Travel to Ross 128 b via Orion

what you dont realize (because youre a retard) is that the solar system as well as any other star system is completely filled with thinly spread hydrogen "dust" which at over 90% of c will completely shred your spacecraft

Will look into him, thanks.

At what speed would you have to reduce the ship to, in these given regions, to avoid any significant damage?

Why does it have a ballistic shell shape? I mean it's going to have to be assembled in space anyway so it can have all sorts of odd shapes like the ISS for example since there's no gas, no air resistance whatsoever.

All you nerds that desperately believe in space travel are always stuck in the 1950's with your design aesthetic, both for space ships and robots. You just can't wrap your heads around modern material science form following function.

Did your calculations include the time taken to reach 10% speed of light and then decelerating at the other end? What happens when you hit a rock in outer space while travelling that speed?

No, I did very basic calculations. I'd imagine the acceleration and deceleration would be a small amount t of the total time, or am I wrong? You know what percent of travel or the added years it would take?

This isn't my design or preference. There's also really "far out" designs like the stanford torus that use artificial gravity through rotation, or ones with enormous solar sails.

A strong electromagnetic field charges these particles in front of the spacecraft and diverts them away. Look it up, they did calculations how strong that field must be for high speeds outside of the Aourt cloud

Space travel nerds are insufferable

are you talking about the alcubierre drive? if so then it is nowhere near close to becoming a reality, at best it's a theory that respects the fundamental laws of physics with the bonus of eradicating the time travel problem when travelling at the speed of light (though technically the ship wouldn't travel as same as light does). but keep in mind that one of its requirements is a quantity of "negative mass" which has never been observed other than on paper from Einstein equations. not only that, you'd also have to take in account how would such a drive affect the passagers on a ship

bet you're chad with a big dick that attracts all the ladies too

It still has to land

Reading your post, OP, I feel very much reminded of Haldeman's THE FOREVER WAR now. In the novel, they first build a forward surface base on Charon and then a base on a comet nearby, if I recall correctly (read the book five years ago, sorry). After many years, that comet, now called Stargate, becomes the sole starting point for all Terran warships to jump to all different regions of space.

Maybe we can do the same, but not in this century. Just look at humanity: We are absolutely not ready yet. We need to deal with Islam and degeneracy first. No sane person would want SJWs in space or Islamic suicide bombers on your spaceship.

True

Nice bread.
Was looking for a bread discuss the formative history of Christianity and the reasons it became popular, but this is equally fascinating.

Starting in the 50s US in the 50's devised several plans to develop a nuclear powered spacecraft, until new treaties put an end to the idea. However, it's fun to speculate that maybe the US did launch something like Orion and there is a 2nd or even 3rd
generation of humans on board a massive interstellar spaceship; blissfully unaware of proceeding on earth and they seek out a new world.

Reminds of the TV mini-series Ascension, although it's not brilliant the concept is clever it's like 'Mad Men' is space, and I wont give away any spoilers

If you were given the opportunity to live aboard a nuclear powered space craft, with it's mission to resettle on another planet in alpha-centuri, knowing that you would never see earth again, and that you may not even get to the new world world yourself, would you go?
Moreover, consider that all of your technology would be frozen in time for the next 50years, no new innovation would ever reach you, and all your entertainment or interests will be confined to a snapshot of human history that has already happened.
Albeit, yes you will be making history, but the living and reading it about it is very different.

You journey could potentially be perilous to you and others, and sacrifices undoutably will be made.
You will be living in onboard a space craft that is run along the lines of a military organisation, to ensure discipline.
All your food, drink, clothing, and all other necessities will be derived from what you have available onboard.
If something breaks you may need to recycle, regalvanise, or repurpose it.
You will be living in a constant state of stress, where if one small variable goes wrong and the mission and your life ends.

>Once conventional rockets push Orion a reasonable distance from the moon, it can start using its nuclear propulsion.
Why?
That was not the plan. You launch the fully laden ship from Earth.
And what an extraordinary sight it would be.

Was just going to ask this. I know nothing about theoretical space travel. One thing I never understood though, was how you could achieve these "near fast as light speeds" and avoid bumping into something. What if you bump into some rock travelling at decent velocity and obliterate your entire ship? There's no way to detect and avoid this.

A multi-generational ship like that would have to ban homosexuality and other forms sexual deviance from nature, to ensure the survival of the ship's crew.
You could not have the Ship's admiral decide he want to have a sex change.
Any form of progressive liberalism would likely kill the ship's crew, as arguments break out over someone being stared at for longer than 4seconds.
It would be interesting to see whether, the people onboard would have the mental adaptability to live their lives there and any changes to them.

>What if you bump into some rock travelling at decent velocity and obliterate your entire ship
The probability of this happening is inconceivably small. remember, it's Space.
Space is nearly 100% empty.
You'd have a better chance of winning all the lotteries in all the countries on the planet simultaneously.

nah think id pass. you?

not reassuring enough

Yeah, hands off my bread and sperm, ya filthy space communist.

Attached: 1539654927096.jpg (434x430, 40K)

Lift up OPs skirt

Such a project would require nuclear weaponry in space, something that has red tape all over it on an international scale.

Necessity is the mother of invention, and we have removed all incentive to weaponize space, thereby severely diminishing the technological innovations that would go with it.

Only if you're a lobotomised redneck with no concept of statistical probability.

Space exploration will be done by Robots not by Humans

>We can get to say 90%, if not 99.9% of light speed just damn fine.

No we can't, see pic.

Attached: main-qimg-16b19a5cc8fc7778e7372ac36c978d21-c.jpg (602x227, 10K)

I'd do it.
I believe good sacrifices have to be made to help the human race progress.
It's in our blood, our ancestors of course did it.
I think the universe wants us to spread life throughout, as it's seems so bereft of intelligent life else where, at least in our Solar system.

I want to see colonizations, on the Moon, Mars, perhaps the moons of Saturn too, in my life time. We have to get off this rock to get some perspective about how fortunate we are and to advance our human civilization.

>which is 11 light-years away.
Yeah, no, you're not getting anywhere near there in any forseeable future.

One of the easiest methods is to put the water tanks in front and let them absorb the hits. You might be interested in the Isaac Arthur youtube channel.

>Fusion electric propulsion, fusion direct propulsion, orion pusher propuslision... or even antimatter propulsion will do the trick.
Why even bother? Just have Scott beam us over there.
None of these propulsion methods exist or will exist in your lifetime, or within the lifetime of your children or grandchildren. Why do you bother?

But remember that reaching your target destination does not automatically mean that you are going to survive 30 years in a maybe harsh or even hostile environment. Not wanting to black pill you, but many of the first settlers to America didn't make past the first few winters.

Attached: 1539520670538m.jpg (1024x576, 41K)

>Space exploration will be done by Robots not by Humans

I think you're correct, but even this is being stalled.
At present, it seems at least for this century 'inner space' is more important than 'outer space'.
What I mean by that is, we are likely to continue our present path of building larger hadron colliders to examine the building blocks of nature (inner space) and develop more advanced augmented reality to disappear into.

If you were an advanced alien life on a planet dying or running out of resources, which would you do?

> 1) Build robots to find an inhabitable planet.

> 2) Expend all resources on building a 'seed' ship for your kind, to find another inhabitable planet, across a vast distance, sending your best and brightest (or richest).

> 3) Develop virtual realities to live in and induce your species to live in low Matrix like pods and thereby reducing the impact billions of lives might have on the planet's resources.

I've not seen the film 'Player One' - I hear it's poor, but I imagine a couple of centuries from now we (if we've not got off this rock) could be facing something similar (if we arent already living in it -somedays I think we are).

Not wanting to black pill you, but many of the first settlers to America didn't make past the first few winters.

That's correct Hans, being a trailblazer or pathfinder, doesnt end in glory, it's an unselfish act. I like reading about the American mid west and how States like Colorodo and Utah were opened up. The sacrifices to establish colonies there even in the 1850s were huge. Let alone traversing space and time to a new world, with a billion different things capable of killing you.

>If you were an advanced alien life on a planet dying or running out of resources, which would you do?

Built Ships that are able to mine the Asteroids that are plentiful around your Solar system which were the same ones that created your Planet/Solar System

Because extinction seems like a good option?

You go ahead and continue to be depressed and die. The rest of us will do what humans do best: explore, expand, and improve.

Attached: 66FA5FE1-2163-40A9-8CF4-1FB7CC95A0E8.jpg (400x400, 36K)

Build*

And to your scenario if you really have to leave just do what you mentioned

Having Virtual reality aboard the Ship for people to not go mental, Have a bunch of "Scout" Drones that would have been sent earlier and have some flying with your huge ship which can look for resources that keep you going "mining" these as you go and manufacture the things you need. but then again it would unimaginable efforts but who knows maybe nothing is impossible if the survival of mankind is on the table.

>You go ahead and continue to be depressed and die. The rest of us will do what humans do best: explore, expand, and improve.

I think this is why Mars hasnt been colonized.
It's because it's a Government sponsored program would need to implement to achieve it and anything that could end in failure looks bad on the Government.
When people boarded the Mayflower it wasnt a Government program these were private citizens, their success or likely failure had no impact on political processes.

The establishment of a Mars colony will require a huge toll on life.
If the program is run by the Government they will shut it down to break their reputation.
We need citizen transports and ways of living on the Martian rock, to advance a new way of life. Obviously once we've sacrificed and built up Mars, we can establish an autocratic oppressive government that siphons off huge resources to spy on it's own citizens.

I have the retard today.
I think one word and then type something different.
Is this early Alzheimers?

We will never reach an earth-like planet, user. We don't even travel between earth and the moon regularly. Every nation's space program is a joke. It's all just a big fucking fantasy for atheist scientism to have a version of heaven.

>I think this is why Mars hasnt been colonized.
The question being why you're such an idiot who believes that Mars has to be Colonized???

any attempt to go fast will generate G forces. 450 years for a 40 light year trip isnt possible. you wont survive the first day of the trip and the ship wouldnt survive 450 years anyways. damage over time with collisions with particulate matter would erode the entire hull on the side facing the direction its moving in. like water carving stone into canyons but the velocity of the ship allows for much less dense gas like space dust with small grains of sand like particles to do the job. and lets not even talk about what a small rock sized piece of debris will do at over 600 mph

Because it was designed to take off from Earth, you literal retard. Read the book.
>muh modern design
>muh form follows function
Nu-Jow Forums retardation at its finest.

Honestly even 20%-40% of c would be amazing. It's already a one-way trip for the first people that go interstellar, might as well take it slow and steady and keep the relativistic effects less extreme if close-to-c speeds are truly accessible.
If someone agrees to zooming for 10 years at 0.99c with no way home they're the kind of guy that will agree to zooming for ~30 years at 0.3c anyway.