Live data from Hacker News

Relativistic Spaceship

dmytry.github.io

471–480 of 500 posts

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's clearly not a solvable problem with current ideas about technology. No amount of ice, rock, magnetism, or Magic Unobtanium is going to make this practical. I'm not even sure about warp drives. Bending spacetime one way means it has to squish back the other way. The energy released might not affect the ship - possibly - but I'd be surprised if it didn't affect the spacetime it had just passed through. Some kind o…

Hydrogen is diamagnetic (1) so you’d just need the right level of magnetism to repel it (or slightly redirect it) Or if we shape the field into a buzzard ramjet then you actually take advantage of the interstellar material for fuel. (1) https://sciencing.com/magnetic-properties-hydrogen-7648446.h...

Well, a Bussard ramjet has been shown to have a maximum possible velocity of .12c. No idea if a buzzard version can do better. :)

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#472
post #370
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you managed to avoid matter, at some point, photons will start to become a problem. As you continue to accelerate, eventually, the cosmic microwave background itself will become deadly X-rays.

X-ray sources would turn to gamma rays. Not that it’s any better that X-rays. Other comments suggested lead plates. It would quickly get irradiated and would probably need to get shed as soon as you got to a destination.

No--x-rays will not make anything radioactive. Gamma rays can only do so when they're in the 2GeV range or higher (indirectly, through pair production.)

It's particles that make things radioactive, mostly neutrons as they aren't repelled by the nucleus and thus have a much easier time getting in. And while it would be hard to construct a shield out of it helium is effectively immune to becoming radioactive under neutron bombardment. And while lead isn't immune the reaction sequence produces nothing that won't be contained by the lead and it self-regenerates, enough bombardment returns it to where it started.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#473
post #157
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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. Also known as the Kzinti Lesson, from Larry Niven's Known Space series. I've not read where in that series this term is first introduced, but they're somewhere in all that. > Obviously anything even wilder like an Alcubierre Drive would be likewise Not yet…

Kzinti Lesson is a subclass of Jon's Law.

I'm thinking of the Lensmen series--the stardrive ejects non-interacting particles and thus doesn't tear things up. And since it's inertialess you can't use it to accelerate an impactor. However, you can go grab something that's already moving how you want, slap an inertialess drive on it and reposition it so that when the drive is turned off it's heading for your target. When it's a planet you fling around that can be pretty dangerous. And when it's a FTL planet (everything is Newtonian, this doesn't cause issues other than for the crew--can't allow one atom of native matter into your ship, can't use one atom from your ship in the drive on the planet) the results are spectacular.

(Note that they also have normal reaction drives in the Lensmen universe--the stardrive will get you to your objective but you still need to match velocities with it. And that does tear things up and we see it's use as a weapon, although not against a peer-class opponent.)

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#474
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you define the "important" reference frame as the speed of light's (in the same direction you are going). Since c is universally constant, it seems like a reasonable privileged reference.

In short, a reference frame moving at c is pretty much a logical absurdity, because by definition it would mean having massive objects move at c as well.

The tl;dr is that often one wants to know about an event on the past or future light cone of an initial event, like connecting the detection of a soft X-ray with an inverse Compton scattering at some astrophysical source like a black hole's corona or high-energy galaxy cluster electrons (the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect), where one wants to trace out the evolution of the scattered photon's momentum across cosmological distances. Coordinate systems along the photon's path from the thermal emission source (the black hole accretion disc or the surface of last scattering) can facilitate this. These coordinate systems are reference frames moving at c.

As long as one is working with covariant descriptions of matter, taking a notion like a photon's "affine time" or similar for a classical electromagnetic wave into (signed) momentum imparted to some object on a timelike path (such an object will have rest mass) is straightforward. The justifications mainly originate with Newman & Penrose in the early 1960s.

Here's a nice (and very fresh -- it's an incomplete draft) technical note that details one use of the Newman-Penrose formalism in the flat spacetime of Special Relativity. Note the extract from Chandrasekhar's 1983 textbook in section 7.3 (the author sources from a 1998 reprinted edition). https://astromontgeron.fr/SR-Penrose.pdf> (PDF). The observations in §7.7 and §7.9 would be enough for me, if I hadn't already internalized the ideas further below.

I'll raise a couple of important and noncontroversial points from Jacques Fric's note: a photon -- whose frequency is proportional to its momentum -- oscillates some number of times along its null path lending a useful affine parametrization of the geodesic (photon motion is for all practical purposes always geodesic) that takes into account the spacetime curvature along the geodesic. Deploying the NP formalism in such a situation gives a nice analogy between motion through curved spacetime and motion through a refractive medium. And finally, covariant results in the NP coordinate system are readily interconvertible with covariant results in Minkowski coordinates.

Coordinate systems built along null geodesics -- typically lightlike Fermi-normal coordinates (FNC) -- also find applications in generalizations of the Jacobi equation, geodesic deviation, conjugate points, and so forth.

Now a step back to your comment. Null-basis FNC approaches let one calculate the momentum of a massless force carrier at any point along its evolution from p_{emited} to p_{observed}, and find cosmological applications (redshift of an astrophysical megamaser, the Lyman-alpha forest, etc) and microscopic ones (for the latter see ref [1] at https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/62488/local-iner...>). In reading that stack exchange answer you'll want to know that 'Penrose showed that any [Einsteinian] spacetime [...] has a limit which is a plane wave, which can be thought of as a "first order approximation" to the spacetime along a null geodesic.' (from https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/1-4020-...>).

Pointing to references rooted in string theory and supersymmetry are not endorsements of those families of microscopic theories; they're just the most accessible examples of the practical use of lightlike FNCs for small locally relativistic systems.

So, not a logical absurdity, not useless, and not even especially uncommon.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Skyrim they didn't send Alduin into the end of time, just into the future (also there is going to be an Elder Scrolls VI so V can't be the end of time, but will likely be the end of the fifth era). It was one of the reasons that the Felldir the Old was not onboard with the plan to use the Elder Scroll on Alduin. They didn't know how far into the future he would be sent. Most people on Nirn at the time of Skyrim di…

the unrealistic part of the whole narrative is: in that distant future he returns, another "hero" might step up and just kill him again, so he can't just "destroy all existence", or even Tamriel after some hundreds of years has modern/advanced military tech and will just obliterate a spawning dragon completely. If something can be "killed" by a dude with an axe, it ain't a world-ending superpower for me. I get that A…

I think that is largely a difference between the lore and the gameplay. Alduin in lore literally eats all the matter in existence like a black hole. In the game he kinda goes against his purpose and wants to rule and feed on the souls in Sovngarde.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#476
post #464
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re driving and see a huge patch of the fog suddenly turn red, I would argue you’re seeing break lights not fog. But that gets into definitions not just physics. Similarly, the CMB is energy from the Big Bang as last scattered ~380,000 years later. IMO, that’s the Big Bang, but reasonable people can obviously disagree.

Everything is energy from the big bang, including you and me. But the photons of the CMB don’t represent anything that already existed immediately after the big bang. Protons and neutrons and hydrogen and helium were created in between, and inflation (probably) happened in between. The universe at the time of last scattering was a whole different world than a split-second after the big bang.

The Big Bang generally refers not simply to the instant the universe was created but an early high energy state. The term had long been in use before it was discovered that there needed to be an initial singularity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Big_Bang_theory

Or as an astrophysicist said ~”You can refer to the Big Bang as the first instant or a fairly arbitrary period after that initial event. The universe cooling down enough for matter is just as reasonable an end as the universe cooling down for atoms.”

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#477
post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re doing 2e8 m/s, your ship is long and thin with a 1m3 nose cone, and space has 100 baseballs per m3 then you’re being hit by 2e10 baseballs a second. How do I get an idea for what 20 billion baseballs (2TJ) feels like? Apparently bullets are about an order of magnitude more energetic than baseballs (800J vs 80J) so I guess I could try to build my intuition based on being shot ~2 billion times a second instea…

Could you repeatedly send disposable ‘dozer’ drone ships towards your destination to help clear the way, and potentially devise a means of keeping the clearing free of stray atoms?

No, interstellar atoms (or other particles) aren't static, they aren't just hanging in one place. Everything is moving. Some particles are moving very fast.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#478
post #357
post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re doing 2e8 m/s, your ship is long and thin with a 1m3 nose cone, and space has 100 baseballs per m3 then you’re being hit by 2e10 baseballs a second. How do I get an idea for what 20 billion baseballs (2TJ) feels like? Apparently bullets are about an order of magnitude more energetic than baseballs (800J vs 80J) so I guess I could try to build my intuition based on being shot ~2 billion times a second instea…

There we go again, Americans using anything but the metric system :) scnr

I’m British with, funnily enough, a Duke’s County cricket ball on my desk.

My nephew is Californian and I gave him one for his sixth birthday. Mine felt a bit lighter so we did an experiment over Zoom together to measure the density. He’s certainly a bit young for that — “it’s the same size but yours is heavier” — but there’s no harm in influencing them from an early age.

Of relevance to your comment: I made a point of doing it in grams and millimetres.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#479
post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As humanity becomes more numerous and richer, the fraction of humanity you need that have such strange ideas and desire keeps shrinking. (Btw, I share your intuition that the number of people willing to sign up for a one-way trip to the stars, or even just Mars, is fairly low. However, if you already look at people who are dedicated enough to become astronauts, I suspect the additional filter of asking for one-way-tr…

> 10-20% of current astronauts would be willing to sign up. Astronauts seem to me to have a higher propensity for kookiness than the general population. You may be right.

Yes. There's currently way more people who want to be astronauts, than people who can be astronauts. So you get some extreme selection effects; and those tend to bring out weird people.

Re: Relativistic Spaceship

#480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The radius of the sun is about 696,340 km Arguably, the entire heliosphere is part of the Sun's atmosphere, and it reaches well beyond Pluto. If I were in a relativistic spaceship, I think I'd want to apply the brakes well before slamming into the heliosphere. What do you call the heliosphere of a star that isn't the Sun? The stellosphere?

Replying to self (sorry). "Stellosphere" is wrong, because "stella" is Latin, and "sphere" is from Greek. It should be "asterosphere", but that's a word I've never seen nor heard.

We have been mixing up Latin and Greek for quite a few terms already, so I don't think that should keep you from using a term.
Post reply on HN