exist, and I'm not sure one could count on them as stable. I can't imagine the first ship deciding to plunge head long into something the size of an atom, and without knowing where you would end up.

Also without some solid evidence of what is there, why would any ship expend these huge quantities of energy and just head off into the sunset like Star Trek? To me it makes much more sence to know where you are going, and have a suitable way to get back.

Yes, travel at near the speed of light is possible, but even still the distances of even just 1 star away are enormous. With our nearest star, the shortest possible trip would be 8 years, with no time to stay and visit. If a ship was going to spend 4 years just traveling from one star to another, then one would think they would be planning on staying for a while. Also you would think they would need some way to refuel.

I did see a design concept of a ship about the size of the moon once. It had a huge, what looked like a satelite dish in front of it. It's purpose was to scoop up free hydrogen atoms from space, where there is about 1 hydrogen atom in an area the size of a grape fruit, and crash them together in a fusion reactor. That ship could have obtained about 80 something % of the speed of light. That would be an example of constant refueling, but the size required would be a lot of resources for anyone to build.

The more we learn about physics, the more we seem to be bound by it.

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Space travellers will almost certainly be 'locked-in' to the science they took with them when they departed. They may hear of new developments happening back on Earth somehow, but how could they fashion/manufacture anything new?? That's where a Robbie Robot would come in real handy, but he/it doesn't exist, AFAIK. :)

it remembers me in some Sci-Fy Tv shows where some humans gone in generations-boats werent arrived yet to their destinations while 100-200 years later humans travel with new technology they discovered since the boats gone... arriving at destinations way ahead before the boats ^^

That sounds like the Star Trek TOS episode and later film with Kahn and his merry band of explorers...


Who knows until we see what we can find and discover...

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

We may seem bound by physics as we currently understand it, but it appears unlikely that our current understanding will be the last word forever on the nature of the universe and what can be done in it. There are a number of hints that there might be ways to work around the light speed barrier, given sufficient technological advancement. There have already been quite serious scientific discussions about how space might be warped around a vessel, in effect, moving space rather than ship. Also considered are 'shortcuts' from point A to point B in our local space-time framework that might be made through domains not affected by the usual relativistic limitations. Michael

I too have heard many times that our technology still has a long way to go. What concerns me is that by looking at the most energetic events in the universe, supernova, and proton crashes, there doesn't seem to be evidence to support it. If evidence is not shown in the enormous amount of energy released in a supernova, which is capable of making most of the periodic table, then where would you look for such evidence. We have looked at the universe in all wave lengths. From radio, to infrared, to visible light, to ultraviolet, microwaves, and gamma rays. The spectrum is only so large, and when making observations across the band, and not seeing evidence, it does make one wonder a bit.

I'm not saying more discoveries won't be made, but they will be made within the bounds of the observable, testable framework present through out the universe.

This is just my opinion.

If physical laws exist on earth, then it must be the same way on the moon, or on other stars, or anywhere, or visa-versa.

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

How much can space be warped in order to change the speed of time?

Is space regarded as one or more dimensions and if so what really is meant when speaking about "dimensions"?

In the same way, what is the definition of time?

With the warping of space and possibly time, one may possibly be speaking of a space/time curve or curvature (or maybe space/time "continuum" - which is not in my dictionary).

In a strong gravitational field like a black hole, time is shown to be slowing up.

This happens when we compare such places or positions against something else. We need at least two different references in order to make a comparison.

Therefore everything should be measured against the one person who happens to be inside such a black hole against someone else who happens to be at a more normal place/location (which may be a point in space and possibly also a point in/of time).

So if we speak about gravitational fields, could we make use of the terminology "time field" also?

I have not seen this being used, however.

If you have a look at your hand watch, you will probably not see any difference at all. The clock will still be clicking and if not so, the numbers on your display will be seen to pass by at speed as usual. A specific definition of time is only relevant to one specific place and/or observer, not to different observers being located at different places.

Time therefore depends on gravity. In the end gravity is the supreme winner.

The only thing better off would be the Superforce.

A UFO was known to have landed close to a railway line in Russia a couple of years ago.

When the landing site was measured in detail, time was found to be speeding up inside a small circle possibly being the landing marks of such a craft.

If you are staying close to a black hole for a longer duration, there will be nothing than the future when you return back home. The people or citizens living on Earth probably have become Type 1 or maybe even Type 2 in the meantime.

Getting inside the "Event Horizon" of a black hole leaves you with no option of escape. If you are so lucky not to become crushed by the enormous gravitational field inside such a black hole, You will be trapped forever and time as we know it will come to a standstill.

The three dimensions we are used to as well as also time, becomes irrelevant and everything ends up becoming or being a "point" (or "singularity").

If UFO's in fact are crafts manufactured by an advanced civilization, such crafts may have several ways of propulsion systems. One for long range flying, possibly long or longer distance by means of speeds that are more comprehensible to us and not necessarily close to the speed of light.

This probably would be the last option.

One way of travel may the instantaneous warping of space in order to go from one place to another not too far away in an instant moment of time (how fast is that - is it possible to relate both time as well as gravity with Quantum Theory).

This could also mean time travel as well, although just getting across the distance is the most important thing.

First option would be to warp space almost indefinitely in order to be able to travel anywhere or somewhere else.

That means going from one point to another in space using a specific amount of time. Time again should be shown or regarded as being "relevant", meaning it should be compared against something else.

Another option is going either forward or backward in time, meaning time travel here.

This also means warping of space related to time.

In addition to Quantum Theory, we also are having a "String Theory" also.

I really have to check this thing out.

We are used to three dimensions when excluding time and maybe other dimensions which may also exist. May we possibly be able to relate "relativistic elements or factors" to the three familiar dimensions we are generally being used to?

Time may for now seem to be related to present vs. future, but what if you were able to travel "back to the future"?

For this question, have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_to_the_Future . One of the actors which was taking part in this science fiction movie was being starred by Michael J. Fox.

You want to know your destination point when traveling in space?

Have a break at one point or place in space. Possibly make an adjustment of your travel direction as well as possibly your travel speed. Never to late to make your choice of destination in order to turn around and return back home.

Anyway, I took myself a little time writing the previous post.

Still, apparently it is not that easy to get everything right.

Like I said - "In a strong gravitational field like a black hole, time is shown to be slowing up".

I really meant slowing down!

Also I said the following - "Time therefore depends on gravity. In the end gravity is the supreme winner".

Meaning that space itself (not just the three dimensions you know it is made up of or you are readily able to see for yourself) is something which has been created as a result of a combination of both time and gravity.

It would seem that a gravitational thrust would take multiple large objects hopping over each other, while a ship is pulled along. I'm not sure that makes sense to me.

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

A large planet such as jupiter could be used to slingshot a space vehicle out of our solar system such as the voyager spacecraft has done.

Slingshots certainly can be used, but there is still the speed limit. Even if you used a bunch of black holes, and stayed clear of the event horizon, you would not even reach, let alone exceed light speed.

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

The older I get and the more I think about what interstellar travel will require I have come to believe we will only master interplanetary travel within our own solar system. I really hope I am wrong.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.