Manned Space Exploration...Why?

Just for reference...

- The spacecraft Voyager has traveled about 13 billion miles from our sun since it's launch in 1977.

- One (1) "Light Year" is approximately 5.9 trillion miles.

- The nearest star to our solar system is Proxima Centauri at a distance o 4.22 light years, or 24.9 trillion miles.

- It has taken forty one (41) years for Voyager to travel to where it presently is.

- It would take Voyager another 108,548 years to reach Proxima Centauri at it's present rate of travel. That's 1,085 'generations' of human beings. Generations, not years, but generations. 1,084 generations will live out their entire lives and die, each in succession, along the way before Voyager would reach the next nearest star to our solar system. (It's not really headed that way, but it's just used for illustration).

- Even if mankind developed a craft 100x faster than Voyager (which is highly improbable), it would still take over 1,000 years to reach Proxima Centauri...the very nearest star to our solar system. Ten generations.

- Anything faster than this almost certainly wouldn't be able to work with mankind in the human form.

Can anyone see how futile this is???

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Just for reference...

- The spacecraft Voyager has traveled about 13 billion miles from our sun since it's launch in 1977.

- One (1) "Light Year" is approximately 5.9 trillion miles.

- The nearest star to our solar system is Proxima Centauri at a distance o 4.22 light years, or 24.9 trillion miles.

- It has taken forty one (41) years for Voyager to travel to where it presently is.

- It would take Voyager another 108,548 years to reach Proxima Centauri at it's present rate of travel. That's 1,085 'generations' of human beings. Generations, not years, but generations. 1,084 generations will live out their entire lives and die, each in succession, along the way before Voyager would reach the next nearest star to our solar system. (It's not really headed that way, but it's just used for illustration).

- Even if mankind developed a craft 100x faster than Voyager (which is highly improbable), it would still take over 1,000 years to reach Proxima Centauri...the very nearest star to our solar system. Ten generations.

- Anything faster than this almost certainly wouldn't be able to work with mankind in the human form.

Can anyone see how futile this is???

People used to think the human body couldn't travel faster than 25mph. There were laws about making cars go slower than this.

The model t could only do 25 there for thinking you could make a car go 100 is stupid.

Physics already says it's possible to use negative matter to go ftl whether worm holes or warp drives.

Your argument is once again this is what we have now there is no way we could ever achieve anything else.

a reply to: blackcrowe

You keep moving the goalposts. Our solar system extends far beyond Mars. But you keep making this ridiculous jump in logic from Mars immediately to other stars, as if every other step should be ignored.

How about to the other planets and/or semi-permanent orbiting space stations around other planets? How about exploration of or orbiting space stations around the 180-ish other moons orbiting planets in our solar system? How about temporary landings in the asteroid belt or late, the Kuiper Belt?

You still haven't answered how any of this is in violation of the laws of physics.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Naw, bruh. I already made an incredibly long and detailed post in response to your OP on page 4 and I didn't see you respond to it. So I'm not wasting my time again w/your long hypothetical questions until you actually address those responses. But if you had responded and I missed it, then I blame Obama & Trump

Though for the record, you're moving the goalposts just like blackcrowe is. You OP says "why does mankind need to go to places like Mars or beyond?". What do your new questions have to do with the exploration of Mars and anything else beyond it that's still in our solar system?

I'm not trying to dampen anyone's spirits here.

I'm pointing out some real problems i have with this subject.

When i came to ATS. I had a theory. It related to this subject. You could even go point to point. Anywhere in the universe. Without having to travel there. Or, without any time passing by.

I felt like i had the sh1t kicked out of me at the time.

I was bombarded with links. And, links within the links as to why i was wrong.

I have read a lot of them. I understand some of it. I don't understand a lot of it.

And now i feel a little less ignorant.

But there are barriers that not only we. But, possibly many forms of universal lifeforms face. Which are the laws of physics.

All stuck on their own rocks. Having to accept their destiny. Which is ultimately death. Which of course happens to everything. Even the universe.

We just have to appreciate that we have the desire and capability to make possible via machines what can't be done by people. I think Flyingclaydisk said similar.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Well, thank you for the response, but candidly, it was not was what I expected from you.

So you think I'm some Interweb troll, talking smack. I understand.

BUT, you didn't answer my question, my main question to you. Instead you deflected, which is disappointing to me...but oh well.

I guess I will give up. I will acquiesce in the interest of friendship and honor. I like and respect many of the posts you make, but we disagree, apparently, on this post.

And so it goes, us as a people...and somehow we will find those golden few who will represent our race.

Can you weigh in on how, exactly, that will all happen????

Best!

FCD

Gosh, I've said about all I can think about on this thread.

It seems everyone is hardened into their respective positions. Me, trying to illustrate more of my position, would be pointless.

Thank you all for all of your comments and opinions. I didn't expect to come here and convince anyone, but rather offer what I feel is a snapshot of reality, reality of what will come.

I guess we all can choose to accept it, or deny it.

I wish the best to both sides!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Actually I was referring to several people in this thread.

Sorry, but it's not all about you.

BTW - you really need to look into different propulsion systems that are technically available to us now for possible interstellar flight, all with in ONE generation. Your knowledge in this area is lacking.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Well, thank you for the response, but candidly, it was not was what I expected from you.

Get in line because you're not the first person who's been disappointed in me lol.

So you think I'm some Interweb troll, talking smack. I understand.

Don't put words in my mouth. If I thought you were a troll, I'd say it. What I do think is that you made an OP with a bunch of points in it, then ignored my detailed response to your OP (HERE). So why should I keep responding to your detailed questions when you're literally going to ignore the responses?

BUT, you didn't answer my question, my main question to you. Instead you deflected, which is disappointing to me...but oh well.

Now I'm starting think you're trolling because this line of yours perfectly describes how your post is deflecting from my post. I even asked you "What do your new questions have to do with the exploration of Mars and anything else beyond it that's still in our solar system?" and YOU deflected from MY question. But oh well?

I guess I will give up. I will acquiesce in the interest of friendship and honor. I like and respect many of the posts you make, but we disagree, apparently, on this post.

We're only "disagreeing" because you deflected once again. Address my original response to you and then answer my question on how your new questions relate to the exploration of Mars and anything else beyond it that's still in our solar system. Then we won't be in "disagreement". Or will you ignore & deflect from this direct request in the name of "friendship and honor" as well?

And so it goes, us as a people...and somehow we will find those golden few who will represent our race.

Can you weigh in on how, exactly, that will all happen????

Represent who exactly and in what regards?

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
It seems everyone is hardened into their respective positions.

I agree, and I think that happens because opinions from both sides are more connected with what people wish or think it's impossible than with facts, as, usually, facts can be presented as support of our opinions.

We have seen several facts presented on this thread, but they are only indirectly related to the possibility of manned exploration of space (beyond what we have already done).

As usual, time will tell, and the future will probably be a mix of the opinions exposed here.

a reply to: blackcrowe

metaphorically we arent looking back , and literally people in rockets dont look back do they !

So I am not sure what you are trying to illuminate me with the link ?

Humans will always strive to go further and take risks !

look at the first guy to sky dive from the stratosphere ! no one ever done that before, no one had did what james cameron had done by going to the very depths of the marianna trench!

We have totally got this , space will not hold us back
the only thing holding us back is ourselves

a reply to: ArMaP

Ok, so you were referring to the second definition of "faultfinding" while I was referring to the first definition (from your link):

1 Continual criticism, typically concerning trivial things.

2 The investigation of the cause of malfunction in machinery, especially electronic equipment.

And "faultfinder" from Merriam-Webster's Dictionary:

Definition of faultfinder for English Language Learners:
a person who criticizes someone or something often in a way that is not fair or reasonable

Although I still think many of the naysayers against the exploration of Mars and beyond fit the 1st definition, I concede that some may be attempting to fit the second definition. I won't concede that completely though, because if they were truly trying to fit the 2nd definition, their responses would be more attuned to figuring out how to overcome any negative glitches or malfunctions as opposed to using those flaws as a way to derail the ideas in general.

And I simply said that the problem was who considered them experts on that topic.

Fair enough.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
ETA: Oh yeah, and who says that Kelvin was the only one?

Not me, I only used that example because it was used on the article you quoted.

Fair point lol.

a reply to: sapien82

What i mean by. We are looking back.
When you look at a star. You're not seeing it in real time. Now. April 2018.
Look at Alpha Centauri. It is 4.3 light years away. The light you see took 4.3 years to get here. You're seeing January 2014.
You can't alter how long light travels to reach us. And the further away the star. The longer ago it is.
So. We are looking back.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: blackcrowe

You keep moving the goalposts. Our solar system extends far beyond Mars. But you keep making this ridiculous jump in logic from Mars immediately to other stars, as if every other step should be ignored.

How about to the other planets and/or semi-permanent orbiting space stations around other planets? How about exploration of or orbiting space stations around the 180-ish other moons orbiting planets in our solar system? How about temporary landings in the asteroid belt or late, the Kuiper Belt?

You still haven't answered how any of this is in violation of the laws of physics.

What goalposts?

The OP is manned space exploration. Why?

Space is the whole infinite universe.

Our solar system is not even a full percentage point of space.

It's not my OP. But, When i hear/read space exploration. I think of space. The whole universe. Not confine myself to my immediate neighbourhood.

So. I look at the big pic.

If we can make it to mars. we should be able to make it anywhere. It's all space. Why limit yourself?

So. Maybe my idea of space is different than yours.

Good job the early explorers on earth didn't limit themselves.

So from your comment. What would you say is space. How far are you happy to see them go. Just to mars. Or, like real explorers. The whole of space?

As for our solar system. Yes. There is plenty to be discovered. No disagreement there.

But. Your limiting it to our solar system. What if a ELE happened? The sun got hit. The whole solar system would perish. Not good for us if we're just piss arsing around in our own back yard.

The space programme is meant to be both serious and ambitious. So, When i see/hear/read space. I imagine there's some serious ambition there to get out of the solar system.

Sorry if my idea of space differs from anyone else's.

As for the violation of laws as you say

The violation of law.

Look at Alpha Centauri. It is 4.3 light years away. The light you see took 4.3 years to get here. You're seeing January 2014.
You can't alter how long light travels to reach us. And the further away the star. The longer ago it is.

You can't be certain that it's still there.

How/why would you send a mission there?

a reply to: eriktheawful

BTW - you really need to look into different propulsion systems that are technically available to us now for possible interstellar flight, all with in ONE generation. Your knowledge in this area is lacking.

With man onboard the craft using these propulsion systems? To travel to other solar systems beyond our own???

If that is in fact true, then I will admit my knowledge in this area is lacking. I don't think it is, and I sincerely doubt your assertion, but never the less I will admit my lacking understanding.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Project Orion was proposed in the 1950s, theoretically that type of nuclear propulsion could have propelled a Manned mission to the next star at around 10% the velocity of light, in around 40-80 years, taking into account that the craft would have to turn and begin to slow half way to its detination.

Not saying its been done all the same as life support and some kind of magnetic shielding would also be required to prevent particulate matter from destroying any ship at such speed.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Yes, I posted this link earlier in this thread:

Project Orion

The original thoughts and designs for the "Momentum Limited" Orion meant a flight time of 133 years, however since the original concept, more recent studies show that it could reach 0.08c to 0.1c (8% to 10% light speed), making the trip down to 44 years.

Breakthrough Starshot is a proposal to send very small probes to Alpha Centauri at 15% to 20% of light speed using light sails and a 100GW laser, meaning around 20 years trip time.

Of course that project is unmanned, however the concept of a propulsion system for unmanned can be applied to manned craft with variations and improvements in technology.

The point is: it is completely possible to send someone to another star within one life time.

I'd never see it, even if such a ship were to launch today as I'd be 96 years old by the time it got there, and most men in my family rarely hit 80.

But the fact is, we do know how to reach another star within one life time, not thousands or tens of thousands of years.

a reply to: blackcrowe

yes you are correct , no debating there but we both know that you knew I was speaking metaphorically not literally talking about looking at snapshots of starlight just reaching us from across the galaxy and from across time.

thing is we need to successfully look back to our past in order to successfully plan for the future !
but this practice also requires us to live in the present.
Presently Im sure the US plans to get to mars by 2030 , Russia plans to send a manned mission to the moon , ESA want a unmanned mission to Europa so we are looking forward and not gearing down!

Given the nature of our species , we may need to start doing all industrial work in space as we increase our population we will need more space, we need to start with space farming , space industry , we can pollute space as much as we like right ?

I mean imagine if we done all of our heavy industry in space to reduce pollution , imagine if we had all of our energy production in space , leaving earth as natural as possible

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: blackcrowe

yes you are correct , no debating there but we both know that you knew I was speaking metaphorically not literally talking about looking at snapshots of starlight just reaching us from across the galaxy and from across time.

thing is we need to successfully look back to our past in order to successfully plan for the future !
but this practice also requires us to live in the present.
Presently Im sure the US plans to get to mars by 2030 , Russia plans to send a manned mission to the moon , ESA want a unmanned mission to Europa so we are looking forward and not gearing down!

Given the nature of our species , we may need to start doing all industrial work in space as we increase our population we will need more space, we need to start with space farming , space industry , we can pollute space as much as we like right ?

I mean imagine if we done all of our heavy industry in space to reduce pollution , imagine if we had all of our energy production in space , leaving earth as natural as possible

Sorry. I didn't realise you was talking metaphorically.

I was starting to wonder why you couldn't understand what i said. LOL. I get it now.

You make some good points of which. I agree with you.

The opportunities are endless.

I am all for the exploitation of space. But. By machines.

They have already gone further than we ever imagined in the '70s.

We as people have the intelligence to make the tech to do what we can't do, or go to ourselves. For whatever reason.

a reply to: blackcrowe

No worries !



it's funny though that you look to the heavens and to our future, but are technically looking at the past !

amazing

how wonderful the universe is eh!