Travelling To The Next Star

[All Seeing Eye]

Really, is that all? Wow, the distance to the Alpha Centauri system is only 41.5 trillion km. At 12 km/s, it will only take 11,000 years to get there!! Let's get started!!!!

(Someone check my math on that, please.)

Getting the Moon out of planetary orbit and beyond the Suns gravitational pull is the tricky part. Once it is out of the solar system more thrust can be added increasing the Moons speed so it gets there quicker and the length of the journey involved is why an object the size of a small Moon will be required. There is no way a generational ship could make a trip to the next star, it simply could not sustain an increasing population and increasing resource depletion.

Sending a Moon colony to the next Star is the best method. The colony can expand, adapt and develop on the journey there. Once there it can locate another rocky Planet or Moon to spread to.

Why send a ship to another star system to try and start a colony which could fail when you can create the colony and send the colony there instead. By arriving at the destination with a fully developed colony it makes the job of creating new colonies at the destination star much easier.

You could knock a Moon out of it's orbit by adding only 1 Newton of force and we could easily add more than that.

You want to push a moon out of its orbit by applying 1 N of force?

No. Where do I say I want to knock a Moon out of orbit with 1 Newton of force? I was simply stating a fact that that's all you would need.
I said clearly "and we could easily add more than that". Meaning we'd knock it out of orbit with a lot more than 1 Newton of force.

 

[Trekker4747]

I Am Legend, we're not living in a "Tom and Jerry" cartoon.

Don't be too sure. A lot of his ideas are pulled right out of hammerspace.

Oooo. I like the esoterics of your word-use.

---

Ok. 1N of force, we'll go with it. Sure, it'd take a long time to do anything with it but let's go further and say it's several 1000 N's of force, again, it'd still take a lifetime to do anything with it, but let's run with it.

How are you going to apply this force evenly throughout the moon's surface? So that it doesn't just crumble apart like the ball of comparitvely loosely packed dirt, rock, and ice that it is?

And again, if you're a society with the capabilities to even begin to take on the venture of pushing a moon out of orbit and use it as spaceship and you're a society that can do this without the moon crumbling apart and you can get the moving moving at any useful speed to be used as an intersystem ship and you're a society that can survive in a frozen rock moving through space (not being under the influence of a star is going to quickly reduce any habitabilty of the surface to zero) then you're probably a society that can much more easily simply build large spaceship.

Like all of your ideas this one is taking some idea and going way, way, to far and big with it for no other reason than spectacle. In your mind it'd "simply be cool" to use a moon as a spaceship no matter how impractical it is.

Why would a society use a moon-sized object as a spaceship when they could simply just built a spaceship?! Hell, it'd be easier to simply build a Death Star and use that mass, that can be built more solid and "together" than a moon is than to try and push a moon out of orbit!

Stop getting your ideas from cartoons.

 

[Hofner]

Instead of "Tom and Jerry" these threads often makes me think of Wile E. Coyote always buildng ACME products to catch the elusive Roadrunner. I see a bunch of ACME rockets being used to rocket Rhea out of orbit and speeding towards the next star only to smack into Neptune.

Robert

 

[Alpha_Geek]

...Sending a Moon colony to the next Star is the best method...

You forgot to add "In my completely unqualified opinion and by throwing all laws of physics out the window, with common sense right on its tail".

Got your camera ready for Jan 1, 2013?

 

[Australis]

Engines. Engines will be a big part of this.

A Moon of any kind is simply too massive. And a ship of some kind is too fragile and small.

Compromise (and often discussed in SF): an asteroid, hollowed out and fitted with engines. Raw materials (if the right metal asteroid is chosen), able to expand by further hollowing, protection from more dangerous space events, smaller engines required.

I never watched Space 1999, it was way too silly. They could never have got the Moon to travel at plus light speeds for a starter. Or the journey out of the Solar System would take 20 or 30 years alone. To get to the nearest star, thousands of years.

 

[Trekker4747]

Engines. Engines will be a big part of this.

A Moon of any kind is simply too massive.

Dude! It's in space! It's weightless! You can move it with a simple push!

 

[Australis]

Ahhh, you've been reading EE Doc Smith's Lensman books, where they have an inertialess drive. Well, that shouldn't be hard to build!

 

[O'Dib]

length of the journey involved is why an object the size of a small Moon will be required. There is no way a generational ship could make a trip to the next star, it simply could not sustain an increasing population and increasing resource depletion.

Dude, you use a spaceship precisely because of the time involved in pushing a FUCKING moon to the next star (and because you're not crazy enough to think of using a moon in the first place). Developing competent cryo tech and/or near light engines is far easier to achieve than riding a FUCKING moon to the stars. And how about this, DON'T have an increasing population in the first place! And regrow food!

Sending a Moon colony to the next Star is the best method. The colony can expand, adapt and develop on the journey there. Once there it can locate another rocky Planet or Moon to spread to.

Because the cold dead of space sure is conductive to growth.

Why send a ship to another star system to try and start a colony which could fail when you can create the colony and send the colony there instead. By arriving at the destination with a fully developed colony it makes the job of creating new colonies at the destination star much easier.

Umm.. well, it's cheaper and less potentially wasteful of human life to build a ship and send a few people than a whole FUCKING moon with a million poor souls who'll likely die! Also, if you develop a colony in this solar system, why would you wanna nuke it into the next one in the first place?

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Dude, you use a spaceship precisely because of the time involved in pushing a FUCKING moon to the next star (and because you're not crazy enough to think of using a moon in the first place). Developing competent cryo tech and/or near light engines is far easier to achieve than riding a FUCKING moon to the stars. And how about this, DON'T have an increasing population in the first place! And regrow food!

Because the cold dead of space sure is conductive to growth.

Umm.. well, it's cheaper and less potentially wasteful of human life to build a ship and send a few people than a whole FUCKING moon with a million poor souls who'll likely die! Also, if you develop a colony in this solar system, why would you wanna nuke it into the next one in the first place?

What's with all the swearing?

Let me answer a few of your points.

1) They aren't in the cold dead of space, they will be deep inside a Moon with resources and technology to keep themselves warm.

2) The reason why the colony would be sent to the next star is to spread Humanity through the Galaxy. Better to have a Human colony away from our home system just incase anything happens.

Having the colony expand and build further on the journey to the next system ensures survival.
By the time we could accomplish something like this we will no doubt have the capability to see what planets other stars have and the makeup of those planets so we will know exactly where to send it.

I do not see Humans ever developing FTL propulsion. Travelling to neighbouring star will be generational and a ship just will not cut it, a Moon colony however would.

We currently cannot terraform a planet but when the time comes it could take hundreds of years maybe longer to try and make it Earth like, does that mean we should not do it?? just because it may take a while to get one of the small Moons out of orbit of it's parent star does not mean it should not be done nor does it make the idea stupid.

Ok. 1N of force, we'll go with it. Sure, it'd take a long time to do anything with it but let's go further and say it's several 1000 N's of force, again, it'd still take a lifetime to do anything with it, but let's run with it.

How are you going to apply this force evenly throughout the moon's surface? So that it doesn't just crumble apart like the ball of comparitvely loosely packed dirt, rock, and ice that it is?

There's no way a solid object like a Moon is going to start falling to pieces just because you start to speed it up gradually.

And again, if you're a society with the capabilities to even begin to take on the venture of pushing a moon out of orbit and use it as spaceship and you're a society that can do this without the moon crumbling apart and you can get the moving moving at any useful speed to be used as an intersystem ship and you're a society that can survive in a frozen rock moving through space (not being under the influence of a star is going to quickly reduce any habitabilty of the surface to zero) then you're probably a society that can much more easily simply build large spaceship.

But I've already explained why using a Moon benefits more greatly than a spaceship. One comet and the ship is history.

Why would a society use a moon-sized object as a spaceship when they could simply just built a spaceship?!

I wrote an entire post HERE detailing WHY the Moon would be more useful than a spaceship.

 

[O'Dib]

It's just how I feel when moons are involved.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

It's just how I feel when moons are involved.

You posted pretty quickly, I was editing and expanding on my post so if you haven't read it I suggest you re-look because I've addressed some of your points.

 

[O'Dib]

2) The reason why the colony would be sent to the next star is to spread Humanity through the Galaxy. Better to have a Human colony away from our home system just incase anything happens.

Before humanity considers expanding to the stars, they would colonize this system. I find it unlikely they would hurl perfectly good rocks at other systems if they have a way of surviving on them w/o moving them.

Having the colony expand and build further on the journey to the next system ensures survival.
By the time we could accomplish something like this we will no doubt have the capability to see what planets other stars have and the makeup of those planets so we will know exactly where to send it.

Yes, we'll know which stars have rocky planets, so we don't need to send more.

I do not see Humans ever developing FTL propulsion. Travelling to neighbouring star will be generational and a ship just will not cut it, a Moon colony however would.

I was talking about a fraction of the speed of light. The energy required would be immense, but far less than what it takes to push a moon. And with the time warp thing happening, you'd get there within the astronauts' lifetimes, as opposed to hundreds of generations later. So, you'd have specialists trained for this sort of thing starting a colony, rather than their atrophied cave descendants. Because, surviving under ground for generations does nothing to prepare you for surface dwelling.

We currently cannot terraform a planet but when the time comes it could take hundreds of years maybe longer to try and make it Earth like, does that mean we should not do it?? just because it may take a while to get one of the small Moons out of orbit of it's parent star does not mean it should not be done nor does it make the idea stupid.

A moon traveling between systems is not exactly the most manouverable spacecraft. W/o comet clearing gas giants, one impact could collapse your entire cave system.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

...Travelling to neighbouring star will be generational and a ship just will not cut it...

So, it's Taccy versus Bova, Heinlein, et al? Sorry pal, I gotta side with Heinlein.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

You are all stubborn in your way of thinking. If a well known highly qualified scientist and astronomer suggested what I'm suggesting with this Moon I have a feeling you would all back the idea and say it was the greatest idea.
You're not willing to consider alternatives which would work better than a built generational ship.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

You are all stubborn in your way of thinking. If a well known highly qualified scientist and astronomer suggested what I'm suggesting with this Moon I have a feeling you would all back the idea and say it was the greatest idea.
You're not willing to consider alternatives which would work better than a built generational ship.

I Am Legend, you continue this argument:
- because you don't want want to recognize your argument is non-sense regardless of its weakness;
- you're so airheaded you actually beleive your Moon idea makes sense;
- because you consider yourself a genius who can think no wrong and being proved so completely wrong is a huge blow to your self-esteeem - in which case, let me tell you, this "ideea" and genius have nothing in common.

PS:
No scientist worth his name would ever propose/endorse something like this for the simple reasons that it's impractical and, if done, would offer only disadvantages.

 

[Squiggy]

You are all stubborn in your way of thinking. If a well known highly qualified scientist and astronomer suggested what I'm suggesting with this Moon I have a feeling you would all back the idea and say it was the greatest idea.

Well, yeah. They'd be well known highly qualified scientists and astronomers as you are not. You're just a "guy" on a message board with a tenuous if not non-existent grasp on the fundamentals on science.

But "if" they did, they'd back it up with science and other fancy things that would make us go "hm" and not claim that we could knock Rhea out of orbit with 1 newton of force, strap a rocket to it, and ride it into the great unknown.

 

[O'Dib]

Guys, I'm calling bullshit. These threads are a joke. I bet Tach is pissing his pants laughing at how seriously we argue with idiocy, right about now.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Guys, I'm calling bullshit. These threads are a joke.

That's what you believe because you are incapable of thinking outside the box.
I've explained the benefits of my idea and how it surpasses building a mere ship, I've even explained what's required to get it out of orbit. I have proven this idea is capable of being accomplished.

You are ignoring everything I have said. A generational ship is limited in scope, can sustain only a certain number of people and would have no additional resources to tap into and would be susceptible to cosmic forces.

A Moon Colony being sent to another star has the following benefits:

1. Protection from radiation and comet/asteroid impacts.
2. Enough water for an enormous continually growing population.
3. Enough space to expand the colony.
4. Enough surface area to build telescopes and other deep space research equipment.
5. Enough resources to expand the colony, build new things and fix old things.
6. Enough resources to allow the colony once it arrives at it's destination to transfer materials and equipment to more easily colonise a planet or other Moon.
7. The Moon is so large compared to a mere ship it could store enough equipment, food and whatever else you can think of for the lengthy journey as well as vast lengths of hydroponics bays.
8. Enough space to store fuel, fuel converters, nuclear material and whatever else needs storing.
9. Enough space to build multiple factory and manufacturing complexes.

 

[O'Dib]

Well argued, sir. I have seen the error of my ways, and now fully support this idea. I propose it first be tested with a leprechaun colony. Keep up the good idea work, I'm sure NASA recruiters frequent these boards.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

I think we should wait a while until something of this scale be implemented. For starters we need fusion rockets or better yet matter/anti-matter rockets.