Mission to stars with (known) planets

[qso1]

BarryKirk:<br />What size apperture or possibly synthetic aperture <br />would be needed to directly resolve earth size planets out to say 100 light years?<br /><br />Me:<br />Its been my experience as of late that this depends on what source the information comes from. At one time, a P.I. for Hubble said that Hubble had at least a 50-50 chance of sighting planets around other stars. So far this has not happened with Hubble, at least nothing that is without doubt a planet, has been confirmed.<br /><br />Ground based telescopes such as Keck and ESO are said to be capable of the task once they become full blown interferometers. Another ground based telescope is currently in the early design phase and it is said this one will be able to directly image planets around nearby stars.<br /><br />There are those who say only a space telescope can do the job. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[Aetius]

Your future settlers could build orbital colonies where it makes sense, to facilitate trade and manufacturing, which would be at least as comfortable as any city with a blue sky. Cities built beneath domes, in lava tubes, or in craters on uninhabited worlds could also be quite beautiful and luxurious.<br /><br />Earthlike worlds are deathtraps that my people would avoid like the plague. First off, the chances are that any world <i>like</i> the Earth will still be substantially different. Even if it's got a rich, complex biosphere, even if it <i>looks</i> like Earth...it's not.<br /><br />The alien air pressure and the makeup of the atmosphere may very well require human colonists to live inside domed habitat areas anyway, and use environment suits outside. Even the temperature extremes might not be too well suited for species homo.<br /><br />The other, and more pressing concern, is contamination. It would take centuries to catalog the different species of microbes on an Earthlike world, in order to determine which ones will be lethal to humans and the Terran ecosystem we'll need to bring with us to survive.<br /><br />Even if the colonists of some Earth analog world don't contract some fatal alien disease against which their Terran immune systems are defenseless, something just as bad could happen. Humans (and the animals we'll need to bring along) have thousands of species of microbes in their fecal matter. Any one of those could trigger an ecological holocaust on the world we want to make our new home.<br /><br />No thanks.<br /><br />If I was the only member of the human race who actually <i>knew</i> where there was some twin planet of the Earth, I wouldn't even tell a soul. That planet needs us coming to visit like Earth needs a nuclear war.<br /><br />I'd stick with uninhabited worlds and orbital colonies.<br /><br />Earthlike = Not Worth The Trouble<br /><br />Maybe that's why the space aliens haven't paid us a visit. I sure as heck wouldn't. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif"></img>

 

[qso1]

Good points, one of which I had to consider while I was writing about going to an earthlike world around another star. That one being the alien disease possibility. Still, we may be able to deal with some of the problems you mentioned by way of the technological advances that would give us those blue sky colonies. If an earthlike world is discovered, its hard to imagine humanity avoiding it. We might have to develop a protocol for such things as bringing back any samples, assuming the world in question is close enough to warrant a return trip.<br /><br />I still tend to think an earthlike world would be a motivational mechanism for human psychological reasons.<br /><br />aetius:<br />First off, the chances are that any world like the Earth will still be substantially different. Even if it's got a rich, complex biosphere, even if it looks like Earth...it's not.<br /><br />Me:<br />Most definitely true as there is no specification yet. I generally consider Mars to be an earthlike world because of its similarities. But Mars is not inhabitable for humans without biospheres which fits within your criteria. The range of earthlike worlds will likely consist mostly of worlds not habitable to humans without some protection although if we discover sufficient quantities of earthlike worlds, the definition will be narrowed.<br /><br />aetius:<br />The other, and more pressing concern, is contamination. It would take centuries to catalog the different species of microbes on an Earthlike world, in order to determine which ones will be lethal to humans and the Terran ecosystem we'll need to bring with us to survive.<br /><br />Me:<br />The above is a matter that would initially have to be dealt with by the first settlers of such a world. For this reason, we could send people into orbit around an earthlike world in a situation I touched upon describing genome info exchange in my "Reverse UFO scenario. " thread in the phenomenon forum. In that scenario, it takes awhile (Although not centuries due <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[remcot]

Some questions 1 when we arrive at 51 Pegasi and we will land on the Moons where the temperature is about 800 degrees celsius because they are much much closer to their parent star ,is it possible to land on this Moons ,and what do we need for kind of protection to land and walk on such a planet? 2 Or can we develop rovers like we have already on Mars ,and send and land on such a planet that is much much closer to their Sun than Mercury is to our Sun? What kind of rovers do we need to drive around there with extreme heat of their parent star and extreme radiation? 3 What will be the best option ,a manned or (un)manned mission to the planets of 51 Pegasi? 4 What kind of experience will it be to walk on a moonlike planet that is much much closer to its star than Mercury is to the Sun? And with no atmosphere? Can somebody try to answer this questions? Thank you. remcot

 

[remcot]

Can somebody try to answer and explain the answers in my last reply? Thank you.

 

[scottb50]

There are those who say only a space telescope can do the job....<br /><br />You could build a pretty capable telescope on the moon. That, and tourists might be all you need to get started. From there it's pretty much, anything can happen.<br /><br />I think it will be sometime before we even know where to go to find a habital Planet. In the mean time if we can reliably get to the moon we can get anywhere, there is an unlimited supply of asteroids and Comets,some of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn might at least be visitable. <br /><br />Beyond that, is going to be a long way down the road, if you ask me.<br /><br />Look at Pioneer and Voyager, if they can do it we can do it. We already proved humans can walk on the moon, we don't need to prove that again, we should be building telescopes, doing research and letting the tourists pay for most of it.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[barrykirk]

Actually, I don't care whether the telescope is space<br />based or ground based. Whichever spot will get the job<br />done is what I'm looking for.<br /><br />Since, this thread was about intersteller colonization, I<br />was only trying to point out, that for initial scouting<br />purposes. Large telescopes are much cheaper and <br />they get results much more quickly.<br /><br />Sure, nothing beats sending an actual probe out there,<br />but we are nowhere's near having exhausted what can<br />be done by first taking a good hard look.

 

[qso1]

Same here, I don't care which one gets the job done. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

remcot:<br />Can somebody try to answer this questions? Thank you. remcot...<br /><br />Me:<br />I'll try, excellent questions BTW. First, 800 degrees celsius (1,472 F) would be a major challenge for todays technologies. Consider unmanned Russian Venus landers have never survived more than an hour or so upon landing on Venus and BTW, they are the only country to have landed anything on Venus. Temps on Venus hover near 900 F daytime (482 C). We sent some atmospheric probes into the Venusian atmosphere in 1978 but eventually lost contact. They were not designed for landing or long duration usage. Current space suit technology would be no match for such temperatures. These temps present major challenges for such things as getting rid of waste heat from EMUs, rovers, electronics that utilize materials that are not able to handle such temps. Not to mention solder melts at less than 400 degrees F. There may be ways to get around the temp problem. One being headquarter the mission equipment on the planets night side or even suspend it in the upper, presumably cooler atmosphere. Then send short duration probes into the harshest areas.<br /><br />Now, the next problem. What I just mentioned is todays technology. The only real way your questions can be honestly answered would be to see what future technological advances may overcome the problems that todays tech cannot handle. Including just getting all your equipment to 51 Pegasi.<br /><br />In fact, first off, we would need better data on the 51 Pegasi system. Starting with direct imaging of the world orbiting the star. AFAIK, no moons have been detected around the planet. This does not mean such moons could not exist, it simply means our technique for detecting the planet (Radial velocity IIRC) is not sensitive enough to detect smaller bodies orbiting bodies orbiting stars. The best done so far with RV is Neptune sized planets. If moons are found, they may have conditions that might be vastly different. Such as a thick atmosphere <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>