Live data from Hacker News

Relativistic Spaceship

dmytry.github.io

281–290 of 500 posts

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#281
post #189

I don't care so much about the physics side, it's just so bloody pretty. Is there anything like this that will play infinitely, with similar sliders to tweak the visuals? It'll look so good on an OLED.

According to another comment The author published a few games which include the code this is based off check out "the polynomial" on steam

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#283
post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right. One addendum: many humans would be bothered by one-way trips, but humanity is large, and in absolute numbers there are still plenty of volunteers for one-way trips to the planets and stars.

When talking about how efficient a given reaction mass engine, such as a rocket, can be the unit is specific impulse in seconds. That unit represents how long a given engine carrying a given propellant can maintain 1g acceleration. For context, the most powerful chemical rockets peak around 450s-530s. A nuclear rocket of the sort we can build today would be more than twice that value, and super-efficient ion thruster…

>imagine how many more interesting things they could do with it than fly to nowhere?

Like what?

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, there are plenty of practical problems that would make the trip impossible. The fuel mass alone that would have to be shot out the back to make that trip would be something on the order of 800 million times the mass of the payload (you). So a 100kg person sitting in a 100kg spaceship would require something like 160 billion kg of fuel, assuming zero energy loss in burning the fuel. Relativistic rocket calculato…

Imagine a generation ship, consuming the energy of an entire star for the trip.

Fun thought, we’re kind of all on one right now! Regardless of how you choose to define “human,” we’ve been around for much less time than a single revolution around the Milky Way. We get no say in the route, and our star is feeding us rather than fueling our travel, but still a wild thought.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#285
post #123
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you could somehow make an Alcubierre warp drive. Of course…even if that was possible, it’s conjectured that the colonists already at your destination won’t appreciate you boiling the atmosphere when you hit them with blue shifted radiation. https://www.universetoday.com/93882/warp-drives-may-come-wit...

> it’s conjectured that the colonists already at your destination won’t appreciate you boiling the atmosphere when you hit them with blue shifted radiation. There's a general principle known as Jon's Law (not sure where the name comes from) that any powerful space drive is by definition a weapon of mass destruction. You see this in The Expanse when incredibly powerful fusion torchship rockets (a major part of the Exp…

> Even present-day chemical rockets could be pretty destructive. Get something massive that won't burn up (like a rod of tungsten) up to interplanetary velocities and you can approach the yield of a small tactical nuke from just kinetic energy. This has been studied at least on paper by militaries. I think the phrase "rods from God" was used by DARPA at one point for the rod of tungsten idea.

Also known as "Project Thor", it was devised by Jerry Pournelle before he became a science fiction author. More on various iterations of the concept can be found in Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#286

I had no idea you could achieve relevant amounts of time dilation so "easily" with relatively small (1m/s) of constant thrust - such that interstellar travel becomes somewhat viable provided you can continuously accelerate for the entire trip. Googling it, it would take approximately three years of observed time for a traveller to get to alpha centauri at 1g. Could any somewhat-plausible technologies (fusion etc) get…

Things get more insane the further you go.

After an observed 12 years of constant 1g acceleration, you will be 113,000 lightyears from your point of departure, which is enough distance to cross from earth to the opposite side of our galaxy.

Of course, you are now traveling at 99.999999996% of the speed of light. If you actually wanted to stop at the other side of the galaxy to take a look around, you would need to turn around at the halfway point to decelerate, which roughly doubles the travel time.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#287
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For practical values, nuclear pulse propulsion would only get you up to a few percent of the speed of light. The best nuclear thermal, gas core, would give you 7000 seconds[0]. A "dusty plasma" rocket (suspend the nuclear fuel in dust form in a magnetic field) might get 100,000 seconds, or just over a day of accelerating at 1g. [0] for the benefit of non-space nerds: the unit of measure is "lb-force seconds per lb-ma…

g-seconds then? That seems like a very handy unit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every proton would have the energy of a baseball. It's bananas. Granted, space is really empty, but it's not that empty, somewhere around a hundred atoms per cubic meter. Your ship might look like a very, very long shooting star. Probably dialing the speed down a touch would be worth it for whatever your shielding material is, but who knows? We're talking miracle engines here. I think in the "Valkyrie" ship-on-a-stri…

> Every proton would have the energy of a baseball I wonder if you could capture that energy and use it to generate thrust. Most of the energy is coming from your thrust so it'd be a lossy process however if you're able to capture all of the energy then there won't be anything left to damage the ship.

There's two different kinds of energy here - the kinetic energy of a moving thing hitting you in opposition is a problem. No way to capture that as far as I know - it's like running into a wall and asking how it can help you go faster.

But then there's e=mc^2, so if the stuff you're running into is the fuel source for your fusion engine (could be a fission engine, but unlikely you'll run into heavy atoms like Uranium or Plutonium) then you have an unlimited source of energy...

So maybe sort of? Running into things slows you down, but then you capture that mass and release the energy out of it to go faster... because of the nature of e=mc^2 you'll usually get more energy out of something if you convert its mass than what you lose by running into that mass.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#289
post #286

I had no idea you could achieve relevant amounts of time dilation so "easily" with relatively small (1m/s) of constant thrust - such that interstellar travel becomes somewhat viable provided you can continuously accelerate for the entire trip. Googling it, it would take approximately three years of observed time for a traveller to get to alpha centauri at 1g. Could any somewhat-plausible technologies (fusion etc) get…

Things get more insane the further you go. After an observed 12 years of constant 1g acceleration, you will be 113,000 lightyears from your point of departure, which is enough distance to cross from earth to the opposite side of our galaxy. Of course, you are now traveling at 99.999999996% of the speed of light. If you actually wanted to stop at the other side of the galaxy to take a look around, you would need to tu…

Is there any relativistic bonus that makes deceleration easier? Does it take less energy to go from 0.999C to 0.99C than to go from 0.009C to 0C?

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#290
I had fun with setting the "throttle_value" variable to something insane, like 30 (1 is the max on the slider), to see how close to c you need to travel at for the web app itself to disintegrate.

Apparently, it takes just over two lines of "9"s on a 1920px display for this to happen. The speed wraps back around to zero, and the world time becomes NaN as an added bonus for (nearly) breaking the laws of physics.

Post reply on HN