Question Will there be deep space travel in the next half century

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
Feb 18, 2020
3,849
2,435
8,070
SOURAV, You are correct. Even the shortest interstellar journeys are going to take hundreds of years. It is still not certain that we can overcome radiation difficulties at all. Extra weight (maybe a lot of extra weight) will greatly increase fuel requirements. Perhaps we will eventually develop weightless fuel systems, but these may require complicated conversion units. Maybe the radiation problem will keep us here until we are seriously threatened. Mankind is a persistent and innovative plague, and will doubtless try hard to survive. So far, we have lasted but a blink of an eyelid. The dinosaurs lasted about 160 million years.

I do believe that remote control will come first and will persist for many generations, but mankind must plan for eventualities. Sooner or later there will be another Chicxulub event, and we will have to get out of the way. We must plan ahead now.

Cat :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SOURAV
Unless we have some tech leap or new understanding of how to travel and bypass space/time then the only way to travel is as DNA.
100s 1000s of year trips even with a pretty good leap of tech.
JMO

Thank You for your feedback. However, it is not possible to 'bypass space/time' !
Gravity does, just for us to figure out how :)
 
Even at 0.7% conversion of hydrogen mass to energy is far more powerful than any chemical process. I think fusion is something over 500x more efficient at conversion vs. fission, IIRC.

Yeah, all critical issues in finding the most effective way to travel incredible distances. But chemical burning fuel that must be carried along in huge quantities seems less effective. I haven't dug into this much as we have such a long way to go to get me excited. :)

The idea of using rail guns to accelerate protons (hydrogen ions) into a high speed stream that could be scooped-up by a subsequent spaceship to minimize wasting fuel on fuel, so to speak, makes some sense.
A forgotten problem to a trip to any star is the relative speed and running into a sand grain along the way.
Lota energy released hitting 1.
Faster you go the more problematic that becomes.
We can fend off most particles that have a + or - charge with a large magnetic field but uncharged bits are going to need a serious shield.
A bunch more weight to carry and a lot more energy for the magnetic field..
 
Jun 14, 2021
21
9
15
Yes Sir, you are right. There may be a lot of problems, but we have to try. Sooner or latter we have to fly out of the Blue Planet. Main problem is fuel. We need a lots of fuel. However, it is not clear (till now) how we fly to another planets some billion of l.y. without storing the fuel in the spaceship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
Feb 18, 2020
3,849
2,435
8,070
"However, it is not clear (till now) how we fly to another planets some billion of l.y. without storing the fuel in the spaceship."

Pardon my asking, as this is probably a difference between US and English English, but over here "till now" is ambiguous. I am assuming you mean til now = up to the present, but it can equally mean (over here) = now, at last, it has become clear, instead of as at present, it still has not yet become clear.

Very often, context would suggest the intention, but not in this case.

Cat :)
 
Jun 7, 2021
4
0
10
I think you are right concerning deep space travel, but unduly pessimistic concerning the exploration of Mars. I suggest that human exploration of Mars may well occur within 10-20 years if Elon Musk gets his way and he seems quite intent. Time will tell if gets a s far as a permanent settlement, flags and foot prints or if it fails to materialise at all. Why do you think that travel to Mars won't be possible?
Humans on Mars, or any attempts of colonization of Mars, in the next half century is indeed, not possible. This is due to one main reason. Funding.. Now Elon Musk may have his big steel rocket, but that rocket isnt going anywhere without NASA, and without american taxpayer money, The cost is simply to great. Furthermore, in order for there to be a publically funded NASA\Musk mission to Mars, there has to be a "financial or political incentive" to go to Mars, to justify the cost, and to justify the risk of people dying on Mars. And right now, sadly, there is no reason for America to pay money to send some billionaire yahoo to Mars, we have way too many problems that need to be solved here first, and to be honest, thanks to a certain political party, a functioning America, as we know it now, has one foot in the grave, and within a decade will no longer exist as the "United" States.. So if Musk is serious about going to Mars in his lifeteam, he should be courting the russians or china, because the US is in no shape to deal with this right now. .. Until NASA finds something worth the effort and worth the tax payer money to go to Mars, the Perserverence Robot, would have to find living organisms for there to be any thoughts of sending more than robots to Mars.. So perhaps the moon, and Ceres(asteroid belt) is possible, but anything else is a pipe dream.
 
Jul 27, 2021
160
108
260
DNA seems to be also not ready to travel.
It needs reconstruction technology development (not less than 20 to 30 years).
It needs ethical issues to be resolved.
If anyhow a mission with a robot and DNA is sent, it will need remote babysitting for the robot at least to handle it.
My bit of opinion.

'Ground control to robot...'

'However, it is not possible to 'bypass space/time''
 
May 11, 2021
53
33
60
Humans on Mars, or any attempts of colonization of Mars, in the next half century is indeed, not possible. This is due to one main reason. Funding.. Now Elon Musk may have his big steel rocket, but that rocket isnt going anywhere without NASA, and without american taxpayer money, The cost is simply to great. Furthermore, in order for there to be a publically funded NASA\Musk mission to Mars, there has to be a "financial or political incentive" to go to Mars, to justify the cost, and to justify the risk of people dying on Mars. And right now, sadly, there is no reason for America to pay money to send some billionaire yahoo to Mars, we have way too many problems that need to be solved here first, and to be honest, thanks to a certain political party, a functioning America, as we know it now, has one foot in the grave, and within a decade will no longer exist as the "United" States.. So if Musk is serious about going to Mars in his lifeteam, he should be courting the russians or china, because the US is in no shape to deal with this right now. .. Until NASA finds something worth the effort and worth the tax payer money to go to Mars, the Perserverence Robot, would have to find living organisms for there to be any thoughts of sending more than robots to Mars.. So perhaps the moon, and Ceres(asteroid belt) is possible, but anything else is a pipe dream.
One thing is for certain nobody will be going to Mars anytime soon onboard NASA’s current SLS heavy launcher at $1 billion a throw. Starship should be cheaper than this congress dictated program by 1-2 orders of magnitude. In a few years time when Starship is operational the cost of getting to Mars is going to look very different.

NASA has no say over the goals of the US Space program, that’s decided by Congress, NASA has to do what it’s told. And Congress is quite happy to spend tens of billions on space activities every year. Once the price to get to Mars comes down the prestige of sending the first humans there will be irresistible to the critters in Washington, especially if the Russians and the Chinese are strutting their stuff in Space.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY