6:50 If you use weights on Mars and particularly on the Moon your walking gets difficult. That is because, if the weights added make your weight same as on Earth, your mass on Mars will be 2.6 and on the Moon 6 times greater. When you star walking (or running) and then want to stop, you have 2.6/6 times less horizontal force per mass to do that. You must learn to accelerate and decelerate more slowly than on Earth. That can be learned, but adding weight doesn't make you move like on Earth.
You could attach little thruster rockets to your spacesuit, for accelerating and decelerating. Or, indoors, shoes with wheels in the heels, with a small motor.
Right, inertia is independent of gravity. Adding mass to balance gravity on Luna/Mars will also increase inertia far beyond what you'd feel on Earth with just your mass. Really surprised Fraser didn't bring this up. Maybe one day on the moon they could build sufficiently large circumference mag lev ring habitats that rotate (easy since no air resistance and friction on the moon) that could be used for exercise and/or sleep pods to minimize the detrimental health effects of low gravity.
Yes, center of mass can be related to remaining upright (by lowering Cg) but the dynamics of acceleration and deceleration in a suit change in 1/3g or 1/6g. I concur with your comments on inertia and momentum.
@@adamsebastian3556 At this point we do not have characterization of the physiological effects of partial g exposure. Only 12 people experienced that and it was only for a comparatively few hours at a time (the longest being Apollo 17's lunar surface stay time). It is entirely speculative as to the fluid shifts at 1/6 g on the moon. In fact, it is possible that 1/6 g is enough of a force vector that said fluid shifts might not even impact the astronaut physiologically. Apollo astronauts going from 1/6g to 0g lunar orbit did not report space adaptation issues. There is speculation as to if this is physiologic or more reflective of the stoic nature of military trained pilots.
I think Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle deal with this in the Mote in God's Eye except... The colony ship is an alien craft from a Globular Cluster. It's awesome 👍
Or worst, receive a message that skynet finally won and realizing that not only they dont have a place to come back to but also that probably a newer ship was sent to terminate them
Hey frasier, love your content. For the next q&a: what are the most convincing and easy to understand arguments to explain people that not every unidentified object someone films "proves" that aliens visited earth.
The thing that convinced me (way back when) is that the more detail and information you have, the more likely it is to turn out to be something terrestrial. The mystery only exists when you don't have enough information. The more people there are who carry cameras all the time, the more Big Foot (and other mysteries) fades away. Tech gets better and more widespread, but UFOs are always the same level of blurry. Meanwhile, weird stuff that turned out to be real became better documented as more witnesses had better technology. Upward-facing lightning, new animals, etc.
Usually the video/images lacks facts like relative speed, scale, definition. Right from the start there was the potential for fake photographs and film. We now have the additional issue of AI. It is only going to get worse.
4:00 that sounds like a situation from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. It is fun to think that it could seriously happen some centuries in the future.
Seeing motion of the stars - The best example of us actually seeing things moxing are the stars around Sagitarius A*. Those image sequences are so cool to watch.
Sending something right now is still useful. Real life trials of technology and its limitations, provide valuable information. If we spend 700 years preparing, but never test a similar mission, it may have problems that would've been quickly revealed had we tested it. We can and should do both. Unfortunately, space exploration is limited by funding, and waiting doesn't provide much public support.
Its also one heck of an assumption that humanity will continue this technological spurt, particularly with regard to energy output, something not historically backed up. Especially with the climate challenges induced by our increased energy use, its hard to imagine it will keep increasing at current rates, whatever path we take.
There would also be a lot to be said for timing them to arrive at the same-ish time, using the progressive resources of each age. That way we have maybe 10x as many resources end up there, likely greatly increasing chances of success, for a more manageable outlay in each era. And we still have something arrive there if things dont go to plan
The tech that is invented for the generational ship would be invaluable, even if a better ship is built in the future. Who is to say that in order to get to that faster ship design we first need to learn to build the slower ships... tech usually builds on previous tech.
Also there's absolutely no guarantee our civilization will survive long enough to build something better than the colony ship. One super volcano or the right solar flare and our civilization is done. So yeah try it as early as possible. Hell try to build a colony ship bound for alpha centauri now even if it will take 1000s of years.
3:26 I seem to recall a Sci-Fi short story where a ship was launched, and a subsequent faster ship got to the destination first. One detail I recall is that someone on the slower ship saw 'something' who was told when he landed that was a faster ship that had failed and burned up. Eᴅɪᴛ: it was A.E. Van Vogt’s 𝙁𝙖𝙧 𝘾𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙪𝙧𝙪𝙨 1944
It's been done a few times in Sci-Fi, most recent was in Starfield actually with a colony ship, but Andromeda had an episode on it back in the early 2000s where a ship travelling near light speed had the same crew 100s of years later due to time dilation. Of course those are dealing with slower than light travel vs Faster Than Light travel.
I've always thought that we should install very large radio telescopes on the far side of the moon (and poles). Possibly using craters already on the lunar surface. Then use these with the other radio telescopes on the earth surface to give a combined telescope diameter of approximately 30 Earths.
Even before the subject of interferometry came up, my reaction to the video title was that the Trojan Lagrange points would be the greatest place for a Ridiculously Long Baseline Interferometry Telescope (they'll probably call it RiBIT) with one scope in the leading and one in the trailing Lagrange point. But I suppose the gravitational disturbance of the asteroids might screw up the interferometry too much.
Yes, checking to see if this had been said, imagine the interstellar observations that could be done, testing and getting it right using Earth L4/L5, but could eventually scale all the way up to Neptune L4/L5, maybe then add one to L3 also for observations directly up/down relative to Neptune's orbital plane with an effective size of Neptune's orbit
Regarding the interferometer telescopes examples, your explanation did not address that you were referring to resolution being the improved aspect and that brightness/dimness of the object is still limited by the limits of the individual instruments and time length of exposure acting as additive rather than a multiplier. The level of resolution of telescopes/receivers also act as baselines for the interferometer's enhancement or resolution. In other words, the precision and quality of the individual telescopes/receivers are also still important to the overall measurements of the interferometer.
we used to, and likely still do obtain parallax images from observing the same patch of sky at opposite times of the year, using the entire orbit of the Earth around the sun for a baseline. this results in pretty accurate pinpointing of objects within 20LY of us. Interferometry using this method with stored images on steady state objects would give us an even bigger view
My idea for a space telescope would be to use the L4 and L5 Lagrange points of Earth sun for the telescopes and sync them with entangled quantum particles.
Hello Fraser First thanks for your great job of your space journalism. Regarding your answer to the first question, I think it lacks some physics about the unstable Lagrange points: In the 3-dimensional space, each Lagrange point is surrounded by an unstable 2-domensional manifold. Any object put on that manifold revolves around the Lagrange point. And satellites are put in such an orbit so their solar panels would not shadowed by the Earth and the Moon, which would unnecessarily reduce their efficiency.
I agree with you about the Jupiter trojan/spartan regions as industrial centers. They are low delta-v places to move from rock to rock for mining, but also loaded with volatiles that can be sent to stations/colonies and factory ships in the inner solar system. A new "space can" habitat built in the trojans can make its first run inwards as a bulk cargo carrier, stuffed to the gills with raw materials, and just retain enough of that to bio-form its own environment cylinders for new habitants/colonists.
Re: interferometry If you’re ever in West Virginia, you can walk around the Green Bank Observatory. They also have driven tours if you prefer. But if walking, there’s old railroad tracks and data cables through the forest so they could move the dishes and do interferometry. It’s so cool to explore and there’s hiking trails everywhere. They have free maps. Just don’t take your phone out of the parking lot, radio interference is a big deal.
Q&A Question: Despite the asteroid belt seeming like a dense collection of asteroids in pop culture, it is mostly empty space. When sending a probe/satellite into the outer solar system, do mission planners account for 'dodging' the known asteroids within the belt? Or do they just 'yolo' it and assume "ehh, it'll probably make it through fine..." What about meteoroids? Has any device ever had an impact with any meteoroids when traveling through the belt? Besides JWST, have any devices ever suffered an impact? How common is meteoroid damage? (if you pick this question feel free to re-word it for your slide) -bbq85
Another example of motion over time (a few of decades?) is that of stars whizzing around the massive black hole (Sagittarius A*) at the center of our Milky Way galaxy. In the timelapse video, one of the nearest stars visibly speeds up with as it nears the black hole, zips around and it, and slows down as it moves away.
The most prominent time laps videos are the observations of the area around Sag A*, wouldn't you say? Star S02 has been observed for almost a complete revolution around the black hole. Rendered the Nobel prize a few years back.
Robert A Heinlein wrote a story titled Time For The Stars that included the “Wait” issue among many other problems concerning traveling to other star systems. It was published in 1956, but describes Torchships that can achieve velocities approaching the speed of light at their maximum.
Last year I turned off the ads on my channel's videos because I was so disgusted by youtube's change in their ad policy. They even sent out an email saying they could make like 1% more by making ads 100 times more obnoxious.
If you turn off monetization, youtube will still run ads. But you won't get any money. At this point, content creators have very little control over the ads youtube puts in the videos. Basically all you can do is turn off the mid-roll ads. Edit: I should also note that if you demonetize, you can't turn off the mid-roll ads. So if you demonetize, you're actually doing youtube a favor. They run all the ads they want, plus they get to keep the ad revenue.
@ Kind of. If you demonetize your channel they will run ads and keep all of it for themselves. That is, as long as the videos are ad-appropriate. You can also make that not happen by including ad-inappropriate things to the video, title, or description, and/or by setting your own video as not appropriate for ads. (Use the F word in the title, or talk about guns at the end of the video after the outro, lots of creative ways to make sure it doesn't get ads.) However, if you set a specific video on a monetized channel to not have ads, they will not run ads on it. (They might make up for it by running more ads on the next video(s) that are ad-enabled though, and that wouldn't surprise me at all.) At least that is the result of my testing.
6:55 - Weights would help where rigorous exercise now at the ISS helps, more or less: bones and musculature. but, as you explain, there are other problems.
The Crab Nebula (Supernova remnant) can also be seen in motion from HST in time-lapse. Also objects like variable stars, and more interestingly, nebulae like Hubble's variable nebula (NGC2261) can exhibit dynamic characteristics in time-lapse imagery. I've also always thought the motion of the fast-moving runaway star AE Aurigae (look it up) should be visible over a few decades of observations (based on back-of-the-envelope calculations) relative to nearby stars, but have not seen anything on that.
How useful will JWST be once it starts to drift from its orbit in 15 years? Is the orientation set by the same thrusters that regularize the orbit? What will cause it to not be useful, given that it's still mechanically operating and able to transmit data?
Two things: When it drifts out of ESL2, it will just be in solar orbit. So it will most often be much further away from Earth than it is now, reducing bandwidth available for data. IIRC, it's about a million km from Earth. Once it's in free orbit, it's average distance will be about 200 times more. Assuming normal inverse-square, the average bandwidth will be 40,000 times lower. It also might not be able to transmit to Earth for much of its orbit, because it's designed with the radio transmitter on the heat-shield side, so it only works when the sun and Earth are both on the same side of the spacecraft. Secondly: Once it runs out of propellant, it also won't be able to use thrust to desaturate the momentum wheels that let it point accurately.
In theory they have 15 years to design a mission to refuel it. They could also update the sensors at the same time. Difficult but not impossible, especially if we have a moon base.
Question: Have questions on 4 different ways to simulate gravity (2 in space, 2 on planets/moons). And one question on VR operated construction robots. Wich of those systems would be better according your view and what are ups and downs of both Gravity and one drone (all five) of the systems? 1) Onboard of starship 1)A) simulated gravity INSIDE a starships "drumm" (say part of the starships constructions main body) zirca 20m in diameter, high RPM, high tangental speed. 1)B) Gravity simulated by THE WHOLE SHIP, by tethering cockpit first, with the same type of ship, or similar mass and start them spinning. 2) On the planetary bodys surface. 2)A) Onboard of space station/inside the building - drumm with sloped "floor", to compensate for local natural gravity, that will align with the force created by spinning. 2)B) Whole building/space station becomes a subway train (material above serves as radiation and micrometeorit shield) speeding on a circular track, with train cars gimbaled in the sideway movement (i.e. quicker it goes during turn, higher the "floor" goes on the "outside" side of the ring). 3) VR operated robots for space base construction and companions of astronauts. I belive, it will be apropriette, if the crews of Mars or Moon starbases could remotely (using VR googles and drones on the surface) visit the base BEFORE they land there, and if needed prepare some details for their future habitation. When already on surface, it should be ussefull to have a robotic mule with manipulator(s), radio repeater and VR colegue right next to you, even if you go only few steps away from the base. Thank you for your time
@fraser for the next Q&A.. I'd love to know how much bigger Mars would have needed to be to remain earthlike? is it just shy of the mass needed to retain its atmosphere, or is it nowhere near?
Alpha Centauri and also Barnard's star are actually moving closer to us at a slow rate. And will be closest to us in roughly 30,000 years. This would be a great time to jump off and lots of time to advance technology for the trip. You would probably want to do some type of terra forming and infrastructure before you arrive so you would probably want to start working on it perhaps a thousand years before you send the first people. A ship traveling at a fraction of light speed could reach it in one generation.
Fraser, I enjoy your videos, but I need to correct some conclusions you drew in the section on wearing weights. I am a 30 year physician and received training decades ago at NASA KSC in Space Life Sciences. While astronauts were walking on the moon during Apollo, there were incidents where the momentum of the moonwalker created a lateral momentum that the moonwalker felt but where the 1/6 g caused destablization and a fall. These falls were actually somewhat dangerous. Charlie Duke described one incident that was actually captured on video where he leapt with both feet off the lunar soil and accidentally flipped on his PLSS and landed looking up at the Earth and blackness of space. Increasing the mass in the boots might be of some value in counter balancing and lowering center of gravity of the suited moonwalker. More important than Charlie Duke's anecdote about moon walkers is the discussion about fluid shifts and opthalmalogic changes. You are correct about these fluid shifts being present in microgravity. In fact, these shifts have been known for decades, measured with blood tests looking at many parameters, and even physiologic models for the shift from 1 g Earth to 0 g LEO. However, there are no studies at lunar 1/6 g nor at Mars 1/3 g to know the extent of these fluid shifts and opthalmologic changes in partial g fields. It is entirely speculative as to the magnitude, clinical significance, and duration of these changes when changing from 1g to 0 g during flight and then 1/6 g exposure for nonspecific and speculative durations. In fact, the absence of NASA prioritization of partial g centrifuges for life sciences experiments is a major miss for the world's space programs over the past 40 years. In my opinion, partial g centrifuges should have been a high national priority during STS and ISS operations. Had we flown those centrifuges (even for lab animal studies), we could have modeled some of these issues in centrifugal force fields and compared to similar experiments when we put a biological lab on the moon or Mars. These studies are DEFINITELY needed in order to predict the short-term adaptation and long-term effects of exposure to 1/3 g and 1/6 g. Until we put these capabilities on the surface of the moon and Mars, we really do not know the effect, impact, or if these fluid shifts and compartmental physiologic effects are even clinically significant. In many ways, the Artemis or other crews who first land on the moon and do these experiments will be the folks testing and doing pioneering work for the human race. I'd love to talk more about this with you and our team if you like.
Maybe we should add a "weight" (or actually mass) calculation to the wait calculation. Like we increase the mass of the spacecraft as well as the possible speed as time goes by. This way we can make sure new spacecrafts don't overtake the old ones.
I feel like the fallacy of the "wait calculation" is assuming that the faster starship would target the same star instead of saying, "Well, we've got a ship going there already, what else is in range for the faster ship that was out of range for the slow boat?" The fact that faster ships exist is only relevant if you have unlimited funds and resources to send ships to every possible destination.
Jupiter's magnetic field is 20,000 times more powerful than Earth's. It traps high-energy particles in its immense magnetic field creating intense radiation belts that are dangerous to spacecraft.
So Interferometry at Nanoscale Wavelengths in the Visible Range on the surface of a Planet or Moon is impossible because of seismic, tidal, and tectonic vibrations - Noise. So Interferometry in Space using the best Gyroscopes unaffected by Terrestrial Noise may be easier. Interferometers at a 1AU sized Appeture would be mind-blowing. I think we'll eventually cancel out the tidal/tectonic terrestrial noise with adaptive optics strategies? And building smaller more precise Attitude Thrusters Gyroscopes & Atomic Clocks could get us Ultra Precise Space Interferometry, as well.
@@1FatLittleMonkey I don't think bed rest studies would tell us that. Astronauts aren't inactive, they work out, move around, gravity during sleep may do a lot to deal with fluid buildup issues. Would have to test on a space station.
@@OnceAndFutureKing13711 yeah, that is just way more expensive and/or disorienting. A small chamber should be fine for lying down to sleep. But certainly if we can afford to build a giant rotating space ship, problem solved!
@@JackMott In bed-rest-studies, participants exercise. It's not the lack of exercise that they are simulating, it's the lack of gravity down the length of the body.
The best place for mining in space is where you have access to: - Plenty of minerals - Plenty of water - Plenty of acids for refining the metals. (its earth)
Why would the faster ship pick up the slower one? The flight trajectory would be completely different at 1000 years. You would have to plot an intercept course to the slower ship then replot the next leg (going along 2 sides of a triangle) to the destination.
Both ships are traversing the same path, one just waited to leave. Think of it like deciding to leave the house early so you can drive half the speed limit for twice as long
They wouldn't be on the same path, they are going from different starting points toward different destination points. The stars are all moving relative to each other.
@seionne85 I have no response to that. The comment you replied to was not about "would you rather" it was about the fact that the mechanics involved in doing an intercept would be way more complicated than "just coast in a straight line at constant speed the whole time."
Astronauts on Mars would enjoy weighted suits for surface exploration. The long list of medical complications would be shortened with a suit that weighs enough to mimic your weight on Earth. During the year plus round trip crew members could enjoy the ɓenefits of being seated in a pedal powered carousel -- one gets a cardio workout pedaling while one or two others experience a centrifugal force that drains blood out of the head and torso.
What to do in the Jupiter Trojan regions? Build interferometers! Gravity from Jupiter and the Sun are fairly cancelled out. I suppose those place would be great for science that require flat spacetime.
Fraser, would it be correct to state that making an interferometer of any frequency is limited by the precision and synchronization of the clocks? That would make the technology independent if it is visible light or radio waves to create an image. Are the clocks the limiting factor?
i have heard of a telescope using images taken in january and another in july. so i guess that's an interferometer the size of the earths orbit. now, jupiter's lagrange points being mentioned.... we can have an interferometer the size of jupiter's orbit! and we don't even have to wait for the orbit, the telescopes can be placed in the lagrange points!
Do you have a wait calculation for an uncrewed mission to AC, too? Recently mobile phones, action cameras and drones got really tiny, so I'm thinking for a tiny spacecraft, hopefully wihout too much problems with micrometeorites.
With radio telescopes being atomic clock synchronized, the atomic clocks are operating at microwave frequencies, so they're ticking at a frequency comparable to the radio telescope observation frequency, which is probably a major part of why that was able to work at all, but they don't tick fast enough to keep up with optical telescope observation frequencies. But newer nuclear clocks and optical clocks do operate at IR or optical frequencies; would those newer clocks would have the timing resolution to synchronize IR and optical telescopes?
interesting point, I would think it would probably work if you could actually build a clock like that... since microwaves are 1 step above radio waves, you'd probably want a clock with a frequency a bit higher than the frequency you're trying to synchronize... so for optical light you'd probably want some sort of UV or even x-ray frequency clock
Can you have non-interferometer telescopes that are made up of separated components but share a secondary mirror, and imagers, like a regular telescope? For eg: JWST (and similar large telescopes on Earth) use segmented mirrors pointing to the same secondary, and same imagers, but the mirrors "fill up" the whole area of the primary mirror. Can you instead have a functioning segmented telescope that _doesn't_ "fill up" the primary mirror, but still works like a regular telescope (not an interferometer)? If so, can you have space-based free-flying telescopes spread over many kilometres, acting as a partially filled primary mirror, all reflecting to a single free-flyer acting as a shared secondary + imagers?
like in future, I'm sure they'll send a voyager 3 and 4 :). That'll probably match up the distance and surpass the first 2 voyager missions. I'm sure it'll be in different direction. They'll have much better technology too
the wait calculation strikes me as silly for a very basic reason: why would you be sending two colony ships to the same system? if i had a ship en route, and had a fresh new ship twice as fast as the old one, i would send it out to a further star. i would only be sending a second ship along the same route if i lost contact with the first.
Question: What happens to the Mass / Schwarzschild radius of a Black Hole if its speed approaches the speed of light compared to earth's reference frame?
the problem with "wait caluclation" is that 700 years for humanity is a very long time. Plenty of time to have some sort of war or catastrophy that makes that calculation moot. So imho its never a waste of time. The time is always right.
Lagrange points L4 & L5. I'm writing a sci fi novel about a Telescope and space station at the L4 point. How stable, how much station keeping energy would be required to keep it there?
Before even thinking of mining asteroids I think we should do a practice mission, maybe something in low Earth orbit. Mine the ISS. I'm serious, I'm not just saying that as a lame attempt to save the ISS, what is a genuine attempt if the human race learning how to refine and recycle resources in space.
Wouldn't a visible light interferometer telescope of say 100,000 kilometers be susceptible to gravity wave distortion. On axis would seem to cancel out, but off axis should create timing errors. How do you compensate for space-time distortions?
Concerning the "wait" equation, does it include the civilization disaster factor? If civilization or the technological culture collapses, the early ship might still preserve civilization or even the human race.
Fraser. Using the points made in this episode regarding "The Wait Calculation", why don't we postpone manned exploration and plow the savings into sending probes to every planet in the solar system and their moons? National ego aside, it seems like a lengthy wait before risking manned exploration would make a lot of sense. I would rather know more about the moons of Saturn and Jupiter than spending a fortune to see a couple of astronauts walk on the moon.
Also, adding weight in lower gravity is going to increase your momentum and make falling over much much easier. Putting most of the weight in the feet would help some but youd lose almost all the biological benefits
Your keeping the ads down is much appreciated. UA-cam is cutting the throats of content creators. Some channel's have ads pop up every 2 minutes, making them unwatchable.
JWST...I hope that when the time comes. They have it return to an orbit around Earth. Refuel it. Then send it back to its rightfull place (with or without help of extra rockets)
For spaceships doesn't centrifugal/centripetal force address these concerns. For mars use solar with giant flywheel living quarters storing power for night while providing more earth like living conditions?
lol interesting... I could see it working, though I don't know how practical it'd be... building something the size/mass of a skyscraper that spins on its side would be quite the undertaking... and I don't think you could really use it as a flywheel for storing energy, as you'd be slowing it down by taking the energy out of it... in fact you'd need to constantly feed it energy to counteract friction and drag (though there wouldn't been too much drag on Mars, but some) better to just do this in space on a space station imo
Why couldn't two Telescopes of a Space Interferometer link up their range, distance, bearing from each other using lasers beamed at one another at nanoscale visible wavelengths. Then using A I. Increasingly accurate attitude adjustments are made between the two until they're in spacial-sync down to a nanometer. Then hook up the rest of the telescopes - may take much longer. But if the A.I. sees all the Scopes in the Interferometer as One Unit. Then works to focus it by more minute attitude adjustments as Scopes fire lasers that push each other away, perhaps. In addition to super subtle/precise micro thrusters. And maybe we can get 6 of them lined up for a few minutes to make some good exposures one day.
On Mars, the shift of body fluids might not be too problematic. The general degradation in strength from partial gravity would be better managed with centrifuges that supplement natural gravity through periodic exercise.
I think it would have been helpful if the video provided a threshold gravity level for this to occur. In space between planets the issue will have an exaggerated effect. On a planet with 1/4 of earth gravity... should not be a problem, just a little more time for the fluid to flow down. Simple exercise and maybe compression will handle that problem.
The problem is, we don't know. (Even after over 60 years of spaceflight, and decades of continuously manned space-stations, we have barely started doing partial gravity animal studies (thanks to the Japanese.))
We sent Voyager 1 and 2 in 1977. They used planets to slingshot and gain speed. The solar system is fairly flat (Maybe). With todays technology, can we send a more comprehensive probe out perpendicular to the solar system to observe our solar system from above and look at other parts of our Galaxy? We have newly developed propulsion systems and larger payload rockets to launch probes with more instruments and fuel to last maybe one hundred years or more. Gradually gaining speed over the years we can go much further in a smaller amount of time.
I find these quick episodes entertaining and all the different topics that can be covered. Thanks
6:50 If you use weights on Mars and particularly on the Moon your walking gets difficult. That is because, if the weights added make your weight same as on Earth, your mass on Mars will be 2.6 and on the Moon 6 times greater. When you star walking (or running) and then want to stop, you have 2.6/6 times less horizontal force per mass to do that. You must learn to accelerate and decelerate more slowly than on Earth. That can be learned, but adding weight doesn't make you move like on Earth.
You could attach little thruster rockets to your spacesuit, for accelerating and decelerating.
Or, indoors, shoes with wheels in the heels, with a small motor.
Right, inertia is independent of gravity. Adding mass to balance gravity on Luna/Mars will also increase inertia far beyond what you'd feel on Earth with just your mass. Really surprised Fraser didn't bring this up.
Maybe one day on the moon they could build sufficiently large circumference mag lev ring habitats that rotate (easy since no air resistance and friction on the moon) that could be used for exercise and/or sleep pods to minimize the detrimental health effects of low gravity.
Momentum is going to make the whole experience very odd
Yes, center of mass can be related to remaining upright (by lowering Cg) but the dynamics of acceleration and deceleration in a suit change in 1/3g or 1/6g. I concur with your comments on inertia and momentum.
@@adamsebastian3556 At this point we do not have characterization of the physiological effects of partial g exposure.
Only 12 people experienced that and it was only for a comparatively few hours at a time (the longest being Apollo 17's lunar surface stay time).
It is entirely speculative as to the fluid shifts at 1/6 g on the moon. In fact, it is possible that 1/6 g is enough of a force vector that said fluid shifts might not even impact the astronaut physiologically.
Apollo astronauts going from 1/6g to 0g lunar orbit did not report space adaptation issues.
There is speculation as to if this is physiologic or more reflective of the stoic nature of military trained pilots.
Lmao imagine being on a generation ship for multiple generations, only to have a newer faster one pass you buy “see you guys there!”
You can stop and pick them up.
@@kkgt6591 What if that "stop and pic up" would cost the (faster) second ship 20 years of traveling time?
Ha yeah! And the passengers on the second ship passing were looking out the windows holding giant "L"'s and laughing?
I think Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle deal with this in the Mote in God's Eye except... The colony ship is an alien craft from a Globular Cluster. It's awesome 👍
Or worst, receive a message that skynet finally won and realizing that not only they dont have a place to come back to but also that probably a newer ship was sent to terminate them
Surprised you didn't point out the Crab Pulsar time lapse. Although it's short, it is still the most amazing display I've yet seen.
The orbits of stars around the black hole at the centre of the Milky Way is some of the coolest moving observations.
Hey frasier, love your content. For the next q&a: what are the most convincing and easy to understand arguments to explain people that not every unidentified object someone films "proves" that aliens visited earth.
It's right there in the word, "unidentified." That means you don't know what it is.
The thing that convinced me (way back when) is that the more detail and information you have, the more likely it is to turn out to be something terrestrial. The mystery only exists when you don't have enough information. The more people there are who carry cameras all the time, the more Big Foot (and other mysteries) fades away. Tech gets better and more widespread, but UFOs are always the same level of blurry.
Meanwhile, weird stuff that turned out to be real became better documented as more witnesses had better technology. Upward-facing lightning, new animals, etc.
the speed of light
Usually the video/images lacks facts like relative speed, scale, definition.
Right from the start there was the potential for fake photographs and film. We now have the additional issue of AI. It is only going to get worse.
The "wait calculation" also must change over time to due unknown unknowns.
Black Swan Events
4:00 that sounds like a situation from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. It is fun to think that it could seriously happen some centuries in the future.
Seeing motion of the stars - The best example of us actually seeing things moxing are the stars around Sagitarius A*. Those image sequences are so cool to watch.
Sending something right now is still useful. Real life trials of technology and its limitations, provide valuable information. If we spend 700 years preparing, but never test a similar mission, it may have problems that would've been quickly revealed had we tested it. We can and should do both. Unfortunately, space exploration is limited by funding, and waiting doesn't provide much public support.
Its also one heck of an assumption that humanity will continue this technological spurt, particularly with regard to energy output, something not historically backed up.
Especially with the climate challenges induced by our increased energy use, its hard to imagine it will keep increasing at current rates, whatever path we take.
There would also be a lot to be said for timing them to arrive at the same-ish time, using the progressive resources of each age. That way we have maybe 10x as many resources end up there, likely greatly increasing chances of success, for a more manageable outlay in each era. And we still have something arrive there if things dont go to plan
The tech that is invented for the generational ship would be invaluable, even if a better ship is built in the future.
Who is to say that in order to get to that faster ship design we first need to learn to build the slower ships... tech usually builds on previous tech.
Also there's absolutely no guarantee our civilization will survive long enough to build something better than the colony ship. One super volcano or the right solar flare and our civilization is done. So yeah try it as early as possible. Hell try to build a colony ship bound for alpha centauri now even if it will take 1000s of years.
3:26 I seem to recall a Sci-Fi short story where a ship was launched, and a subsequent faster ship got to the destination first. One detail I recall is that someone on the slower ship saw 'something' who was told when he landed that was a faster ship that had failed and burned up. Eᴅɪᴛ: it was A.E. Van Vogt’s 𝙁𝙖𝙧 𝘾𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙪𝙧𝙪𝙨 1944
But do you really be first when you can arrive a little later and the dinner is on the table?
Found it, 𝙁𝙖𝙧 𝘾𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙪𝙧𝙪𝙨 by A. E. van Vogt 1944
@@doncarlodivargas5497 Only if that dinner will be set 700 years in the future.
It's been done a few times in Sci-Fi, most recent was in Starfield actually with a colony ship, but Andromeda had an episode on it back in the early 2000s where a ship travelling near light speed had the same crew 100s of years later due to time dilation.
Of course those are dealing with slower than light travel vs Faster Than Light travel.
I've always thought that we should install very large radio telescopes on the far side of the moon (and poles). Possibly using craters already on the lunar surface.
Then use these with the other radio telescopes on the earth surface to give a combined telescope diameter of approximately 30 Earths.
Old idea, but yeah its very doable.
The faster ship likely wouldn't be able to pickup the slower craft. It would have to slow down and then speed back up again.
Still way faster than continuing on previous technology
Or they can just send them the blueprints to make new engines at light speed.
Even before the subject of interferometry came up, my reaction to the video title was that the Trojan Lagrange points would be the greatest place for a Ridiculously Long Baseline Interferometry Telescope (they'll probably call it RiBIT) with one scope in the leading and one in the trailing Lagrange point. But I suppose the gravitational disturbance of the asteroids might screw up the interferometry too much.
Yes, checking to see if this had been said, imagine the interstellar observations that could be done, testing and getting it right using Earth L4/L5, but could eventually scale all the way up to Neptune L4/L5, maybe then add one to L3 also for observations directly up/down relative to Neptune's orbital plane with an effective size of Neptune's orbit
Regarding the interferometer telescopes examples, your explanation did not address that you were referring to resolution being the improved aspect and that brightness/dimness of the object is still limited by the limits of the individual instruments and time length of exposure acting as additive rather than a multiplier. The level of resolution of telescopes/receivers also act as baselines for the interferometer's enhancement or resolution. In other words, the precision and quality of the individual telescopes/receivers are also still important to the overall measurements of the interferometer.
we used to, and likely still do obtain parallax images from observing the same patch of sky at opposite times of the year, using the entire orbit of the Earth around the sun for a baseline. this results in pretty accurate pinpointing of objects within 20LY of us.
Interferometry using this method with stored images on steady state objects would give us an even bigger view
My idea for a space telescope would be to use the L4 and L5 Lagrange points of Earth sun for the telescopes and sync them with entangled quantum particles.
Amazing, we have not scratched the surface.
Thanks for all the answers, Fraser! 😊
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Hello Fraser
First thanks for your great job of your space journalism.
Regarding your answer to the first question, I think it lacks some physics about the unstable Lagrange points:
In the 3-dimensional space, each Lagrange point is surrounded by an unstable 2-domensional manifold. Any object put on that manifold revolves around the Lagrange point. And satellites are put in such an orbit so their solar panels would not shadowed by the Earth and the Moon, which would unnecessarily reduce their efficiency.
I agree with you about the Jupiter trojan/spartan regions as industrial centers. They are low delta-v places to move from rock to rock for mining, but also loaded with volatiles that can be sent to stations/colonies and factory ships in the inner solar system.
A new "space can" habitat built in the trojans can make its first run inwards as a bulk cargo carrier, stuffed to the gills with raw materials, and just retain enough of that to bio-form its own environment cylinders for new habitants/colonists.
The asteroid collection in Jupiter's Lagrange points is particularly interesting, also watched Hubble and Chandra animations of 1987A over 20 years.
The environmental suits they will have to wear on Mars or on the Moon will be very "heavy" as it is.
Re: interferometry
If you’re ever in West Virginia, you can walk around the Green Bank Observatory. They also have driven tours if you prefer. But if walking, there’s old railroad tracks and data cables through the forest so they could move the dishes and do interferometry. It’s so cool to explore and there’s hiking trails everywhere. They have free maps. Just don’t take your phone out of the parking lot, radio interference is a big deal.
No chance.
Q&A Question:
Despite the asteroid belt seeming like a dense collection of asteroids in pop culture, it is mostly empty space. When sending a probe/satellite into the outer solar system, do mission planners account for 'dodging' the known asteroids within the belt? Or do they just 'yolo' it and assume "ehh, it'll probably make it through fine..." What about meteoroids? Has any device ever had an impact with any meteoroids when traveling through the belt? Besides JWST, have any devices ever suffered an impact? How common is meteoroid damage?
(if you pick this question feel free to re-word it for your slide) -bbq85
Another example of motion over time (a few of decades?) is that of stars whizzing around the massive black hole (Sagittarius A*) at the center of our Milky Way galaxy. In the timelapse video, one of the nearest stars visibly speeds up with as it nears the black hole, zips around and it, and slows down as it moves away.
The most prominent time laps videos are the observations of the area around Sag A*, wouldn't you say? Star S02 has been observed for almost a complete revolution around the black hole. Rendered the Nobel prize a few years back.
Great video. Thanks.
13:07 - Have you ever talked about the Dittoscope, which is a proposal for a gigantic interferometer?
Robert A Heinlein wrote a story titled Time For The Stars that included the “Wait” issue among many other problems concerning traveling to other star systems. It was published in 1956, but describes Torchships that can achieve velocities approaching the speed of light at their maximum.
Last year I turned off the ads on my channel's videos because I was so disgusted by youtube's change in their ad policy. They even sent out an email saying they could make like 1% more by making ads 100 times more obnoxious.
If you turn off monetization, youtube will still run ads. But you won't get any money. At this point, content creators have very little control over the ads youtube puts in the videos. Basically all you can do is turn off the mid-roll ads.
Edit: I should also note that if you demonetize, you can't turn off the mid-roll ads. So if you demonetize, you're actually doing youtube a favor. They run all the ads they want, plus they get to keep the ad revenue.
@ Kind of. If you demonetize your channel they will run ads and keep all of it for themselves. That is, as long as the videos are ad-appropriate. You can also make that not happen by including ad-inappropriate things to the video, title, or description, and/or by setting your own video as not appropriate for ads. (Use the F word in the title, or talk about guns at the end of the video after the outro, lots of creative ways to make sure it doesn't get ads.)
However, if you set a specific video on a monetized channel to not have ads, they will not run ads on it. (They might make up for it by running more ads on the next video(s) that are ad-enabled though, and that wouldn't surprise me at all.) At least that is the result of my testing.
6:55 - Weights would help where rigorous exercise now at the ISS helps, more or less: bones and musculature. but, as you explain, there are other problems.
The Crab Nebula (Supernova remnant) can also be seen in motion from HST in time-lapse. Also objects like variable stars, and more interestingly, nebulae like Hubble's variable nebula (NGC2261) can exhibit dynamic characteristics in time-lapse imagery. I've also always thought the motion of the fast-moving runaway star AE Aurigae (look it up) should be visible over a few decades of observations (based on back-of-the-envelope calculations) relative to nearby stars, but have not seen anything on that.
L1, L2 & L3 are saddle points they are also referred to as keyhole orbits because of their instability and are an intrinsic part of the 3 body problem
How useful will JWST be once it starts to drift from its orbit in 15 years? Is the orientation set by the same thrusters that regularize the orbit? What will cause it to not be useful, given that it's still mechanically operating and able to transmit data?
Two things: When it drifts out of ESL2, it will just be in solar orbit. So it will most often be much further away from Earth than it is now, reducing bandwidth available for data. IIRC, it's about a million km from Earth. Once it's in free orbit, it's average distance will be about 200 times more. Assuming normal inverse-square, the average bandwidth will be 40,000 times lower. It also might not be able to transmit to Earth for much of its orbit, because it's designed with the radio transmitter on the heat-shield side, so it only works when the sun and Earth are both on the same side of the spacecraft.
Secondly: Once it runs out of propellant, it also won't be able to use thrust to desaturate the momentum wheels that let it point accurately.
If its orientation changes and it faces the Sun, it would heat up and make it mostly useless for infrared imaging.
In theory they have 15 years to design a mission to refuel it. They could also update the sensors at the same time.
Difficult but not impossible, especially if we have a moon base.
Inter galactic Lagrange points...? 😅 Say between galaxies or between interactions with the super massive black hole at galactic centre
Question: Have questions on 4 different ways to simulate gravity (2 in space, 2 on planets/moons). And one question on VR operated construction robots.
Wich of those systems would be better according your view and what are ups and downs of both Gravity and one drone (all five) of the systems?
1) Onboard of starship
1)A) simulated gravity INSIDE a starships "drumm" (say part of the starships constructions main body) zirca 20m in diameter, high RPM, high tangental speed.
1)B) Gravity simulated by THE WHOLE SHIP, by tethering cockpit first, with the same type of ship, or similar mass and start them spinning.
2) On the planetary bodys surface.
2)A) Onboard of space station/inside the building - drumm with sloped "floor", to compensate for local natural gravity, that will align with the force created by spinning.
2)B) Whole building/space station becomes a subway train (material above serves as radiation and micrometeorit shield) speeding on a circular track, with train cars gimbaled in the sideway movement (i.e. quicker it goes during turn, higher the "floor" goes on the "outside" side of the ring).
3) VR operated robots for space base construction and companions of astronauts. I belive, it will be apropriette, if the crews of Mars or Moon starbases could remotely (using VR googles and drones on the surface) visit the base BEFORE they land there, and if needed prepare some details for their future habitation.
When already on surface, it should be ussefull to have a robotic mule with manipulator(s), radio repeater and VR colegue right next to you, even if you go only few steps away from the base.
Thank you for your time
AE Van Vogt's 'Far Centaurus' (1944) likely inspired the concept of 'wait calculation'
@fraser for the next Q&A..
I'd love to know how much bigger Mars would have needed to be to remain earthlike? is it just shy of the mass needed to retain its atmosphere, or is it nowhere near?
Thanks.
Hello Fraser,
Love the vids, but which of your past answers do you believe has aged worse?
excellent
Alpha Centauri and also Barnard's star are actually moving closer to us at a slow rate. And will be closest to us in roughly 30,000 years. This would be a great time to jump off and lots of time to advance technology for the trip. You would probably want to do some type of terra forming and infrastructure before you arrive so you would probably want to start working on it perhaps a thousand years before you send the first people. A ship traveling at a fraction of light speed could reach it in one generation.
Use magnetic boots that release as you step forward.
Get well soon friend
Fraser, I enjoy your videos, but I need to correct some conclusions you drew in the section on wearing weights. I am a 30 year physician and received training decades ago at NASA KSC in Space Life Sciences.
While astronauts were walking on the moon during Apollo, there were incidents where the momentum of the moonwalker created a lateral momentum that the moonwalker felt but where the 1/6 g caused destablization and a fall. These falls were actually somewhat dangerous. Charlie Duke described one incident that was actually captured on video where he leapt with both feet off the lunar soil and accidentally flipped on his PLSS and landed looking up at the Earth and blackness of space. Increasing the mass in the boots might be of some value in counter balancing and lowering center of gravity of the suited moonwalker.
More important than Charlie Duke's anecdote about moon walkers is the discussion about fluid shifts and opthalmalogic changes. You are correct about these fluid shifts being present in microgravity. In fact, these shifts have been known for decades, measured with blood tests looking at many parameters, and even physiologic models for the shift from 1 g Earth to 0 g LEO.
However, there are no studies at lunar 1/6 g nor at Mars 1/3 g to know the extent of these fluid shifts and opthalmologic changes in partial g fields. It is entirely speculative as to the magnitude, clinical significance, and duration of these changes when changing from 1g to 0 g during flight and then 1/6 g exposure for nonspecific and speculative durations.
In fact, the absence of NASA prioritization of partial g centrifuges for life sciences experiments is a major miss for the world's space programs over the past 40 years. In my opinion, partial g centrifuges should have been a high national priority during STS and ISS operations. Had we flown those centrifuges (even for lab animal studies), we could have modeled some of these issues in centrifugal force fields and compared to similar experiments when we put a biological lab on the moon or Mars. These studies are DEFINITELY needed in order to predict the short-term adaptation and long-term effects of exposure to 1/3 g and 1/6 g.
Until we put these capabilities on the surface of the moon and Mars, we really do not know the effect, impact, or if these fluid shifts and compartmental physiologic effects are even clinically significant. In many ways, the Artemis or other crews who first land on the moon and do these experiments will be the folks testing and doing pioneering work for the human race. I'd love to talk more about this with you and our team if you like.
The Babylon 5 episode "The Long Dark" has an interesting take on the explorer ship being overtaken by new technology
Maybe we should add a "weight" (or actually mass) calculation to the wait calculation. Like we increase the mass of the spacecraft as well as the possible speed as time goes by. This way we can make sure new spacecrafts don't overtake the old ones.
I feel like the fallacy of the "wait calculation" is assuming that the faster starship would target the same star instead of saying, "Well, we've got a ship going there already, what else is in range for the faster ship that was out of range for the slow boat?"
The fact that faster ships exist is only relevant if you have unlimited funds and resources to send ships to every possible destination.
Osmium gym shorts? Lead socks? Tungsten sweatbands?
What about Jupiter's magnetic field? Many say it is not good for electronics.
Yeah, seems like the loudest place (across most of the spectrum) in our solar system, other than sun itself.
Jupiter's magnetic field is 20,000 times more powerful than Earth's. It traps high-energy particles in its immense magnetic field creating intense radiation belts that are dangerous to spacecraft.
It seems like a pretty crazy idea to build an interferometer telescope using Jupiter's Lagrange points . . .
So Interferometry at Nanoscale Wavelengths in the Visible Range on the surface of a Planet or Moon is impossible because of seismic, tidal, and tectonic vibrations - Noise. So Interferometry in Space using the best Gyroscopes unaffected by Terrestrial Noise may be easier. Interferometers at a 1AU sized Appeture would be mind-blowing. I think we'll eventually cancel out the tidal/tectonic terrestrial noise with adaptive optics strategies? And building smaller more precise Attitude Thrusters Gyroscopes & Atomic Clocks could get us Ultra Precise Space Interferometry, as well.
Sleeping chambers in a rotating chamber to give you a little gravity every night might mitigate most of the health issues.
Gravity during sleep doesn't provide much benefit. To the point where we can use "bed rest studies" on Earth to mimic the damage caused by zero-g.
@@1FatLittleMonkey I don't think bed rest studies would tell us that. Astronauts aren't inactive, they work out, move around, gravity during sleep may do a lot to deal with fluid buildup issues. Would have to test on a space station.
Some designs have them spend their entire trip in a series of rotating chambers.
@@OnceAndFutureKing13711 yeah, that is just way more expensive and/or disorienting. A small chamber should be fine for lying down to sleep. But certainly if we can afford to build a giant rotating space ship, problem solved!
@@JackMott In bed-rest-studies, participants exercise. It's not the lack of exercise that they are simulating, it's the lack of gravity down the length of the body.
The best place for mining in space is where you have access to:
- Plenty of minerals
- Plenty of water
- Plenty of acids for refining the metals.
(its earth)
11:52 you could set up the telescopes right next to the radio telescopes and use it's atomic clock
It's not about not having an atomic clock, it's that atomic clocks aren't enough to be accurate at optical wavelengths.
@@1FatLittleMonkeyWTF are you talking about? They are already setting this up with the European Southern Observatory Network.
Sounds like Jupiter's Lagrange points would be the perfect place for aliens to hide an observation station to track earthling activity ;)
Why would the faster ship pick up the slower one? The flight trajectory would be completely different at 1000 years. You would have to plot an intercept course to the slower ship then replot the next leg (going along 2 sides of a triangle) to the destination.
Both ships are traversing the same path, one just waited to leave. Think of it like deciding to leave the house early so you can drive half the speed limit for twice as long
@@tommerren1249 they can't. It would take way too much energy (which would need to be on the ship...the tyranny of the rocket equation strikes again.)
They wouldn't be on the same path, they are going from different starting points toward different destination points. The stars are all moving relative to each other.
The faster ship would also need to slow down and speed up twice instead of once in order to meet up and exchange cargo.
@seionne85
I have no response to that. The comment you replied to was not about "would you rather" it was about the fact that the mechanics involved in doing an intercept would be way more complicated than "just coast in a straight line at constant speed the whole time."
Astronauts on Mars would enjoy weighted suits for surface exploration. The long list of medical complications would be shortened with a suit that weighs enough to mimic your weight on Earth.
During the year plus round trip crew members could enjoy the ɓenefits of being seated in a pedal powered carousel -- one gets a cardio workout pedaling while one or two others experience a centrifugal force that drains blood out of the head and torso.
What to do in the Jupiter Trojan regions? Build interferometers! Gravity from Jupiter and the Sun are fairly cancelled out. I suppose those place would be great for science that require flat spacetime.
15:28 isn't the Homunculus Nebula surrounding Omicron Ceti (Mira)? the light echo (ripple?) you're showing is in the constellation Monoceros.
Fraser, would it be correct to state that making an interferometer of any frequency is limited by the precision and synchronization of the clocks?
That would make the technology independent if it is visible light or radio waves to create an image. Are the clocks the limiting factor?
A pressurized suit will keep your eyeball hydraulics in check.
So what we need is a JWST+ in a Neptunian lagrange point?
What’s the size and shape of a Lagrange point?
i have heard of a telescope using images taken in january and another in july. so i guess that's an interferometer the size of the earths orbit. now, jupiter's lagrange points being mentioned.... we can have an interferometer the size of jupiter's orbit! and we don't even have to wait for the orbit, the telescopes can be placed in the lagrange points!
Do you have a wait calculation for an uncrewed mission to AC, too? Recently mobile phones, action cameras and drones got really tiny, so I'm thinking for a tiny spacecraft, hopefully wihout too much problems with micrometeorites.
what effect if any do al the telescopes in l2 have on any future telescopes or space infastructure we might one day want to also put there.
Can/Do scientists use ground based telescopes along with space based telescopes to create an interferometer?
How much lagrange could a lagrange point point if a lagrange point could point lagrange?
L4 + L5 missions… any news? Example: binocular telescope. Then expand to L4/5 of other planets for a solar system array.
What mechanism ejects a binary companion from a system, when the primary object goes supernova?
Hey Fraser, if 3 body is an unsolved problem, how can there be Lagrange points? Are we even sure the Earth won't randomly fly away?
cool
Question for Q&A. What would you see and experience if you were on a planet in a galaxy that collides with another galaxy?
With radio telescopes being atomic clock synchronized, the atomic clocks are operating at microwave frequencies, so they're ticking at a frequency comparable to the radio telescope observation frequency, which is probably a major part of why that was able to work at all, but they don't tick fast enough to keep up with optical telescope observation frequencies. But newer nuclear clocks and optical clocks do operate at IR or optical frequencies; would those newer clocks would have the timing resolution to synchronize IR and optical telescopes?
interesting point, I would think it would probably work if you could actually build a clock like that... since microwaves are 1 step above radio waves, you'd probably want a clock with a frequency a bit higher than the frequency you're trying to synchronize... so for optical light you'd probably want some sort of UV or even x-ray frequency clock
Can you have non-interferometer telescopes that are made up of separated components but share a secondary mirror, and imagers, like a regular telescope?
For eg: JWST (and similar large telescopes on Earth) use segmented mirrors pointing to the same secondary, and same imagers, but the mirrors "fill up" the whole area of the primary mirror.
Can you instead have a functioning segmented telescope that _doesn't_ "fill up" the primary mirror, but still works like a regular telescope (not an interferometer)? If so, can you have space-based free-flying telescopes spread over many kilometres, acting as a partially filled primary mirror, all reflecting to a single free-flyer acting as a shared secondary + imagers?
like in future, I'm sure they'll send a voyager 3 and 4 :). That'll probably match up the distance and surpass the first 2 voyager missions. I'm sure it'll be in different direction. They'll have much better technology too
I think CBMAmiga1200 wanted stereoscopic images to watch with e.g. a VR headset to sense depth.
the wait calculation strikes me as silly for a very basic reason: why would you be sending two colony ships to the same system? if i had a ship en route, and had a fresh new ship twice as fast as the old one, i would send it out to a further star. i would only be sending a second ship along the same route if i lost contact with the first.
V838 MON is not the Homunculus Nebula. --- That's Eta Carinae.
Question: What happens to the Mass / Schwarzschild radius of a Black Hole if its speed approaches the speed of light compared to earth's reference frame?
the problem with "wait caluclation" is that 700 years for humanity is a very long time. Plenty of time to have some sort of war or catastrophy that makes that calculation moot. So imho its never a waste of time. The time is always right.
Ads aren’t a problem for me
Surely L4/5 would be the best place for interferometers ?
Speaking of Jupiter, would there be any advantage to putting a three satellite, gravity wave detector around Jupiter, like eLisa?
Lagrange points L4 & L5. I'm writing a sci fi novel about a Telescope and space station at the L4 point. How stable, how much station keeping energy would be required to keep it there?
Before even thinking of mining asteroids I think we should do a practice mission, maybe something in low Earth orbit. Mine the ISS.
I'm serious, I'm not just saying that as a lame attempt to save the ISS, what is a genuine attempt if the human race learning how to refine and recycle resources in space.
Assuming progress in robotics and rocketry over the next decade, is refuelling James Webb possible? Did the JW designers include a refuelling port?
Wouldn't a visible light interferometer telescope of say 100,000 kilometers be susceptible to gravity wave distortion. On axis would seem to cancel out, but off axis should create timing errors. How do you compensate for space-time distortions?
Concerning the "wait" equation, does it include the civilization disaster factor? If civilization or the technological culture collapses, the early ship might still preserve civilization or even the human race.
Fraser. Using the points made in this episode regarding "The Wait Calculation", why don't we postpone manned exploration and plow the savings into sending probes to every planet in the solar system and their moons? National ego aside, it seems like a lengthy wait before risking manned exploration would make a lot of sense. I would rather know more about the moons of Saturn and Jupiter than spending a fortune to see a couple of astronauts walk on the moon.
Also, adding weight in lower gravity is going to increase your momentum and make falling over much much easier. Putting most of the weight in the feet would help some but youd lose almost all the biological benefits
Your keeping the ads down is much appreciated. UA-cam is cutting the throats of content creators. Some channel's have ads pop up every 2 minutes, making them unwatchable.
JWST...I hope that when the time comes. They have it return to an orbit around Earth. Refuel it. Then send it back to its rightfull place (with or without help of extra rockets)
For spaceships doesn't centrifugal/centripetal force address these concerns. For mars use solar with giant flywheel living quarters storing power for night while providing more earth like living conditions?
lol interesting... I could see it working, though I don't know how practical it'd be... building something the size/mass of a skyscraper that spins on its side would be quite the undertaking... and I don't think you could really use it as a flywheel for storing energy, as you'd be slowing it down by taking the energy out of it... in fact you'd need to constantly feed it energy to counteract friction and drag (though there wouldn't been too much drag on Mars, but some)
better to just do this in space on a space station imo
Why couldn't two Telescopes of a Space Interferometer link up their range, distance, bearing from each other using lasers beamed at one another at nanoscale visible wavelengths. Then using A I. Increasingly accurate attitude adjustments are made between the two until they're in spacial-sync down to a nanometer. Then hook up the rest of the telescopes - may take much longer. But if the A.I. sees all the Scopes in the Interferometer as One Unit. Then works to focus it by more minute attitude adjustments as Scopes fire lasers that push each other away, perhaps. In addition to super subtle/precise micro thrusters. And maybe we can get 6 of them lined up for a few minutes to make some good exposures one day.
Arriving faster at Mars was the plot of a Peter F Hamilton novel. However the fast guy was FTL.
On Mars, the shift of body fluids might not be too problematic. The general degradation in strength from partial gravity would be better managed with centrifuges that supplement natural gravity through periodic exercise.
I think it would have been helpful if the video provided a threshold gravity level for this to occur. In space between planets the issue will have an exaggerated effect. On a planet with 1/4 of earth gravity... should not be a problem, just a little more time for the fluid to flow down. Simple exercise and maybe compression will handle that problem.
The problem is, we don't know. (Even after over 60 years of spaceflight, and decades of continuously manned space-stations, we have barely started doing partial gravity animal studies (thanks to the Japanese.))
We sent Voyager 1 and 2 in 1977. They used planets to slingshot and gain speed. The solar system is fairly flat (Maybe). With todays technology, can we send a more comprehensive probe out perpendicular to the solar system to observe our solar system from above and look at other parts of our Galaxy? We have newly developed propulsion systems and larger payload rockets to launch probes with more instruments and fuel to last maybe one hundred years or more. Gradually gaining speed over the years we can go much further in a smaller amount of time.