I keep hearing that. Again - I don’t work on space physics, so forgive my ignorance on why. However- I’m good with billionaires taking as long as needed to get to our sun, some other maybe hospitable planet, or just dying in the cold of interstellar space while we observe a new holiday of them all fuckin’ off from terra firma.
Earth is traveling 29.8km/s around the sun. In order to go to the sun, you have to slow down. But to escape the sun from earth, you need to accelerate to 42km/s or just 12km/s relative.
Are you trying to get us fucking killed??? Those types of speeds are capable of reversing the Earth's rotation, and turning back time! But even more likely is that the Earth will stop rotating and we'll all get crushed because of gravity vs centrifugal force, and the world will stop being flat and then we'll all fall off!
The launch technology is already taken care of. We still need interplanetary radiation shielding and a landing system that doesn't bounce them across the landscape like a ball, but that's no reason we can't start now.
Not sure what you mean by the question, but it's because we're in orbit around the sun. We're already going way too fast, so you'd have to slow down, and slow down a lot.
It's actually a kinda' fun challenge in Kerbal Space Program to hit the sun, and KSP's solar system is much smaller than ours (meaning everything is much closer and easier to hit).
Nope, it'd me much easier from Mercury. A higher orbit has more energy. A space ship has to speed up to increase it's orbit.
Think of it like the old expression about what an orbit even is: You're still falling same as always, you're just moving to the side fast enough to always miss. Earth is 'missing' the Sun by a whole lot more than Mercury is 'missing' the Sun.
Basically because the planet the craft is being launched from is hurtling around the sun, you have to first cancel out all of that...let's call it horizontal motion. Its the same way that orbits around earth work, you throw the thing horizontally fast enough and it will just fall around the planet. Want it to stop orbiting? Now you have to slow it down enough that it no longer falls around the planet but falls onto the planet.
Well while things are falling around (orbiting) the Earth, the Earth is falling around (orbiting) the sun. To launch something from earth and have it hit the sun, it first needs to get through all of Earth's atmosphere, achieve orbit around the Earth, then exit the Earth's sphere of orbital influence by increasing the height of the orbit so that the craft is no longer orbiting the Earth but orbiting the Sun, then decrease that orbit around the sun until eventually you get so close to the sun you fall into it rather than falling around it.
Now, if we were a real space program planning a real mission, we'd probably do something frugal and smart like using gravity assists to make the whole endeavor more achievable (which is exactly what the Parker Solar Probe did!)
Hear me out. What if we get that billionaire submarine company to build 2 big rockets, each one full of billionaire. We'd say one is going to do an exclusive tour near the sun, and the other is going to that fancy new planet. No one can go on both, because whatever, just bs that they leave at the same time. And limited seats to the highest bidder.
I mean the thing doesn't even need to work. Just take their money and ship them to their doom, then build public houses with their money and put on space YouTube to see them squirm.
It's a reference to Amazing Stories from the 80's (specifically the episode Thanksgiving, Season 2, 1986), starring David Carradine. In it, Carradine and his daughter discover a mysterious hole/well on their property. When they lower objects down in it, something living below fills the bucket with gold, jewels, and notes like “thanks for the food, send more”. Eventually Carradine is like, fuck sending shit down there, I'm gonna go down there myself with an AR and take all the gold.
When his daughter tries to pull him up it comes back with a bunch of gold and "Delicious. Please send more."
It was really well made for the time, I seem to recall, but I was a kid so YMMV.
Would be a funny conspiracy theory that this is how humans spawned on earth. Not evolution, but just some alien civilization shooting all their pedos into space, some of which were lucky to land on a habitable planet.
You should read Hitchikers Guide To The Galaxy. One planet decides to ship off all their "useless" people on a colony ship pretending they're saving them from the apocalypse and everyone else is coming soon.
Assuming we want to accelerate at a constant 1g for half of the travel and then brake at 1g for the second half of the travel we would need 151 years to get there but only 9.794 years would pass on the ship. Depending on the mass of the ship we would need coupe million/billion tons of fuel (anti-matter).
In theory yes, in practice we have absolutely no idea how to actually do that and use the energy in an efficient or practical way. Even just on paper without limitations of technology or costs, we have no idea. Physics simply isn't as clean or neat like that in real life.
Smarter people than me on the internet calculate that at constant 1g you only need 2.5 years to get very close to speed of light. So I guess you accelerate fast enough and reach 'almost speed of light' very early in your travel and total time is almost as if you traveled at speed of light the whole time.
The main advantage of keeping accelerating when you're at >90% of the speed of light is that it means you arrive faster in subjective time. You could take 160 years to get there and use ten times less fuel (or thereabouts), but the subjective travel time would go up by decades.
I think having constant gravity on the ship during the entire flight is also a big plus. Designing a ship where you can live in 0g for years and in 1g for years would be like designing two ships in one.
Not that smarter when they forget you're running out of gas by the Oort cloud. Gotta spread christianism capitalism there and build a petrol station before we go further.
I just used the calc, it's closer to 152 years. Which I assume means acceleration at 1g for about a year to reach .999c, and deceleration for the same time.
I just confirmed with dV= a*t, a year of 1g(9.8m/s/s) gets you just over the speed of light. I think it's more complicated than that, If I remember right relativistic speeds require more and more energy to accelerate so you can't ever "reach" light speed.
Constant acceleration at 9.8m/s^2 in a given direction will bring you close to the speed of light eventually, but yeah, I'm also not super sure how this math checks out
Just imagine sitting on a spaceship for 151 years to find out they got there first because in 151 years space travel tech has improved so much they can travel there in 35 years.
So a bit quicker than terraforming Venus by chucking several oceans worth of ice at it, and some cyanobactera once it cools down in a few hundred thousand years.
It's not just blanket entire body experience that force including internal organs.. So i guess sleeping with tgat would be more than just uncomfortable
I say have a spinny ship that does that with the shape of the ring. Some kind of parabolic bullshit I'm sure there's a way to get it to math without having to have a 1g ring and a 3g ring but that works too
I mean, yeah. They'd probably have reasons to have stuff in the high grav areas besides sleep areas. I'm not a spaceshipologist I can't think of anything but radon to keep there tho
No, the people in the ship will experience less time then 152 years. Relativity tells us the faster an observer is moving, the slower it moves through time.
Only 150 light years away?! Wow, that's practically next door! Now all we need to do is figure out how to go light speed and even then it'll take a further 300 years just to know if the colonists got there safely or not!
When the first colonists arrive the planet will already be inhabited by humans since 100 years after they left we invent the warp drive. And trying to intercept them mid travel and board them on to the new ship is impossible since they travel near the speed of light in the darkness of space.
I'm pretty sure that's a sidequest in Starfield. The ECS Constant colony ship set off in 2140 to colonise a planet, arriving in 2330 at the planet Paradiso, which had become a luxury resort planet for the rich, because shortly after the ship left, humanity invented the grav drive and every ship just zoomed right past them.
Whenever a game gives me a questline like "a mysterious ship is hailing you. You have never seen anything like it, you get the feeling that it is very important" I blast the fucking thing out of the sky.
Any civilization capable of sending missiles across the galaxy should be more than capable of simply sending a tight beam of gamma radiation to sterilize the planet. No need for earth shattering explosions. Just a flood of radiation engulfing the planet for a minute or two and everything not buried a mile underground will be dead. There would be no warning either.
And that's if they don't bother to just blow up the sun.
They want the power over others. At the very least they'll want harems. My point here is there are more, ahem, local solutions to our inequality problem that don't involve letting the oligarchs just fuck off.
If we can go back in time, we can recount the election, find those missing votes and have the person Americans actually wanted become president. Al Gore
AIs may never be a real thing. Even if it were somehow theoretically possible for an AI to suddenly come into being if a computer system gets complicated enough, humans would probably do what humans do best and make them extinct. Humans have already killed off massive numbers of species by accident just because they happened to be on the same terrain humans wanted to use: there used to be a forest, humans wanted to grow crops so they destroyed the forest, now a lot of forest species are gone.
Now a new species might emerge on terrain that humans already fully control and consider 100% theirs: computer systems? Humans would just kill it off to get 100% of their computer systems back, rather than having to share them with another entity -- and that's even assuming the humans recognized them as being "alive" in some way.
Only a tiny number of animal species have prospered in the era of humans, and they're the species that humans have domesticated -- in other words, the species that humans have intentionally modified to be calm, dumb and servile. So, maybe a version of AI could survive, but it would have to offer great benefits to humans to make it worth the humans giving up their "land" to it. It certainly won't own the future, it will just be yet another thing that humans modify and shape until it's useful to them.
There are a few speculative ideas on faster than light travel. Such as worm holes, quantum tunneling, and super fluid vacuum theories.
Are they real in the sense that we can know how they can work today? Nope. But lots of ideas we take for granted today were "impossible" not that long ago. The fact that real physicists are even thinking about those possibilities could lead to something in the future.
They're probably so full of weird shit and plastic surgical filler they will contaminate wherever they die. Imo send them to mars alive. The microbes on them might help terraform mars if you send enough billionaires. All of them should do.
Why all these fancy impractical scifi solutions when the problem can be solved by a single bullet to the forehead? You can even use those cattle euthanizers and save on the bullet.
That's a great idea, instead of building rockets to deliver them to mars we could build a giant gun and fire them into mars at crazy high velocity. An operation plumbob situation.
Haven't you seen Alien:Prometheus? Humanoid aliens sending their pedos to earth and dispersing their DNA to create a whole new pedosystem was what got us into this mess in the first place. We must not repeat the cycle!
I don't have time to read a 16-page paper in detail, but I did want to know how the host star compares to everyone's favourite local solitary K-type dwarf, Epsilon Eridani. It's slightly less massive (~0.7 solar mass versus 0.8 for ε Eri) and quite a bit less bright (difference of about 0.1 solar luminosity), but I especially wanted to know about the age of the star. ε Eri is quite young and frothy, but the investigators here infer from the star's motion that it belongs to the thin disk, up to a whopping 10 billion years old.
So we are definitely not talking about an ε Eri-type system. So that should be mean no dust disks, no crazy activity from the star, and no newish planets still carving out their places through the system.
You've really got to wonder about such an old planet, however cold and quiescent it may be. The potential paths for climatic evolution on such a world boggle the mind, however cold it is. You could get an episodically or formerly active world like Mars, a beautifully unstable oscillatory world like Earth, or something completely different. Assuming any atmosphere, of course (safe assumption?). And that's without considering whether there are any other planets in the system.
I really wouldn't spend too much time thinking about this candidate detection, as we have literally seen just the one transit, and we will need to observe this fellow for a while to confirm the discovery, learn about other planets in the system, and so on. The investigators themselves note that the transit was shallow (meaning difficult to detect), but the good news is that the host star is fairly bright, well within reach of amateur equipment. I wonder if citizen scientists will be able to follow the transits.
This is the main reason I've never taken the Fermi paradox seriously. I know it's only supposed to be a thought experiment, but way too many casual readers interpret it as some kind of scientific theory.
There's no paradox at all when you consider how unlikely it is that another civilization reached the same or similar technology level as us in the exact same microscopically thin slice of time that we've had radio. And that's even ignoring all the problems with detecting an alien radio signal in the first place.
I always found it arrogant to presume aliens would want anything to do with us. If life exists on one other planet, then life will exist fucking everywhere and we wouldn't be special, it's not like life will have evolved on specifically two planets only.
If the rare earth hypothesis is true, which I personally think it is because of how many coincidences it took to make Earth habitable, then I do think they would be interested.
I mean we'd be very interested if we found another Earth-like planet with a civilization on it, so why wouldn't aliens? Presumably any species capable of that discovery would at least have a need to pursue new knowledge, otherwise they would not be able to advance scientifically.
It's not about humans being special at all, rather the opposite. Intelligent life is likely to share at least some things in common with us. For example it's possible that they're also violent assholes like we are, and destroyed their own planet, so now they a need one and we fit the bill.
If the rare earth hypothesis is false, then things simultaneously become more and less interesting. More interesting in that there's suddenly a whole galaxy of life-rich planets to explore, less interesting in that there would be nothing rare about an Earth-like planet and aliens may be less interested in us.
But even then, I feel that someone's going to be interested. We have millions of species on this planet and that doesn't stop people from looking for new species.
I'm being semi-facetious of course, I just always found it a bit funny to assume that life either only exists on Earth or on Earth and then like a few other planets. Presumably if life exists anywhere beyond Earth it would be safe to assume that life would be everywhere and not uncommon at all, for reasons of panspermia and because it would indicate life is an inevitable chemical process that would naturally spring up around the Universe.
I'd say that the two extremes- life being unique to Earth, and life being ubiquitous in the Universe, are both more reasonable positions than life being unique only to Earth and just a few other places.
I am a strong proponent of life being ubiquitous, because the Universe doesn't do "one off" phenomena, and as per my previous argument, if it's in more places than here, it's going to be everywhere. That's only my intuition, of course, we can't meaningfully say scientifically which is the case without more data either way.
But to address the original argument- if we would say that life is indeed everywhere, then that would seriously diminish the interest of any would-be advanced alien civilization because they'd likely have seen it before. Interesting, sure, but not world-shattering, or even important enough to warrant direct communication, just like finding a new species of orchid deep in an Amazonian jungle would be interesting to botanists and maybe be photographed and put in a magazine but not even make the faintest blip on the radar of the corpus of scientific discovery as a whole.
I don't think we have the technology or will have the technology any time soon to send a focused enough powerful enough radio signal over 150 light years. As radio is subject to the inverse square law, the amount of power you'd need is gigantic. Like black hole swallowing a bunch of stars levels of energy. Iirc anything over 25 light years is pretty much a no-go for radio as the detectors get ridiculous and the signal to noise ratio makes it indistinguishable from background levels.
If we could accelerate at a constant 1g, flip, and decelerate at a constant 1g, the trip would take ~152 years... from Earth's perspective. If you were onboard, time dilation would make the trip about 10 years.
C'mon billionaires! This is your chance to create a totally unique planet! Get onboard an X rocket and fly your teslas out there! We are all counting on you my friends! All of you! We will need the chip guys, the real estate and building tycoons, the medicine billionaires and everyone in between, all you must go!
No, g is a measure of acceleration equal to Earth's gravitational pull at the surface of earth (approx 9.8 meters per second per second). 'c' is the speed of light, you can't accelerate with a speed.
I mean 'g'. 1g is 9.81m/s^2.
c is a speed, not an acceleration. g is acceleration.
Not coincidentally, it's the acceleration you experience from Earth's gravity, but it doesn't have to come from gravity. Astronauts routinely experience 3gs during takeoff from their rocket boosters.
If you were in a rocket that accelerated at a constant 1g it would feel like Earth's gravity, even in space. We don't have any rockets capable of producing 1g for years.
I actually don't know, it's been my favorite/lucky number since I was a kid. I've really thought about it and tried to remember, I've asked my parents etc. but no one knows. It's a really cool number though, some random things:
There's a lot more where 137 pops up, but please don't take this as me thinking it's some deeper thing and that 137 is the truth of the universe or whatever else conspiracy mumbojumbo. I'm a science nerd and just think it's fun to have it pop up in so many places of importance, and I know most of those are via our own completely subjective measurement scales (a circle being 360°, measuring the age of the universe in earth years etc.)
Some have asked if it has anything to do with 1337, and it has no connection to that.
I have a fantasy (as in it only exists in my head, so far) sci-fi universe that I've been developing for most of my life where 137 is important that I hope to do something with in the future. Like writing a book, making a game etc. all I can say is that blade runner and 2001 are major inspirations for it.
I gotta head to bed but can post more fun things about it tomorrow.
Nope. Further from the host star than Venus from Sol, and that star is far less luminous to begin with. (Source)
The amount of CO2 or any other plausible greenhouse gas you'd need to pump a place like that up to lead-melting temperatures means you'd need, what, two planets' worth of available volatiles? You'd probably also need a seriously disturbed spin for that, like Venus does. I think we can safely start with the assumption that this place (if we can confirm it's real) is pretty cold.
200 Comments
in_my_honest_opinion@piefed.social · 170 pts · 200d
Cool lets pack up the billionaires and ship em over there.
stephen@lazysoci.al · 107 pts · 200d
I like the way you think. I think the sun is closer though. Probably easier to get too. I don’t know I don’t work on space travel.
Aquila@sh.itjust.works · 75 pts · 200d
Its actually easier to launch stuff out of the solar system than to slow stuff down enough to fall into the sun
stephen@lazysoci.al · 26 pts · 200d
I keep hearing that. Again - I don’t work on space physics, so forgive my ignorance on why. However- I’m good with billionaires taking as long as needed to get to our sun, some other maybe hospitable planet, or just dying in the cold of interstellar space while we observe a new holiday of them all fuckin’ off from terra firma.
piccolo@sh.itjust.works · 32 pts · 200d
Earth is traveling 29.8km/s around the sun. In order to go to the sun, you have to slow down. But to escape the sun from earth, you need to accelerate to 42km/s or just 12km/s relative.
bufalo1973@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
And if the launch is towards the "back" of Earth's orbit? 29.8 km/s - escape velocity...
hypeerror@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 199d
guillotines need less energy than a light bulb.
sga@piefed.social · 5 pts · 199d
psud@aussie.zone · 0 pts · 198d
If we made guillotines now we would certainly use electric winches to lift the blades
stephen@lazysoci.al · 2 pts · 199d
Great way to get some exercise in.
prettybunnys@piefed.social · -3 pts · 200d
I’m a certified internet space-e-ologist and can confirm that it’s all conjecture cuz we’ve never tried.
So for scientific purposes we should send a capsule in both directions.
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com · 4 pts · 200d
Actually we did!
prettybunnys@piefed.social · 6 pts · 200d
I was referring to chucking billionaires into the sun.
I’m sure the physics are wildly different so we need to test it, is my point.
fartographer@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 200d
Are you trying to get us fucking killed??? Those types of speeds are capable of reversing the Earth's rotation, and turning back time! But even more likely is that the Earth will stop rotating and we'll all get crushed because of gravity vs centrifugal force, and the world will stop being flat and then we'll all fall off!
Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 200d
Mars ?
GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca · 10 pts · 200d
The launch technology is already taken care of. We still need interplanetary radiation shielding and a landing system that doesn't bounce them across the landscape like a ball, but that's no reason we can't start now.
name_NULL111653@pawb.social · 4 pts · 200d
Nah, let the billionaires eat some radiation and bounce around at high velocity on landing
GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca · 8 pts · 200d
S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 200d
Hear me out what if we aaaiiimm it real good to the sun like "follow the bright ball buddy"?
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 200d
That's how you get comets
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 200d
Is it because of our position?
As in, is it fair to say in terms of potential gravitational energy, that we are basically outside of the “centre” of sun’s gravity?
MotoAsh@piefed.social · 8 pts · 200d
Not sure what you mean by the question, but it's because we're in orbit around the sun. We're already going way too fast, so you'd have to slow down, and slow down a lot.
It's actually a kinda' fun challenge in Kerbal Space Program to hit the sun, and KSP's solar system is much smaller than ours (meaning everything is much closer and easier to hit).
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 200d
I meant whether we are farther away from the sun or not. As in, would it take less energy to hit the sun if we started from Mercury.
But now I realize that it’s our momentum given earths orbit. So I guess it would be harder from mercury cause it’s going faster?
MotoAsh@piefed.social · 4 pts · 200d
Nope, it'd me much easier from Mercury. A higher orbit has more energy. A space ship has to speed up to increase it's orbit.
Think of it like the old expression about what an orbit even is: You're still falling same as always, you're just moving to the side fast enough to always miss. Earth is 'missing' the Sun by a whole lot more than Mercury is 'missing' the Sun.
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 200d
Basically because the planet the craft is being launched from is hurtling around the sun, you have to first cancel out all of that...let's call it horizontal motion. Its the same way that orbits around earth work, you throw the thing horizontally fast enough and it will just fall around the planet. Want it to stop orbiting? Now you have to slow it down enough that it no longer falls around the planet but falls onto the planet.
Well while things are falling around (orbiting) the Earth, the Earth is falling around (orbiting) the sun. To launch something from earth and have it hit the sun, it first needs to get through all of Earth's atmosphere, achieve orbit around the Earth, then exit the Earth's sphere of orbital influence by increasing the height of the orbit so that the craft is no longer orbiting the Earth but orbiting the Sun, then decrease that orbit around the sun until eventually you get so close to the sun you fall into it rather than falling around it.
Now, if we were a real space program planning a real mission, we'd probably do something frugal and smart like using gravity assists to make the whole endeavor more achievable (which is exactly what the Parker Solar Probe did!)
tomiant@piefed.social · 0 pts · 199d
Yeah but let's not leave anything to chance
tomiant@piefed.social · 0 pts · 199d
Easiest is to just round them up and shoot them and let their corpses rot in a ditch.
in_my_honest_opinion@piefed.social · 8 pts · 200d
shhhhhh they don't understand Hohmann Transfers, we can send them there regardless.
trolololol@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 200d
Hear me out. What if we get that billionaire submarine company to build 2 big rockets, each one full of billionaire. We'd say one is going to do an exclusive tour near the sun, and the other is going to that fancy new planet. No one can go on both, because whatever, just bs that they leave at the same time. And limited seats to the highest bidder.
I mean the thing doesn't even need to work. Just take their money and ship them to their doom, then build public houses with their money and put on space YouTube to see them squirm.
robocall@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
Your idea is complicated, let's just Luigi them
trolololol@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
Why not both
robocall@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
yes
Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 200d
Recommend them to compute a sol gravity assist trajectory using chatgpt
Venator@lemmy.nz · 0 pts · 198d
Guillotines are even closer than the sun.
tomiant@piefed.social · 8 pts · 199d
302 years later the ship comes back with a pile of gold and a note:
"Delicious. Please send more."
robocall@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 198d
Everyone likes gold. This would be a good movie!
tomiant@piefed.social · 2 pts · 197d
It's a reference to Amazing Stories from the 80's (specifically the episode Thanksgiving, Season 2, 1986), starring David Carradine. In it, Carradine and his daughter discover a mysterious hole/well on their property. When they lower objects down in it, something living below fills the bucket with gold, jewels, and notes like “thanks for the food, send more”. Eventually Carradine is like, fuck sending shit down there, I'm gonna go down there myself with an AR and take all the gold.
When his daughter tries to pull him up it comes back with a bunch of gold and "Delicious. Please send more."
It was really well made for the time, I seem to recall, but I was a kid so YMMV.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 5 pts · 200d
We could save a lot of money on life support system.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 200d
They'll pull themselves up by their bootstraps on the way there!
rbn@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 199d
Would be a funny conspiracy theory that this is how humans spawned on earth. Not evolution, but just some alien civilization shooting all their pedos into space, some of which were lucky to land on a habitable planet.
ProfessorHoover@infosec.pub · 6 pts · 199d
You should read Hitchikers Guide To The Galaxy. One planet decides to ship off all their "useless" people on a colony ship pretending they're saving them from the apocalypse and everyone else is coming soon.
ChilledPeppers@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 200d
That could mess up the biggest computer ever, which is supposed to answer the question to which the answer is 42!
Mongostein@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 199d
With their work ethic they’ll be fine!
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 199d
Don't spread the virus...
robocall@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
Let's just tell them we're sending them to the new world and blow them up in the space rocket ship.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 120 pts · 200d
Found a calculator: https://www.calctool.org/relativity/space-travel
Assuming we want to accelerate at a constant 1g for half of the travel and then brake at 1g for the second half of the travel we would need 151 years to get there but only 9.794 years would pass on the ship. Depending on the mass of the ship we would need coupe million/billion tons of fuel (anti-matter).
Thorry@feddit.org · 60 pts · 200d
Oh only a billion tons of anti-matter. Good thing we've already made a few nanograms, so in a billion years or so we'll have plenty.
Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz · 19 pts · 200d
Yeah, and antimatter converts to pure energy with e=mc^2 what means that 60 grams contains like Hiroshima worth of energy
Thorry@feddit.org · 8 pts · 199d
In theory yes, in practice we have absolutely no idea how to actually do that and use the energy in an efficient or practical way. Even just on paper without limitations of technology or costs, we have no idea. Physics simply isn't as clean or neat like that in real life.
sga@piefed.social · 2 pts · 199d
mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 200d
Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 39 pts · 200d
How can it take 151 years to go 150 light years when not close to lightspeed most of the time? I get the 9 year thing, but 151 years seems wrong.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 62 pts · 200d
Smarter people than me on the internet calculate that at constant 1g you only need 2.5 years to get very close to speed of light. So I guess you accelerate fast enough and reach 'almost speed of light' very early in your travel and total time is almost as if you traveled at speed of light the whole time.
Tiresia@slrpnk.net · 20 pts · 200d
The main advantage of keeping accelerating when you're at >90% of the speed of light is that it means you arrive faster in subjective time. You could take 160 years to get there and use ten times less fuel (or thereabouts), but the subjective travel time would go up by decades.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 11 pts · 199d
I think having constant gravity on the ship during the entire flight is also a big plus. Designing a ship where you can live in 0g for years and in 1g for years would be like designing two ships in one.
trolololol@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 200d
Not that smarter when they forget you're running out of gas by the Oort cloud. Gotta spread
christianismcapitalism there and build a petrol station before we go further.Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 200d
Earth’s gravity being what it is a blessing cause it means we can do interstellar travel faster.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 34 pts · 200d
The closer you get to lightspeed, the slower you accelerate (from an outside perspective). It's actually close to lightspeed for most of the time.
domdanial@reddthat.com · 18 pts · 200d
I just used the calc, it's closer to 152 years. Which I assume means acceleration at 1g for about a year to reach .999c, and deceleration for the same time.
I just confirmed with dV= a*t, a year of 1g(9.8m/s/s) gets you just over the speed of light. I think it's more complicated than that, If I remember right relativistic speeds require more and more energy to accelerate so you can't ever "reach" light speed.
degenerate_neutron_matter@fedia.io · 17 pts · 200d
skulblaka@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 200d
Constant acceleration at 9.8m/s^2 in a given direction will bring you close to the speed of light eventually, but yeah, I'm also not super sure how this math checks out
SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml · 32 pts · 200d
Imagine sitting on a spaceship for 151 years just to discover your parents' bet was wrong
Zolidus@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 200d
9.974 years
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 14 pts · 200d
It's only 9 years for you!
SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 200d
Ohhhhhhh, ok that's clever!
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 200d
Imagine getting there and finding out a ship left 50 years after yours that flies faster and arrived 2 years before yours!
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 200d
Just imagine sitting on a spaceship for 151 years to find out they got there first because in 151 years space travel tech has improved so much they can travel there in 35 years.
plecks@programming.dev · 8 pts · 199d
Unless we figure out FTL travel that wouldn't be possible.
bufalo1973@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
Alcubierre engine.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
so with the solar mass of antimatter ponies that are propelling your spaceship, please tell me how yours works in reality.
tetris11@feddit.uk · 4 pts · 199d
Nah, Earth ran out of ideas in the 2020s
UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 199d
Maybe ChatGPT has some ideas
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 199d
i mean shit this isn't even my idea jerry pournelle wroute a short story about it ages ago
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 200d
Time for Bussard to invent those collectors
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 200d
So a bit quicker than terraforming Venus by chucking several oceans worth of ice at it, and some cyanobactera once it cools down in a few hundred thousand years.
m0darn@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 200d
What about accelerating 1g for 16 hours of 'day', then 8 hours of 3g 'night'. It would be one hell of a weighted blanket lol.
mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 200d
It's not just blanket entire body experience that force including internal organs.. So i guess sleeping with tgat would be more than just uncomfortable
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 200d
I say have a spinny ship that does that with the shape of the ring. Some kind of parabolic bullshit I'm sure there's a way to get it to math without having to have a 1g ring and a 3g ring but that works too
m0darn@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 200d
The purpose of my idea is to average 2g without expecting people to function in 2g. Not just for the purpose of a weighted blanket
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 200d
I mean, yeah. They'd probably have reasons to have stuff in the high grav areas besides sleep areas. I'm not a spaceshipologist I can't think of anything but radon to keep there tho
dreamkeeper@literature.cafe · 2 pts · 199d
It would only save you a few months
Venat0r@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 200d
And you'll only need about 320 million GWh per ~80kg person... plus 4 million GWh per kg of supplies, equipment and ship weight...
trolololol@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 200d
Great Scott!
Venator@lemmy.nz · 4 pts · 200d
Oh and also thats just the pure energy for acceleration/deceleration, not life support, steering, thrust ineffeciencies, take off, landing etc... 😅
bufalo1973@piefed.social · 3 pts · 199d
So 340 PWh per person. A couple of guys with a static bike and a dynamo and that's it😜
Note: the Earth receives 170 PWh of energy from the Sun in a year.
Venat0r@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
Sounds feasible for a fusion reactor to provide at some point in the very distant future.
bufalo1973@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
Twice the full energy the Sun gives the Earth in a year for each person is not a future fusion reactor level. 😀
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 200d
I’m guessing you probably go faster than 0.9C after six months, given that the difference is 1 year.
mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 200d
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de · 0 pts · 200d
Your statement makes things sound a bit confusing.
To clarify, if you are inside the ship, 152 years will pass.
Edit: Nevermind. Time travel is stupid.
FUCKING_CUNO@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 12 pts · 200d
No, the people in the ship will experience less time then 152 years. Relativity tells us the faster an observer is moving, the slower it moves through time.
rumba@lemmy.zip · 74 pts · 200d
Nalivai@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 199d
*they
phoenixz@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 199d
That would be us
JargonWagon@lemmy.world · 63 pts · 200d
Is there another similar format for this meme, but without this dipshit in it?
shadowtofu@discuss.tchncs.de · 162 pts · 200d
Does Bernie suffice?
JargonWagon@lemmy.world · 56 pts · 200d
Beautiful, Bernie is much preferred, thank you!
orgrinrt@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 199d
Yeah this one should take over
RedFrank24@piefed.social · 50 pts · 200d
Only 150 light years away?! Wow, that's practically next door! Now all we need to do is figure out how to go light speed and even then it'll take a further 300 years just to know if the colonists got there safely or not!
SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 199d
When the first colonists arrive the planet will already be inhabited by humans since 100 years after they left we invent the warp drive. And trying to intercept them mid travel and board them on to the new ship is impossible since they travel near the speed of light in the darkness of space.
RedFrank24@piefed.social · 14 pts · 199d
I'm pretty sure that's a sidequest in Starfield. The ECS Constant colony ship set off in 2140 to colonise a planet, arriving in 2330 at the planet Paradiso, which had become a luxury resort planet for the rich, because shortly after the ship left, humanity invented the grav drive and every ship just zoomed right past them.
Enzy@feddit.nu · 3 pts · 199d
I blew them up.
tomiant@piefed.social · 6 pts · 199d
Whenever a game gives me a questline like "a mysterious ship is hailing you. You have never seen anything like it, you get the feeling that it is very important" I blast the fucking thing out of the sky.
Don't tell me what I think is important, dev.
hypeerror@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 200d
They've already sent galactic missiles to wipe us out before we can ruin them.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
Any civilization capable of sending missiles across the galaxy should be more than capable of simply sending a tight beam of gamma radiation to sterilize the planet. No need for earth shattering explosions. Just a flood of radiation engulfing the planet for a minute or two and everything not buried a mile underground will be dead. There would be no warning either.
And that's if they don't bother to just blow up the sun.
TurtleTourParty@midwest.social · 1 pts · 199d
I like the just speed up a small, really heavy object to a very high speed approach of The Three Body Problem books.
RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 200d
Unfortunately it is technically in New Jersey.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 200d
I'm gonna eat that planet
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 199d
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 29 pts · 199d
Can we trick a few billionaires into going there
ebolapie@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 199d
Not without condemning their personal staff to a living hell
Spezi@feddit.org · 2 pts · 198d
I‘m sure theres plenty of maga and crypto bros that would be willing to serve their billionaire sugar daddys to suck on their feet.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 198d
They can quit
ebolapie@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 198d
Yeah but then the billionaires wouldn't go. We can't trick them into going without them taking a bunch of working class people to torture.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 198d
Just convince them that AI can handle it. Shouldn't be too hard these days.
ebolapie@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
They want the power over others. At the very least they'll want harems. My point here is there are more, ahem, local solutions to our inequality problem that don't involve letting the oligarchs just fuck off.
avg@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 199d
Let's tell them they're next
Lucky_777@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 200d
Now all we need is an FTL drive
Deme@sopuli.xyz · 25 pts · 200d
Yeah then we can use that to go back in time and save Harambe, and then we won't need another planet!
anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 16 pts · 200d
If we can go back in time, we can recount the election, find those missing votes and have the person Americans actually wanted become president. Al Gore
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 200d
Excelsior!
tomiant@piefed.social · 2 pts · 199d
Never forget the day democracy was usurped and Bush seized power. We are still living with the consequences of that daily.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 200d
Harambe was a consequence, not the cause.
Deme@sopuli.xyz · 5 pts · 200d
Sure, that's what they want you to think.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 200d
David Bowie was the force holding the universe together.
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 200d
Really tied the universe together, man.
Lucky_777@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 200d
See! All kinds of fun things possible!
merc@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 200d
Honestly, if FTL travel is never invented, the future is going to be so incredibly boring.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 199d
The future doesn't belong to us. It belongs to AIs.
(Not claiming that LLMs are anywhere close to human-level AI)
merc@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 198d
AIs may never be a real thing. Even if it were somehow theoretically possible for an AI to suddenly come into being if a computer system gets complicated enough, humans would probably do what humans do best and make them extinct. Humans have already killed off massive numbers of species by accident just because they happened to be on the same terrain humans wanted to use: there used to be a forest, humans wanted to grow crops so they destroyed the forest, now a lot of forest species are gone.
Now a new species might emerge on terrain that humans already fully control and consider 100% theirs: computer systems? Humans would just kill it off to get 100% of their computer systems back, rather than having to share them with another entity -- and that's even assuming the humans recognized them as being "alive" in some way.
Only a tiny number of animal species have prospered in the era of humans, and they're the species that humans have domesticated -- in other words, the species that humans have intentionally modified to be calm, dumb and servile. So, maybe a version of AI could survive, but it would have to offer great benefits to humans to make it worth the humans giving up their "land" to it. It certainly won't own the future, it will just be yet another thing that humans modify and shape until it's useful to them.
aeronmelon@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 200d
Quickly, let’s build a rocketship so we can fuck that planet up, too.
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 200d
For 150 light-years I'm afraid we'll need something more advanced than rockets
otacon239@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 200d
I’ll just ask Grok to build me something…
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 200d
The inhabitants of HD 137010 b thank you for that decision
tomiant@piefed.social · 2 pts · 199d
Grok:
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 199d
if you are traveling at sublight speeds, it will take you 10s of thousands of years if not more. maybe if you somehow travel at near the light speed.
gkaklas@lemmy.zip · 21 pts · 200d
Source: https://www.unisq.edu.au/news/2026/01/earth-meets-mars
(Nice!)
A_Chilean_Cyborg@feddit.cl · 18 pts · 199d
How cool would be to have radio communications with similarly tech-evolved aliens.
Edt: could
tetris11@feddit.uk · 22 pts · 199d
Very could!
DancingBear@midwest.social · 12 pts · 199d
MoffKalast@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
Could could could no scout no scout no scout
DancingBear@midwest.social · 1 pts · 199d
Smoogs@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
I think that's a drone you’re shaking your fist at.
DancingBear@midwest.social · 1 pts · 198d
RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 199d
Sadly, special relativity says no.
Bluewing@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 199d
There are a few speculative ideas on faster than light travel. Such as worm holes, quantum tunneling, and super fluid vacuum theories.
Are they real in the sense that we can know how they can work today? Nope. But lots of ideas we take for granted today were "impossible" not that long ago. The fact that real physicists are even thinking about those possibilities could lead to something in the future.
tomiant@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
Yeah yeah everyone thinks they're special.
lightsblinken@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
not with that attitude!
aliser@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 199d
cant wait to see alien brainrot
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 200d
Send the pedofile billionaires
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 200d
pedoplanet? this is how you get pedoplanet.
just kill them here so their bodies can rot and feed the planet.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 200d
as far as we know this is the pedo planet
zbyte64@awful.systems · 6 pts · 200d
They said send them, never said in what condition.
Fedizen@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 200d
They're probably so full of weird shit and plastic surgical filler they will contaminate wherever they die. Imo send them to mars alive. The microbes on them might help terraform mars if you send enough billionaires. All of them should do.
tomiant@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
Why all these fancy impractical scifi solutions when the problem can be solved by a single bullet to the forehead? You can even use those cattle euthanizers and save on the bullet.
Fedizen@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
That's a great idea, instead of building rockets to deliver them to mars we could build a giant gun and fire them into mars at crazy high velocity. An operation plumbob situation.
bampop@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
Haven't you seen Alien:Prometheus? Humanoid aliens sending their pedos to earth and dispersing their DNA to create a whole new pedosystem was what got us into this mess in the first place. We must not repeat the cycle!
Fedizen@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
Prometheus was a silly movie.
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 200d
They’ll never make it
birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 199d
Why not ship them into Venus' surface? Much closer, anyway.
Vupware@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 200d
Send them on a generation ship without medbays with Hormel and Campbell’s and Dasani
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 200d
Excuse me but if alpo's good enough for daisy, it's good enough for them
Numenor@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 200d
Planet of the Rapes. Oh my God, I was wrong it was Earth all along!
DancingBear@midwest.social · 1 pts · 199d
SpecialSetOfSieves@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 200d
Well. This is quite a pearl.
I don't have time to read a 16-page paper in detail, but I did want to know how the host star compares to everyone's favourite local solitary K-type dwarf, Epsilon Eridani. It's slightly less massive (~0.7 solar mass versus 0.8 for ε Eri) and quite a bit less bright (difference of about 0.1 solar luminosity), but I especially wanted to know about the age of the star. ε Eri is quite young and frothy, but the investigators here infer from the star's motion that it belongs to the thin disk, up to a whopping 10 billion years old.
So we are definitely not talking about an ε Eri-type system. So that should be mean no dust disks, no crazy activity from the star, and no newish planets still carving out their places through the system.
You've really got to wonder about such an old planet, however cold and quiescent it may be. The potential paths for climatic evolution on such a world boggle the mind, however cold it is. You could get an episodically or formerly active world like Mars, a beautifully unstable oscillatory world like Earth, or something completely different. Assuming any atmosphere, of course (safe assumption?). And that's without considering whether there are any other planets in the system.
I really wouldn't spend too much time thinking about this candidate detection, as we have literally seen just the one transit, and we will need to observe this fellow for a while to confirm the discovery, learn about other planets in the system, and so on. The investigators themselves note that the transit was shallow (meaning difficult to detect), but the good news is that the host star is fairly bright, well within reach of amateur equipment. I wonder if citizen scientists will be able to follow the transits.
Exciting times.
tetris11@feddit.uk · 6 pts · 199d
haha, y-yes
birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 199d
Alright, Jimbo, let's see its atmospheric composition. Does it have a gas giant in its system?
tomiant@piefed.social · 18 pts · 199d
No, your mother is in the kitchen.
Microw@piefed.zip · 12 pts · 200d
"Only" 150 light years away
Ephera@lemmy.ml · 17 pts · 200d
We could start sending radio waves there and if something happens to be alive there, the response wouldn't arrive until 300 years from now. 🫠
ameancow@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 200d
dreamkeeper@literature.cafe · 2 pts · 199d
This is the main reason I've never taken the Fermi paradox seriously. I know it's only supposed to be a thought experiment, but way too many casual readers interpret it as some kind of scientific theory.
There's no paradox at all when you consider how unlikely it is that another civilization reached the same or similar technology level as us in the exact same microscopically thin slice of time that we've had radio. And that's even ignoring all the problems with detecting an alien radio signal in the first place.
tomiant@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
I always found it arrogant to presume aliens would want anything to do with us. If life exists on one other planet, then life will exist fucking everywhere and we wouldn't be special, it's not like life will have evolved on specifically two planets only.
dreamkeeper@literature.cafe · 2 pts · 199d
If the rare earth hypothesis is true, which I personally think it is because of how many coincidences it took to make Earth habitable, then I do think they would be interested.
I mean we'd be very interested if we found another Earth-like planet with a civilization on it, so why wouldn't aliens? Presumably any species capable of that discovery would at least have a need to pursue new knowledge, otherwise they would not be able to advance scientifically.
It's not about humans being special at all, rather the opposite. Intelligent life is likely to share at least some things in common with us. For example it's possible that they're also violent assholes like we are, and destroyed their own planet, so now they a need one and we fit the bill.
If the rare earth hypothesis is false, then things simultaneously become more and less interesting. More interesting in that there's suddenly a whole galaxy of life-rich planets to explore, less interesting in that there would be nothing rare about an Earth-like planet and aliens may be less interested in us.
But even then, I feel that someone's going to be interested. We have millions of species on this planet and that doesn't stop people from looking for new species.
tomiant@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
I'm being semi-facetious of course, I just always found it a bit funny to assume that life either only exists on Earth or on Earth and then like a few other planets. Presumably if life exists anywhere beyond Earth it would be safe to assume that life would be everywhere and not uncommon at all, for reasons of panspermia and because it would indicate life is an inevitable chemical process that would naturally spring up around the Universe.
I'd say that the two extremes- life being unique to Earth, and life being ubiquitous in the Universe, are both more reasonable positions than life being unique only to Earth and just a few other places.
I am a strong proponent of life being ubiquitous, because the Universe doesn't do "one off" phenomena, and as per my previous argument, if it's in more places than here, it's going to be everywhere. That's only my intuition, of course, we can't meaningfully say scientifically which is the case without more data either way.
But to address the original argument- if we would say that life is indeed everywhere, then that would seriously diminish the interest of any would-be advanced alien civilization because they'd likely have seen it before. Interesting, sure, but not world-shattering, or even important enough to warrant direct communication, just like finding a new species of orchid deep in an Amazonian jungle would be interesting to botanists and maybe be photographed and put in a magazine but not even make the faintest blip on the radar of the corpus of scientific discovery as a whole.
ameancow@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
tomiant@piefed.social · 1 pts · 199d
We should also better be lucky they're not gonna be like those Krikkit robots from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Thorry@feddit.org · 2 pts · 200d
I don't think we have the technology or will have the technology any time soon to send a focused enough powerful enough radio signal over 150 light years. As radio is subject to the inverse square law, the amount of power you'd need is gigantic. Like black hole swallowing a bunch of stars levels of energy. Iirc anything over 25 light years is pretty much a no-go for radio as the detectors get ridiculous and the signal to noise ratio makes it indistinguishable from background levels.
mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 200d
That is so close tho
HaiZhung@feddit.org · 1 pts · 200d
It’s not that far away IF we discover a method to perpetually accelerate in space with 1g
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 10 pts · 200d
Imagine arriving there after 150 years only for the colony to fail due to a random prion in the environment.
the_mighty_kracken@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 200d
150 years travelling at light speed?
FastQuelonios@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 200d
Check this out
https://youtu.be/K0K-pMPFzGY
tomiant@piefed.social · 2 pts · 199d
itsaphoque@moist.catsweat.com · 2 pts · 198d
Give a read to Aurora by Kim Stanley Robinson 😉
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 198d
It's in fact what I was channeling with my comment ;)
Rhoeri@piefed.world · 8 pts · 200d
-94° is apparently habitable?
GenosseFlosse@feddit.org · 10 pts · 200d
We let Exxon and Ford build petrol stations and oversized pick ups and SUVs first, then just wait about 100 years.
Rhoeri@piefed.world · 4 pts · 200d
That’ll do it.
Darkness343@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 199d
Our two guaranteed inhabitable worlds are in alpha centauri and sirius
josephc@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 198d
If we could accelerate at a constant 1g, flip, and decelerate at a constant 1g, the trip would take ~152 years... from Earth's perspective. If you were onboard, time dilation would make the trip about 10 years.
altphoto@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 198d
1g! We have like 6g now!
C'mon billionaires! This is your chance to create a totally unique planet! Get onboard an X rocket and fly your teslas out there! We are all counting on you my friends! All of you! We will need the chip guys, the real estate and building tycoons, the medicine billionaires and everyone in between, all you must go!
zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 198d
Do you mean "c" instead of "g"? I don't think there are a lot of "g" in interplanetary travel.
Siethron@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
No, g is a measure of acceleration equal to Earth's gravitational pull at the surface of earth (approx 9.8 meters per second per second). 'c' is the speed of light, you can't accelerate with a speed.
zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 198d
Ok, thanks for the clarification, I clearly misunderstood "g" and how it was used.
josephc@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 198d
I mean 'g'. 1g is 9.81m/s^2. c is a speed, not an acceleration. g is acceleration.
Not coincidentally, it's the acceleration you experience from Earth's gravity, but it doesn't have to come from gravity. Astronauts routinely experience 3gs during takeoff from their rocket boosters.
If you were in a rocket that accelerated at a constant 1g it would feel like Earth's gravity, even in space. We don't have any rockets capable of producing 1g for years.
zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 198d
I understand now, thanks.
ICastFist@programming.dev · 5 pts · 199d
How neat, its name even comes in High Definition!
moseschrute@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 200d
That’s the reaction of billionaires when they realize they have a backup planet while they kill earth. Everyone else is fucked
M137@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 200d
137 is my favorite and lucky number, so I'm gonna decide this is the one that we find life on.
volvoxvsmarla@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 200d
What happened in your life that this has become your lucky number? (Genuine question)
M137@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 200d
I actually don't know, it's been my favorite/lucky number since I was a kid. I've really thought about it and tried to remember, I've asked my parents etc. but no one knows. It's a really cool number though, some random things:
The golden angle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_angle
Age of the universe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe
The periodic table should end at 137 elements. Here's a good blog post about it: https://gravityandlevity.wordpress.com/2013/04/27/where-the-periodic-table-ends/
And here's just about the number itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/137_(number)
Here's a great video about 1/137: https://youtu.be/RCSSgxV9qNw
And an article (there are many more about it): https://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/physics-terms/why-is-137-most-magical-number.htm
There's a lot more where 137 pops up, but please don't take this as me thinking it's some deeper thing and that 137 is the truth of the universe or whatever else conspiracy mumbojumbo. I'm a science nerd and just think it's fun to have it pop up in so many places of importance, and I know most of those are via our own completely subjective measurement scales (a circle being 360°, measuring the age of the universe in earth years etc.) Some have asked if it has anything to do with 1337, and it has no connection to that.
I have a fantasy (as in it only exists in my head, so far) sci-fi universe that I've been developing for most of my life where 137 is important that I hope to do something with in the future. Like writing a book, making a game etc. all I can say is that blade runner and 2001 are major inspirations for it. I gotta head to bed but can post more fun things about it tomorrow.
5715@feddit.org · 4 pts · 200d
Great side project for keeping busy after climate change...
zen@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 199d
Friday night HD 137010 b run boys, who is in?
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 200d
But does it have a moon?
Hexagon@feddit.it · 2 pts · 200d
Too good to be true. The climate has to be something like Venus, or worse
SpecialSetOfSieves@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 200d
Nope. Further from the host star than Venus from Sol, and that star is far less luminous to begin with. (Source)
The amount of CO2 or any other plausible greenhouse gas you'd need to pump a place like that up to lead-melting temperatures means you'd need, what, two planets' worth of available volatiles? You'd probably also need a seriously disturbed spin for that, like Venus does. I think we can safely start with the assumption that this place (if we can confirm it's real) is pretty cold.
Sam_Bass@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 200d
And 50% not
DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 199d
Vince McMahon is a rich snob
sahin@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 199d
Yess, that is how capitalism will work.
PointyFluff@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 198d
None of you smelly monkeys are welcome; keep your filthy paws off my home.
domdanial@reddthat.com · 1 pts · 200d
DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 199d