Space Travel

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:59 pm Space Travel**

"Space...the Final Frontier..."
- Captain James T. Kirk, Federation Starship Enterprise

Let's talk Space. Yes, space. Fitting, considering the premise of this site, eh?

Earth has gone through a number of technological and societal revolutions�the Neolithic Revolution, the Green Revolution, the Biotechnological Revolution, the Industrial Revolution. All were carried out by those who worked towards advancement in technology and economic, agricultural, and societal practices. It seems to me that we are seeing the dawn of the Space Revolution, a new age for mankind. We see, now, the start of space tourism and space travel taking many forward steps, from technology to private companies entering the field. It's becoming de-centralized from government control.

So, I ask you. What are the possiblities for real-life space travel? What technologies do we have that make you think that way? What does our future with space hold--both the near and distant futures?
How much involvement should the government have in it? Should it continue along the track it is, or should it continue the way it is but also reach out and help private companies trying to establish a foothold in the Final Frontier? Or should the government concentrate more on the latter. That is, have less involvement in space themselves and instead give aid to private citizens to do such things?
What does the future have in store for us? Could we be, sometime soon, developing interstellar travel? What about more massive starships and space stations?
How close are we to, at last, exploring what James T. Kirk so pointedly called "the Final Frontier."
Space.

If there's a topic that covers all these concepts, my apologies, and please lock.

LightningBoy · **Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:02 pm**

I think we're on the brink of MAJOR space propulsion advancements. We will see a faster-than-light enging in our lifetimes. The more and more scientists learn about breaching spacetime, the more and more likely it gets.

Captain Patrick · Commodore Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2421

I beleive that some from of FTLD in our life time is possible, In my opinoin we like LightningBoy said are about to see a major space Propulsion Advancement. I mean the European Space Agency and Australian National University have already succeful tested an ION Drive. So yes FTLD is possible in this lifetime.

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:10 pm**

Well, I agree that we're probably on the brink of major propulsion developments, yes; however, I don't think we'll, in our liftimes, develop faster-than-light technology. I think we're at least a bit farther away from that. ::makes the "small" sign with index finger and thum:: A bit.
Actually, probably a bit longer than a bit, lol, but yeah. I think we'll be able to get to, say, Pluto at far faster times soon.
But what's incredibly interesting is the space tourism industry. I mean, hotels in space and week-long trips to the moon and stuff--all in less than two years. It's amazing...
I really think, though, that we put too little emphasis on space exploration. That's one thing I would really like to see the government talk about more and concentrate more on--space exploration. More money should go to NASA and rewards should be given to companies that work to develop space technologies. There's so much to do up there. Let's get started now, I say.
I also am fine with weaponizing space, as US Space Command hopes to do. I think it could add to another level of defense for our country--a defense which we need.

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:12 pm**

Captain Patrick · Commodore Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2421

Republican_Man · **Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:22 pm**

Awesome! All this stuff is great. I just wish we could get out into space far more than we are now...
The main problem, though, I think, is with interstellar travle. that's something that I'm not sure we'll achieve--at least, in the coming years. Probably in the distant future, though...any ideas how we might get there? What power sources we could use and what not?

Captain Patrick · Commodore Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 2421

borgslayer · **Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:36 pm**

Solar Power is already possible. We do have Solar powered Cars, Satelites, and Space Stations.

Plasma or Photon matter is what the world needs.

lionhead · **Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:49 am**

Solar Power might be possible, but its just too weak too be the major power source for a space Ship or station.

Unfortunantely, i beleive the only way too advance in technology enough too actually go into the Frontier like RM says, i think we need a big war.

webtaz99 · **Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:02 am**

1 ) We still lack a safe, truly reusable, low-cost, heavy lift system. That is going to be the lynchpin of all space development. "If you're in LEO, you're half way to anywhere in the solar system." Not quite true, but mostly. The best we're likely to see is the linear aerospike running on LH2/LOX. Sadly, I don't think that the low-cost rubber/NOX engines currently used by Spaceship One and its derivatives will have the power and robustness for true orbital use.

2 ) In raw sunlight, solar energy is around 1.4 Kw / square meter. If current research pans out, 98% efficient solar cells will be possible. Inside the orbit of Mars, solar is a viable option.

3 ) The human body deals poorly with constant freefall. Recent research suggests that short exposures (less than 1 hour per day) to a 1-g field will offset the negative effects of freefall. We badly need to construct a habitat with stationary and rotating sections in order to do the research which will show what proportion is healthy.

4 ) Plants, generally speaking, don't like freefall either. Most people seem to think that any old plants can easily be grown in space, but it's not true. So far, only 3 or 4 species have been grown from seeds and produced seeds which grow properly. We will probably be able to engineer some plants for freefall, but serious farming (the kind you would need for permanent space colonies) will need 1-g, just like humans.

5 ) The small, closed environments common to space living promote unhealthy microbe growth. We need to get much better at recycling water and air, while mitigating this growth. This will get even more important when we try to grow serious amounts of crops. The ISS crew spends hours every week just cleaning surfaces to keep bacteria from going nuts. And the air systems must deal with accumulations of things which get diluted and blown away here on Earth (the ammonia, methane and carbon monoxide humans give off is just one example).

6 ) For propulsion in space, the plasma engine will be hard to beat, although lower-tech chemical engines will still be used. I'm not going to even worry about FTL. If it happens, fine, but we have plenty to do without it, and most of that needs to be done even with it.

7 ) We MUST begin utilizing space-based resources. I go nuts every time I hear the "experts" talk about blowing up a near-Earth asteroid. We should capture those things (in a Lunar orbit, that is)! All we have to do is slow them down a little. One day we will even start grabbing stuff from the Ort cloud.

8 ) The only involvement governments have had in the more successful colonizing efforts was to give the colonists reason to flee the government's control. The prime motivators for colonial expansion have always been freedom and opportunity. Our "capitalistic" system is inherenlty based on the idea of expanding markets, and the Earth is going to peak out one day. The only direction we can go then is up. I can foresee a rather sad period in time when the people living in space will have it better than the groundhogs. My dream is that we humans can leave the cradle and let the Earth go back to being the Earth.

Curtis · **Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:56 pm**

Republican_Man · **Wed Feb 22, 2006 7:43 pm**

Interesting thoughts, both of you...
You know what's funny? I start Interstellar Revolution with Cathexis.
Then I start this topic.
Yesterday I watched DS9.
And then, just today, I get my Business2.0 magazine and guess what it's all about? Part of this topic. Space and private enterprise.
Ironic, huh?

WeAz · **Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:54 am**

If fusion is perfected, then we could see impulse power, which uses the exhaust of Fusion reactors to drive something forwards

webtaz99 · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:25 pm**

What's REALLY ironic is what this thread shows.

Trekkies are more in to their self-fantasies than real space development.

madlilnerd · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:20 pm**

I would love to partake in commercial space travel, possibly as the space version of an air hostess, but space travel is extremely bad for the environment so partaking in it would make me a hypocrite.

webtaz99 · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:36 pm**

Um...What?

Getting humanity off the planet is the only long-term recovery plan for the environment.

Aside from that, what harm would it be to help develop better ways to recycle water, purify air, or grow food?
What about a cheap, easy way to take lots of CO2 and turn it into carbon powder and oxygen gas. Does that sound bad for the environment?

Republican_Man · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:26 pm**

No, I agree. We can develop technologies not only to keep the environment safe, but we can develop technologies to improve it. And yeah, space travel could be done in ways to better protect the environment.

WeAz · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:23 pm**

I saw the next space station is a shipyard, where we build a deep space exploration vessel.

Republican_Man · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:25 pm**

Do you mean "say," because if it's saw, then I would be very interested in reading up on it.
Spelling does count IRL, you know

But I don't know...I don't think we're to the point where deep space exploration is something we should be concentrating on so much yet. We're not even close to developing the proper technology for such a thing.

WeAz · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:27 pm**

I did mean say...

Never mind, the next space station should be a freakin' huge laser to destroy astroids with.

Republican_Man · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:29 pm**

Why destroy them when we can develop technologies and whatnot to harvest their resources? For instance, this one asteroid (I don't remember the name) has trillions of dollars worth of natural resources on it--and it'll be within reach in 20 years. I say we go down that route with asteroides.

WeAz · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:31 pm**

so we harvest its metals, as it hurtles down to destroy us?

Republican_Man · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:33 pm**

Well, if it's hurdling down to destroy us we should have a defense, but the likelyhood of that happening is small.
But I'm not really that opposed to the weaponizing of space, so long as we're ahead of the game

Phasers, lasers, photon, quantum, and proton torpedoes, here we come!

webtaz99 · **Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:51 pm**

Everywhere Man has gone, Man's weapons have gone.

We will weaponize space. Get used to it.

The question is, will we colonize it?

Why is it that we dump billions of dollars into trying to get rid of hunger, war and poverty, and yet they are still going strong.
At the same time, we say "Space is too expensive."