Posted on 01/26/2016 2:19:03 PM PST by BenLurkin
We know there are planets orbiting other stars near to our Solar System, and many of these stars are similar to our own.
In the future, should mankind wish to leave the Solar System, we'll have a huge choice of stars we could travel to, and many could have the right conditions for life to thrive. But where would we go and how long would it take for us to get there? Just remember, this is all speculative and there is currently no benchmark for interstellar trips. That being said, here we go!
...
The question of how long would it take to get somewhere in space is somewhat easier when dealing with existing technology and bodies within our Solar System. For instance, using the technology that powered the New Horizons mission - which consisted of 16 thrusters fueled with hydrazine monopropellant - reaching the Moon would take a mere 8 hours and 35 minutes.
On the other hand, there is the European Space Agency's (ESA) SMART-1 mission, which took it's time traveling to the Moon using the method of ionic propulsion. With this revolutionary technology, a variation of which has since been used by the Dawn spacecraft to reach Vesta, the SMART-1 mission took one year, one month and two weeks to reach the Moon.
So, from the speedy rocket-propelled spacecraft to the economical ion drive, we have a few options for getting around local space - plus we could use Jupiter or Saturn for a hefty gravitational slingshot. However, if we were to contemplate missions to somewhere a little more out of the way, we would have to scale up our technology and look at what’s really possible.
(Excerpt) Read more at universetoday.com ...
Good question...I’ll let you all know how long it takes if Hillary gets elected cause that’s where I’m headed.
“With this revolutionary technology, a variation of which has since been used by the Dawn spacecraft to reach Vesta, the SMART-1 mission took one year, one month and two weeks to reach the Moon. “
What? Huh? Maybe I’m missing something.
They probably took the scenic route.
Far too long to be contemplated. And it will remain that way for a long, long time.
Eight and a half minutes at the speed of light, unless they don’t really mean the “nearest” star.
Speed is not the question but some sort of collision avoidance system. The faster you go the smaller the piece of matter required to destroy you. You need some radar to detect stuff and avoid it.
Depends a lot on how much you want to spend.
Maybe closer to 4 light years.
Is Proxima Centauri the nearest star? It's 4.24 light years away.
LOL!!! count me in.
At present, the total amount of antimatter that has been created by humans is less 20 nanograms....
When the hell did we start making antimatter and anybody know what the @#$#@$ it is?
Great article Ben. Not done with it, keeping it open.
most fascinating one i’ve read in a while.
Traveling at the speed of light is a physics no no.
Trust me - you don’t WANT to go to the nearest star.
Stars are hot.
After we harness the power of fusion, it won’t take more than a lifetime. Moving on to controlling atomic particles, you might just get there before you leave.
The Voyager spacecraft were launched in the 70’s. If they had been launched on an intercept to Alpha Centauri, the closest star to the Sun, it would take close to 100 thousand years.
Depends. I you live in Hollywood it shouldn’t take that long . . . maybe a couple of blocks.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.