XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.alien.research
XPost: alt.alien.visitors
From: Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com
On 9/24/2025 12:06 AM, jojo wrote:
> % wrote:
>> Dawn Flood wrote:
>>> On 9/22/2025 5:16 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2025 13:51:35 -0500, Dawn Flood
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/21/2025 10:41 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2025 19:25:55 -0500, Dawn Flood
>>>>
>>>>>>> I would have to take issue even with unmanned space probes, all
>>>>>>> of which
>>>>>>> require some energy to function, even if they are sitting in standby
>>>>>>> mode. Even the PCBs in the spacecraft will degrade over time, as it
>>>>>>> would take tens of thousands of years for one to travel the
>>>>>>> distance to
>>>>>>> the nearest star (other than our Sun), Proxima Centauri. When
>>>>>>> (and if)
>>>>>>> such a probe arrived, it would be completely dead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dawn
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you taken time dilation into account?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that's irrelevant, because, getting a spacecraft up to 90% (or
>>>>> more) of the speed of light would require enormous amounts of energy,
>>>>> and an equal amount of energy to slow the thing down. What would
>>>>> be the
>>>>> source of this energy, especially, that which is needed for the
>>>>> slow-down?
>>>>>
>>>>> Dawn
>>>>
>>>> Right. I was just saying that *if* rockets could reach relativistic
>>>> speeds, *then* long life spans for the astronauts would not be a
>>>> problem.
>>>
>>> Agreed. Of course, their rocket would, at those speeds, need to
>>> avoid colliding with anything!
>>
>> you just raise your shields
>
> you create a positron shield to prevent interstellar dust from
> accumulating in your spaces.
>
LOL! (Jojo, think about the conservation of momentum.)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
