/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11294777]

>launch space engine
>set speed to 1c
>start flying around
Holy shit, this crap is painfully slow.
There truly is no hope for human space travel if this is the absolute maximum speed at which anything can move in the universe, and it makes me very sad.

[Anonymous No.11294779]

[Anonymous No.11294786]

>>11294777

if there is alien life, it's evolution would probably follow similar lines as ours and occur in similar conditions. rest of the universe is hostile or empty.

[Anonymous No.11294790]

point is, space isn't terribly exciting if you think about it.

[Anonymous No.11294795]

[Anonymous No.11294838]

>>11294777
Warp drive my negro.
You have to be a type 1 civilization to create enough energy to power it though.

I doubt humans will make it that far.

[Anonymous No.11294841]

>>11294795
based comfyposter

[Anonymous No.11294852]

>>11294777
> Holy shit, this crap is painfully slow.

It’s not that bad.

> There truly is no hope for human space travel if this is the absolute maximum speed at which anything can move in the universe

Wrong.

[Anonymous No.11294854]

desu i think space is a big topic in popsci because it's largely irrelevant from an economic standpoint. the powers that be try to convince us otherwise by propping up celebrity billionaires like musk.

it's shocking how extensively the media shapes our ideals.

[Anonymous No.11294859]

not that i don't find it interesting. it's just funny how pop culture is.

[Anonymous No.11294868]

>>11294854
>Satellites don’t real
>Asteroid metals don’t real

[Anonymous No.11294889]

>>11294868

ah yes, satellite ownership and asteroid mining. true pursuits of the 21st century gentleman

[Anonymous No.11294906]

why move quickly through space, if we can make the space move even quicker around us?

[Anonymous No.11294918]

>>11294777
Ever heard of length contraction?

[Anonymous No.11294917]

>>11294889
>ah yes, satellite ownership and asteroid mining. true pursuits of the 21st century gentleman

Yep. Satellites are very important big business, and asteroids hold immense mineral wealth

[Anonymous No.11295243]

>>11294889
>moon
>fuck ton of iron, silicon, and other shit
>smelter setup with infinite solar energy
>easy manufacturing setup for ferroalloys of all flavors
>easy setup for extremely pure silicon
>0 worry about environmental protection and can design manufacturing systems to be as brutally efficient as you want

[Anonymous No.11295253]

>launch space engine
>set speed to 1c
>start flying around
>no matter what direction you go at 1c, the cosmic microwave background radiation becomes infinitely hot and dense
>your space ship evaporates into a gas of fundamental particles and so do you

[Anonymous No.11295261]

>>11294906
>>11294918

Ok. bois. Give me the skinny on the space contraction theory.

I understand it conceptually, but how plausible it is to actually be a thing at some point in the far future

[Anonymous No.11295264]

>>11294777
are you low iq? think how much time would actually pass on the shit traveling at 99.9%c compared to space outside or earth

[Anonymous No.11295301]

>>11295243

i guess so. perhaps "economically irrelevant" wasn't the word i should have used. it seems like we have more important things to worry about though.

[Anonymous No.11295316]

>>11295261
The hardest part is having efficient enough engines to reach relativistic speeds, and slow back down at the other end.
The second hardest part is dealing with particles in space: the diffuse gas in the interstellar medium is unnoticeable for modern spacecraft, but would likely pose heating issues for relativistic craft. Also, photons and cosmic rays in front of you would be blueshifted to very high energy radiation.

[Anonymous No.11295317]

>the longer we wait, the faster will the universe expand
We'll never leave the Milky way, right?

[Anonymous No.11295337]

>>11295317
The local group is gravitationally bound, so it won't be affected by expansion. Outside that, I'm pretty sure there are at least hundreds to thousands of galaxies near enough for us to theoretically visit

[Anonymous No.11295384]

>>11295337
I heard from that Kurz vid even the nearest, are expanding too fast for us to ever visit. Andromeda being an exception because it's on a collision course with us.
Unless you meant the Magellanic Clouds around the milky way.

[Anonymous No.11295387]

>>11294777
If you're travelling at C you can get anywhere instantly (from the traveller's frame of reference)

[Anonymous No.11295442]

>>11295387
This is true.
>>11294777
OP, don't worry, even though it takes a long time from an onlookers perspective, if you're actually in the spaceship it will seem like nothing.

[Anonymous No.11295523]

>>11295384
There's Triangulum too, and a few dozen dwarf galaxies in the local group. Even out to a few hundred million light years, I doubt expansion would make travel impossible.

[Anonymous No.11295593]

>>11294779
how weak are they 100 light years out? assuming they were broadcast at today's amplitudes.

[Anonymous No.11295595]

>>11295253
just gotta go 2c to outrun the microwave background radiation that is only moving at 1c

[Anonymous No.11295634]

>>11294777
nah the real sad part is that at that speed you can reach other galaxies in a couple of hours but time will pass like crazy for everything you left behind making space diplomacy impossible

[Anonymous No.11295647]

>>11295634
>you can reach other galaxies
Negro, going at 1c would take 2.5 million years to get to Andromeda, the closest proper galaxy to us. Even the Magellanic clouds would take 100s of thousands of years at C.

[Anonymous No.11295649]

>>11295593
not an exact answer, but gives a rough sense of the numbers:
https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=81538&postid=1871681

[Anonymous No.11295654]

>>11295647
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time#Example_1:_The_twin_%22paradox%22

[Anonymous No.11295660]

>>11295634
why need diplomacy be impossible? In the days of sail, ambassadors used to be much more powerful because they were the local representative of their country and there was no higher authority to intercede on their country's behalf, no red phone line in the white house in those days. Why shouldn't it be like that again, ,with ambassadors charged with, as best as they're able, keeping up the culture and value of the place when they left (10,000 years ago by Earth time)?

[anonymous1 No.11295711]

if the human race can survive long enough to plan in advance i think there is but we might just evolve into some other intelligent animal also i'm scared of the replys i might get if this is scientificly inaccurate

[Anonymous No.11295714]

>>11295660
Massive difference between a communication time on the order of months and one on the order of millions of years.
A colony across an ocean can still be taxed, and can still be sent troops to enforce the sovereign's will.
A colony across an intergalactic void is a de facto completely independent state. By the time the sovereign learns of anything the colony does, a response would be millions of years too late. The sovereign almost certainly wouldn't still exist by that time anyway.

[Anonymous No.11295718]

we haven't even had antibiotics for a hundred years, let alone computers. I wouldn't assume we know everything there is to know about spaceflight methods just yet.

[Anonymous No.11295771]

>>11295718
Listen to logical anon

[Anonymous No.11295775]

>>11295771

[Anonymous No.11295813]

>>11294777
>There truly is no hope for human space travel
key word is "human"
we'll eventually become post-human though

[Anonymous No.11295828]

>>11294777
>Set engine to 1c
>Being physically impossible due to having a mass, I cruise a theoretically infinite distance in the span of an infinitesmal duration then die instantly as my path curves into a black hole's reach at some point in that infintesmally long duration

[Anonymous No.11295853]

>>11294838
Cute, but since gravity waves travel with speed of light Einstein fucks you again.

[Anonymous No.11295870]

>>11295853
how fast did the universe expand genius

[Anonymous No.11295893]

>>11295647
>1c would take 2.5 million years to get to Andromeda
>what is the lorentz factor
i guess you're the nigger

[Anonymous No.11295894]

>>11294777
People don't understand how relativity works.
>Move at 88% speed of light relative to Earth. 1 year passes. Two years pass on Earth. Time dilation is 50%.
>Earth is moving relative to the galaxy, which is perhaps moving relative to a supercluster... and so on. Everything has a speed. More dilation means that for a single year on your 88% lightspeed spaceship, 2 years and maybe 1 day pass on the galactic frame.
>This is velocity time dilation. Gravity time dilation also exists - things closer to a center of mass experience things slower.
It's all relative. So yes,
>A space ship at sufficient speed could travel to another galaxy (not even just another star) with a human today on it. It would require a constant acceleration equivalent to the pull of gravity for I believe a few months. But a lot of time would pass on Earth. With sufficient technology a vessel could reach the end of the universe.
It's more complicated than that but yes, Interstellar does a good job of portraying it. A black hole makes time go really slowly. Going fast makes time go really slowly. Hang around a black hole as it travels to another galaxy or accelerate.

[Anonymous No.11295924]

>>11294838
>negative matter/energy
no such thing my negro. just because a square root has two answers doesn't mean that there is negative mass

[Anonymous No.11295935]

>>11294777
You could cross the whole milky way in a about 23 years. That's 200,000 light years. And if you can accelerate faster than 1g, even less.
Say goodbye to your loved ones on earth tho. Millennia will have passed.

[Anonymous No.11295938]

>>11295647
Just 29 years for the traveler, at 1g acceleration.

[Anonymous No.11296878]

>>11295870
nobody really knows, different methods of measurement get different results and for the most important part in early universe there are no measurements.

[Anonymous No.11296901]

>>11294790
IM not sure if I agree with you here.

IMAGINE if you could escape ALONE WITH YOUR WIFE with a spaceship and colonize a planet. All to yourself. Imagine.

[Anonymous No.11297607]

>>11295647
>what is frame of reference
>what is relativity

[Anonymous No.11297636]

>>11296901
Imagine not, but with Mormonism this can be your reality

[Anonymous No.11297660]

>>11295337
We'll never be able to reach any galaxy that isn't gravitationaly bound to ours.

[Anonymous No.11297750]

>>11294777
We'd be better off getting digitalized and tweaking our clock speed, travelling at whatever speed is achievable. Who cares about that 10-million year voyage to the next galaxy if you can make it seem like a day. And who cares about habitability when you're a computronium husk that exists completely fine in a vacuum.

[Anonymous No.11297751]

>>11297660
Wrong. The Hubble constant is about 65 km/s/Mpc, and acceleration due to dark energy is small out to hundreds of millions of light years, so galaxies within such a radius should be readily visitable by relativistic travel.

[Anonymous No.11297753]

>>11294779
What are those brownish red blobs?

[Anonymous No.11297760]

>>11297753
The reddish-pink spots are star birth nebulae, and the brown streaks are interstellar dust

[Anonymous No.11297767]

>>11297751
>65 km/s/Mpc
2cm/s per ly

[Anonymous No.11297972]

>>11294868
>popsci fags think asteroid mining is economically viable
Ah yes, let us spend 250 billion on a manned spacecraft to collect a hundred kilograms of gold.

[Anonymous No.11298610]

>>11294838
>crashes into a pebble going 5x the speed of light and creating a black hole instantly
Nothing personal kid

[Anonymous No.11299123]

>>11297660
If w can see it it's also gravitationally bound

[Anonymous No.11299124]

>>11296901
>Imagine
Jello babies!

[Anonymous No.11299139]

>>11294777
>truly is no hope for human space travel if this is the absolute maximum
No, it just stymies your personal Buck Rogers ambitions.
Rather egotistical of you.

[Anonymous No.11299147]

>>11294838
Alcubierre + Kardashev

Max Cringe

[Anonymous No.11299159]

>>11295264
>how much time would actually pass on the shit traveling at 99.9%c compared to space outside or earth
Very impressive, but that would take an absurd amount of energy.
Try playing with this:
http://convertalot.com/relativistic_star_ship_calculator.html

[Anonymous No.11299163]

>>11295649
There's also this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#We_are_not_listening_properly
>with a radio telescope as sensitive as the Arecibo Observatory, Earth's television and radio broadcasts would only be detectable at distances up to 0.3 light-years

[Anonymous No.11299166]

>>11295714
>Massive difference between a communication time on the order of months and one on the order of millions of years.
For nearby stars, it would be years, not millions of years.

[Anonymous No.11299285]

>>11294786
Perhaps. Unless alien life is not carbon based.

Also you know how much crazy shit happened on Earth for humans to become the dominant species? There would have to be a ridiculously similar chain of events.

[Anonymous No.11299295]

>>11299285
>Unless alien life is not carbon based.
There aren't many good alternatives, though.

[Anonymous No.11299305]

>>11299295
Yes that is true. The (arguably) best hypothesis is silicon based life, perhaps even phosphorus based.

[Anonymous No.11299320]

>>11295387
Cool, but the universe (and time) pretty much ends in an instant.

[Anonymous No.11299339]

>>11297972
why would it be a manned mission?

[Anonymous No.11299370]

>>11299124
just accelerate at 1g for the entire duration lol

[Anonymous No.11299383]

>>11297972
Every industrious endeavour is expensive when it first starts out. The commercialization and frequency of the enterprise that lowers cost due to competition and more certainty from the companies funding the shit.

[Anonymous No.11300376]

>>11296901

i don't have a wife

>>11297750
>And who cares about habitability when you're a computronium husk that exists completely fine in a vacuum.

if you don't care about habitability, then what's the point of traveling so far?

[Anonymous No.11300779]

>>11299123
Definitely not

[Anonymous No.11300786]

>>11294777
Just go faster lol are u dumb or something?

[Anonymous No.11300852]

>>11295243
How much moon can you chew away before you kill us all? Go mine the asteroid belt and leave my backyard intact

[Anonymous No.11300909]

>>11300779
Gravity propagates at c

[Anonymous No.11300938]

>>11300909
It sure does. That doesn't change the fact that almost everything we can see is too far away from us to be gravitationally bound.

[Anonymous No.11301122]

>>11300909
You could reach galaxies that are not bounded to us by gravity, but it would take an infinite amount of time, travelling at c
So good luck anon

[Anonymous No.11301224]

>>11300852
fuck that, asteroids are part of the delicate, intricate solar ecology on which all life depends. Go to alpha centauri with your heavy industry bullshit

[Anonymous No.11301286]

>>11299166
If you follow the reply chain back, you'll find we're talking about intergalactic diplomacy

[Anonymous No.11301348]

Is traveling with light speed making you age slower?

[Anonymous No.11301356]

Is thot experiment a valid scientific method?

[Anonymous No.11301626]

>>11295316
just use the sun instead of a ship, great shield and constant acceleration, and we can go explore the galaxy with our entire solar system!

[Anonymous No.11301679]

>>11294777
>what is proper time

[Anonymous No.11301836]

>>11294777
OK fags here's how you do it, it's easy.

>solve consciousness
>upload brain into computer
>use red dwarf or black hole as an energy source
>slow down perception of time such that a single thought takes you millions of years
>either travel through cosmos yourself or manufacture billions of von neumann probes to do it for you
>explore entire visible universe
>discover space is the fucking same everywhere, there is no purpose to any of it, you cannot escape heat death and there are probably infinite universes beside this one that you have no hope of interacting with
>KYS

[Anonymous No.11301842]

>>11294786
Could be slow moving methane breathers around, takes less energy.

[Anonymous No.11301844]

>>11294777
It shouldn't. We're humans, evolved to live in a gravity well and function ecosystems. Our goal should be to create robots to explore the galaxy, they will be far better suited towards the task than we ever could hope to be. Our robotic offspring could colonize the universe given enough time.

[Anonymous No.11301888]

>>11301836
>it's easy.
OK, my good homosexual, I'll bite.

>>solve consciousness
>>upload brain into computer
See pic related.
I'll take a moment to point out my (hetro) roommate and I are re-watching STTGN, episode by episode, and nobody mentions that they don't want to be "transported" for fear of spending the rest of their lives wondering if their "original self" was murdered on the transporter pad to obfuscate moral issues related to the newly formed "transported" versions of themselves.

cont...

[Anonymous No.11301890]

>>11301888
>STTGN,
*STTNG, oops

[Anonymous No.11301902]

>>11301888
>cont...
>>use red dwarf or black hole as an energy source
Considering there are none in our solar system, you seem to be claiming we have to leave our solar system before we can leave our solar system.
I'll skip the next few lines as too absurd to respond to...

>>discover space is the fucking same everywhere, there is no purpose to any of it,
[citation REALLY needed]
How broken inside do you have to be to put this shit into words? "There's just no escape! I could make a billion copies of myself (hand-waves away obvious issues), but no mater what' Ill never know the satisfaction of being a real boy".

>KYS

kys, indeed, my ill-fated friend. kys indeed,

[Anonymous No.11301915]

>>11301902
>being this autistic

[Anonymous No.11301962]

>>11301915
no u

[Anonymous No.11302643]

>>11295387
ok brainlet here, how does that work?

[Anonymous No.11302666]

>>11302643
>>11295654

[Anonymous No.11302693]

>>11301836
>slow down perception of time such that a single thought takes you millions of years
Yeah there’s no way THAT could ever turn around and fuck you in the ass.

[Anonymous No.11302704]

>>11295935
not if you speed up the earth's rotation to near light speed too.

[Anonymous No.11302733]

>>11297972
The value of metals in asteroids isn't in introducing them into earthly circulation it's that they are already in space saving the cost of launching such material into orbit for low gravity manufacturing.

[Anonymous No.11302832]

>>11294777
What if I were to tell you we're already travelling faster than the speed of light
(Away from the most distant observable galaxies that are moving away from us faster than light speed)
Can we utilize this phenomenon?

[Anonymous No.11302860]

>>11302832
>Can we utilize this phenomenon?
No.
Just like the searchlight spot, the scissors crossing point, etc. expansion of the universe isn't FTL in any practical sense.
The real answer to OP's dilemma is generation ships.
Forget your personal fantasies of walking on an alien world.
Strap in, make babies, and hope there's a habitable home waiting for your great-grandkids at the far end of the ride.

[Anonymous No.11302905]

>>11294777
Your perception of time also slows as you speed up. Also, cryogenics. If you can get to an appreciably large fraction of the speed of light it won't be so bad. More concerning is what happens if you hit something. You'd definitely need a decent amount of forward shielding and some means of avoiding anything bigger than a grain of sand in your travel path.

[Anonymous No.11302920]

>>11302905
>Also, cryogenics
Not real (yet).

[Anonymous No.11303580]

>>11294918
Your mom contracts my length

[Anonymous No.11304557]

>>11302905
How would you even detect anything that is in your path, when any instruments that could conceivable spot them are too slow?

[Anonymous No.11304560]

>>11302860
>Forget your personal fantasies of walking on an alien world.

Nope. We’re going to walk on alien worlds.

[Anonymous No.11304749]

>>11295387
this gave me an idea for a sci-fi universe
>people settle on planets as you might expect
>but in order to travel anywhere outside of your local system, you have to take a lightspeed ship
>the journey is over in seconds (from your perspective), but to everyone else it takes years
>in order to reach more distant systems, 200+ years can pass in non-light time
>thus families and close friends tend to stick together, usually avoiding interstellar travel when alone
>also in terms of cargo hauling there is much more profit to be made in huge loads of cargo than small ones, because as the ship is in transit the colony's needs are building up for years
>as a result, the interstellar ships gradually change from the initial "small" aircraft carrier-size things with a few dozen crew members to cities in space housing several million that are so big they need to account for how the gravity well of their destination will be affected when they arrive
>each one develops its own unique culture, government, even technology becomes radically different as they jump between colonies, as news travels between colonies no faster than the ships do - they usually don't develop anything themselves, but they use technology from their clients to fix/upgrade malfunctioning systems, etc., and because so much time passes between visits there's always something different when they come back
>a 200ly 10-minute round trip on the ship can mean the destination changes from a few farms to a huge city when you get back
>what's more, the residents of the city-ships become the only remaining "original" humans in the universe, because they're constantly jumping and are thus thousands of years "ahead" of everyone else

and maybe a story in this universe would start with some scientist on a distant colony inventing a mcguffin that allows for FTL travel without time dilation, which suddenly mushes all the different cultures and technologies together and sparks a huge war or something

[Anonymous No.11304778]

why move yourself when you can move space around you

[Anonymous No.11304780]

>>11304560
>Nope. We’re going to walk on alien worlds.
Mars, sure.
And that's about it for the "sure" list.
Since you're poo-pooing my claims of our great-grandkids, I assume you mean people alive today will walk on alien worlds, and that's super-unlikely.
Even in this solar system, with a vac suit, Mercury and Venus are both very inhospitable.
Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus are gas giants, and don't really have a surface.
Neptune has an ice mantle, so -maybe- that, and Pluto and the other dwarf planet count, I guess.
But exoplanets? Probably not.
The closest exoplanet (no surprise) orbits Proxima Centauri, 4.2 light years away.
Our fastest plausible starship design would have to be Project Orion.
Dyson's numbers (from 1968) give a best time of 133 years to Proxima Centauri, but even that speed doesn't allow for saving fuel to slow down at the other end. So you'd just flay past a world you can't actually stop to walk on at 3.3% of c.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)#Theoretical_applications
The article goes on to mention much higher speeds for anti-matter versions of the spacecraft, but that's not currently a realistic option.
And don't miss this:
>In each case saving fuel for slowing down halves the maximum speed.
So, realistically, we're taking 266 years to reach the nearest exoplanet, which (based on what little we know) seems about as interesting as Mars was to begin with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri_b
>Proxima Centauri b orbits the star at a distance of roughly 0.05 AU ... with an orbital period of approximately 11.2 Earth days, and has an estimated mass of at least 1.3 times that of the Earth.
>Its habitability has not been established, though it is unlikely to be habitable since the planet is subject to stellar wind pressures of more than 2,000 times those experienced by Earth from the solar wind.[8][9][10]


Sorry, but this adventure is for some future generation, not us.

[Anonymous No.11304799]

>>11304780
>still thinks you have to move to get somewhere
yikes

[Anonymous No.11304826]

>>11304749
Sounds cool

[Anonymous No.11304837]

>>11304749
>>the journey is over in seconds (from your perspective), but to everyone else it takes years
At 1g, it's going to take 520 days to accelerate to 0.9c, where time dilation factor tau is 0.436, not exactly "seconds" for the journey, especially considering you need another 520 days to slow down.
Even at 0.99c, time dilation is about 7:1, and you'd spend over 5 years accelerating and decelerating to make that happen (at 1g).
http://convertalot.com/relativistic_star_ship_calculator.html


>gave me an idea for a sci-fi universe
What you're describing sounds a LOT like James Blish's "Cities in Flight", except he starts off with a FTL mcguffin that also allows for entire cities (Manhattan for instance) to be lifted off the Earth's surface and flown to distant worlds.
It's really a great series.

[Anonymous No.11304843]

>>11304799
>yikes
Let me know when you invent FTL, Doc,

[Anonymous No.11304851]

>>11294777
it's not slow if we get to live longer.

[Anonymous No.11304859]

>>11304837
p.s. before you ask, the 520 days (1140 total) and 5 year figures are ship time, not Earth time.

[Anonymous No.11304874]

>>11304837 (You)
p.s. before you ask, the 520 days (1040 total) and 5 year figures are ship time, not Earth time.

[Anonymous No.11305187]

>>11301348
welcome to the 20th century

[Anonymous No.11305650]

>>11304837
>At 1g, it's going to take 520 days to accelerate to 0.9c
why 1g? it is almost as if you assumed that space travel meant a star wars ship with an actual crew

[Anonymous No.11305690]

>>11295316
>The second hardest part is dealing with particles in space
imagine a small steel ball moving through space at 0.999999999999999999999999999999999c relative to sheet of paper 0.1mm thick
now this ball impacts with this paper right in the center. Guess what happens?
1. there is round hole in the paper
2. paper and ball annihilated in explosion
3. nothing happens, because the ball is so thin relative to paper, so it just quantum tunnels through

[Anonymous No.11305764]

>>11305690

But we wouldn’t be travelling through space on a piece of paper like a magic fucking carpet, you ignoranus, there would be a lot more material to hit on a fucking FTL ship!

[Anonymous No.11305765]

>>11305764
Like what

[Anonymous No.11305769]

>>11305764
Oh no, a few hundred hydrogen atoms!
Ahhhhhhhhh!

[Anonymous No.11306473]

>>11300909
fly at 1.01c, free anti-gravity tech!

[Anonymous No.11306480]

>>11305690
Is there a way to accelerate a baseball sized object up to .9 c without nukes yet?

[Anonymous No.11306747]

>>11301836
that's from the new movies do you have the one for the original trilogy?

[Anonymous No.11306931]

>>11295924
dark matter = dark energy = negative mass fluid. farnes gang gang gang.

[Anonymous No.11306938]

I feel unless we come close to faster than light travel, we should focus on improvements to our own planet and humanity.

[Anonymous No.11307019]

>>11306931
>dark matter = dark energy
wrong

>dark energy = negative mass fluid
wrong

[Anonymous No.11307104]

>>11305769
Interstellar medium has average density of 1 atom per cubic centimeter. For a ship with 100 m^2 cross section, this corresponds to 10^8 atoms to collide with per forward meter travelled. With a length contraction factor of 10, this becomes 10^9 atoms per meter. At near the speed of light, this is about 3e17 atom collisions per second. The kinetic energy per hydrogen atom is about a nanojoule.
The result is an energy dump on a ship of on order 100 megawatts over 100 square meters with a relativistic contraction factor of just 10. That's about the power of a typical power plant, concentrated on an area the size of a typical house. So not totally unreasonable heat dissipation for futuristic tech, but definitely far beyond current heat dissipation tech. And this doesn't account for the ablation of the ship itself, or radiation on the crew.
This calculation assumes 100% of the atoms' kinetic energy is dumped into the ship, but it's just an order of magnitude calculation anyway so I'd expect it to be right within a factor of 10 or 100.

[Anonymous No.11307958]

>>11304749
Would read desu

[Anonymous No.11307964]

>>11294777
>set drive to 1c
>hit fleck of dust the size of a pebble
>die

[Anonymous No.11308058]

>>11294777
By the time we get to space travel, almost 80% of modern physics will be discarded as outdated horseshit so who knows, maybe it's not all doom and gloom.

[Anonymous No.11308074]

>>11307104
>shields up!

[Anonymous No.11308082]

>>11307964

[Anonymous No.11308253]

>>11300376
To get away from the unwashed masses in this galaxy.

[Anonymous No.11309688]

>>11308253
who cares about being clean when you're made of metal
just hose yourself down and take a hot wax bath every so often

[Anonymous No.11309775]

>>11305650
>why 1g? it is almost as if you assumed that space travel meant a star wars ship with an actual crew
Well, OP was lamenting about humans not getting anywhere anywhere soon.
And there's not much point in longing for better time dilation unless there's someone on board.
But even 1g is purely speculative with current technology.
We don't even have any ideas that might hypothetically drive a ship at one g for amt extended period.