Re: starship-design: Go Starwisps

[Antonio C T Rocha <arocha@bsb.nutecnet.com.br>]

L. Parker wrote:

> Antonio,
>
> The probes we are talking about would be travelling at relativistic
> velocities
> (0.9xx c) at these velocities it would be nearly impossible to synch
> the
> clocks no matter how good your lasers. Time runs at different rates a
> those
> velocities so even atomic clocks would not stay in synch.
>
> Now if you can keep them on the same vector but spread out across a
> wide
> volume of space it would work, but it would be easier to just build
> them in
> orbit around the sun, say about the asteroid belt or even further. As
> Kelly
> (or was it Kevin?) popinted out, a sufficiently large array spread out
> that far
> could see quite a bit of detail of the nearer stars without actually
> going there.
>
> My sketch for a planned exploration of the nearer stars included the
> use of
> large space borne telescopes to identify likely systems for priority
> in
> scheduling further robotic and manned missions.
>
> Lee Parker
>
>     Of course, if a probe scope is nice, what about a multi-probe
> interferometric telescope (scopes being kept in sych through good
> lasers
> and atomic clocks).Its just an idea, but it will come true sometime
> next
> century.
>
>     Antonio C T Rocha
>
> [L. Parker]
> Bohr moved in atomic circles while Schrodinger waved and Heisenberg
> hesitated.

   Of course you re right. They probe-scopes would only be useful if set
in place before the ships arrival, and being capable of transmitting
data to, and being remotely controlled by the crew.
   As for a near-space or moon-based array, it would probably be quite
able to compensate for dust and debris between us and nearby systems.

Antonio C Rocha