Hyperspace travel could become a reality, but of course there are some obstacles.

[Windu Chi]

A unified field theory by the the late German theoretical physicist, Burkhard Heim in 1957(when his idea became public) where he theorise that our universe at the smallest fundamental scale has quantize structure(similar to Quantum Gravity); a

structure of quantize area, volume and time.

So at the scale of area 10^-70 m^2, where m is in meters; space becomes a discrete structure of surface elements called metrons.

His theory is that the universe has a four-dimensional hyperspace component along with our 4 D spacetime( 3 D & 1 D time), that add to 8 dimensional spacetime in total(7 D space, 1 D time) that could lead to interstellar travel one day or sooner.

His field theory predicts that gravity has 2 other forces yet unobserved particles; gravito-photons that has + or - force interaction that theoretically, will allow the conversion of an electromagnetic field into a gravitational-like field or a anti-gravity propulsion mechanism.

The gravito-photon is electromagnetism and gravity coupling particle state .

This Quantum spacetime theory of nature could, finally get us to the stars .

His theory also predicts a force called quintessence, a weak gravitational-like repulsive force that would cause the expansion of universe; dark energy, explanation.

Along with the other 3 forces of our universe that theorize 6 forces of nature in total; strong or nuclear, weak and of course electromagnetism, with this Quantum spacetime theory adds other three forces; quintessence, +gravito-photons

& -gravito-photons.

 

Also the physics community, has shown great interest in this theory, because

Burkhard Heim's theory predicts the masses of sixteen elementary particles to a relative accuracy of 1 part in 10,000.

There is no other known established theory of fundamental particles physics at present that have made comparable theoretical predictions to that accuracy.

Says, the particle physicists at large.

 

The US military also has got interested in the hyperdrive concept, cite this article Take a leap into hyperspace.

Of course there are other techtincal details I will love to present; equations & more detail physics concepts, but I don't want to bore people with that complex info.

05 January 2006, page 24

 

Who was Burkhard Heim?

 

Burkhard Heim had a remarkable life. Born in 1925 in Potsdam, Germany, he decided at the age of 6 that he wanted to become a rocket scientist. He disguised his designs in code so that no one could discover his secret. And in the cellar of his parents' house, he experimented with high explosives. But this was to lead to disaster.

 

Towards the end of the second world war, he worked as an explosives developer, and an accident in 1944 in which a device exploded in his hands left him permanently disabled. He lost both his forearms, along with 90 per cent of his hearing and eyesight.

 

After the war, he attended university in Göttingen to study physics. The idea of propelling a spacecraft using quantum mechanics rather than rocket fuel led him to study general relativity and quantum mechanics. It took an enormous effort. From 1948, his father and wife replaced his senses, spending hours reading papers and transcribing his calculations onto paper. And he developed a photographic memory.

 

Supporters of Heim theory claim that it is a panacea for the troubles in modern physics. They say it unites quantum mechanics and general relativity, can predict the masses of the building blocks of matter from first principles, and can even explain the state of the universe 13.7 billion years ago.

Download this book about this theory if any of you are interested in the physics and the mathematics. link to book ~ Hyperspace Propulsion

 

Also here is article that got some aerospace engineers interested, ~ Take a leap into hyperspace

Here is another link to a article about Heim's Theory.

Prepare for Ludicrous Speed.

 

Hyperspace Physics Concept

 

The quintessence, a weak repulsive

gravitational like interaction (dark energy) and

gravitophoton interaction, that enables the conversion

of electromagnetic radiation into a

gravitational like field, represented by the two

hypothetical gravitophoton (negative and positive

energies) particles. The gravitophoton interaction

is Quintessence (dark energy)

 

According Burkhard Heim's theory, gravitation, as we

know it, is comprised of three interactions,

namely by gravitons, the postulated gravitophotons,

and by the quintessence particle. This

means that the gravitational constant G contains

contributions from all three fields. The quintessence

interaction, however, is much smaller than

the first two contributions.

In Heim's theory the existence

of matter as an independent entity is replaced by

the features of a dynamic 8-dimensional discrete

spacetime, and as such is created by space itself.

 

The conversion of electromagnetic radiation into a

gravitational like field; the physical

effect lies in the different absorption coefficients

of negative and positive gravitophotons. As it

turns out, gravitophotons are generated

by virtual electrons, that is, they are generated by vacuum polarization.

 

In QED the vacuum behaves like a dielectric

absorbing and producing virtual particles

and the Coulomb potential is associated

with the transfer of a single virtual photon. Vacuum

polarization in form of the electron-photon

interaction changes the Coulomb potential of a

point charge for distances within the electron

Compton wavelength with respect to a nucleus.

 

 

The the application for interstellar travel

is, for a anti-gravity field propulsion is by the effect

of the reduction of the gravitational potential of a spacecraft

by the interaction of the positive gravitophotons with gravitons and their conversion into (repulsive) vacuum particles.

That will allow FTL travel in hyperspace.

Also with the reduction of the gravitational field of a body the object will accelerate by aide of negative gravitophotons, that will produce a anti-gravity propulsive like effect involving gravity to the outside observer.

 

Negative gravitophotons are

absorbed by protons and neutrons, while the remaining

positive gravitophotons interact with

the gravitons of the spacecraft, being converted

into vacuum particles, thus reducing the gravitational

potential of the spacecraft, that will allow a spaceship to enter hyperspace.

 

This anti-gravity effect of course, will make it more easier to accelerate to higher speeds thus, negating the higher mass chemical fuel payloads to escape Earth's gravitational field or to reach the 6.96mi/s aprox. escape velocity of this planet.

 

The kinetic energy from anti-gravity propulsion

is extracted from the vacuum, although the total

energy extracted from the vacuum that is in the

form of negative and positive gravitophotons, is zero; must have conservation of energy.

 

 

The acceleration that is achieved by the

absorption of negative gravitophotons through

the protons and neutrons of the torus coil material.

Will require a superconductor magnetic coil material; the obstacles I spoke of is that the limit of known superconductors to high magnetic field densities is of some 34 T, where T is tesla, a unit of magnetic flux density.

Some magnetic field density of 50-60 T would be needed, for 1,000kg masses ranges; for a spacecraft of mass 1,000kg at 50 T approx. will obtain a value n=9,013

v=cn or a velocity equal to 2.5 light hour per second approx. after a accelerated transition(2.7m/s^2 or 27% of g) into hyperspace, by positive gravitophoton force propulsion.

It also depend on other physical parameters like higher atomic numbers elements and of course electrical power ratings in 1 MW; million watt ranges for a spacecraft around 100,000 kg mass ranges, for around the same hyperspace velocity as above, and accelerated transition, 2.7m/s^2.

That same magnetic field density of approx. 50 T , a electrical current density of 250 A/mm^2, where mm is millimeter for a magnetic coil of superconductor material

and a torus ring superconductor material(fill with hydrogen gas of 103 kg), a rotation velocity of 1,000m/s, and with magnetic coil number of turns of 1x10^6 will require a power rating of around 14,887 W or 14.9 kilowatts approx. for entering hyperspace, by +gravitophoton production for spacecraft of mass of 1,000 kg, according to the theory and the equations of Heim's theory.

The MW power ratings can be achieve with a very efficent nuclear reactor on a possible yet to be build(still on the drawing board at NASA) spaceship I think, but I will have to check that info.

 

Gravitophoton field propulsion would obtain the kinetic energy from the vacuum.

The transition into Hyperspace space would

need a repulsive strength of the gravitophoton

field (positive gravitophotons), that will produce an phase or accelerated transition into Hyperspace that will let a spacecraft achieve FTL travel at a speeds much greater than light speed, once in Hyperspace the speed of light is c=nc, where n>1 is a integer; that must be because of the quantize discrete spacetime in the theory.

The gravitational potential of the spacecraft of mass M is reduce; Gs=GM/r , where G is the gravitational constant and r is the distance from the center of this mass by the interaction with +gravito-photons the gravitons of the spacecraft and their conversion into (repulsive) quintessence vacuum particles.

 

The gravitational constant transform by this relation, G/n in hyperspace for hyperdrive velocity factor, n to increase, the gravitational constant must decrease also.

That also mean to get a faster velocity factor in Hyperspace, once all other physical conditions are met, the vehicle will have to have a faster acceleration at the moment of entering hyperspace.

 

 

vacuum polarization: this link for explaination vacuum polarization

Compton wavelength: fundamental limitation on measuring the position of a particle, taking quantum mechanics and special relativity into account.

 

 

light hour: 7.24329227133423AU exact

AU:A unit of length used for distances within the solar system; equal to the mean distance between the Earth and the Sun (approximately 93 million miles or 150 million kilometers)

virtual photon: here for explanation

QED means Quantum Electrodynamics: the Quantum physics of electromagnetism explained through Quantum Field Theory.

metron: Planck length^2= 10^-70 m^2

(String Theory; 10 D and 1 D time)

[edlib]

All interesting theories...

 

However: I don't believe any of us will live to see any practical use made of them.

 

Every serious discussion I ever heard or read about the possibility of hyperspace travel always comes down to one main thing: We are easily decades, if not centuries, away from being able to generate the massive energies required to punch a hole in space-time, or even power the technologies capable of doing so.

 

Once humans have figured out how to efficently produce power on that scale, then we can really start to explore the practical uses of all these theories. But at the moment all the output of all the power plants on Earth don't generate nearly enough in an entire year that would be required in a single burst to bridge that gap.

 

Once we can harness the power of fusion, we might stand a chance.

[Windu Chi]

All interesting theories...

 

However: I don't believe any of us will live to see any practical use made of them.

 

Every serious discussion I ever heard or read about the possibility of hyperspace travel always comes down to one main thing: We are easily decades, if not centuries, away from being able to generate the massive energies required to punch a hole in space-time, or even power the technologies capable of doing so.

I don't agree, I believe we are very close.

One main thing that stop all human progress is our strong dependency on money, if money was no issue we will probably colonizing the Milky Way right now.

As along as money determine our fate in the galaxy we will be stuck on this planet for 10,000s of years, never to leave until over population force us to leave.

By the way centuries ago we should already had explore the galaxy and set up a major human presence in Milky Way, if the Dark Ages never had happen.

The physics is there, money and laziness of our society only holds us back.

[jon_hill987]

It isn't going to happen any time soon. This war on terror is leading to a new dark age where science and technology will again be heresy. There are religious fundamentalists, on BOTH sides, that want it that way.

[Windu Chi]

It isn't going to happen any time soon. This war on terror is leading to a new dark age where science and technology will again be heresy. There are religious fundamentalists, on BOTH sides, that want it that way.

Yeah, Jon this war on terror really pisses me off, religious people don't seem to care about possible interstellar travel; traveling the galaxy and finding other ET life would mean back to the drawing board as far as their specific religions is of concern.

Dark Ages, when religion had immense power was a example of 800 years wasted time as far as for progress for our society.

 

This war on terror won't ever end, I don't think you can achieve victory on a enemy that wants to die.

If we ever do wipe al-Qaida out, there will still be terrorism, this sh*t isn't going away.

There will always be terrorist to fight,

Bush idea of winning a general war on terrorism is foolhardy.

But of course, the war must go on because al-Qaida and other Islamic extremists will try their best to vaporise the surface of the planet with a fusion nuke if they can't have a Islamic world.

[edlib]

Personally, I believe you to be far too optimistic in the time window for this, Windu...

 

There too far many problems to take care of at home first before we can even think of extra-solar explorations. Not the least of which is the current socio-political situations already mentioned.

 

My point about the power was basically this: If we can develop a machine capable of producing the types of power required rip the fabric of Einsteinian space-time and let us jump through higher dimensions, that machine will be hard-pressed to ever be used in that manner.

We currently have more than enough trouble keeping the lights on and the AC running in places like California during a heat wave. (And of course, with our current power-plant technologies... the cooler we try to make ourselves, the more we may be contributing to the root causes of the heat wave in the first place...)

 

A generator capable of producing multiple gigawatts on demand (especially if it is clean power) isn't going to be willingly sacrificed to space exploration by the general public far more interested in survival and personal comfort.

 

Once we solve some of the planet's pressing problems we may be able to put plans together to explore these types of things. But the resources needed to attempt travel of type you describe can't be put forward by a single nation. It will take a multi-national, and possibly a planetary effort to achieve these types of goals.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

There too far many problems to take care of at home first before we can even think of extra-solar explorations. Not the least of which is the current socio-political situations already mentioned.

Exactly. What about with global warming, hunger crises, overpopulation, slavery, poverty, warfare, torture, and so on? Is is ethically right to neglect these because we want to see if we can travel faster than light?

 

http://www.costofwar.com has a nice little counter that shows how much the 300+ billion USD spent messing up Iraq could've done for things such as fighting world hunger. And believe me, landing on Mars or building a base on the Moon is going to cost far, far more than Iraq ever will.

[Windu Chi]

Personally, I believe you to be far too optimistic in the time window for this, Windu...

Well, I perfer being optimistic then say that wonderful technologies like this, hyperdrive is centuries off, that kind of thinking is unacceptable to me.

 

There too far many problems to take care of at home first before we can even think of extra-solar explorations. Not the least of which is the current socio-political situations already mentioned.

Yes, global warming is big problem we should take care of, but oil companies don't won't that problem taken care of because they will be ass out.

This problem need to be solve NOW and not wait 50 years as some fools say, concerning global warming

My point about the power was basically this: If we can develop a machine capable of producing the types of power required rip the fabric of Einsteinian space-time and let us jump through higher dimensions, that machine will be hard-pressed to ever be used in that manner.

 

This hyperdrive mechanism suppose to extract energy from the Casmir vacuum(in theory), yeah money I know, I really hate that crap.

 

We currently have more than enough trouble keeping the lights on and the AC running in places like California during a heat wave. (And of course, with our current power-plant technologies... the cooler we try to make ourselves, the more we may be contributing to the root causes of the heat wave in the first place...)

Well, I don't have that trouble, you must live in California.

 

A generator capable of producing multiple gigawatts on demand (especially if it is clean power) isn't going to be willingly sacrificed to space exploration by the general public far more interested in survival and personal comfort.

Yeah, keep coming to these crossroads we will never leave this world.

We can't survive here forever over population were make sure of that; the laziness I spoke of, we got to stop saying space exploration is no interest now, crisis situations will always be, people can't keep making excuses like that.

We can solve all these problems now not 50 years from now; that belief is just laziness, oil companies can solve global warming, if they abandon their oil business but of course they won't dare do that because they care more for profit than the environment, no more environment, no profit to make because your ass will be DEAD.

For example in the 60s Moon exploration, our society lost interest in space because of laziness, we must not waste our time exploring space they ,we must invest our effort to solve problems here first, keep having that stance we will never explore the universe.

We aren't going to solve every single problem by staying here.

Another thing I have notice since their precious oil is runing, why the hell oil companies don't try to push our society harder or build their own space exploration company; Saturn's moon Titan has natural gas, most of the moon fluids are natural gas, why they don't go there, because they are LAZY.

Their laziness is destroying our planet.

They should give up on that black crap NOW.

And invest in in hydrogen fuel cells or they will be ass out.

With all the resources they have, global warming won't still be a issue today, if they give up on that crap.

 

Once we solve some of the planet's pressing problems we may be able to put plans together to explore these types of things. But the resources needed to attempt travel of type you describe can't be put forward by a single nation. It will take a multi-national, and possibly a planetary effort to achieve these types of goals

.

Yes, the people on this planet need get over their petty differences and work as one and then we will solve all those problem you mention.

[Windu Chi]

Exactly. What about with global warming, hunger crises, overpopulation, slavery, poverty, warfare, torture, and so on? Is is ethically right to neglect these because we want to see if we can travel faster than light?

Gobal Warming should already have a solution blame the oil companies who put us in this mess.

Poverty will never be solve, as along as money exist there will always be poverty.

And I hate saying never but I just don't see that happening.

Torture! What the hell do torture have do with interstellar travel?

Are you kidding me, there will always be torture.

Hunger! Well, hunger problem exist because of money this problem goes back to the ancient times; profit making people don't give a damn about the hungry, but I don't see that being solved either, we will always have hungry people you can't feed everybody on this planet with food that Americans eat, or Europeans and so on.

Since, not many people aren't willing to eat the trillions of eatable bugs we will always have some in the 6 billion populous being hungry.

Overpopulation! Well, unless you are talking about wiping 100 of millions of people out, that is definitely is not going to be solve until some of us jump ship.

Oh, not this warfare again, thats not going to end we will always have wars.

Only people who believes in utopia, will believe wars will end.

[edlib]

Well, I don't have that trouble, you must live in California.

Boston. I haven't personally encountered many problems on that front myself...

 

But every year I see that there's some power brownouts or rolling blackouts in some part of the most technologically advanced and prosperous nation in the history of the planet when the temp gets up there for a sustained period of time.

 

Well, all I can say is that I hope you are right and I am wrong about this,.. but I'd still be cautious about getting my hopes up. We are having problems enough keeping a sustained human presence in close orbit, let alone on the nearest satellites and planets to us. That stuff should be hopelessly simplistic compared to what you are talking about.

 

Leaving the solar system seems a very long way off to me. Even if we can theoretically pull it off with technologies and resources we have today, I just don't see how it is possible to do it practically with the state of things as the are at the moment. And I don't expect many of those things to change any time soon...

 

The fact that many of the particles and forces outlined in the proposal you posted are still strictly theoretical also makes me think we may still have a ways to go.

 

I'm hardly an expert on the math of this stuff, but I am pretty familiar with the popular works of Hawking, Michael Greene, and Michio Kaku (I am currently in the process of re-reading his book "Hyperspace"...) who are leading experts in some of this stuff, and none of them have ever given me the impression that they believe that we will see practical uses of any of these ideas in our immediate future.

 

There may very well be different schools of thought in the overall physics community on this matter, but personally I'm gonna place my bets with what the generally accepted leaders in the field seem to think.

[Tyrion]

Gobal Warming should already have a solution blame the oil companies who put us in this mess.

 

It's not as simple as that. Most of our economy is built on how cheaply gasoline can be procured, produced, and sold with such availability; there's nothing else that really competes with it. Nuclear energy has hazards of its own, more so if things go really wrong. The other major alternatives like ethanol fuels tend to impact the environment just as much as or even more so than oil while being all the less efficient.

 

Poverty will never be solve, as along as

money exist there will always be poverty.

 

No, poverty will exist as long as materials stay limited. Money isn't a cause of the problem, it's an effect.

 

And I hate saying never but I just don't see that happening.

Torture! What the hell do torture have do with interstellar travel?

Are you kidding me, there will always be torture.

 

He's saying that we should probably focus on our ills before we spread them to other planets.

 

Hunger! Well, hunger problem exist because of money this problem goes back to the ancient times; profit making people don't give a damn about the hungry, but I don't see that being solved either, we will always have hungry people you can't feed everybody on this planet with food that Americans eat, or Europeans and so on.

 

People in prehistoric times could usually only predict their next meal to within a day or so, and yet they had no currency to speak of. What money does is it lets civilization remove the strict bartering system of "this for that" and replace it with the ultimately better system of "this for anything I wish".

 

Since, not many people aren't willing to eat the trillions of eatable bugs we will always have some in the 6 billion populous being hungry.

Overpopulation! Well, unless you are talking about wiping 100 of millions of people out, that is definitely is not going to be solve until some of us jump ship.

 

Nah, it could be solved, or at least alleviated, with more research being spent on increasing agricultural efficiency instead of, oh, interstellar engines.

 

 

Oh, not this warfare again, thats not going to end we will always have wars.

Only people who believes in utopia, will believe wars will end.

 

Actually, I propose that we build a global government with the sole central headquarters somewhere in Siberia. It'll be a very fancy and large affair, sure, with perhaps a million civil employees residing within the halls. The reason why it'll work so marvelously is precisely because the bureaucracy will be far too bloated to do anything, wars the least of them. It'll be bliss.

[Windu Chi]

Well, all I can say is that I hope you are right and I am wrong about this,.. but I'd still be cautious about getting my hopes up. We are having problems enough keeping a sustained human presence in close orbit, let alone on the nearest satellites and planets to us. That stuff should be hopelessly simplistic compared to what you are talking about.

Still stuck in Earth's orbit, is pitiful and embarrassing.

Thats got end in this decade.

 

 

The fact that many of the particles and forces outlined in the proposal you posted are still strictly theoretical also makes me think we may still have a ways to go.

Well, what have got me interested in Heim's theory, because I just came aware of it.

Is that his mass formula predicted all the masses of all the elementary particles of nature and the values of the coupling constants: Value for creation and destruction

of messenger (virtual) particles,

relative to the strong force (whose value is

set to 1 in relation to the other coupling constants).

As the particle physictists say.

There is no other theory that comes close to that acurracy of 1 in 10,000,

not String Theory no theory.

I'm hardly an expert on the math of this stuff, but I am pretty familiar with the popular works of Hawking, Michael Greene, and Michio Kaku (I am currently in the process of re-reading his book "Hyperspace"...) who are leading experts in some of this stuff, and none of them have ever given me the impression that they believe that we will see practical uses of any of these ideas in our immediate future.

Because their lazy and close-minded, but Michio Kaku is more optimistic than the rest of them.

There may very well be different schools of thought in the overall physics community on this matter, but personally I'm gonna place my bets with what the generally accepted leaders in the field seem to think.

They are clueless about Heim's theory, Heim's theory is very recent he was working in private on his Quantize Geometry theory, because of his accident.

I think his theory is 4 years old respect to the physictists at large awareness of it.

The 700 page book about Heim's Theory was written in German, but the supporters of his theory are trying to translate it into English, I didn't know german was that hard to translate.

Also Michael Greene is a String theorist, I doubt he know jack about this theory.

He is to busy playing with strings.

Michio Kaku book Hyperspace, isn't about Heim's Teory its about M-theory,

I never read about Heim's theory in that book, but it has been a long time since I read that book so I have forgotten some detail.

[Windu Chi]

It's not as simple as that. Most of our economy is built on how cheaply gasoline can be procured, produced, and sold with such availability; there's nothing else that really competes with it. Nuclear energy has hazards of its own, more so if things go really wrong. The other major alternatives like ethanol fuels tend to impact the environment just as much as or even more so than oil while being all the less efficient.

You must support oil companies; no environment no economy, got it.

 

 

No, poverty will exist as long as materials stay limited. Money isn't a cause of the problem, it's an effect.

Until someone does a experiment taking money out of the system, we will just have to see who's right.

 

 

He's saying that we should probably focus on our ills before we spread them to other planets.

If our society keep complaining about our ills, then we won't ever spread to other planets.

 

 

 

People in prehistoric times could usually only predict their next meal to within a day or so, and yet they had no currency to speak of. What money does is it lets civilization remove the strict bartering system of "this for that" and replace it with the ultimately better system of "this for anything I wish".

 

Prehistoric! I'm talking about the times such as the anicent Romans

 

Nah, it could be solved, or at least alleviated, with more research being spent on increasing agricultural efficiency instead of, oh, interstellar engines.

That is just lazy talk, if the environment dies we die, how more clearly do I have to explain that to you, Tyrion.

There will be no agricultural efficiency, if farm lands don't exist no more.

[edlib]

But Heim's idea is still just a theory, as promising as it might seem to be. Maybe parts of it could be true, but it may not fully pan out the way you think. Or it could end up being fully disproven. We simply don't know yet, it's way too early to tell.

 

You cannot simply approach it with a semi-religious zeal just because it seems to tell you things that you would like to be true.

 

Michio Kaku is more optimistic than the rest of them.

Oh really? http://www.mkaku.org/article_intertravel.htm

 

And it seems to me that all these theories are interconnected, since they all have to do with the nature and the fabric of the universe... which is exactly what we are going to need to understand and overcome if interstellar travel is to ever become a reality.

 

I haven't fully accepted the idea that interstellar travel will ever become a possibility for human beings. The nature of the universe we find ourselves in may just forbid it. We just don't know enough yet. But wishing for it to be true won't make it so.

 

I personally hate the idea of the universe forever expanding until it eventually grows dark and cold... but all the current information we have points to that as the eventual outcome. I don't particularly like the idea but I have to accept it as the most likely scenario.

 

The fact that we may never be able to blip from solar-system to solar-system at will might also be the eventual conclusion as well. I honestly don't care for that idea any better... but I can't say that it isn't a possible outcome.

[Tyrion]

You must support oil companies; no environment no economy, got it.

 

Huh? You're not making much sense...

 

Until someone does a experiment taking money out of the system, we will just have to see who's right.

 

You mean like socialism?

 

If our society keep complaining about our ills, then we won't ever spread to other planets.

 

You can't just ignore them, you have to fix it. Our problems will be exponentially worse if we spread to other planets; as the old adage goes: "a stitch in time saves nine."

 

Prehistoric! I'm talking about the times such as the anicent Romans

 

I was simply illustrating how a lack of money will not instantly lead to a land of plenty.

 

That is just lazy talk, if the environment dies we die, how more clearly do I have to explain that to you, Tyrion.

There will be no agricultural efficiency, if farm lands don't exist no more.

 

Er, what? That's a bit of a, um, non sequitur right there. I was talking about how we should focus more on terrestrial research like agriculture instead of more fanciful expeditions like space travel. Environment falls under the former.

[Pho3nix]

@windu6

 

Why are you so 'obsessed' with spreading humanity to other planets? Why would it be a positive thing to spread humanity?

 

We would only spread death, possibly diseases and religion.

 

Sure it would be exciting to see aliens and encounter other civilizations and planets, but I'm just afraid what might happen. Not sure that the result of this would end up in anything good on either sides.

[Windu Chi]

Huh? You're not making much sense...

So, you want, what?

We should keep using oil until that pitiful resource dry up in 50 years, by that time half the environment will be destroyed

 

You mean like socialism?

No I'm talking about StarTrekism.

 

 

 

You can't just ignore them, you have to fix it. Our problems will be exponentially worse if we spread to other planets; as the old adage goes: "a stitch in time saves nine."

We aren't going to solve poverty; there will alway be rich snobs, middle people who try to become rich, and poor people because society don't give a damn about them, everybody can't or won't be friends, poor people will always exist because the simple fact that sh*t happens.

Not everyone going to get lucky and live a normal life .

 

 

I was simply illustrating how a lack of money will not instantly lead to a land of plenty.

Duh, I know that, I just hate money so much I'm just bias.

 

 

Er, what? That's a bit of a, um, non sequitur right there. I was talking about how we should focus more on terrestrial research like agriculture instead of more fanciful expeditions like space travel. Environment falls under the former.

So, how long we should wait before we explore the Milky Way and the Universe.

A billion years, because if you believe most scientists it will take millions of years before we even explore our own galaxy.

That lazy belief is unacceptable, we are long overdue for exploring the Milky Way.

[edlib]

Overdue?

 

The internal combustion engine is less than 200 years old. Air flight 100 years. Manned rocketry and space flight less than 50. Reusable space platforms less than 30 (within my lifetime... and we have had serious problem with it as it is.)

 

Given the entire timeline of modern humans as a species, this is a phenomenal rate of technological progress. But faster than that seems like it would be unsustainable.

 

My parents were born in 1930... before the jet plane, television, and a number of other technologies we take for granted. I'm sure neither of them would say that things are moving too slow.

 

I don't believe that the human colonization of the galaxy could have possibly occurred at any point before now. I can't see how we are already overdue.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

He's saying that we should probably focus on our ills before we spread them to other planets.

Exactly. Humanity and the planet is, quite frankly, a mess. We're in 2007. We've existed for 200 000 years. Isn't it time we eradicate hunger and fix our Earth and make this a good place to live for everyone, not just the English, South Koreans, Scandinavians, Canadians and other middle class industrial nation residents?

 

If our society keep complaining about our ills, then we won't ever spread to other planets.

Worse. If society keeps complaining about our ills, we might actually get around to fixing them:eek:.

 

There is no reason to prioritize space colonization over our own world's problems. It's like being ill and buying a PlayStation instead of anti-biotics. Sure, it's ten times more cool than some boring little white pills, but in the long run...

 

Since, not many people aren't willing to eat the trillions of eatable bugs we will always have some in the 6 billion populous being hungry.

I sincerely hope you're joking. There's more than enough food for all of us. It's not just distributed properly. Basic social studies.

[Windu Chi]

Overdue?

 

The internal combustion engine is less than 200 years old. Air flight 100 years. Manned rocketry and space flight less than 50. Reusable space platforms less than 30 (within my lifetime.)

Well, I'm not sure what is the complete history concerning ancient societies 10,000s years ago.

But, the Dark Ages, 800 years wasted.

 

Given the entire timeline of modern humans as a species, this is a phenomenal rate of technological progress. But faster than that seems like it would be unsustainable.

Phenomenal rate !

More like a snail's pace.

Computer technology is the only thing that has been a phenomenal rate over the last 50 decades, in my opinion.

The internal combustion engine is too old it's way overdue, it's time to retire that technology.

Manned rockery should've been done and over with by now in 21 century.

The 60s & 70s should've been a period of manned solar system exploration.

If our society didn't become lazy after the Moon landing.

I just think outside the box, I don't close my mind or have the "it will take a long time" belief as others do.

I'm more like do it now, do it now and do it now.

But, our society is not truely sure if there was any advance civilization here before what we know of in the history texts.

So, the jury is still out on how advance we are.

[edlib]

The 60s & 70s should've been a period of manned solar system exploration.

If our society didn't become lazy after the Moon landing.

More like broke and focused on other societal problems (hard to colonize the stars when engaged in expensive wars overseas.)

 

But did we really have the tech to colonize the moon back then? Do we have it now?

For human beings to live somewhere you need a constant and renewable oxygen, food, and water supply, as well as sanitary waste removal.

Were we ever truly capable of terraforming the Moon in that way in the 60's, 70's,.. or even today?

We barely had the capacity of hauling a single capsule and a couple of men and their life support that distance with the technology we had then. Bringing all the cargo needed for long-term human survival on the Moon is, in my opinion, STILL outside of our current capabilities... at least at a cost that anybody would be willing to pay for it.

 

How many gallons of water does the average human require in a year (and that's for drinking, bathing, cleaning, and the growing of vegetables and supplying the needs of possible livestock of some sort)? Calculate that, then multiply it for the amount of people in your colony, and the period of time you are planning on being there. (Permanent? Then factor in population growth...)

You will have to bring that water with you. Even with calculating waste-water reclamation technology, that's a very, very large and heavy payload to get all the way to the Moon.

Same goes for oxygen. And the soil for hydroponic gardens. And all the food it would take to sustain human life until the gardens are constructed and the first crops are grown. (And exactly what is the process of storing all this stuff and growing crops in a low gravity environment?) Then all the construction materials for the surface pods to contain this stuff in.

 

Even if we had the tech and resources to get all this crap there in one piece, it actually makes far more sense to have robots set all this stuff up for us before we get there. Why risk human lives on that type of process? However: Robot technology still isn't that advanced, even today.

 

I honestly don't believe we could have ever pulled that kind of activity at any point in the last 30 years. I have my doubts about doing it even in today's day and age.

 

If anything, I would say that we are not behind the times, but that the moon missions of the past were premature. We proved we could get there and back. But we never had a chance at the time of keeping humans there for any sustained period of time.

[Windu Chi]

More like broke and focused on other societal problems (hard to colonize the stars when engaged in expensive wars overseas.)

I was refering to the whole planet not just America.

 

 

But did we really have the tech to colonize the moon back then?

Do we have it now?

Well, since United States government don't tell all it's secrets.

Who knows?

For human beings to live somewhere you need a constant and renewable oxygen, food, and water supply, as well as sanitary waste removal.

Duh !

Were we ever truly capable of terraforming the Moon in that way in the 60's, 70's,.. or even today?

Yes, if the world was working together back then.

at least at a cost that anybody would be willing to pay for it.

Yes, at the cost, money, that sh*t is a major hinderance to any profound progress of our society, as I have said before.

How many gallons of water does the average human require in a year (and that's for drinking, bathing, cleaning, and the growing of vegetables and supplying the needs of possible livestock of some sort)? Calculate that, then multiply it for the amount of people in your colony, and the period of time you are planning on being there. (Permanent? Then factor in population growth...)

You will have to bring that water with you. Even with calculating waste-water reclamation technology, that's a very, very large and heavy payload to get all the way to the Moon.

Same goes for oxygen. And the soil for hydroponic gardens. And all the food it would take to sustain human life until the gardens are constructed and the first crops are grown. (And exactly what is the process of storing all this stuff and growing crops in a low gravity environment?) Then all the construction materials for the surface pods to contain this stuff in.

Look, I don't give damn about lunar or Mars colonization, I'm more interested in Milky Way colonization; I was giving an example, that we need to speed things up.

 

 

I honestly don't believe we could have ever pulled that kind of activity at any point in the last 30 years. I have my doubts about doing it even in today's day and age.

Because you have that "it will take a long time" belief, so you will always feel that way about the creation of profound technologies like a Hyperdrive engine.

[edlib]

Well then, we keep coming back to the issue of solving the world's problems first, before we head out and make them the galaxy's problems. If the entire planet needs to work together to make these things a reality then that's still a pretty big thing to overcome on it's own.

 

Money is simply a reality in our world. There's no way around it. Without it we'd all still be each growing our own food and building our own houses and making our own clothing. Nobody would have time to even speculate about space travel... or much of anything else for that matter. Money allows to concentrate on issues other than our own survival.

 

If we can't colonize even our nearest planets and satellites, there's no way we will ever be able to survive outside our solar system. That's an even larger hurdle to overcome.

 

And even if you were able to get the entire planet to put aside all it's differences tomorrow and concentrate every ounce of energy into creating this technology and populating the galaxy, it would still take a long time. There are an insane amount of purely logistical problems to overcome... let alone the theoretical ones. It's just not going to happen any time soon.

 

 

Go ahead and prove me wrong...

[Ray Jones]

So we have the hyperdrive, and then what? Power my neighbour's old ladies' bicycle with it? Like I've said already a couple of times, we need a lot more than a hyper/star/warp/subspace/chocolatemilk-drive just to leave our solar system let alone the fact that we actually need to arrive at another one.

What would, what could, what should isn't going to be any helpful in that matter.

Earn some money and pump it all into the "space industry" or make up your own space company - in other words, turn those theories and ideas into reality - now that would be helpful. Oh, and don't forget to call me if you need any astronauts.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

I could easily change things around a bit and ask if we should colonize Mt. Everest (the world's tallest mountain), the Mariana Trench (the world's deepest ocean) or Mt. Vesuvius (a volcano). All three would teach us a huge deal in many fields, but is, apart from that, about as pointless as colonizing the Moon.

 

The only reason why everyone are so crazy about colonizing some dead rock out in space as opposed to some dead trench or mountain or some active volcano is the "cool factor". It's not that we'll learn this or advance that way. It's that space travel fascinates. The abundance of sci-fi movies, games, and television series proves as much. It's not about learning, advancing technology, or "finding out how we came to be here". It's about having fun.

 

Look, we'll get man to Mars in time. We'll estabilish our colonies in the Andromeda Galaxy. We may even one time in the far future have grown to tens of thousands of billions of people and spread our colonies, explorers and probes to all over the galaxy. What's the bloody hurry?

 

Again, if you've got a moderately serious illness, what do you do? Do you spend your money on that cool, awesome PlayStation 3 you want so much - or do you buy antibiotics and save the console for the next time you've got the money?