My other blogs are:
-
No discoveries in the past 100 years have yet to prove any realistic improvement in the chances of realistic space flight, but rather the opposite, as Einstein stated that objects with large amounts of mass basically stood no chance of even coming close to light speed, which would make space travel almost not worth the undertaking. For a spaceship such as Project Daedalus (see my article "Project Daedalus: Possibility or Hubris?" located on the right >>>), it'd have a weight of 54,000 tonnes (119 million lbs.), and this was the most realistic and smallest spacecraft yet theorized. Theoretically it could reach 12% light speed (80,473,995.516 mph; 81 million) after 2 years of nonstop acceleration, but how could it possibly accelerate for 2 years continuously? There's simply too many obstacles that would have to be avoided quickly, and I can only imagine what would happen if the pilots suddenly jerked the wheel of a ten million tonne vessel at 81 million miles per hour. However, it is fairly aunanimously agreed that even Daedalus' 81 million mph is very slow speed-- in fact, by comparison it'd be far slower than watching a snail crawl across the entire Earth. Yet because of Einstein even this snail-slow speed may not be possible to attain, as cosmic rays and atoms have the collision force of thermonuclear bombs. To make this slow slow speed safely attainable at all the ship itself would either need a powerful shield (most likely being an enormous fusion powered electromagnet to deionize incoming atoms and rays) or have a hull that can withstand the explosive forces of Earth's mightiest bombs for centuries on end. Not years either, but at least centuries, for even at 81 million mph it'd still take several human lifetimes to travel to even some of the nearest planets outside of our Solar System, and many human generations- even epochs, to reach the nearest stars. Now, without a shield the ship itself would become nothing more than a light show because it seems more likely that even a powerful hull would wear down very quickly or jostle things loose on the ship. After all, when I think of bombs I usually think of Hiroshima.
-
For the past several decades, Einstein's theories on special and general relativity hampered any hopes of any practical space travel outside of our solar system, let alone exoplanetary, interstellar, or intergalactic space travel. The nearest exoplanets to Earth would take decades and centuries to reach at 12% light speed. The thing is though, we can see them just fine from here with our telescopes... we know that they're not worth visiting. Most of them are hotter than open flames or colder than Antarctica or have the gravity of 10 Earth's. In fact, the saddest part is, we can see stellar objects very clearly even at hundreds of light years away with our fancy telescopes but have yet to find a single planet worth colonizing. Mars still seems like the best bet, as it is only a shor trip days away at our current tiny 35,000 mph, but most astronomers and astrophysicists prefer their corny fantasies of space travel someday. Now because of these mega-distances, even at light speed the planets and stars well inside of our own galaxy would take thousands times thousands of years just to reach if we made a bee-line for them. As if any space pilot is going to set his course for destination "A" and never stop nor ever change course ever at all for thousands of years times thousands of years. It's silly.
 |
| The Milky Way arch emerging from the Cerro Paranal, in Chile, on the left, and sinking into the Antofagasta's night lights. The bright object in the center, above the Milky Way is Jupiter! |
For example, our galaxy is called the Milky Way galaxy and is merely one of hundreds of billions of galaxies, most of which are 20,000 to 300,000 light years in diameter (each taking eons to traverse). Now I've had people ask me how long a light year is, which is simply this: A year for light to travel anywhere in a vacuum, such as outer space. This speed just happens to have a finite measurement of 670,616,629.3843951 mph (671 million mph), compared to Daedalus' 81 million mph. As another example: With our galaxy being 120,000 light years in diameter, it would obviously take any object at light speed 120,000 years to traverse from end to end (although the shape may enable you to leave it much faster, shaving off a few thousand decades), which is a mind boggling total of 705,435,044,782,032,000 miles (7.054×1017) or 705 quadrillion miles, which is the same distance as traveling from our Earth to the Sun 7,585,323,063 times or 7.5 billion times. At Project Daedalus' speed of basically 81 million mph it'd take 8,766,000,001 years to traverse our galaxy from end to end, and another 10,000,000,000 years to reach our next nearest galaxy.
 |
| Milky Way |
-
And because I love nailing down the head, here's one final example: To reach one of our nearest neighboring galaxies, the Andromeda Galaxy, we'd have to travel 2,500,000 light years. Now that's about 14,696,563,432,959,000,000 miles away and would take a beam of massless light 2 1/2 million years to reach at the top speed of the universe, no less. Let's say we can go 1700c. That's 1,104,170,400,000 mph. That journey would still take 13,310,050.2 hours of travel time, which is 1,518.4 years. Do you see now? This is why humanity will never be more than ants. Even at 1,700 times the speed of light we could not even make it to the next closest galaxy within a millennium, it'd still take years of nonstop travel and stupid speeds that obviously cannot happen.
-
-
-
Anyone wanna invest in Stargate technology? If you donate $1 you get a wristband!! YES!!
-
-
If you loved this uplifting article on hopeless pursuits in astronomy then you'd love my article called INTERPLANETARY TRAVEL that you can click it on top of the right hand side of your screen>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No comments:
Post a Comment