At a recent rocket propulsion conference in Connecticut, scientists announced that they had studied the issue and concluded that interstellar travel outside the solar system would never be practical.
Interstellar travel outside the solar system will never be practical. This pessimistic view was announced at the Joint Rocket Propulsion Conference in Hartford, Connecticut, where the challenges of future space propulsion were discussed.
The starting point of all researchers is that any type of interstellar propulsion will require huge technological advances, but some believe that these advances can only occur in the realm of science fiction and will not be applicable in reality. Using current technologies is impractical because it will take tens of thousands of years to reach the nearest planet and even in the most optimistic scenario and with the most advanced technologies, the journey will still take many hundreds of years. However, above all there is a question of fuel: how can a journey to Proxima Centauri be carried out, if we require energy 100 times greater than what the Earth produces today?
In a previous article we analyzed how long it will take to arrive To the star closest to us - Proxima Centauri - using the slowest drive (ion engine like the one used in the Deep Space-1 mission in 1998), and the fastest (gravitational acceleration with the help of the sun like the one used in the Helios 2 mission in 1976) . We also discussed the theoretical possibility of using nuclear propulsion - a series of nuclear fusion bombs thrown behind the spacecraft to provide it with thrust, as in the Daedalus concept proposed in the seventies.
Unfortunately, a flight to Proxima Centauri, the closest star to the solar system, using an ion engine would take 81 years, and even with the help of the Sun's gravity it would still take at least 19 years to reach our destination. This means 2,700 and 600 generations respectively, in any case a long-term commitment. To put things in perspective, 2,700 generations ago, Homo sapiens had not yet developed the ability to communicate through speech. 600 generations ago, the Neanderthals had just become extinct. Even with the help of nuclear propulsion, it will take 85 generations to reach the neighboring planet, it is still a very long journey and we hope they will get to travel in business class at least...
At a recent meeting of experts in the field of space propulsion, it turns out that there are more fundamental obstacles facing humanity in its request to spread outside the solar system. In response to the idea that we might even make the flight to Proxima Centauri in one person's lifetime, states Prof. Paolo Lozano, from the Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, "In this case we would have to talk about an engineering scale that cannot even be described."
An important question is, for example, how it will be possible to refuel an interstellar spacecraft. According to Bryce Cassanti, a professor in the Rensselaer Institute of Technology's Department of Engineering and Science, at least 100 times the energy consumed worldwide each year would be required for the journey. "We can't mine enough resources on Earth to make fuel for one trip." Kasanti said during his speech at the conference. "These resources simply do not exist, we will have to mine them in the outer planets of the solar system."
so that the human race will reach the stars, we are required to offer a better plan. Even the most advanced forms of propulsion, even antimatter engines cannot facilitate bridging the gap. Suddenly, even a spacewalk seemed more attractive.
For the news in Universe Today
On the same topic on the science website:
123 תגובות
This has also been my conclusion for many years.
This is also the solution to the question: why, given the multitude of possibilities in the universe for the development of other intelligent life (aliens)
As Prof. Carl Sagan explained, don't you see any signs of them?
The answer is: every intelligent species is confined to its region due to the inability to bridge the expanses of space!
This is an unpopular truth, especially in the Middle East
But as Sherlock Holmes also pointed out: when all other possibilities are ruled out with scientific tools, what remains must be the truth.
The future is really hard to talk about, but what makes it difficult for you to be precise about the past?
19,000 years is not 600 generations. A generation is considered 25 years, so there are 760 generations. 81,000 years is 3240 generations.
Considering that the first birth in most of history was at an age less than 25 years and not around 30 years, your calculation is simply crooked.
But worse - for some reason you decided that the archaic Homo sapiens (and in Africa already the modern Homo sapiens) and the Neanderthal did not speak. based on what? Based on researchers' hypotheses from 40 years ago? More accepted today by most researchers since they had a language.
And the Neanderthals didn't disappear 20,000 years ago, but more. They also did not really become extinct according to the latest publications, but were assimilated. So the question of extinction is relative.
19,000 and 81,000 years is indeed a very long time. Man began permanent settlement only about 13,000 years ago and developed agriculture only about 10,000 years ago. But on the other hand, the pace of technology development has accelerated all the time - so what happened in the first 10,000 years of permanent settlement cannot be compared to what happened in the last 100 years.
In fact, it is not even possible to compare the rate of development in the 100 years of 1890-1990 to the rate of development from 2010 to 2020. Not only technologically, but also in terms of technological opportunities - the amount of government and private resources invested in the development of technology is unprecedented and so is the number of people Those involved in the field (many educated people - increasing the chance of the appearance of the next Einstein).
Indeed, with the current knowledge we cannot fly to the neighboring planet. However, assuming that space and time are one, that time we don't really understand and that 85% of matter we don't see at all, the answer probably sits somewhere else entirely.
Not bad, it was once thought that trains would not be able to pass a certain speed because all the air would be sucked out and the passengers would die. Every era and its black predictions
Ok, what about the space warping technology?
It's scary because we don't fall beyond the event horizon
At the speed of light the mass of the spaceship will be infinite according to the formula for calculating mass in motion (with the denominator coming out 0) therefore even billions of tons of antimatter will not be enough to push the spaceship.
An ancient formula from Newton's time.
So it's amazing why the readers are so surprised that tens of thousands of tons of antimatter are needed to propel the spaceship at speeds close to the speed of light.
And this is without taking into account many problems including the gravity of the earth and the stars in a way that we did not take into account.
Suffice it to mention that a trip to the distant moon is about a light second! The best minds and powers struggle with enormous difficulties to accomplish it, so why does it seem that it is possible to fly to change light very easily?
In my opinion, maybe only in thousands of years will humanity know how to obtain technology for manned interstellar travel to a distance of several light years.
A spacecraft moving at a constant acceleration in space increases its mass continuously, until at a speed one tenth of the speed of light, every addition of energy becomes mass, therefore there is no point in adding energy because only the weight of the spacecraft will increase and nothing else.
Is there an advanced culture somewhere that knows how to overcome this limitation? time will tell.
In any case, humans today do not know how to bypass this limitation, so scientists are pessimistic about interstellar travel!
Regarding antimatter, if there is an accident and just one gram of matter will leak from the magnetic fields that hold it, the entire spaceship will turn to dust, and if we are talking about a journey to a distance of light years, the spaceship's engine will consume many tons of antimatter - which there is no way or concept today how to produce them, how they will last Tons of antimatter in the spaceship?
So the scientists are very pessimistic.
The biggest problem is that even the sages in it are relatively laymen who are completely ignorant of physics.
Everything you study in your first degree, even your second degree, is the foundation of the foundation.
So tossing here wonderful and exploded formulas that you learned in the degree reminds me a little of the movie Will Hunting's story in the scene where the literature student tries to impress the girl with his wits and the nice Will bursts his bubble in all his theories by simply saying that all this will last until he waits longer and then confuses his mind with the new things He learned.. and returns, God forbid.
All of our physics is based on hypotheses and observations and assumptions.. this science has a less strong hold than mathematics
ours.
Which makes all these claims and others not exactly well founded.
All the great inventors in history were characterized more than anything by thinking outside the box and by being extraordinary in their opinion .. and the majority around did not even think about the idea they conceived .. Below is Galileo Newton ... and to this day in modern science there is the famous story where Hawking interfered with his friend about inventing a black hole in reality At all..and it wasn't too many years ago...to mention only in the early 90's to the best of my memory they found a real black hole for the first time.
That's why all the discussions that seem to be higher than all the physicists, what will never be possible... are always compared to a child who plays Lego and thinks he can design a skyscraper.
There are things that are happening today in the world of science..if not physics in the next generation Star Trek series that just came to an end about 10 years ago, there are things that they predicted would exist in 500 years only in their infancy...which now are an existing and active reality..
Below is the ability to reproduce genetically, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, the study of the body and the brain, the levels of computing and the level of AI.
Internet..etc...so really we are still so babies in physics that anyone who claims something that can never be should be stripped of the title he simply has.
And if you also notice that Hawking expresses himself about theories and science.. he never places the thing as a universal fact but always .. according to the information we have .. the theories we have...
So really a little modesty..a little
post Scriptum
To the one who stung me from above that what I can only imagine and I can do anything... you should try it a little...
Thought creates reality... and it's not that I'm saying that a disabled person can get up and walk... but on the other hand... there is one Hawking who was not given 9 years to live and somehow he is already in his late 60s and shows everyone where the quantum particle urinates from... and everything that was invented here that was of a huge size went through a mental process of imagining before that.
When we studied physics in high school, we were taught that a journey from point A to B (without a gravitational potential difference) should not be considered work and therefore should not consume energy. energy to heat.
If all this is true, then actually the need to speed up and slow down is a kind of 'friction' that, similar to physical work, we need to reduce or prevent altogether in order to succeed in our goal..
If our understanding of the perception of space and time is not perfect, there is still a great chance of traveling through space by cutting space.
In any case, why give up so quickly?
Another small thing
For thousands of years horses were the preferred means of transportation on land with or without a wagon it was quite clear that we would never be limited to an average speed of twenty five kilometers per hour
Five hundred years ago people were burned who claimed that the earth revolved around the sun
From the moment the Middle Ages ended and human curiosity prevailed, we have been on a never-ending journey of discoveries and the pace has only increased - it took hundreds of years from the discovery of electricity to its commercial exploitation, it took decades from the fission of the atom to its transformation into a weapon and energy source. Today it takes a few years and even months to turn a scientific discovery into a game-changing invention
Bill Gates didn't believe in the Internet and that was less than fifteen years ago
About thirty years ago, the great scientists at IBM thought that the Josephson junction would be the future of computing, no one predicted that the existing technology (silicon transistors) would reach where it did and left the junction in the trash can of technology.
As at the end of the nineteenth century today there are two clouds in the sky of physics, so is the situation today - there are some rather embarrassing problems we still do not understand and are not even sure. Einstein invented several thought experiments that seem to disprove principles of quantum theory,
No one knows what we will discover tomorrow
"Everything that can be invented has already been invented"
Charles Doyle, Director of the US Patent Office, 1899
According to this, no one here would upload this site to the network...
ben rich
Former manager of the "skunk" division at Lockheed, in a lecture given by him near his death.
"We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity.... Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do.”
Ben Rich, former Head of the Lockheed Skunk Works, in a lecture shortly before he died. UCLA Alumni Speech in 1993
"We have the means to travel between the stars, these technologies are hidden and only miraculously came to light
In order for humanity to be hired... we know how to do anything you can imagine."
The "Skunk" brigade produced aircraft that shaped the course of history.
Meanwhile we have enough problems on our planet
So why do you need to fly far? To destroy more?
After all, it is clear that just as they did not foresee sensational discoveries in the field of science that allowed extraordinary breakthroughs, so they are now basing their conclusion in light of the current reality and this is a mistake
In my opinion, it is arrogance to reach the above conclusion. A number of commenters here have given many examples of different conclusions that first-rate scientists have drawn in the past. From history we learn that sometimes, a few years after one of the greatest scientists of his generation declared something impossible, a breakthrough happened, and it became a reality.
Maybe a breakthrough will come tomorrow. Maybe another 10 years. Maybe another 100 years, maybe another 2000 years. But where does the arrogance come from to assume that "never"?
I am sure that in medicine, in another 50-200 years the doctors of our time will be looked upon as "pagan doctors". The treatments of using destruction to repair, (radiation, chemotherapy) will seem almost as absurd to them as bloodletting.
there is plenty to discover. The human race may have only just begun to scratch the surface.
N. plant:
I hope it is clear to you that as long as no one talks about the subject, it will not progress either, and if your proposal was logical, it would have remained logical forever until, in fact, no subject would ever progress.
to plant
What about elephants? I'm sure the cave dwellers twenty thousand years ago would have suggested:-
Let's build a big eagle with big wings and fly it.
As for Mars, I'm not a fan of manned flights at this point and the automated tools are doing their job.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Gentlemen, all your brainstorming and arguments are nothing more than water-milling.
The talk today is about flights to other stars, while a flight to Mars!!!! is a task that my son
The 50-60 of us probably won't get to see her, why are they similar?
To two cave dwellers about 20000 years ago one said to the other - let's build something as big as a hundred elephants with huge wings, make windows for it and fly with it up up up like an eagle.
The other tells him a good idea. I suggest we call this thing Jumbo…
And enough for wisdom...
I meant
"SCIENCE CHANGE, FICTION STAY FOREVER"
Sorry for the small error (and the many along the way)
There is a beautiful sentence that says
SCIENCE CHANGE ALL THE TIME, FICTION STAY FOREVER
And if you don't believe, open the history books
Roy, maybe you should ask the question where did the word "forever" come from my father? After all, there is no doubt that between the original and the translation there is a difference between heaven and earth.
little brother:
This is a link to the Traversability chapter in the Wikipedia description of wormholes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole#Traversability
At the end of the description there are some general links as well as those that deal specifically with transgressive wormholes.
And in addition - the little brother - I would not be in a hurry to get caught up in absolute determinations regarding astrophysics or physics or astronomy. Since we currently understand a negligible part of the universe, then I suggest waiting a bit and not getting hung up on equations that are pretty powerful on paper.
Nature has surprises sometimes, as you probably know...how wormholes are created or how distortions in spacetime can be created, the current information does not cover all the possibilities (except maybe Promil, and that too on paper).
little brother -
Maybe there are works from the sixties, but we are already in the XNUMXs... I guess the works have multiplied a bit since then... haven't they?
Michael,
Can you point me to a reliable scientific link on the subject, every search for "traversable worm holes" led me to 'babblings' or works that disproved their existence?
little brother:
There is a proven stability problem with some types of wormholes, but there are types of wormholes that are defined as "traversable" that may not suffer from it.
The issue is not so sharp and smooth.
Hanan, there is a problem with the existence of wormholes according to the laws of physics!. There are theoretical works from the 60s that show that a 'wormhole' would be so unstable that its lifetime would not even be long enough to transmit light. Beyond being a 'wormhole' a mathematical possibility and nothing else, at the level of the act it was predicted that if there are 'wormholes' then they will be formed by black holes (a tear in the gravitational surface) and 'wormholes' will connect the black holes to white holes (mass emitters). There is no observation to confirm the existence of white holes!
Roy, right now the Voyager 2 spacecraft is at the edge of the solar system and is continuing and its sister Voyager 1 is following it. But of course it's robotic spacecraft and human spacecraft is a completely different story.
Gillian,
I don't know where the word 'forever' came from. The original quote is:
It is highly improbable that humans will ever explore beyond the Solar System.
and after that:
It is widely acknowledged that any form of interstellar travel would require huge advances in technology, but it would seem that the advances required are in the realms of science fiction and are not feasible. Using current technology would take tens of thousands of years, and even advanced concepts could take hundreds.
In short, the conference aims to review the current state of affairs. With the current propulsion methods we will not be able to leave the solar system, and this is good information to know in order to plan for the future (even if for the very distant future). Other methods of propulsion are needed to get us out of the solar system, but they are currently out of our hands.
good week,
Roy.
Evidently Eyal, the universe contains more things than those we know or think we know. Today we take black holes, pulsars, etc. for granted. A few decades ago, they were in the realm of superstitions. At least according to all the rules of physics (as far as I understand, and I'm not a physicist), there is no problem with the existence of worm tunnels.
If we currently know maybe 5% of the universe (and this is an extremely negligible percentage), we still have a lot to learn.
Intuition says that any solution that includes energy calculations and takes into account travel times in the way we are used to thinking about the matter today is simply not practical.
The solution must be in the creation of wormholes through another dimension assuming that such a thing is possible.
The question is whether the universe allows this magic called a wormhole
Higgs, regarding your 85 response to Eran,
I think you missed his point. Eran meant to say that if we imagine hard enough we can find a solution to any problem.
Not that we can invent things out of thin air.
I agree Michael. It's a shame that the global Wikipedia doesn't bother to make sure that in every country the translations and entries are corrected and identical (more or less).
I don't think Wikipedia is the best encyclopedia in the world (I don't think it's better than Britannica), but there is nothing to compare the English Wikipedia to the Hebrew.
Your argument about a hostile version takeover is not only true, but it is also documented by us. We have already published one article on the subject in the past and it is likely that we will publish another article - until someone starts paying attention to the matter.
Regarding Wikipedia:
The English version is really excellent - in my opinion it is simply the best encyclopedia out there.
It is true - it is an encyclopedia and not a textbook dedicated to a specific subject, but as long as you are looking for the information accepted by most people dealing with a certain subject, this seems to me to be the most reliable source.
When it comes to things that are at the forefront of science about which the dust of the debates has not yet settled, Wikipedia is a source like all sources and the same feature of representing the popular opinion has not yet been manifested.
The Hebrew version of Wikipedia is a completely different story.
In my opinion, this version has undergone a hostile takeover by a group whose characteristics I'd better not mention for fear of stoning.
For most arguments here, a citation from Wikipedia is good enough.
Regarding Calvin:
The quote brought by Yehuda appears in both Hebrew and English.
Calvin did say those things.
On the other hand, he also said what the "slanderers" attribute to him.
According to the English Wikipedia, he even said this in the same year (1900) - but not in the same lecture.
Lahanan Sabat and others
I was bothered by the above issue and that's why I did a search. I believe that the late Yuval Neman was accurate in what he said.
Initially, in most of the places I searched, the following quote appeared, usually also in a tone of disdain:-
"There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement
But in the end I came to the appropriate quote:-
"On 27th April 1900, Lord Kelvin gave a lecture to the Royal
Institution of Great Britain. The title of the lecture was
Nineteenth-Century Clouds over the Dynamical Theory of Heat and Light.
Kelvin mentioned, in his characteristic way, that the "beauty and
clarity of theory" was overshadowed by "two clouds". He was talking
about the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment and the
problems of black body radiation. In fact, these "two clouds" were there
herald the early 20th century revolution in theoretical physics with
the emergence of relativity and quantum theory..."
http://www.physics.gla.ac.uk/Physics3/Kelvin_online/clouds.htm
good week
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Higgs:
Very simple - to hear 5 hours of nonsense I can just turn on the TV and switch to channel 2 or 10, why bother running to the conference?
Roy - your claim is somewhat of a paradox. If indeed the scientists are basing themselves on technologies and methods that exist today, how can they declare "forever"?
I hope you realize how irrelevant your argument is…
Lachna Sabat
The first to point me to the "injustice" done to Calvin was the late Prof. Yuval Ne'man in one of our conversations. I preferred instead of writing "personal knowledge" to quote from Wikipedia (in Hebrew).
Let's say that in this case it is almost certainly true.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
to flatter,
Thanks for the objective answer, it's not trivial here.
In my opinion, the purpose of the meeting was an attempt to assess the situation and outline a way forward. There are quite a few researchers and projects that such a conference can help them with the doubts they experience firsthand. Unfortunately, not all news in life is good news, but these are scientists and it is not their job to encourage - their job is to tell the truth as it appears from the data in their hands!.
A reference to scientific information (and emphasis on scientific) regarding "wormholes" would be welcome. As far as I know, this is only a mental amusement that even the best physicists have sinned against!
I find Wikipedia superficial and not updated, it cannot compete with sites such as "Hidan" which are updated on a daily basis.
Yehuda - I hope you are not quoting from the Hebrew Wikipedia... which is full of errors and mistakes, but also full of unverified information, private information of the writers of the articles and other vegetables...
It's not for nothing that Wikipedia is not treated as a non-academic or qualified source of information.
Lachna Sabat
A common and unflattering mistake is made about Lord Calvin. He never asserted his words as you and others quote them, he said them as they are said in Wikipedia, a quote from which I quote here:-
"In 1900, Lord Kelvin gave a famous lecture entitled: Nineteenth-Century Clouds over the Dynamical Theory of Heat and Light. In this lecture, he argued that there were two clouds on the beautiful sky of 19th-century physics: the Michelson-Morley experiment (and the problems in measuring the properties of the ether), as well as the difficulty of understanding the phenomenon of blackbody radiation. From the first cloud mentioned by Lord Kelvin, the theory of relativity was born, and from the second cloud, the quantum theory was born. These two theories are destined to change the entire way we understand the world. In addition to this, the discovery of the electron, radioactivity and the structure of the atom Contributed to the establishment of new branches of physics: nuclear physics and physics of elementary particles
William Thomson
William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin
1824 – 1907
End of quote.
That is, he is talking about two clouds, not easy problems, which stand above physics, and how right he was.
Nevertheless, he prefers to be quoted as saying that there is nonsense left to investigate. He is really being wronged.
good week
Sabdarmish Yehuda
To the "little brother":
I would be happy to give you a link to the articles I based it on. And no - I'm not wrong and I interpreted the articles correctly. These are articles published in scientific journalism and not any gossip. I imagine it bothers you, but these are the facts. I did not invent anything, but discussed existing articles.
The above-mentioned articles are a very small part of scientific information that has been refuted or turned out to be wrong, and that is for one reason only, the reason that the current conference was guilty of - a wrong starting point and wrong basic assumptions! Don't forget what Lord Calvin said at the end of the 19th century: he claimed that the world of physics Most of it as a whole is known to us and there is almost nothing left to discover in it, except for a few marginal things - and how wrong he was.
Since this is not the appropriate forum, I would be happy to give you a link and a reference to the articles on which I was based, if you contact me by email:
eura.isr@gmail.com
And as for the "wormholes" claim, I can only refer you to studies done in recent years. The assumption does not rule out the existence of wormholes and this is to the best of my understanding of the physics of the late 20th century and likewise, I have also come across calls from astrophysicists to start looking for such "creatures" not only in the microscopic dimension, but in the macroscopic dimension.
Regarding the researchers at the conference - it does not seem to me that they convened a conference and made statements just to "get a point of view" or to discuss the future without thinking about different options and sticking to the existing knowledge only - if this is the case, then their starting point is incorrect and therefore all the arguments put forward at the conference are not valid More than the garlic peel. Then the question arises - if so, then why hold conferences of this type and issue statements? To achieve what exactly?
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL
Eran
Nice, now imagine you are a bird and start flapping how long it may take until you fly according to your calculations.
You deviate from the main point and from the essence of everything we call science fiction...Einstein himself said when asked how he thought about the theory of relativity the following simple answer..
The hard part was imagining it...after you imagine something all that's left is to prove that it exists...of course this is a free translation..but the idea is that everything that exists in our world started with people's imagination first....
Even in the most advanced interstellar travel, they did not predict that we would reach a situation where genetic replication is possible in our time today... the same goes for the narrow thinking of the scientists...
You have to see the truth here...with our current technology and means we really can't do anything about interstellar flight either....but..and that's a big but..that says nothing about other means that bypass these limitations...and all of them by the way physically are supposed to be approachable…
1. Movement through a buffer space or in the more popular name... some kind of wormhole..
2. A shift like in Babylon 5 for example in some other dimension where the distance is different... this is a slightly different variation of a wormhole..
3. Hmmm...Quantums is a subject that even the great scientists admit that only about 10 in the world really understand what is going on in the depth of the matter so that we are not even children, but spermatozoa towards the research on the subject..
And I haven't moved on yet... there are so many directions... I personally believe that everything our human imagination is capable of imagining is achievable... the question is of simple time.
Because until today most of the things we imagined have been achieved so there is no reason to assume that it won't be like this in the future... thought that creates reality is not just a cliché..
You would have taken something 120 years ago and told him that machines weighing hundreds of tons would fly thousands of kilometers in the air without falling..and you would have received exactly the same reaction...if this is what we did in 120 years..think about 1000 for example...
Lachna Sabat,
Regarding your response 77, it bothers me a little.
1. The weight of the Apollo spacecraft when it left the ground was tens of tons (with the boosters), please show me the research of the professor who claimed that a system weighing billions of tons would be required? Sounds completely absurd to me!
2. To my knowledge, the same scientists who in the 30s and 40s worked on missile technologies for military purposes, worked in the 20s and 30s on missile and space technologies for civilian purposes (for example, Oppenheimer. There are charts from the 1000s about cities in space). Mainly in Germany but also in the rest of the world. To remind you that the Chinese used rockets about XNUMX years ago! Some of Jules Verne's books dealt with missiles... Your argument sounds completely absurd to me!
3. Regarding aviation, this sounds like a bizarre argument to the point of 'slander'. Even in 1903 there were birds and insects flying without balloons. Kites are an invention that predates even rockets and are completely based on lift (all kites are heavier than air). Sounds like a completely absurd argument to me!
Could it be that you didn't understand the essence of the claims of the above-mentioned scholars? Could it be proper gossip? After all, in 100 years they will be able to write about you and me as well as anything that we supposedly said, of course we will have a hard time correcting and defending ourselves (because we will be deep in the ground).
And why did I write the long treatise?, because it's easy to miss the main point and get caught up!
In the link you attached, I saw that you are involved in UFOs. Can you point to some natural phenomenon of "wormholes"? (Similar to the birds and insects that flew and fly). Nuclear propulsion has been thoroughly tested and is not satisfactory. If you read the above article, you will see that on the whole those scholars pointed out the possible difficulties and did not rule out possibilities.
Why get upset?
In the article it is written explicitly that the researchers refer to the technologies that exist today. "The starting point for all researchers is that any kind of interstellar propulsion will require enormous technological advances."
I assume that the conference participants did not take into account future / futuristic methods such as nuclear fusion or wormholes, because their effectiveness and plausibility are currently unknown. They based their statement on the existing technologies, as they themselves admit.
Gillian
Why, because it is not kosher according to the aliens' religion
Or you don't like eating with professors
And even if they had invited me - I certainly wouldn't have gone. 🙂
What can I tell you, Gilly, I really don't know what they served for lunch, or what they seasoned the food with.
What to do, they don't invite UFO researchers to scientific conferences, in the field of "the study of analytical prophecy and the prediction of the cosmic distribution of homo-sapiens". It's too much assigned.
Hanan
I really wonder what they put in their lunch before writing this article...
And here are a few more "prophecies" straight from the creators of the former senior leaders of the scientific world:
In 1941, Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy John William Campbell calculated the weight of a manned spacecraft to the moon and back - as 300 million times the weight of the "Apollo" spacecraft, which took off to the moon in 1969, while using fuels and technology that were familiar to Campbell. The results of his research have been scientifically "proven". The professor assumed that the rocket that would carry a man to the moon would be single-stage and accelerate up to 1G). In practice, a three-stage rocket was used, its speed was much higher than 1G, and the gravitational forces of the moon and the earth were used.
Dr. Alexander Bickerton, "proved" in 1926 that it is not possible to give energy and acceleration to a body, to bring it into orbit around the Earth.
Prof. Simon Nocomb, "proved" in October 1903, that it is not possible to build a heavy aircraft from the air, except with the help of balloons. Two months later, the Wright brothers took off in their plane.
These are three classic examples of wrong assumptions, deficient technical knowledge, lack of comparable situations and sufficient research information. None of the three could have predicted technological developments, smarter data utilization, and different and innovative execution of processes.
Any historical study of technological developments proves that development comes from new and unexpected performances and discoveries. Shuttle computers do not consist of radio tubes, jet planes are not driven by propellers, and lasers are not more sophisticated light bulbs.
That's how Magellan's ships circled the Earth in two years and the space shuttles do it in about 90 minutes - the future is not an extension of past perceptions.
Therefore, it can be said about the above article - "proofs" of this kind hardly last on the paper (or the computer, in this case) on which they were written. It's not even MDB, but a developed imagination and returned to a logical/scientific/realistic basis.
Participants cannot take into account propulsion methods that are not based on rockets and rocket fuel - as they are today. They do not take into account nuclear propulsion (fusion or fission) and they do not take into account new possibilities to travel distances in space-time - such as wormholes or other distortions in space.
So just as Seth Shostak of SETI "knows" that we will contact aliens within 25 years, so the joking group that has gathered, may know what was served for their lunch, but they certainly do not know (and cannot know) what the future possibilities of space travel are.
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL
Apparently the glorified NOT scientists did not hear to whom the prophecy was given after the destruction of the Temple. And again - I can only wonder why my father chooses to publish such delusional articles on the website.
to our little brother
Happy and happy that we now agree on our precious sun.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Clarification - my response 58 should be taken as humor only!
According to the well-known and proven truth today, exceeding the speed of light is contrary to the law of nature (the principle of causality) and does not just derive from a mathematical formula. Any other statement is unproven speculation!
Another clarification - also regarding quantum tunneling and the way of generating energy in the sun, I renounce my previous statements. Quantum tunneling is a particle phenomenon that has not found any hold in the macro world in which we live. There is a dispute regarding the production of energy in the sun: many and excellent think that normal fusion takes place in the sun (as in hydrogen bombs) since the temperature of the interior of the sun is about 15 million degrees. The explanation given by me regarding fusion at 6000 degrees Kelvin (also appears on the Weizmann Institute's website) is acceptable, but the evidence for it can and should be questioned. Both claims are hypotheses: 15 million degrees to perform fusion is the calculation result that allows the sun to perform fusion and structural stability, this result has never been measured. 6000 degrees Kelvin is a hypothesis based on measuring the wavelength of radiation emitted from the surface of the sun. This is about 'remote sensing' (remote sensing) with all its limitations.
Lagal - I read it and it is accurate. My personal opinion is that the relationship is more complicated because I think the speed of light changes over a period of years and becomes slower.
But it is not for this time of night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda take a second look at this
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%3Dmc%C2%B2
They say that the formula is not exact and Einstein did not say in detail what the formula means.
Don't attack me if I'm wrong, I'm very interested in these topics =]
Zagligilo
Friends:
Just so you know that no way to truly exceed the speed of light has yet been found.
There are "phenomena" that move faster than the speed of light, but there is no way to transfer material or information faster.
If you find such a way, causality will be hidden and we can find in our world results that precede their causes.
I don't know of any temperature limit on the issue of quantum tunneling, but I also don't know that it has been proven to occur at a speed that exceeds the speed of light.
Some people think so, but no experiment has been able to measure tunnel speeds that exceed the speed of light.
to the little brother
It doesn't seem to me that the tunneling would be significant so that photons of six thousand degrees would behave like twenty million degrees or something like that. And if so, then it is really negligible and will not allow any merger.
and bite
Listen, it is not possible for your answer to be composed of three lines of a scientifically relevant answer and another five lines of an obsessive answer about Hugin. You may have said smart things in your scientific response, but in protest of your campaign of stupidity against Hugin, I decide not to respond to any comment that even implicitly contains something Hugin. I'm tired of your behavior and I call on all commenters to do the same. Listen, maybe you need therapy. Besides, be a man and appear under your real name so that you can see what the name is behind this stupid obsession. I'm sorry to say, but it's tiring and it can have far-reaching consequences!
Father, if you can, call me on this subject on the phone.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
In the Victorian period, consultants studied the growth rate of the number of horses in London, and predicted that in the future people would be basking in horse dung. They could not have predicted the invention of the car.
Consultants examined the growth rate of the number of horses in London, and predicted that in the future people will be basking in horse dung. They could not have predicted the invention of the car.
Further to comment 62, below is a link to the space mission I mentioned.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/journey-to-the-sun-1611081/
Correction - in the attached article the temperature of the aura is one million degrees and not as I wrote.
oh, every where i go... i meet you
I'll tell you a secret, but don't tell anyone - I don't read Hugin's comments at all!
I tried to read a few sentences and got tired... then I saw that there was a stylistic change but I didn't find anything interesting in the content. Like you, I don't know Hugin personally at all. But I don't think they all have to be the same.
The little brother
Exactly what Yehuda said but I took your point of view and your idea forward.
According to the laws of thermodynamics in a body with such a large mole in such a large volume, there is no constant temperature at all, especially due to the dynamics of the various fusion processes, it is easy to see this by the periodic appearance of the spots.
As for Hugin, everyone has had enough a thousand times. She treats or tries to treat men in a feminine, manipulative style, unless there was at least some information there, but there is nothing but zivoli, all the audacity
She is the one who compliments someone on duty every time and then criticizes and judges him and others.
She diverts the subject every time to her nonsense and don't tell me you're not fed up, you just want to be politically correct. But I think that sometimes it is time to take off the hypocrisy and the masks and speak directly.
Judah's exaggeration,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LKjJT7gh9s
Refresh your knowledge 🙂
Lahiggs and little brother
Nuclear fusion is done inside the sun where the temperature is over ten million degrees (can't remember exactly how many)
So that no tunneling can do this at 6000 degrees because then long ago they would have made energy from fusing hydrogen with helium.
As for the temperature around the sun, it is only about two or three million degrees, which is not enough for fusion.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Higgs, what happened!
The sun performs fusion at 6000 degrees Celsius (+/-). In the Sun's halo the temperature can reach 25 million degrees, but there is no energy creation. By the way, why the temperatures are so high precisely when you move away from the sun is a mystery for which science has no answer. A few weeks ago, I think, there was talk of a mission aimed at examining this very mystery.
What I wrote in 58 is factually completely correct and without any 'exceptions' of any kind.
post Scriptum. - I completely disagree with your "honesty" regarding Hugin, there is no factual or objective basis for this. And stylistically it is unpleasant and looks like injustice and cruelty. What's your problem with just ignoring her?, not reading her comments?
I will respond to Higgs and Michael in the free comments section
Sabdarmish Yehuda
The little brother
6000 is an average number.
Think for yourself what is easier to see, that there are scattering points where the temperature is millions of degrees. Or exceptions of the type you suggested? And maybe there is no difference.
The simple answer is that such a large mass with such an average temperature is needed for any abnormal points to exist within it.
So we are back to step 1.
what are you saying?
And regarding Ms. Hugin
Does not understand that behavior that constantly revolves around her navel and again around the whimpers of her personal ego is not acceptable social behavior. All she cares about is how they look at her and if they notice her. True as a woman it is clear. But everyone has one of these at home, here we want a bit of freedom from this nijus. Enough.
Hugin's comments #45,56,94 were directly related to the topic of this article and as a response to the commenters in the same context: interstellar flight will remain science fiction.
Then came the particle-creature "Higgs" the essence of all the evil that has ever been in the universe and in the world and on this site - the "science" (sciences?) and destroyed and spoiled and confused and slandered and murdered Hugin and tarnished all the rest of the good that was here, if it was here on the site...
And the place was silent!
And the Higgs boson won!!!!!!
Ahtung Ahtung - I solved the problem of flying above the speed of light!
Well, the truth is that I solved it conceptually, but there are still some 'technical' details left to make it practical.
Oh yes. I have solved the 'energy barrier' part and I have a few more 'small ends' left to close.
The idea is philosophical and the end is that there is probably a part of our basic physics that is still not clear to us, that part is the one that makes it possible to pass an energy barrier even when the 'threshold energy' is not present. And the meaning is that maybe the 1/2MV^2 is not required and maybe even C is not as rigid as Einstein thought.
And for proof... the quantum tunneling phenomenon. In order to bring an atomic nucleus closer to another nucleus, it is necessary to overcome an energy barrier that originates from the repulsive forces between the protons of the two nuclei. In order to perform fusion, a temperature of millions of degrees is needed to overcome the aforementioned barrier. Emma what, our sun has been doing this at 6000 degrees for billions of years. How?, it turns out that it's not 'black and white' and one for phenomenal statistics it happens. And it just so happens that everything we are is the result of this deviation.
Therefore, I have already done most of the work that can exceed physical limits at a very reduced energy cost. There remains a small detail of finding the 'open sesame' to do it.
Michael, this is your part from here. I would finish it, I just have to go to sleep.
PS - Michael, I don't want to argue, but does the fact that Yehuda's username is in blue and yours is in black mean something?
I understood, I thought it was God forbid some relativistic or quantum thing and I'm glad it wasn't.
And about the Vishers (wipers in Leaz) I laughed, but you know that it would have been desirable to send the spacecraft to Mars with Vishers who would clean the photoelectric surfaces. In the end, the winds of Mars apparently do the work of the Whishers after all.
And besides, you have to say "if I will not be censored" and not "will be censored". A small correction for a big censorship.
And besides, tonight I respect.... the censor.
I hate censorship, but his work tonight is blessed, and please do not quote these words in the future.
so good night
And we hope that in Hebron the eyes will calm down
And I hope that Hogin and Higgs and all the people of Israel will sleep peacefully tonight.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Roberts:
Right.
I had the opportunity to participate in previous discussions on this topic on this site already in the past and this was also my conclusion.
I didn't find them all, but in the comments to this article:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/long-journies-to-space-220408/
Various suggestions of ways around the problem have been made. As you will see in my comments, the suggested ways will probably not work.
I think a point meant exactly the same thing in your previous comment.
On the other hand - if at some stage (probably very far in the future - if at all) they manage to apply the method described in the article that the little brother pointed to, it is possible that this problem could be solved.
Haim:
Although I did not bring the links for this purpose, but only to support my claim that according to what is known today - at least in the part of the universe known to us - there is an overwhelming majority of matter over antimatter.
However, the answer to your question also appears implicitly there (probably they assumed that it was known and did not see fit to explain it explicitly) because in many places they talk about the "annihilation" that goes through antiparticles (the particle and its antiparticle) meeting each other. Ionization means that the mass of the particles is completely converted to energy.
Hugin:
I've seen the bickering here today, including your requests for help.
This is a painful situation, for me.
On the one hand, you know that I don't agree with some of your beliefs and I think you would do well to get rid of them.
On the other hand, as someone who has experienced quite a few attacks, I understand exactly how you feel.
I think we need to find a way to moderate the comments here because I really don't think any of us read and comment on the site to suffer or to cause suffering.
Part of the solution to the problem can be provided by the "free responses" department. It's only a part because we don't want to suffer there either, but at least we should agree that we won't even start an irrelevant discussion in any article and if we want to start such a discussion, we'll start it right in the free comments.
If by chance you "caught up" with someone and they responded "free comment" to the article, they should agree that it will be moved by the site administrators to its natural place or even deleted (because we don't want the site administrators to waste time copying comments. We prefer that they devote their time to preparing new interesting articles ).
Lesbadramish Yehuda
Don't treat zzz like it's earnings. Just writing formulas with parentheses gets distorted without it.
(Yehuda, you forgot to say "if I'm not censored" 🙂 )
(For all those who are bothered by collisions during a very fast flight... why not put and align?)
Lesbadramish Yehuda
It is actually very easy to calculate the amount of potential energy that the spaceship needs to carry with it for the journey where it must reach a speed of half the speed of light
If we assume that all the potential energy of the spaceship will be converted into kinetic energy (in other words, we will neglect effects of speed reduction as a result of friction with the air during the spaceship's exit from the atmosphere and gravitational effects of the Earth and possibly other stars)
So if we want to go from speed 0 to speed V=c/2 where c is the speed of light at the mass m of the spacecraft
After all, the kinetic energy required for the spacecraft is m(V^2)/2
that if we place V as mentioned we will get
zzz (mc^2)/8 zzz
And of course at relative speeds the mass increases. When the mass aspires to infinity according to Leibniz's laws when there is an approach to the speed of light. But as far as I remember a speed half the speed of light does not radically change the required mass and energy
So we are left with this question.
What is the energy worth?
zzz (mc^2)/8 zz where m is the weight of the spacecraft
Michael
I read the Wikipedia article to which you referred the readers (I mean an article in English that includes energy calculations) - I could not understand how the conversion efficiency from matter or antimatter to energy theoretically reaches 100% if matter remains as part of the process.
Also, I really agree with you that there is no point in predicting. It is clear that the scientists at the conference are talking about the technologies that exist today.
By the way, there is a very high probability that a part of our Earth will eject in the near future and become our second moon...
So, everyone who longs to move on... here it comes.. just know to be in the ejected part while it happens and.. don't forget to take a lap-tov with you everywhere, just to keep up to date..
"The meiosis-mitosis effect"..
Roberts
You seem to have a serious problem. Reminiscent of Apollo 13, one hypothesis is that it collided with something that caused the malfunction.
Some protection will be provided if a certain shield moves in front of the spaceship, it might help against dust the size of pinheads. Beyond that, I don't think there is any protection.
Good Morning
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Hello everyone,
In my opinion, the dear members of the site are forgetting one detail... and I would be happy to hear a response to this:
...and even if the fuel is found to reach high speeds, then the journey to some planet will be accompanied by a lot of collisions with dust grains the size of at least a pin, which, according to the best of my understanding, at high speeds the spacecraft will "decompose" because of these collisions.
It seems to me that even a collision avoidance radar is impossible (because of the speed of light)
I would appreciate your response - good night
The main problem is that the spacecraft will disintegrate before reaching the nearest star
deer,
The scenario you talked about is disturbing... describe to you a journey of 80,000 years. After 79,999 years
Suddenly you are not sure if you locked the door or not. So you go back to check…
post Scriptum. - What did we talk about?
The only scientific solution to the problem (if anyone asked me) is to extend the human lifespan to a ridiculous scale.
Although by the time we reach the stars we will be terribly old, and forget why we came, but at least we will arrive.
To all hitchhiker guide people: in Essa. You guys are stuck here forever with Fouad.
And again, please don't go into existential depression and don't panic.
Except that one day we'll probably all sit down and laugh about it.
should have written:
that interstellar travel outside the solar system would never be practical - with today's technology.
Following on from 3 and 35, it's like 200 years ago they could say that we will never be able to reach the moon because we will never build a tower that will be stable enough even above a height of 1000 meters.
But one should try to evaluate technological developments or simply qualify the calculations for our convenient understanding of the world.
For some reason I don't feel existentialist depression from the message.
And something else
http://verylongurlname.nasa.alnafsha/needtosaymany-things-butDontHaveEnoughSpace-Soooo-waitA-minutePlease-OK-GO-NoReallyJustGo
And does that mean we're done?
: )
In my opinion, only when the particles are separated from each other can they reach the speed of light.
Which means that even if the tremendous force is allowed to accelerate to this speed, the material near the explosion will simply disintegrate into particles =(
So let's avoid these or similar experiments.
Today's technology opens doors to advanced possibilities that were previously just a dream and illogical to imagine.
It's a shame that people are tempted by curiosity that causes dangers instead of living life, stop running away from reality and concentrate on problems and not what is beyond pleasure =]
Just a concept that came to mind the last few days.
Attached is a link on travel at speeds above the speed of light, Funny, but it was published in Universe Today just a week before the depression article above:
Still, the energy calculation is a bit problematic... the calculations show (in the floating link) that you have to burn something like Jupiter to reach that nearby planet.
Are we not talking about wormholes anymore?
to donate
You are 99.9 percent right and really since there is no friction in space then it is only necessary to give the initial speed. Take into account that the excess acceleration until the final speed is obtained is the acceleration we experience on Earth which is 9.8 meters per second squared. Therefore, it will take 15 million seconds to reach a speed of 150 million meters per second (half the speed of light), which means that it will take about six months in the acceleration phase, and another six months of deceleration, and since during the acceleration phase and the deceleration phase, the spaceship absorbed half a light year, so we have about three and a half light years left to complete In seven years of weightlessness. SA Eight years of pleasant and fun flight to Proxima Centauri.
Only one question remains, why did I say you are only 99.9 percent correct. Because there is a certain anomaly in space flights, the Pioneer anomaly where the spacecraft slows down, and we don't exactly understand why.
So it's a good day to donate
and to the rest of the respondents
Sabdarmish Yehuda
I will not enter into the arguments and stings above and will treat the issue seriously.
You can see that in the last centuries there were a large number of such revolutionary, dramatic and unexpected breakthroughs that changed the course of history and life in general beyond recognition. Suffice it to mention Newton's theory, the discovery of electricity, the theory of relativity, quantum mechanics, the computing revolution, and much more. You can also notice that if you put the above events on the timeline - the rate of revolutions only increases.
Articles and books have been written about the sayings and assertions of renowned experts about what will never be achieved and that they would later have to eat the hat (if they were alive when the things came true).
True, according to today's physics, it probably won't be easy (or even impossible in the foreseeable future) to reach the stars, but we have already seen how physics is changing and who knows what else will be discovered in the future and what the consequences of these discoveries will be?
Nevertheless, renowned scientists gave their opinion on the subject and even planned contingency plans of a flight to the stars. One famous example is the Bossard engine, a detailed description of which appears in the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard_ramjet
In conclusion, I will bring again the two trite but true sentences already mentioned earlier:
It is difficult to predict, especially regarding the future and Never say never.
Yes, I know that in principle it is impossible to exceed the speed of light, and the problem described is not technical but in the essence of physics, but....
At the beginning of the century it was clear that apart from proving the existence of the ether and explaining the photoelectric effect, physics was actually completed. or not?
Here are some predictions for your reference:
"There is absolutely no way that communication satellites will ever provide television telegraph and video transmissions within the United States" 1961 FCC Director
"The thought of a human journey to the moon is far-fetched and is more suitable for the writings of Jules Warren than reality"
Leigh DeForest, radio pioneer and inventor of the vacuum pump 1926
"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible" Lord Calvin, Chairman of the British Royal Society 1895
"The energy created by the splitting of the atom is very small... anyone who expects to use this energy as a source of power is talking nonsense" Ernest Rodford, shortly after the splitting of the atom (Nobel Prize winner).
"There is not the faintest sign that nuclear energy will ever be available" Einstein 1932
"How will you make a ship sail upwind if you light a fire in it? I have no time for this nonsense" Napoleon Bonaparte 1800
But they were so stupid and without modern science, today on the other hand...
I would have thought that scientists who release such messages would be aware of lists such as this.
Thinking that we know what will happen in science and what discoveries will be made in the future has been proven wrong time and time again.
I have a strange feeling that somewhere in the future the above publication will join the long list of predictions about the future that turned out to be wrong.
And for those who want more:
http://listverse.com/history/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/
According to everything that has happened and the history of the blue ball, most likely we will be extinct before we have time to set foot on Mars. In my opinion, if people stop fighting each other then maybe there is a chance that we will survive the next 100 years, and this is in light of the way we "protect" the environment and treat our natural resources.
So before Proxima or anywhere else, there are problems here and now that are better to focus on and not elsewhere.
Nice, great!
Every time they say something is impossible in science, then a little while later something is discovered and it becomes possible and easy. This means that by the age of 31 I will reach the moon. (or any planets)
Gil Dotan: Maybe, but we'll also have to find a way not to get out of the wormholes. Remember a wormhole is very similar to a black hole (as far as I know, a black hole with more than one singular point)
A person:
So for you I wrote the recommendation not to read the links to Wikipedia which show that the comments you enjoy are nonsense.
I wanted to warn you so that your enjoyment of the nonsense is not impaired.
I am actually satisfied with Yehuda's arguments.
It is Michael who is starting to get on my nerves.
When a man says something and there is no woman around is he still wrong?
Facilitator:
Talk about the need for energy for the journey to last reasonable periods of time.
If you decide that there is no problem if the journey takes hundreds of thousands of years, the need for energy decreases.
It only decreases and does not reset because in any case energy will be required to keep the life support systems in the spaceship.
Ran Levy
According to this logic, it is possible to say the following:
When a disreputable amateur says about a respected professor that he is wrong then he is right
I don't understand at all why it takes a lot of energy to sail in space
After all, there is no atmospheric friction in space, and if the sailing spacecraft avoids approaching different stars, its trajectory and speed will not be affected or changed
And so according to Newton's first law the spacecraft will continue to move at a constant speed in space
So that within a finite time the spaceship will reach anywhere in the universe without any energy at all (of course, spend the energy required to break free from the gravitational forces of the Earth. Of course, I did not take into account the expansion of the universe so that the spaceship's destination can move away from it faster than its speed. But it is possible that it can be neglected This. In addition, it is not clear to me whether it is possible to direct the direction and speed of the spacecraft upon exiting the atmosphere in such a way that for the entire duration of the spacecraft's cruise, its speed and trajectory will not be affected by the gravitational forces of other stars. And perhaps it is possible to plan a trajectory so that the gravitational effects of other stars will actually accelerate the cruise speed. without applying energy from the spacecraft.
Those who want more complete information on the asymmetry between matter and antimatter are invited (but only if they think it is worth commenting) to read more at the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter#Asymmetry
Yes, and heavier than air craft will never be able to take off……
Higgs:
So that you have no doubt what Yehuda advised you not to read, I will repeat the link:
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%98%D7%99-%D7%97%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%A8
Be careful not to read this
Arthur C. Clark once said-
"When a respected professor says something is possible, he is almost always right.
When the distinguished professor says that something is impossible, he is almost always wrong."
: )
Ran
Higgs boson
I got into a debate between Michael and Shinon about the amount of antimatter in the universe and it is common as Shinon says.
I specifically in my response am talking about a baryonic substance that can be turned into energy for the purpose of the interstellar mass, and from the beginning I argued that there is nothing to talk about how he would do this. They will already find a way to do it. What I think about this story of the creation of the violent substance from the void according to the principle of uncertainty I will not tell because then it would legitimize the censorship.
I believe that contrary to the words of the ever-persistent Michael, there are those who relate to his words, that's why I write my responses.
The rest of Michael's words are not worth commenting on and it is better not to comment on them so that I will not be censored.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda
Just for thought: the heavens "censor" who is authorized to come into their midst and probably also how/when/and by what means...
And probably the equipment and means known today are not compatible and may the Lord-heavens forgive me.
Therefore, everything should be in accordance..
Haim:
Still the words of the scientists (as well as the words of Judah) are in the nature of prophecies.
The truth is that no one knows what we will be able to do in the future.
We will probably have difficulty transferring the entire population of the earth to another planet, but it is possible that some idea of a kind of "comfort box" based on various propulsion technologies together with hibernation technologies and other methods of life extension could work and allow the human race to survive as a species.
In principle, it is also possible that we will meet aliens who have adopted such solutions.
Go know!
It has already been said before that it is difficult to predict - especially in relation to the future.
If, according to the serious scientists (and not the amateurs-Keri Yehuda), we will never be able to reach the stars due to a lack of technological programming, then the aliens also cannot reach us, that is, there is a logical argument here for the theory of aliens visiting our world.
If anyone at all refers to Yehuda's words in his last response, he is recommended to read the chapter "Anti-matter in nature" here:
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%98%D7%99-%D7%97%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%A8
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Quote from your speech:
"According to the theories that exist today in which, according to Eisenberg's uncertainty principle, matter is created from the void, for every particle of matter, a particle of antimatter is created somewhere in the universe. Therefore, the amount of matter and antimatter must be the same in the universe."
Hear for yourself what you write. Is the sipa of your words not a result of the Risha?
That means you will need to build an uncertain engine that collects material at an uncertain time and place.
So where does the certainty come from in turning a theoretical principle about uncertainty into certainty.
Yehuda
I don't tend to criticize or belittle anyone's thinking even if their opinions are unusual.
But it's hard for me to understand why you express such a strong and opposite opinion to those researchers who came out with this announcement precisely because they checked and calculated that the conventional methods, including mass conversion, would not succeed.
It is puzzling to me why to walk with one's head against the wall.
……..maybe we found a strategy?
Years after I realized that a journey like Star Trek would not be possible in the near future,
A wormhole based stargate seems a more realistic solution.
Maybe salvation will come from there.
To Michael - in the hope that I will not be censored, (this is in light of the bitter experience I have with censored responses in my responses to Michael's words - always Michael).
According to the theories that exist today where, according to Eisenberg's uncertainty principle, matter is created from the void, for every particle of matter, a particle of antimatter is created somewhere in the universe. Therefore, the amount of matter and antimatter must be the same in the universe. This is contrary to Michael's words quoted here: - "Antimatter is not known as the most common matter in the universe" end of quote. That's why Yanon was right in his words that antimatter is common matter.
Since this is a site that school students enter, Michael - forever Michael, must be careful with his words so as not to damage the knowledge of our dear students.
But regarding the interstellar travel, there is no need to decide how this engine will be built. I believe that in a few decades they will know how to produce such an engine that can turn several tons of matter into kinetic energy for the spaceship for the interstellar journey.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Michael
My intention was to lightly sneer at Yehuda's ignoring the last paragraph in the article.
If from the distraction of the mind and therefore he hypothesizes about the use of a mass-to-energy conversion engine.
And if from the fact that the calculations of the researchers at the conference are not in line with his calculations, he tends to dismiss their opinion due to their amateurish statement versus his precise calculations resulting from his extensive research and extensive expertise in these subjects.
Yehuda:
You are only wrong in your dishonest attempt to misrepresent that unacceptable views are the reason for censorship.
This is a lie and defamation and I hope that if you repeat it you will end up permanently banned.
On the technical side - there is no mistake in your words.
All in all, there is a difference between your optimism and that of the members of the conference.
They are surely aware of the trivial calculations as they are aware of what was said in the link I provided in my previous response.
I personally do not tend to predict. This is another custom of mine based on a wise article by a sage.
More than once, science encounters challenges
that at that time seemed insoluble and one
The common ways is to say accept with a committee
Because science will never be able to solve the problem.
do not worry -
Solutions and people will still be found
They will go wherever they want and that's it
A matter of time and appropriate investment.
for everyone
I insist so I really hope I don't get censored.
I still think that, although it is a lot of energy, it is all about a few tons of mass that become energy, and the calculation is simple:-
Matter turns into energy according to the formula E=M*C^2
It will become the kinetic energy of the spacecraft according to the formula E=0.5*M*V^2
We will make reductions and get that the amount of mass that must be converted into energy is in the order of magnitude of the mass of this spacecraft to reach a speed of several tens of percent of the speed of light which will allow us to reach Proxima Centauri in about ten years.
We are talking about orders of magnitude so the calculation is correct.
It must be remembered that these are orders of magnitude of huge amounts of energy, but a mass that will turn into soft energy of several tons, at least a portion of which can be collected in space while traveling to Proxima.
I admit that everyone talks about huge amounts of energy, but the formulas are simple, can someone show me where I'm wrong? (if it exists at all).
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
https://www.hayadan.org.il/longjourney-170202/#comment-144900
Higgs:
It is possible to understand from your words something that you certainly did not mean, and it is as if reading the article is a condition for censorship.
There are those who try to create the impression that unacceptable substantive opinions lead to censorship when we all know that the reason for censorship is inappropriate behavior on completely different levels - those of the culture of discussion, of fairness and respect for others.
Yanon:
Antimatter is not known as the most common matter in the universe and it is not invisible either.
It seems to me that you are confusing dark matter with antimatter.
As far as we know there is much more matter than antimatter.
If there was a lot of antimatter in our environment, we would all be ionized with it and race like radiation across the expanses of space.
never say never
An antimatter engine is a (theoretical) engine that receives its energy from the ionization (nonexistence) of a matter particle and an antimatter particle (with the protons and electrons "reversed" in it - this is the most common matter in the universe, even though it is invisible). Theoretically, such an engine should use 100% of the nuclear energy (E=mc2). For the sake of comparison, an atomic bomb uses about 1-2%.
"Antimatter engines" do you mean a particle accelerator?
As usual, possible scientific progress is ignored.
Did they think about atomic acceleration before Einstein? No, they must have said - there is no chance of reaching Alpha Centauri - with all the coal there is today it won't be enough, etc.
In short, if there is a technological leap it will be possible.
At the level of knowledge that exists today, this is impossible
Yehuda
You will not be censored because you did not bother to read the article to the end.
The last paragraph mentions your idea as insufficient to accomplish the task.
They calculated and found that even if you could get energy from an antimatter and matter ion it would not be enough
To roll you to the nearest star.
I am about to respond to an unacceptable response to the article that does not meet the accepted consensus, so I hope I will not be censored.
Comment:-
I don't understand where the numbers about the high energies for flying the spacecraft were taken from. From where they also took the strange and huge times.
Let's start with the fact that I believe we will have technology that will be able to propel a spaceship to almost the speed of light. For this purpose, matter must be turned into energy with a mass that is on the order of the mass of the spacecraft. This mass should not be taken from home. I imagine that it would be possible to collect it in space, in gases and interstellar dust. I believe . So, we will reach Proxima Centauri, which is about four light-years away from us, in a journey of less than ten years!
I will not expand so that my school students will not be hurt by the response.
That's all my response and I hope that the scientific respondents will be able to overcome possible trauma from her injury
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
http://madaveteva.blogli.co.il/