Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if FTL is achievable (which I agree, highly unlikely), it's still extraordinarily slow on cosmic scales. The closest star is a little over 4 ly away! And probing the universe outside the Milky Way? Forget about it.
1. if FTL is achievable, then presumably it isn't limited to 1.00000000001 x C 2. I like to think about the size of the universe by always remembering that with the naked eye, on a good night, there's only a single object in the entire night sky that isn't in our galaxy (M3, the Andromeda Galaxy).
First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
251–260 of 330 posts
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even on that scale, major roads and agricultural grids are clearly visible. The mark of abstract intelligence is unmistakeable.
Well, they would see the I-35 out of Houston, but that would show them no sign of intelligence. Just signs of corruption
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on who you mean as "we". The speed of light isn't a speed limit. If you can create a ship that is capable of 1g acceleration, it doesn't just stop accelerating as it reaches the speed of light relative to some stationary object, like Earth. Instead you start getting relativistic effects and things start getting very weird with time and distance doing some funky stuff. You keep zooming along just fine from you…
> If you can create a ship that is capable of 1g acceleration, it doesn't just stop accelerating as it reaches the speed of light For any object with nonzero rest mass, reaching exactly the speed of light in vacuum would require infinite energy.
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#25448 light years is in our back yard. Close enough that we could probably develop a probe to get there in the next few centuries and check it out. What are the current popular candidates for propulsion systems capable of accelerating to near the speed of light?
Just going to recycle this comment I made in reply to an almost identical comment as yours. I don't think you folks realize how big space actually is. The speed of light is 1079 252 848 km/h, the fastest space craft ever made was the Parker Solar probe (using a sling shot) clocking in at 692 000 km/h. So at that speed it would take, 1559 years to travel one light year. This planet sits at a distance of 48 light years…
What kinds of scientific breakthroughs would be required? Could those breakthroughs be achieved in the next 2 or 3 centuries?
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we’re talking about human technology available in a few hundred years, don’t discount far more exotic options. I’ve heard people talk of theoretical terrestrial lasers pushing on tiny probes. With an absolutely gigantic laser and magical material at the back of the probe that won’t instantly vaporize there’s enough energy to get something the size of a smartphone up to a reasonable proportion of the speed of light…
Exactly. Imagine what would be possible after a billion year of technological evolution, heck even just 100'000 years. We already know that space time metric engineering is theoretically possible within our current understanding of physics, we don't have either the technology or access to energy density necessary to do it. And that's only within our limited understanding of how the universe works.
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on who you mean as "we". The speed of light isn't a speed limit. If you can create a ship that is capable of 1g acceleration, it doesn't just stop accelerating as it reaches the speed of light relative to some stationary object, like Earth. Instead you start getting relativistic effects and things start getting very weird with time and distance doing some funky stuff. You keep zooming along just fine from you…
Relativistic starships are impossible because they require impossible amounts of fuel. "If you can create a ship that is capable of 1g acceleration" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. The rocket equation means you need to take along exponentially increasing amounts of fuel Even antimatter rockets top out at 50% of light speed. Laser boost like with Dyson Swarm could get similar speeds because time dilation slows down t…
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s highly unlikely we’re ever getting FTL. We should become comfortable with that and let go our fantasies. Let theoretical physicists chug away at this, we should get underway with projects that are possible with known science.
We are still so slow and have had space travel for so little time, we are almost certainly on the "wait" side of the wait equation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wait_Equation
I love it.
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
The host star is described as very inactive, which probably accounts for the retention of atmosphere.
A really powerful magnetic field could help, also. Without our field, we would be in trouble, too.
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#259I think we should focus at the solution of Fermi paradox, especially the short time window factor. Life on earth evolved for billions of years, while one of it's creatures is capable to receive/send messages to space for only 50. That leads to a factor of billions/50 reduction at the calculated probability of alien life discovery. Multiply that with another billions/xxx at the receiver side, if they are similarly abl…
Re: First atmosphere found on Earth-like planet in habitable zone of distant star
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
A really powerful magnetic field could help, also. Without our field, we would be in trouble, too.
This is false. Earth's magnetic field does not significantly impact atmospheric loss. For comparison, Venus is closer to the sun and has no magnetic field, but has a substantially thicker atmosphere than earth.