[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: Suspended animation.

In a message dated 1/6/00 6:54:59 PM, STAR1SHIP writes:

>In a message dated 1/6/00 9:11:14 AM Pacific Standard Time, KellySt@aol.com
><< Hey folks.  Ran across a comment about suspended animation/hibernation.
> Seems they've done studies on animals using some of the drugs VooDoo folks
> usedto use to make Zombies.  They show promis in use for hibernation.
> The 
> same effect that slows resperation and pulse enough so you look dead and
> don't sofocate until they dig you up, also works for hybernation for 
> something like space travel.
>  >>
>Seems like there would be to much to do aboard a space craft to even want
>hibernation. Picking landing site, training colonist with colony skills,
>scanning scenery, Solving problems. Any star system colonization would
>require independence from earth and also require that reproductive quality
>of life in an environment of possible enclosed dimensions protected from
>the elements so that colony would succeed and grow and grow even if landfall
>was in an uninhabitable place.
>A long time span journey solution has already been found by Einstein who
>showed that should your craft near speed of light relative to earth, time
>became dilated. At 50% dilation a journey a distance of 4 light years takes
>two years ship time giving a velocity of twice light speed. Closer to light
>speed, crossing galaxies and even the distance between them can be 
>in days of ship time.  Better money be spent on engines capable of 
>light speed, -- like the one in the link below. Independence from earth
>means that the eons passed on earth during the few days are not important
>so distance traveled divided by observer time giving observed velocity
>with a c limit is meaningless. Unless of course your motivation for the
>journey is the parade of family and friends on return to earth. 
>Since velocity can exceed light speed in the part of the example trip given
>there clearly exists in the universe a counter example proving a light
>speed limit for rockets as nonscientific nonsense and defines the limit
>is on what can be observed and not what may be doable. The is no known
>reason to shut the engines accelerating at one g for 355 days off just
>because the rocket becomes unobservable.
>The rocket becomes unobservable when velocity exceeds light speed because
>observer light traveling towards earth relative to the rocket is in fact
>traveling away from the earth with a negative velocity so does not hit
>retina to get observed.
>No paradox there but basic physical science calculating and measuring the
>velocity of an object thrown from a car towards the starting point when
>the velocity of the car wrt (with respect to) staring point is faster than
>the velocity wrt car of the object thrown back to starting point. The object
>simply does not reach the starting point. (neglect air resistance).
>I propose such unobservable velocities obtained may allow the travelers
>to return to earth and be closer to the age of the earth twin. Do not look
>for (as they do not yet exist as a complete relativity theory) the equations
>determining time variance above light speed and calculating the amount
>but do feel free to derive them special relativity(SR) and general 
>Please, do not confuse my rocket engine with those imaginary thought 
>rockets so often found in SR and GR basic training. 
>It has been pointed out to me that such a velocity concept and understanding
>of Einstein's theory was published by the SCI-faction author Poul Anderson
>in a book entitled Tau Ceti.
>My independent contribution to above remains my engine. Kelly- Please forward
>to starship- design mailing list as I forgot how and my mail responder
>just listed your address in send to: block. Feel free to add any personal
>discalimers you like :=)