Interstellar colonisation.

Fourier · 21-11-2017 10:27pm

Nice grounded video.

Fathom · 04-12-2017 5:28pm

Portland State University anthropologist Cameron Smith suggests sending 20 to 40 thousand for interstellar colony. Genetic and demographic diversity key to adaptation and survival.

Rubecula · 05-12-2017 12:55pm

That ties in with my own idea of 30,000 quite nicely.

No I have no idea here I got the figure from either.

Fathom · 05-12-2017 4:23pm

Planet or worldship? Ashworth, S. (2012) in The Emergence of the Worldship: The Shift from Planet-Based to Space-Based Civilization, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, vol. 65, p. 140-154, suggests "The more credible options for human interstellar flight are the multi-generation cruiser and worldship, in either case requiring the construction of an artificial mobile world-like environment for the sustainable support of a town- to city-sized community of travelers."

Rubecula · 05-12-2017 4:53pm

I was thinking of suspended sleep in a ship to a destination but 30,000 would be my lower limit, occasional rotation of crew with return to sleep every so often.

Fathom · 05-12-2017 5:05pm

Worldship? Too small for thousands.

Capt'n Midnight · 05-12-2017 9:56pm

Fathom wrote: »

Worldship? Too small for thousands.

Daedalus isn't a world ship. Has a payload of 450 tonnes. Only about three times as much as the Saturn V beside it. Also no passengers and no stopping.

Fathom · 06-12-2017 11:32pm

NASA faster than light spaceship design? ixs-enterprise41-Jun.-11-14.40.jpg

Fathom · 13-12-2017 4:57pm

Rubecula · 13-04-2018 8:37pm

if a mission will take longer than the lifespan of the crew then perhaps we should only go by proxy.

Capt'n Midnight · 13-04-2018 11:00pm

Mammals are bad at that.

Most other animals can be stored as eggs.
Crows and Squid ?

Fathom · 14-04-2018 12:01am

Rubecula wrote: »

if a mission will take longer than the lifespan of the crew then perhaps we should only go by proxy.

Robots?

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Mammals are bad at that. Most other animals can be stored as eggs. Crows and Squid ?

AI crows and squid?

ED E · 14-04-2018 12:06am

I've always thought that will be the jumping off point. Build a "drone" producing facility in earth/lunar/martian orbit. Find way to feed it supplies effectively (anything we can get from space dust/asteroids we do). Produce drones at send them out like buckshot.

Proceed like this for x years until we have a large range comms net with sensor data trickling back about loads of stellar bodies. When thats done start pushing out drones with re-entry shields to land and get surface readings on interesting bodies. From there: terraforming.

By the time we send any humans anywhere there should be a veritable army of automated units preparing for them.

Fathom · 14-04-2018 12:14am

ED E wrote: »

I've always thought that will be the jumping off point. Build a "drone" producing facility in earth/lunar/martian orbit. Find way to feed it supplies effectively (anything we can get from space dust/asteroids we do). Produce drones at send them out like buckshot. Proceed like this for x years until we have a large range comms net with sensor data trickling back about loads of stellar bodies. When thats done start pushing out drones with re-entry shields to land and get surface readings on interesting bodies. From there: terraforming. By the time we send any humans anywhere there should be a veritable army of automated units preparing for them.

A plausible space exploration policy. Funding is problematic. Profits from expanding space exploration? Perhaps mine and ship rare minerals with high return on investment?

Capt'n Midnight · 14-04-2018 12:30am

Fathom wrote: »

A plausible space exploration policy. Funding is problematic. Profits from expanding space exploration? Perhaps mine and ship rare minerals with high return on investment?

Most of the platinum group metals on earth are the result of asteroids as the primordial heavy metals sank deeper in earths crust back in the day.

All the gold ever mined would fit in a 20m cube, and then someone goes and finds billions of tonnes of the stuff, price would drop and with it the economics.

You could mine Helium-3 on the Moon like in the film Moon but if you have the technology to do that then you'd probably have enough solar power not to need it.

Once there were even mad cap schemes to mine titanium on the moon but then they realised that you'd need heat shields for re-entry to land it. Otherwise you'd probably end up with lots of titanium dioxide. It's the stuff that makes everything white from pain to pills.

sophiewilson · 14-04-2018 2:26pm

I do think it is far from reality.
But if we can just find another Earth it can be done slowly.
We already found another galaxy so finding a new Earth is possible.

Capt'n Midnight · 14-04-2018 5:57pm

sophiewilson wrote: »

I do think it is far from reality.
But if we can just find another Earth it can be done slowly.
We already found another galaxy so finding a new Earth is possible.

We don't need another galaxy yet.

http://sci.esa.int/gaia/60146-how-many-stars-to-expect-in-gaia-s-second-data-release/

The much awaited second release of Gaia data will contain the position and brightness on the sky of 1 692 919 135 stars, as well as measurements of the parallax and proper motion of 1 331 909 727 stars.

...

The second Gaia data release will also include a wide range of additional information: the colours of 1.38 billion stars [1]; the radial velocities of 7 224 631 stars; information about 550 737 variable sources; an estimate of the surface temperature for 161 497 595 stars, the extinction – a measure of the amount of dust along the line of sight – for 87 733 672 stars, and the radius and luminosity of 76 956 778 stars.

Closer to home, the new data set will contain the position of 14 099 known Solar System objects – mostly asteroids – based on more than 1.5 million observations.

TBH the 14,099 solar system objects are he only places we could reach within our lifetime but plenty of materials to build habitats.

Also if you are building a generation ship then taking an asteroid full of raw materials with you might not be the worst option.

Fathom · 16-04-2018 2:52am

sophiewilson wrote: »

We already found another galaxy so finding a new Earth is possible.

Big Bang aside. If space is infinite, then chances are another "Earth is possible?"

Rubecula · 17-04-2018 2:53am

if the universe is infinite then the earth and every person who has ever lived is also infinite,
as are/is every possible outcome.

Fathom · 19-04-2018 7:10pm

Rubecula wrote: »

if the universe is infinite then the earth and every person who has ever lived is also infinite, as are/is every possible outcome.

I need coffee to answer this one Rubecula.

Black Swan · 21-04-2018 12:48pm

Using the Drake Equation, it has been estimated that life exists from 1 (only Earth) to billions of chances elsewhere.

Source:
Jason Marshall (2017), What Is the Probability That Alien Life Exists? Scientific American.

Fathom · 21-04-2018 7:14pm

Drake Equation would thrill Mathematics forum!

Rubecula · 21-04-2018 10:40pm

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/wwfeatures/wm/live/1280_720/images/live/p0/64/ld/p064ld85.jpg

a little off topic but not starting a new thread for one post.

Capt'n Midnight · 21-04-2018 11:00pm

Black Swan wrote: »

Using the Drake Equation, it has been estimated that life exists from 1 (only Earth) to billions of chances elsewhere.

We have better values for some of the factors in the Drake equation.
But some of the other values could still be zero or as close as makes no difference even in a large universe.

Title text: Statistics suggest that there should be tons of alien encounter stories, and in practice there are tons of alien encounter stories. This is known as Fermi's Lack-of-a-Paradox.

Capt'n Midnight · 21-04-2018 11:07pm

Rubecula wrote: »

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/wwfeatures/wm/live/1280_720/images/live/p0/64/ld/p064ld85.jpg

a little off topic but not starting a new thread for one post.

Back when the UK could launch satellites.

Like the original US Atlas missile it's so lightly constructed the tanks have to be kept pressurised to stop it collapsing under it's own weight.

Rubecula · 21-04-2018 11:24pm

fuel tanks made from kitchen foil (almost) wonderful memories. I wonder why Ireland with it's Atlantic coast does not partner UK in this project.

Capt'n Midnight · 21-04-2018 11:53pm

Rubecula wrote: »

fuel tanks made from kitchen foil (almost) wonderful memories. I wonder why Ireland with it's Atlantic coast does not partner UK in this project.

Because you get 1,000kmph by flying eastwards due to the Earth's rotation.

Israel launches it's satellites Eastwards because of the neighbours, so they have to go a wee bit faster to get to orbit.

Down in New Zealand there's less shipping and less neighbours so more launching directions for different orbits.

For equatorial orbits French Guiana is ideally placed as it's very close to the equator so maximum boost.

Rubecula · 22-04-2018 1:33am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Because you get 1,000kmph by flying eastwards due to the Earth's rotation.

Israel launches it's satellites Eastwards because of the neighbours, so they have to go a wee bit faster to get to orbit.

Down in New Zealand there's less shipping and less neighbours so more launching directions for different orbits.

For equatorial orbits French Guiana is ideally placed as it's very close to the equator so maximum boost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_Engines_A2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)

Capt'n Midnight · 22-04-2018 5:29pm

Rubecula wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_Engines_A2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)

I can remember Skylon when it was Hotol :pac:

HOTOL development was conducted from 1982 to 1986 before the British government withdrew funding. From 1988 http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1988/1988%20-%200537.pdf the big differences since then are they've moved the engines closer to the centre of gravity and some changes in the way air is cooled.

One of the tricks they used to keep weight down was to use water cooled brakes for take off. As it would be a lot lighter when landing they wouldn't need to cool the brakes so the weighty water was to be dumped as soon as it lifted off the runway.

Materials technology is now at the stage where we could consider space elevators for the Moon and Mars so we could build colony vessels there and not have to worry about this gravity well for the heavy stuff, and use asteroids for the really heavy stuff.

Fathom · 23-04-2018 6:37pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Materials technology is now at the stage where we could consider space elevators for the Moon and Mars so we could build colony vessels there and not have to worry about this gravity well for the heavy stuff, and use asteroids for the really heavy stuff.

To clear Moon's atmosphere? Mars?

Interstellar colonisation.

Comments