Hey Insane Curiosity Squad! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it with your friends or on other social networks like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter, etc... (Since the algorithm is not cooperating in showing us to the public 😅). In just 30 seconds, you will greatly help our Channel to grow and improve future contents. A big thank you from all of us.
A million years from now somebody in Proxima Centauri will be sitting on their sofa eating popcorn and watching "Ancient Aliens" and it will be about us...
@boskee Maybe it's a Fire Centaur born of the great flame of Anor by the NetherDemons of Handorfall. That would be my guess. But everybody knows they don't watch tv. They're only passion is catching Star Flies in the Great Astrobelt of Zendar's 3rd moon. Duh! This guy! Lol. He must think we're crazy.🤪
Unfortunately the planet Proxima Centauri b is tidally locked to Proxima Centauri, so the habitable zone between the light (too hot) side and the dark (too cold) side would be a narrow strip of the planet. If there’s an atmosphere then it may be much warmer on the dark side, but that’s if there even is an atmosphere that has survived, because Proxima Centauri is a flare star, and the flare-ups would probably strip the planet of any atmosphere in the first place. Nice to imagine the possibilities though!
The biggest issue isn't even getting there. The biggest issue is slowing down enough to be captured within the planets orbit. Doing so would require a tremendous amount of energy.
The thing that wasn't mentioned is that you need just as much fuel to slow down at the other end. Travelling in space doesn't use fuel, only to accelerate, once up to speed, you stay at that speed with the engines off. The slowing down part is probably the hardest.
Thanks to the rocket equation you actually need less fuel to slow down. At the other end your spaceship is lighter than at the beginning, because it has spent a lot of fuel accelerating. This is true for all reaction drives (chemical, nuclear, ion, vasimr, etc) For laser powered light sails you need the same amount of energy to slow down as it took to speed up, but unfortunately there are no lasers at the destination to slow you down.
If those spacecraft reach proxima centauri at a significant fraction of lightspeed, and they are not able to slow down, that probably would only give them minutes (a few hours at the very most) to do useful observations after a voyage of many years.
If you stagger the launch of the ships so that several mini ships reach proxima every week for a year you could get different readings out of them and do a composite of the system over time
And how would you get the information it records back to earth considering that the spacecraft transmitter would be in the glare of the star when seen from Earth four years later?
The irony is that it is pointless to ever send a vessel because long before we reach our destination a much faster vessel will pass us hundreds of years later.
But if we don't send the first vessel, we will not have developed the technology to launch the second one. 🤷🏽 We should embrace the fact that any starship we send will be seen as a prototype to more powerful designs in hindsight. Just what happened in the history of computers.
@@no_more_spamplease5121 No, you simply develop the tech on Earth! I dont believe we will ever get to another star. Why should we? We have everything we need right here.
What I find most disturbing is that they think that throw a bunch of these nano-spacecrafts and that with them just floating around aimlessly, they could then just shoot a laser at each one and expect it to fly directly towards Proxima Centauri, unguided and that they seem to think that after 20-40 years their aim would be so perfect that they will hit this system. It will take some pretty amazing math to calculate our system's velocity, direction and angular trajectory within he galaxy as well as where PC might be decades from now… People seem to forget that if we shot a rocket directly at the sun, it would hit it, not even close… they forget the the Earth is traveling at 67,000 MPH around the sun and every hour that that rocket is shooting straight at the sun, it drifts 67,000 miles off target, think of our angular velocity as a wind blowing a bullet as it travels to the target… This video explains how the earth moves through the Galaxy as does PC and it's all different… ruclips.net/video/1lPJ5SX5p08/видео.html
@@MindoftheNorthStar "We" would not go but we could send a probe it would eventually get there and probably just fly by cause the power source would be as dead as the human race.
@@perry92964 Really? How? At what cost? At what speed? When? You do realize that Proxima is almost 25 Trillion miles away and even if you could hit 1 million mph (which we can't at the moment) it would still take you about 2,900 years to get there. So yea. Please enlighten us all on our "ability to get there" and it "not being an issue".
There will have to be some type of extremely powerful magnetic field that protects the vehicle from damage while traveling at these speeds. Up with shields captain!
One thing that should be clear by now: "a significant chellenge" is a monumental understatement, when it comes to interstellar travel even if we are talking about timy probes.
TBH, the only challenge to getting tiny probes to another star, is getting the money. On a technological level, it's not that difficult. We can already make the lasers, we can launch them into space, and building tiny probes is definitely pretty simple. It's just a LOT of billions of dollars to pay for it. Getting humans to another star system on the other hand.....
@@lordgarion514 yup, it' all about the funding; if we kept going, decade by decade, after Apollo, we'd have the whole Solar system explored by man, and some planets and moons all colonized by now, ....but alas!! ;D
@@lordgarion514 I agree, from what I have seen so far, that Starshot is probably viable. However, I also suspect, that the estimated costs are much much higher, than anyone would be currently willing to spend. But I hope Starshot becomes a reality. I hope, that my children get to see close up pictures from a planet in another star system.
@@christoph4977 All this technology, and no one has figured out how to get remotely close on cost estimates. Yeah, I bet the costs are 5-10 times the estimate.
The beauty of the Universe and our part in it is that things are so far apart that if one species screws up it won't likely contaminant others, the distance is a sort of quarantine against that! The so-called nearby stars' planets are mostly unsuited for our kind of life, based on the early "guesses". And we evolved here and not there. Think of the alien microbes, for example, and diseases that would make Covid seem like a mild headache by comparison! We have a nice solar system to explore and colonize, that should be enough for a long time. LOL ;D
The star is 4.2 light years away. Each light years is about 6 trillion miles. So, we are talking about 24 trillion miles! With our crafts, that would take over 6000 years (one way)!
you don't need pebbles even. Just atoms of hydrogen colliding with the spaceship at such high speeds (if we were to reach the star within one generation) will be deadly. If we wrapped the spaceship into lead... would that be sufficient? How much of it? That would make it extremely heavy then, hard to get up and then maneuver at the destination. Some sort of an energy shield like Startrek? Would we have enough energy to achieve that 24/7 for years, on top of our energy need to actually travel? However I look at it, I see it impossible even if we developed the fuel method to make us reach the star in let's say 30 years.
Interstellar space has 1 atom / 4 cubic meters. Now if your spaceship has only 1m2 frontal area, and you travel 5 light years, you would colide with ~5x10^16 atoms.
As far as photons are concerned, they reach anywhere in the universe instantaneously lol. Photons, travelling at their light speed, don't experience time
The far distance and spacecrafts aren’t the only problems, considering we’re having trouble going to mars imagine going to Proxima Centauri, We’re just not ready to travel that far especially with modern technology, maybe in the future. It is indeed a challenge. Interesting video anyway!
We didn't even go back to the moon since 50 years because there was no interest to go there and it's the same for Mars, why going there there is nothing but rocks and death. We went to the moon because it was the cold war and the competition to show who had the biggest di.k! And what about proxima centauri, well it's a hell of a star, an unstable red dwarf that has some tremendous outburst, imagine the sun becoming 100 times brighter one morning when you go out on you balcony, you will be turned into a nice barbecue!
I'm guessing because its a VERY long way away in interstellar space and we don't exist in a Sci-fi novel. Having said that, its seems incredible to me how many people can't distinguish science fiction from science fact. You only have to read the comments on ANY "space" video to see that.
Only if your propulsion system relies on constant acceleration by throwing mass out the back for an entire 50% of the travel time. If it were a somewhat primitive prolusion system which for example uses nuclear bombs, then it would quickly get to a point in which the vehicle had a top speed, after which it coast, and then decelerates by doing the same mauver at the other end. If you instead kept on throwing bombs out of the back for a full 5 years of a 10 year trip, the size of the vehicle containing all of those nukes becomes unviable. More likely you would use half of whatever your propellant is in a very short window at the start of the trip, and then coast for 98% of it, then when you reach the destination throw out the rest of the nukes for that final 1% to slow down. The best possible case we know of with conventional mass and physics would be a matter/antimatter prolusion system. Not only would the energy conversion rate be far, far higher, but you could also use pieces of the ship itself as fuel, so by the time you get to your destination you've burned through so much of your ship's hull that the craft will be much lighter, and so require much less reaction to slow at the destination, like conventional rockets which burn through fuel mass and start dumping rocket stages on the way up. The best sci-fi solution will be field propulsion in which we either generate gravity from electricity, or warp the fabric of space with electricity so the ship never actually moves and instead moves the space around the ship. Both of those are pretty much the same thing though, just expressing an artificial curvature of space in two different ways.
@@NeonVisual these solar/laser sail models would have issues with slowing down. Also having those nukes just sitting there for 50+ years might be a bit of an issue
Fly by is enough to gather some basic data tho. Maybe it seems not much, but it would be way better than we can do now, just observing from a great distance. Who knows? Maybe it would be even enough to detect life, if present, on proxima B. Or at least it would give better picture of that solar system - discover new planets etc. I don't believe we will live to see it tho. Even if in 30 - 50 years the technology becomes available it would take way more for it to become practical. I would suspect such a mission would cost way more than any government would be willing to invest even if the technology exists in theory. And propulsion is only one of many problems to overcome. I think in this centruy, such a mission therefore is unlikely. Maybe if we extend the expectation to 200 - 300 years in to the future, it is a more likely scenario. This is because ofc we must take into account for disasters, like wars, pandemics, AI or global warming, which would interrupt human civilization enough to divert focus away from these goals and instead be forced to deal with our own survival.
We are already getting close to harnessing true nuclear fusion. 100 years ago the ability to harness the power of stars would be considered impossible scientificly. You underestimate our potential.
Easy , you power up the gateway , The machinery folds space, making two points coexist in the same space and time - thus creating a portal allowing the ship to reach directly any point in space. You open a gate way to Proxima Centauri. Mysteriously the ship with the entire crew , vanishes for 7 years only to reappear in a decaying orbit around Neptune . only to discover that a sinister force has come back with it.
Earthlings traveling to another planet kinda reminds me of a family that totally trashes their house, scribbles graffiti on walls and ceiling, dog poop all over the floors, and then moves to another house in another state thinking that things are gonna be better. Until we learn how to live together and become good stewards of this planet, we will carry our troubles with us no matter where we go.
There is no feasible way to relocate any significant percentage of people off Earth. People aren't going to "move" from Earth. We're basically stuck here. The only thing that could happen is a very few humans get transported and breed a population.
@@randyparker2134 yes, colonization is not relocation, and that's a good thing. No baggage of any kind will be stored on a colony ship. All that you could need will be provided or manufactured when and if you get there. Ship weight will be critical, you might be allowed a toothbrush though, after you wake up from "hibernation" for a hundred years! ;D
@@dot1298 yes, like outriggers of the Polynesians are to cruise ships today. Everything we have today would be considered "black magic" 1000 years go, and "the church" would have us "burned at the stake" as witches if we could reveal it somehow by time travel!! LOL
I think fast drives will be invented given time but that is not the problem. With such high speed how will you shield the ship from space dust and particles that will collide with you ?
So at just over 4 light years away even if we could travel at light speed this would require a travel time of just over 8.5 years between Earth and Proxima Centauri (assuming you could do light speed right from Earth all the way to your target spot in Proxima and don't have to spend months at sublight leaving or entering the systems before jumping). But then comes the nasty trick of relativity... spending 8.5 years at light speed would mean something like 425 years (minimum) would have passed from the perspective of the people back on Earth when you get back the only time the people on the trip to Proxima would experience nearly the same relative passage of time would be when they drop out of light speed to do whatever the mission is in Proxima as long as the gravitational well of Proxima isn't that different from Sol's. The problem of interstellar distances and the travel across isn't just a matter of the speed we can move at, but also the mass' interaction with gravity as well attempt to move at speeds closer to the speed of light. So far we've managed 0.0005% the speed of light so we have barely scratched the surface of this effect but we already compensate for the time dilation it causes between something on Earth and something in orbit and/or moving at high velocity.
Not happening, especially not with solar sails due to micrometeorites and space dust that would certainly destroy the sail travelling possibly 1% light speed
your right, we assume that the space between stars is void of anything when is could be so filled with dust that even if it didnt tear the sail would build up on it making the whole thing into an asteroid by the time it got there
We can't possibly think of all the possibilities at the present time. As far as space exploration is concerned we may simply be stone age men trying to think of travelling to the moon when all they know is walking on foot. There is certainly going to be new physics and some may make it possible travel those huge distances.
My guess is that the star system is 4 light years away and the amount of time that it would take to get there with current propulsion systems would make the attempt prohibitive? How'd I do?
A few major technological breakthroughs may be on the horizon. (1) advanced generalised artificial intelligence allowing the creation of advanced construction robots (2) sustained thermonuclear fusion reactors allowing the creation of nuclear fusion engines (3) genetic engineering to significantly extend the human lifespan (4) creation of artificial biospheres to provide long term food supplies for space travellers. We could build immense solar power plants in space to harness a substantial fraction of the sun’s power output and use this to power large lasers. In combination with an onboard nuclear fusion engine large laser propelled sails could propel a space ship to a significant fraction of the speed of light. We would really want to go to a close earth analog planet rather than a planet like Mars.
@@johngeier8692 This calls for things like suspended animation over 50,000 years or sending a robot ship that hatches and educated batches of humans once it gets there. But we have none of that at all. Because we don't have things that last 50,000 years. Machines break down and semi-conductors degrade over these periods of time even if they're unused spare parts. It would take exceptional effort to get there to the point we could do that.
What about relative velocities of other Stars compared to the Sun? The problem will be we don't know what happens when we escape our Solar System. Because when the craft crosses Solar System, it'll mean it can be lost in interstellar space travelling on it's own and outside of spheres of influence of any one Star, meaning, its as if one mosquito escaping out of window of a speedy car, and trying to enter into another speedy car. That's some task. But I'm sure scientists will work it out.
Never mind getting there. Just imagine a 4 year delayed communicartions channel. Each way, for every command (for probes) or message (for manned ships)...
I think the best option is to build more powerful telescope's even better than James Web to see exoplanets this is the best option during our life time.
@@hazeaveiro2049 Yes this is the best,beceause star shot project is very difficult and even if it works who will decelerate when that sail arrive ther😞😞 and whit navigation it will be complicated so build high resolution telescope that is the best option,I think it will be nice if scientists from around the world come together and build that telescope.
Look up "The Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) is an astronomical observatory currently under construction. When completed, it is planned to be the world's largest optical/near-infrared extremely large telescope." Primary mirror 39m, compared to jwst's 6.5m...
There will eventually be a form of field propulsion which allows us to push against the quantum vacuum, instead of throwing out or bouncing off of mass. It will likely be completely counter intuitive like relativity, but once we figure it out it will tie up a couple of scientific loose ends with other things we've observed and either don't currently understand, or seem contradictory and unconnected, possibly a macroscopic quantum effect uniting a theory of quantum gravity with classical physics.
Negative mass density can be achieved but only on very small quantum scales as of right now. Once we get nanotech clouds to manufacture the negative mass density plates, it will become more feasible.
@@snufflehound On the contrary, I'm well versed. Field propulsion is an active area of study at NASA JPL and there are also a few Harvard papers published in recent years. Field propulsion would employ a physical means to asymmetrically interact with the quantum vacuum. In 2021 NASA JSC and Edgeworks working with DARPA accidentally created a microscopic warp bubble in a Casimir cavity, as theorised by physicist Miguel Alcubierre in 1994. Such a warp field scaled up to contain a spacecraft at high enough energy levels would theoretically allow the craft to move through space at speeds faster than light without using any propellant by crating the asymmetry pressure gradient in the quantum vacuum.
@@NeonVisual Good luck scaling that conjectural field up to practical levels under the constraints of reality. Your statements sound as feasible as those "We will have flying cars in 60 years" statements that were all the rage was 60 years ago.
3:10 not sure I quite follow here. Why would the ship need to be 100 times the mass if the earth? Are you saying that's how much fuel would be needed for the trip? Cuz it's not so obvious that follows on from the previous statement that the fuel needs to be 1,000 x the mass of the ship
it's amazing they discovered an exoplanet here, especially when you consider it was the premise behind Lost in Space and nobody even knew exoplanets existed back then!
25000 kps ! They better hope deflector shields are invented by the time those speeds are possible as I'm sure hitting an atom of gas would destroy the spaceship
The one point that is not discussed here is the fact that we need to slow the spacecraft down when approaching the star. No point in reaching a star to just fly pass it at a tremendous speed.
I find the expression “why is it challenging” to be particularly amusing. We live, with a good trip to the clearing at the end of the path, about 80 years. Numbers expressing interstellar distances aren’t something humans can internalize, and, yeah, I’m including mathematicians, physicists, astronomers, and all of “that crowd.” We’re just not built for it. "Numbers do not seem to work well with regard to deep time. Any number above a couple of thousand years -fifty thousand, fifty million- will with nearly equal effect awe the imagination to the point of paralysis." - John McPhee, Basin and Range ....and this may be applied to all other use of large numbers.
Well, point taken but we know our model of physics is incomplete and a breakthrough revision of our understanding of it would very likely open the universe to us.
Homework assignment: put yourself in the shoes of someone who disagrees with your argument, and try to shoot it down. See what you can come up with and let us know here.
At present, you'd have to say it's impossible. Long, long time before we can even contemplate the notion of travelling these distances. Mind-boggling stuff though
You're objectively wrong. Even with current space travel speeds we've achieved could reach proxima centauri, just not for 1000s of years. Also it would be very difficult to accurately hit our target at that distance, but entirely possible. Who knows how much technology will improve in the future. Say "improbable", not impossible
@@sentientflower7891 Google did mention that it was revolving around the sun making a rubber band effect that caused it to go fast. And YouTub is a unique way of fact checking especially in the comments
I so love this topic and I have been reading about it, thinking about it, quite a lot. Regarding the exoplanet able to host life... maybe extremophiles. Just imagine how difficult for us is to live in Qatar without air conditioning or Siberia in winter and you get the idea what could be awaiting us there - just more extreme, even if the planet had the spectrum of chemicals we consider as supporting life - detected by our telescopes. The reality awaiting us there could be quite disappointing. And there is a massive difference between sending an unmanned spacecraft so far at such a speed that it would make it meaningful for humans travel next, and send a living organism there. This video only touched on the interstellar dust and debris that would destroy the spacecraft. Even if it didn't, the deadly radiation from collision with this space debris penetrating the whole spacecraft would kill living organisms very quickly inside the spacecraft. The faster we would to, the quicker the destruction, at least after leaving the heliosphere, which already is damaging due to its own radiation. My laic conclusion is that travelling to the nearest star at the speed that would get us there within one generation is incompatible with survival, however you look at it. There is no Earth 2.0 within our rech I'm afraid.
Engineering can find solutions for objects that will collide, big shields made of something like tungsten... And there must be good shields to protect the crew from radiation. Maybe not now of or in near future, but...never say never.
Agree. Space dust and microparticles would be damaging to spacecraft, not to mention larger objects, and the faster you go the greater the damage. According to Einsteins theory of general relativity moving large objects becomes increasingly difficult as you approach the speed of light, where it becomes well nigh impossible. Even if planets might be habitable for other life, it doesn't mean they would be for us. Oxygen is highly corrosive. Humans and other species have adapted to Earth's conditions over millennia to survive here. Perhaps organisms on other planets use methane for example, or perhaps they survive without a gas or breathing mechanism.
They haven’t figured out that we are gravity bound to our solar system….the flight time will change as soon as we leave our local cluster of planets ( ort cloud is about the boundary) because centari group moves independently of sol group will add tons of time
is it correct to refer to the planets of other stars as "exoplanets"? since we're looking at what you might call an "exo-star" planets orbiting such a star are not "exo" their own solar system
need to try sending (from an earth orbit satellite) sending a radio message . let’s say things like ”hello” “greetings” “peace” and “goodwill” use directional beam antennas and then sit back and wait. it would be nine years at very minimum if we get anything back at all
Careful saying that we as a species haven't sent anything outside the solar system. That all depends on where you consider the edge of the solar system. If you consider the edge of the solar system as the heliopause (the outer edge of the heliosphere), then both Voyagers 1 and 2 have passed that into interstellar space. If you consider the edge of the solar system as the outer edge of the oort cloud (which is still only a hypothesis) then, yeah, neither Voyager space craft have gotten that far out (about 3.2lyr). Watch your semantics. ;-)
For the next few decades surveyors should be our main focus even if we could launch a telescope like device that journeys millions of kilometres or even a few light years away would give us a further eagle’s eye 👁️ into our neighbouring solar systems and we can see for ourselves up and close what they contain without even taking humans there we can observe all of that from our current very livable location earth 🌏
less than a gram ever made , longest lasting 17 mins , and we have 0 because we cant store it , and this is a tech you dont want to be playing with on earth
My own personal beliefs don't account for any needs of interstellar travel by humans or machines. But we are naturally interested, so logically I think there 2 things to do. 1) continue telescopic technology to study nearby stars and planets. And 2) instead of billions of dollars and many decades research of how to get to Alpha C., use much more in development of a self-contained space city, as an enormous wheel, spinning to create artificial gravity, with adequate soil for crop growth, materials for dwellings (supposing we need them), recreation-- much of it 3-D around the middle of the wheel, et al. But a micro-earth, in the chief sense, in which nothing is ever wasted or dumped into oblivion [space]. I think something like that is the only way we are ever going to live permanently apart from our home planet.
it seems the actual hurdle with reaching the Centauri system lies purely in wating 4 years to know you got there, which is a lot of faith to put in intergalactic travel for research
It's a real stretch to assume Proxima b has conditions that could host lifeforms from here on Earth. For all we know the winds blow continuously at 250kph and the atmosphere is laden with carcinogens. "Goldilocks" does not mean "ideal".
You couldn't even pack enough food and water for that long of a trip, not to mention the generations of people on that ship just to be alive by the time it would get there, and by the way, think of all the problems that would come up in all those years on a ship. Could you imagine having kids on a space ship and telling your kids this is your entire life, traveling on a ship. Nothing to do but go crazy. I think everyone would lose there minds way before they would ever even make it a fraction of the way. It's nothing but a wild dream in my opinion.
We will do it because its difficult. The same reason we crossed oceans on wooden ships. Many people died, they said its impossible and not worth it but we will do it anyway.
The new engine is being assembled now. Once in orbit, propellant is obsolete. The rocket equation changes from ISP to a non stop run time warranty. CTO Douglas Renzoni
The existence of Earth-like planets is of relative non-importance in any destination star. Travelling between stars already requires the ability to live in space. Since you can expect to be able to do that for decades to centuries on the trip there it doesn't matter if you keep doing it once there. Besides, landing on a planet basically strands you there until you can overcome the gravity well and rebuild space infrastructure to easily transport on and off world. You're better off landing on low mass bodies with low escape velocity and building infrastructure in space first, then landing on the planet below with large amounts of pre-fab equipment to facilitate construction and transportation in the solar system. No Earth-like planet? Then just colonize asteroids, moons, icy bodies, and any of the other millions of other objects likely to be in orbit of a star. Then mine those out to build a network of space stations.
Hypothetically, due to lack of gravity.. wouldn’t you only need enough fuel to take off, maintain and land? You don’t lose momentum in space. You only need to accelerate on take off Therefore you wouldn’t need as much fuel storage space..
It's depressing to know that if some kind of hyperspace travelling is not possible, we are locked to this solar system and galaxy. If you think about it even science fiction material like Star Wars or Mass Effect is mostly confined to a singular galaxy. Intergalactic travelling through galaxy clusters seem impossible. Can't even imagine how could we achieve that
Before a space craft or probe arrives at Proxima Centauri our technology will have advanced and we will have launched a second mission that will be there to greet it upon arrival. Also a third mission will greet our second mission. Then our fourth mission ……..
Lol The logical conclusion is that we arrived 1000 years ago already!!! I like speculation like that, that exposes so much of the naive techno-optimism that comes with these interstellar travel fantasies.
by listening to this video, it becomes obvious that we will not be travelling to other planets until we've evolved as a species(how long will that take). Machines won't get us out of this solar system let alone to another one.
Here’s how we do it: We scan human minds, store them as data on a large robot spacecraft piloted by a Strong AI. This spacecraft will have the ability to gather resources and build additional robots and structures that the AI designs based on the situation. Spacecraft launches, takes 50k to 100k years to make the trip, arrives, and starts setting up shop. Gathering resources, building helper robots, building factories, etc. It finds the most habitable planet in the new system and begins construction of human habitats, infrastructure, farms, etc. New synthetic human bodies are grown/3D printed, with (adaptations tailored to the new environment) and the scanned human minds are loaded into them. The humans wake up on a planet that already has cities and infrastructure ready to go. This would require mind-uploading tech, strong AI, mastery of bioinformatics and cloning, the ability to 3D print living organisms, etc. All of that sounds positively doable compared to the prospect of inventing a warp drive.
If a ship travels at a constant 1g acceleration rate it would get to Alpha Centauri in just 3.6 ship/7.3 Earth years and this includes turning the ship around halfway to decelerate. It would achieve about .95% light speed after about 1 year. Not only is this by far the fastest way we can get to other worlds but the ship would have gravity the whole way. A 10 ton ship would need a mere 10 tons of continuous thrust. All that is needed for this to become a reality is a fission rocket that can put out thrust for long periods and does not consume hydrogen or xenon. A true fission rocket should consume only uranium or plutonium. They are both jittery atoms that are on the verge of fissioning all by themselves, there should be a way to get them to fission in a linear fashion. What's needed is a controlled, time released nuclear explosion. In an atomic bomb, fission occurs when neutrons hit the nucleus of uranium or plutonium atoms. This is because they will not tolerate an increase in mass. Due to the equivalence of mass and energy, the same should be true if you infuse them with energy. This might be as simple as having negatively charged atoms coming into contact with positively charged atoms or perhaps with laser energy. With the constant 1g acceleration method a ship can span the entire diameter of our galaxy in 24 ship/113,000 Earth years. Systems with stars similar to our sun can be reached in under 10 ship years.
So in other words: in order to reach impossible goals, all you need to do is apply impossible methods, and voila, they cancel each other and the impossible becomes possible!
@@shawns0762 It's not a method, it's just a description of a goal that we have to reach. And yes we can do it, sort of... Just not long enough. Not NEARLY long enough. Not long enough by a LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG way. Not long enough EVER.
@@johelsen5776 Obviously it's a method. The rockets don't have to put out thrust for 3.6 years straight, a couple months would be good enough because they could be jettisonable or manually serviceable. A true fission rocket should be simpler than a chemical rocket. I have diagrams of 4 potential ways of doing this, many people have told me it may work, one was a nuclear physicist.
Why does nobody ever mention antimatter propulsion? I know it's kind of impossible with current technology, but so are all the rest of the propositions in this video (at the current time of course). Antimatter propulsion seems like the only realistic way to get as fast as possible to any destination in and outside the solar system, but nobody ever talks about it.
The most realistic is Nuclear Fusion tbh. If we can make nuclear fusion sustainable and energy efficient than we can reach speeds approaching 1/3 the speed of light
@@xavierwhitcraft1310 Correct me if I'm wrong, but most physicists I've talked to or physicists I've seen on youtube say that Fusion can't hold a candle to Antimatter propulsion in terms of the sheer amount of energy produced. I guess fusion is more realistic and it's probably safer, but antimatter seems like it should also be a candidate.
0:17 “ Will we ever have the technology to reach the closest star to the solar system?” Answer: No, humanity will splutter into extinction without ever leaving our back yard.
I agree. There are so many factors againt humans reaching another star. Transport is one of them. Speed - the proposed high speeds are deadly. There's no magnetic field and atmospheres to protect us. There's no gravity, so muscle mass is gone. Time - many things could go wrong and communication will take a long time. Plus so much more.
Well ... the Sun is a star ... and it is pretty close to earth at approximately 4 light minutes .... so yeah, to answer the exact question posed, we have that technology now as proven by the Parker Solar Probe, sans humans onboard.
nah, lets all spend out time on twatter and not worry about anything sensible. 50 years ago we had the drive to do this sort of thing (which is where these concepts come from), but now we sit and get dumber every day. we are doomed. good news for the universe.
The nano spacecraft are the future of space flight. The things they will discover I won’t be around to see but they will do wonderful amazing discoveries and journeys in the centuries to come
Far better to work on improving the resolution of telescopes like they have with microscopes. Technically a lot of what we could observe close up with a spacecraft we could do with a high power telescope.
Hey Insane Curiosity Squad! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it with your friends or on other social networks like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter, etc... (Since the algorithm is not cooperating in showing us to the public 😅). In just 30 seconds, you will greatly help our Channel to grow and improve future contents. A big thank you from all of us.
A million years from now somebody in Proxima Centauri will be sitting on their sofa eating popcorn and watching "Ancient Aliens" and it will be about us...
I assure you no one will or ever lived on Proxima Centauri. It's a star.
@boskee Maybe it's a Fire Centaur born of the great flame of Anor by the NetherDemons of Handorfall. That would be my guess. But everybody knows they don't watch tv. They're only passion is catching Star Flies in the Great Astrobelt of Zendar's 3rd moon. Duh! This guy! Lol. He must think we're crazy.🤪
Lol they will be like the gods were here 😆
@@boskee Good catch, but we many get what he was after, and it's still pretty funny!! LOL ;D
Unfortunately the planet Proxima Centauri b is tidally locked to Proxima Centauri, so the habitable zone between the light (too hot) side and the dark (too cold) side would be a narrow strip of the planet. If there’s an atmosphere then it may be much warmer on the dark side, but that’s if there even is an atmosphere that has survived, because Proxima Centauri is a flare star, and the flare-ups would probably strip the planet of any atmosphere in the first place. Nice to imagine the possibilities though!
The biggest issue isn't even getting there. The biggest issue is slowing down enough to be captured within the planets orbit. Doing so would require a tremendous amount of energy.
The thing that wasn't mentioned is that you need just as much fuel to slow down at the other end. Travelling in space doesn't use fuel, only to accelerate, once up to speed, you stay at that speed with the engines off. The slowing down part is probably the hardest.
None of this is ever gonna be practical!
Thanks to the rocket equation you actually need less fuel to slow down. At the other end your spaceship is lighter than at the beginning, because it has spent a lot of fuel accelerating. This is true for all reaction drives (chemical, nuclear, ion, vasimr, etc)
For laser powered light sails you need the same amount of energy to slow down as it took to speed up, but unfortunately there are no lasers at the destination to slow you down.
@@milobem4458 Nothing in these plans are practical or workable. When they test these systems, they will find that out.
@@5rings16 Chemical rockets have been in use for over 60 years. How are they not workable?
Youll never get to another star with chemical rockets.
If those spacecraft reach proxima centauri at a significant fraction of lightspeed, and they are not able to slow down, that probably would only give them minutes (a few hours at the very most) to do useful observations after a voyage of many years.
The light from Proxima could be used on the solar sail to slow the craft down, but that would probably take a long time.
If you stagger the launch of the ships so that several mini ships reach proxima every week for a year you could get different readings out of them and do a composite of the system over time
And how would you get the information it records back to earth considering that the spacecraft transmitter would be in the glare of the star when seen from Earth four years later?
@@jessejamesainger3263 I dont know if that is true or not, but it does make sense.
They would have to slow them down somehow.
The irony is that it is pointless to ever send a vessel because long before we reach our destination a much faster vessel will pass us hundreds of years later.
But if we don't send the first vessel, we will not have developed the technology to launch the second one. 🤷🏽
We should embrace the fact that any starship we send will be seen as a prototype to more powerful designs in hindsight. Just what happened in the history of computers.
That's a fascinating problem
We have to start somewhere
@@no_more_spamplease5121 No, you simply develop the tech on Earth! I dont believe we will ever get to another star. Why should we? We have everything we need right here.
@@dipanjanghosal1662 You stay on Earth and get the tech over the next 1,000 years!
What I find most disturbing is that they think that throw a bunch of these nano-spacecrafts and that with them just floating around aimlessly, they could then just shoot a laser at each one and expect it to fly directly towards Proxima Centauri, unguided and that they seem to think that after 20-40 years their aim would be so perfect that they will hit this system. It will take some pretty amazing math to calculate our system's velocity, direction and angular trajectory within he galaxy as well as where PC might be decades from now…
People seem to forget that if we shot a rocket directly at the sun, it would hit it, not even close… they forget the the Earth is traveling at 67,000 MPH around the sun and every hour that that rocket is shooting straight at the sun, it drifts 67,000 miles off target, think of our angular velocity as a wind blowing a bullet as it travels to the target…
This video explains how the earth moves through the Galaxy as does PC and it's all different…
ruclips.net/video/1lPJ5SX5p08/видео.html
Challenging is an understatement 😳
we have the ability to get there and thats not the issue, the issue is seeing the result.
@@perry92964 how the hell would we get there?
@@MindoftheNorthStar "We" would not go but we could send a probe it would eventually get there and probably just fly by cause the power source would be as dead as the human race.
@@perry92964 Really? How? At what cost? At what speed? When? You do realize that Proxima is almost 25 Trillion miles away and even if you could hit 1 million mph (which we can't at the moment) it would still take you about 2,900 years to get there.
So yea. Please enlighten us all on our "ability to get there" and it "not being an issue".
@@gigakrait5648 its really irrelevant how long it would take cause there wont be a human race anymore but it would eventually get there
There will have to be some type of extremely powerful magnetic field that protects the vehicle from damage while traveling at these speeds. Up with shields captain!
Magnetic field will protect the craft from ionized cosmic particles not from space debris...
One thing that should be clear by now: "a significant chellenge" is a monumental understatement, when it comes to interstellar travel even if we are talking about timy probes.
yes, "doing the impossible" will be "child's play" by comparison to star-travelling!!
TBH, the only challenge to getting tiny probes to another star, is getting the money.
On a technological level, it's not that difficult. We can already make the lasers, we can launch them into space, and building tiny probes is definitely pretty simple.
It's just a LOT of billions of dollars to pay for it.
Getting humans to another star system on the other hand.....
@@lordgarion514 yup, it' all about the funding; if we kept going, decade by decade, after Apollo, we'd have the whole Solar system explored by man, and some planets and moons all colonized by now, ....but alas!! ;D
@@lordgarion514 I agree, from what I have seen so far, that Starshot is probably viable. However, I also suspect, that the estimated costs are much much higher, than anyone would be currently willing to spend. But I hope Starshot becomes a reality. I hope, that my children get to see close up pictures from a planet in another star system.
@@christoph4977
All this technology, and no one has figured out how to get remotely close on cost estimates.
Yeah, I bet the costs are 5-10 times the estimate.
The beauty of the Universe and our part in it is that things are so far apart that if one species screws up it won't likely contaminant others, the distance is a sort of quarantine against that! The so-called nearby stars' planets are mostly unsuited for our kind of life, based on the early "guesses". And we evolved here and not there. Think of the alien microbes, for example, and diseases that would make Covid seem like a mild headache by comparison! We have a nice solar system to explore and colonize, that should be enough for a long time. LOL ;D
The star is 4.2 light years away. Each light years is about 6 trillion miles. So, we are talking about 24 trillion miles! With our crafts, that would take over 6000 years (one way)!
The chances of traveling at an extreme velocity and not hitting anything (even a pebble) for trillions of miles is vanishing small.
you don't need pebbles even. Just atoms of hydrogen colliding with the spaceship at such high speeds (if we were to reach the star within one generation) will be deadly. If we wrapped the spaceship into lead... would that be sufficient? How much of it? That would make it extremely heavy then, hard to get up and then maneuver at the destination. Some sort of an energy shield like Startrek? Would we have enough energy to achieve that 24/7 for years, on top of our energy need to actually travel? However I look at it, I see it impossible even if we developed the fuel method to make us reach the star in let's say 30 years.
yeah I know! too bad force fields don't exist
I don't think this would be a practical problem. Space is really empty.
Interstellar space has 1 atom / 4 cubic meters. Now if your spaceship has only 1m2 frontal area, and you travel 5 light years, you would colide with ~5x10^16 atoms.
@@AndrasMihalyi Wrong. The most recent estimate is 40 hydrogen atoms PER CUBIC METER.
It's not hard for photons from the sun to reach Proxima Centauri. It just takes time and patience for our radio signals to get there.
As far as photons are concerned, they reach anywhere in the universe instantaneously lol. Photons, travelling at their light speed, don't experience time
@@mbonje4948 What?
The far distance and spacecrafts aren’t the only problems, considering we’re having trouble going to mars imagine going to Proxima Centauri, We’re just not ready to travel that far especially with modern technology, maybe in the future. It is indeed a challenge. Interesting video anyway!
We didn't even go back to the moon since 50 years because there was no interest to go there and it's the same for Mars, why going there there is nothing but rocks and death. We went to the moon because it was the cold war and the competition to show who had the biggest di.k!
And what about proxima centauri, well it's a hell of a star, an unstable red dwarf that has some tremendous outburst, imagine the sun becoming 100 times brighter one morning when you go out on you balcony, you will be turned into a nice barbecue!
Imagine you know they arrived there around this time but still have to wait 4years for it to confirm🤯
yes, and then to find they were all duds!! LOL
Obviously, subspace radio should be invented first.
@@oberstvilla1271 telepathy
I'm guessing because its a VERY long way away in interstellar space and we don't exist in a Sci-fi novel. Having said that, its seems incredible to me how many people can't distinguish science fiction from science fact. You only have to read the comments on ANY "space" video to see that.
people tend to forget you would have to stop when you get there, or fly by the system so quickly you won't be able do to much
A ship would need to accellerate halfway there, then flip over and decellerate the same distance. If we want to actually visit it.
Only if your propulsion system relies on constant acceleration by throwing mass out the back for an entire 50% of the travel time.
If it were a somewhat primitive prolusion system which for example uses nuclear bombs, then it would quickly get to a point in which the vehicle had a top speed, after which it coast, and then decelerates by doing the same mauver at the other end. If you instead kept on throwing bombs out of the back for a full 5 years of a 10 year trip, the size of the vehicle containing all of those nukes becomes unviable.
More likely you would use half of whatever your propellant is in a very short window at the start of the trip, and then coast for 98% of it, then when you reach the destination throw out the rest of the nukes for that final 1% to slow down.
The best possible case we know of with conventional mass and physics would be a matter/antimatter prolusion system. Not only would the energy conversion rate be far, far higher, but you could also use pieces of the ship itself as fuel, so by the time you get to your destination you've burned through so much of your ship's hull that the craft will be much lighter, and so require much less reaction to slow at the destination, like conventional rockets which burn through fuel mass and start dumping rocket stages on the way up.
The best sci-fi solution will be field propulsion in which we either generate gravity from electricity, or warp the fabric of space with electricity so the ship never actually moves and instead moves the space around the ship. Both of those are pretty much the same thing though, just expressing an artificial curvature of space in two different ways.
@@NeonVisual these solar/laser sail models would have issues with slowing down.
Also having those nukes just sitting there for 50+ years might be a bit of an issue
@@nostrum6410 Referencing trips to another system, not a flyby. Breakthrough Starshot is already working on an Alpha C. flyby proposal.
Fly by is enough to gather some basic data tho. Maybe it seems not much, but it would be way better than we can do now, just observing from a great distance. Who knows? Maybe it would be even enough to detect life, if present, on proxima B. Or at least it would give better picture of that solar system - discover new planets etc.
I don't believe we will live to see it tho. Even if in 30 - 50 years the technology becomes available it would take way more for it to become practical. I would suspect such a mission would cost way more than any government would be willing to invest even if the technology exists in theory. And propulsion is only one of many problems to overcome. I think in this centruy, such a mission therefore is unlikely. Maybe if we extend the expectation to 200 - 300 years in to the future, it is a more likely scenario. This is because ofc we must take into account for disasters, like wars, pandemics, AI or global warming, which would interrupt human civilization enough to divert focus away from these goals and instead be forced to deal with our own survival.
It will take a few thousand years to figure out how to quickly get to the next star assuming mankind stops fighting with each other.
Not going to happen.
-The con game that is American Politics.
You are insanely optimistic. The technology level required would probably take longer to reach than humankind will continue to exist.
@@DieFlabbergast Could be. We'd have to learn how to cheat time and space.
We are already getting close to harnessing true nuclear fusion. 100 years ago the ability to harness the power of stars would be considered impossible scientificly. You underestimate our potential.
@jp5000able unfortunately we mortals don't have the materials and time.
Easy , you power up the gateway , The machinery folds space, making two points coexist in the same space and time - thus creating a portal allowing the ship to reach directly any point in space.
You open a gate way to Proxima Centauri. Mysteriously the ship with the entire crew , vanishes for 7 years only to reappear in a decaying orbit around Neptune . only to discover that a sinister force has come back with it.
Props on that.
"We don't need eyes to see where this probe is going. "
Earthlings traveling to another planet kinda reminds me of a family that totally trashes their house, scribbles graffiti on walls and ceiling, dog poop all over the floors, and then moves to another house in another state thinking that things are gonna be better. Until we learn how to live together and become good stewards of this planet, we will carry our troubles with us no matter where we go.
There is no feasible way to relocate any significant percentage of people off Earth. People aren't going to "move" from Earth. We're basically stuck here. The only thing that could happen is a very few humans get transported and breed a population.
@@randyparker2134 yes, colonization is not relocation, and that's a good thing. No baggage of any kind will be stored on a colony ship. All that you could need will be provided or manufactured when and if you get there. Ship weight will be critical, you might be allowed a toothbrush though, after you wake up from "hibernation" for a hundred years! ;D
@@dot1298 yes, like outriggers of the Polynesians are to cruise ships today. Everything we have today would be considered "black magic" 1000 years go, and "the church" would have us "burned at the stake" as witches if we could reveal it somehow by time travel!! LOL
Irrelevant in the long term.
Whether we tear up the planet or not, we will go extinct if we only stay here.
@@lordgarion514 yes, and it might happen as early as April 13, 2029, when the huge asteroid Apophis is due to come very close to the Earth!! ;D
I think fast drives will be invented given time but that is not the problem.
With such high speed how will you shield the ship from space dust and particles that will collide with you ?
Proper navigation via your Nav Computer before jumping to warp / Light Speed, off course! Did Star Trek and Star Wars teach you nothing man??? 🤣
force field like in star trek
So at just over 4 light years away even if we could travel at light speed this would require a travel time of just over 8.5 years between Earth and Proxima Centauri (assuming you could do light speed right from Earth all the way to your target spot in Proxima and don't have to spend months at sublight leaving or entering the systems before jumping). But then comes the nasty trick of relativity... spending 8.5 years at light speed would mean something like 425 years (minimum) would have passed from the perspective of the people back on Earth when you get back the only time the people on the trip to Proxima would experience nearly the same relative passage of time would be when they drop out of light speed to do whatever the mission is in Proxima as long as the gravitational well of Proxima isn't that different from Sol's. The problem of interstellar distances and the travel across isn't just a matter of the speed we can move at, but also the mass' interaction with gravity as well attempt to move at speeds closer to the speed of light. So far we've managed 0.0005% the speed of light so we have barely scratched the surface of this effect but we already compensate for the time dilation it causes between something on Earth and something in orbit and/or moving at high velocity.
Not happening, especially not with solar sails due to micrometeorites and space dust that would certainly destroy the sail travelling possibly 1% light speed
A really thought out comment - thanks.
Emergency power to the navigational deflector!
What if we sent a million of them, used all of earths money
Possible and realistic are too different things
your right, we assume that the space between stars is void of anything when is could be so filled with dust that even if it didnt tear the sail would build up on it making the whole thing into an asteroid by the time it got there
Even the shortest of these travel times to interstellar destinations is absurd. Needed: Warp drive or a dedicated wormhole.
You’ve been watching too much Star Trek.
We can't possibly think of all the possibilities at the present time. As far as space exploration is concerned we may simply be stone age men trying to think of travelling to the moon when all they know is walking on foot. There is certainly going to be new physics and some may make it possible travel those huge distances.
New physics that we can't even conceive of at this time. Like a warp bubble.
My guess is that the star system is 4 light years away and the amount of time that it would take to get there with current propulsion systems would make the attempt prohibitive? How'd I do?
About 50000 years with speed current tech. That’s 25 trillion miles btw
That's putting it mildly.
A few major technological breakthroughs may be on the horizon.
(1) advanced generalised artificial intelligence allowing the creation of advanced construction robots
(2) sustained thermonuclear fusion reactors allowing the creation of nuclear fusion engines
(3) genetic engineering to significantly extend the human lifespan
(4) creation of artificial biospheres to provide long term food supplies for space travellers.
We could build immense solar power plants in space to harness a substantial fraction of the sun’s power output and use this to power large lasers.
In combination with an onboard nuclear fusion engine large laser propelled sails could propel a space ship to a significant fraction of the speed of light.
We would really want to go to a close earth analog planet rather than a planet like Mars.
@@johngeier8692 This calls for things like suspended animation over 50,000 years or sending a robot ship that hatches and educated batches of humans once it gets there. But we have none of that at all. Because we don't have things that last 50,000 years. Machines break down and semi-conductors degrade over these periods of time even if they're unused spare parts. It would take exceptional effort to get there to the point we could do that.
@@johngeier8692 Definition of someone trying to sound smart without actually saying anything.
“How difficult would it be?”
“ A lot. “
A lot difficult?
I was wonder who was going to say something about that. Alpha Centauri is like waaaaaaaaay, way way…..
What about relative velocities of other Stars compared to the Sun?
The problem will be we don't know what happens when we escape our Solar System. Because when the craft crosses Solar System, it'll mean it can be lost in interstellar space travelling on it's own and outside of spheres of influence of any one Star, meaning, its as if one mosquito escaping out of window of a speedy car, and trying to enter into another speedy car. That's some task. But I'm sure scientists will work it out.
imagine getting half way there, just leaving the ort cloud and your ship dies? what a horrible feeling that would be
call AAA for a tow back to earth
What if you spent 50 years getting there, & then you find out that it sucks,
& want to go home.?
@@mickmccrory8534 that would the most miserable, depressing feeling you can imagine. just pue hopelesness
Never mind getting there. Just imagine a 4 year delayed communicartions channel. Each way, for every command (for probes) or message (for manned ships)...
Yep. Send a message, then wait 8.4 years to get the reply.
I think the best option is to build more powerful telescope's even better than James Web to see exoplanets this is the best option during our life time.
Exactly. imagine having such a powerful telescope that you can see the surface of a distant planet.
@@hazeaveiro2049 Yes this is the best,beceause star shot project is very difficult and even if it works who will decelerate when that sail arrive ther😞😞 and whit navigation it will be complicated so build high resolution telescope that is the best option,I think it will be nice if scientists from around the world come together and build that telescope.
Look up
"The Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) is an astronomical observatory currently under construction. When completed, it is planned to be the world's largest optical/near-infrared extremely large telescope."
Primary mirror 39m, compared to jwst's 6.5m...
telescopes
I’d say, give within one or two centuries, we’ll have something, but right now we can forget it
Give it another 50.000years
@@jasmijnariel I think we gotta solve our own problems back on Earth first, since I find it hard for humanity to exist that long otherwise.
There will eventually be a form of field propulsion which allows us to push against the quantum vacuum, instead of throwing out or bouncing off of mass. It will likely be completely counter intuitive like relativity, but once we figure it out it will tie up a couple of scientific loose ends with other things we've observed and either don't currently understand, or seem contradictory and unconnected, possibly a macroscopic quantum effect uniting a theory of quantum gravity with classical physics.
In other words, you have no clue what you are talking about,
Negative mass density can be achieved but only on very small quantum scales as of right now. Once we get nanotech clouds to manufacture the negative mass density plates, it will become more feasible.
@@christopherraymond592 The Casimir effect isn't in any way usable.
@@snufflehound On the contrary, I'm well versed. Field propulsion is an active area of study at NASA JPL and there are also a few Harvard papers published in recent years. Field propulsion would employ a physical means to asymmetrically interact with the quantum vacuum.
In 2021 NASA JSC and Edgeworks working with DARPA accidentally created a microscopic warp bubble in a Casimir cavity, as theorised by physicist Miguel Alcubierre in 1994. Such a warp field scaled up to contain a spacecraft at high enough energy levels would theoretically allow the craft to move through space at speeds faster than light without using any propellant by crating the asymmetry pressure gradient in the quantum vacuum.
@@NeonVisual Good luck scaling that conjectural field up to practical levels under the constraints of reality. Your statements sound as feasible as those "We will have flying cars in 60 years" statements that were all the rage was 60 years ago.
3:10 not sure I quite follow here.
Why would the ship need to be 100 times the mass if the earth?
Are you saying that's how much fuel would be needed for the trip? Cuz it's not so obvious that follows on from the previous statement that the fuel needs to be 1,000 x the mass of the ship
I've got a feeling we're going to need to get our calculations right and maths hat on! 🎩
it's amazing they discovered an exoplanet here, especially when you consider it was the premise behind Lost in Space and nobody even knew exoplanets existed back then!
25000 kps ! They better hope deflector shields are invented by the time those speeds are possible as I'm sure hitting an atom of gas would destroy the spaceship
The real challenge of interstellar travel is that I will only let people I like aboard my starship
Exactly, my crew, for example, will all be gorgeous young women, who are pretty smart too. No bimbos need apply!! LOL ;D
Distance is the challenge. 4,3 light years. 8,6 years to comunicate back and forth at the speed of light.
The one point that is not discussed here is the fact that we need to slow the spacecraft down when approaching the star. No point in reaching a star to just fly pass it at a tremendous speed.
The video briefly touches on this from 3:43 till 3:55
I find the expression “why is it challenging” to be particularly amusing. We live, with a good trip to the clearing at the end of the path, about 80 years. Numbers expressing interstellar distances aren’t something humans can internalize, and, yeah, I’m including mathematicians, physicists, astronomers, and all of “that crowd.” We’re just not built for it.
"Numbers do not seem to work well with regard to deep time. Any number above a couple of thousand years -fifty thousand, fifty million- will with nearly equal effect awe the imagination to the point of paralysis."
- John McPhee, Basin and Range
....and this may be applied to all other use of large numbers.
7:36 "60 Celsius of acceleration"??? Celsius is not a measure of acceleration.
I didn't understand that, either.
Well, point taken but we know our model of physics is incomplete and a breakthrough revision of our understanding of it would very likely open the universe to us.
There isn't some magical requirement for the universe to "open" to us.
When the probe gets there, there will be a delay of 4 years sending a receiving messages to Earth. That's going to be frustrating.
9:07: not true; Voyager 1 left the solar system about 10 years ago, and is now in interstellar space (at least according to one definition).
In the 19th century it was unthinkable that there would ever be missions to space.
Homework assignment: put yourself in the shoes of someone who disagrees with your argument, and try to shoot it down. See what you can come up with and let us know here.
IT is not challenging, it's impossible.
Always will be impossible.
At present, you'd have to say it's impossible. Long, long time before we can even contemplate the notion of travelling these distances. Mind-boggling stuff though
@@alanbrady7116 truly
The word Impossible tells you, "I'm possible"
You're objectively wrong. Even with current space travel speeds we've achieved could reach proxima centauri, just not for 1000s of years. Also it would be very difficult to accurately hit our target at that distance, but entirely possible. Who knows how much technology will improve in the future. Say "improbable", not impossible
@@d8dknee8rjdje8 It's still impossible.
Correction: the fastest man made object is the Parker Solar Probe at 510,000 miles per hour.
Close enough according to Google
@@onedova2298 provided you ACTUALLY TRUST or BELIEVE GOOGLE OR FACT CHECK!
Speeds approaching the sun are irrelevant to interstellar travel.
@@sentientflower7891 Google did mention that it was revolving around the sun making a rubber band effect that caused it to go fast. And YouTub is a unique way of fact checking especially in the comments
But that's in orbit around the sun, not exiting the solar system.
I so love this topic and I have been reading about it, thinking about it, quite a lot. Regarding the exoplanet able to host life... maybe extremophiles. Just imagine how difficult for us is to live in Qatar without air conditioning or Siberia in winter and you get the idea what could be awaiting us there - just more extreme, even if the planet had the spectrum of chemicals we consider as supporting life - detected by our telescopes. The reality awaiting us there could be quite disappointing. And there is a massive difference between sending an unmanned spacecraft so far at such a speed that it would make it meaningful for humans travel next, and send a living organism there. This video only touched on the interstellar dust and debris that would destroy the spacecraft. Even if it didn't, the deadly radiation from collision with this space debris penetrating the whole spacecraft would kill living organisms very quickly inside the spacecraft. The faster we would to, the quicker the destruction, at least after leaving the heliosphere, which already is damaging due to its own radiation. My laic conclusion is that travelling to the nearest star at the speed that would get us there within one generation is incompatible with survival, however you look at it. There is no Earth 2.0 within our rech I'm afraid.
Engineering can find solutions for objects that will collide, big shields made of something like tungsten... And there must be good shields to protect the crew from radiation. Maybe not now of or in near future, but...never say never.
Hey you aren't supposed to point that out!
Agree. Space dust and microparticles would be damaging to spacecraft, not to mention larger objects, and the faster you go the greater the damage. According to Einsteins theory of general relativity moving large objects becomes increasingly difficult as you approach the speed of light, where it becomes well nigh impossible. Even if planets might be habitable for other life, it doesn't mean they would be for us. Oxygen is highly corrosive. Humans and other species have adapted to Earth's conditions over millennia to survive here. Perhaps organisms on other planets use methane for example, or perhaps they survive without a gas or breathing mechanism.
the only way we leave the solar system is if we figure out worm holes
After watching this video I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that unmanned spacecraft are making it here to Earth.
So since there is a Proxima Centauri, is there a Distal Centauri?
They haven’t figured out that we are gravity bound to our solar system….the flight time will change as soon as we leave our local cluster of planets ( ort cloud is about the boundary) because centari group moves independently of sol group will add tons of time
We have sent spacecraft outside our solar system, it was the voyager probes.
No regular service goes there?
is it correct to refer to the planets of other stars as "exoplanets"? since we're looking at what you might call an "exo-star" planets orbiting such a star are not "exo" their own solar system
need to try sending (from an earth orbit satellite) sending a radio message . let’s say things like ”hello” “greetings” “peace” and “goodwill” use directional beam antennas and then sit back and wait. it would be nine years at very minimum if we get anything back at all
Careful saying that we as a species haven't sent anything outside the solar system. That all depends on where you consider the edge of the solar system. If you consider the edge of the solar system as the heliopause (the outer edge of the heliosphere), then both Voyagers 1 and 2 have passed that into interstellar space. If you consider the edge of the solar system as the outer edge of the oort cloud (which is still only a hypothesis) then, yeah, neither Voyager space craft have gotten that far out (about 3.2lyr). Watch your semantics. ;-)
The technical challenges are solvable. The real problem is finding the willpower and funding to make it happen.
yes, and especially the psychological fitness of the crew. Mars trips will test that out pretty well though!
@@ronschlorff7089 there's plenty of people who are willing to leave their lives to go on these crazy ass missions I know that for sure
For the next few decades surveyors should be our main focus even if we could launch a telescope like device that journeys millions of kilometres or even a few light years away would give us a further eagle’s eye 👁️ into our neighbouring solar systems and we can see for ourselves up and close what they contain without even taking humans there we can observe all of that from our current very livable location earth 🌏
We should be able to use anti-matter as energy to propel the spaceships, the only problem is how expensive it is and how little of it we have.
less than a gram ever made , longest lasting 17 mins , and we have 0 because we cant store it , and this is a tech you dont want to be playing with on earth
@@stevensmith797 good point 😔. Looks like using just fuel as energy is just impossible to reach Proxima.
My own personal beliefs don't account for any needs of interstellar travel by humans or machines. But we are naturally interested, so logically I think there 2 things to do. 1) continue telescopic technology to study nearby stars and planets. And 2) instead of billions of dollars and many decades research of how to get to Alpha C., use much more in development of a self-contained space city, as an enormous wheel, spinning to create artificial gravity, with adequate soil for crop growth, materials for dwellings (supposing we need them), recreation-- much of it 3-D around the middle of the wheel, et al. But a micro-earth, in the chief sense, in which nothing is ever wasted or dumped into oblivion [space]. I think something like that is the only way we are ever going to live permanently apart from our home planet.
Spectacular video and keep the videos coming from now till we reach a Type 1 Civilization.
Seriously informative - loved it ❤
Yes, but R U Sirius!! ;D
@@ronschlorff7089 Well said 🤩
Another option is to ask the supposed Aliens that might be here watching us to take us there.
When we got there, it already gone. Because the location provided was 4 years ago. Drifted.
it seems the actual hurdle with reaching the Centauri system lies purely in wating 4 years to know you got there, which is a lot of faith to put in intergalactic travel for research
It's a real stretch to assume Proxima b has conditions that could host lifeforms from here on Earth. For all we know the winds blow continuously at 250kph and the atmosphere is laden with carcinogens. "Goldilocks" does not mean "ideal".
Why is it challenging? Because, even though it’s the closest star to us, it is really, really far away. There, I made it nice and simple for you.
It would be easier to buy a 2nd hand warp drive from the Ferengi.
I have been to proxima Centauri in my dream, it was quite ugly out there.
A lot of small headed aliens live in there.
You couldn't even pack enough food and water for that long of a trip, not to mention the generations of people on that ship just to be alive by the time it would get there, and by the way, think of all the problems that would come up in all those years on a ship. Could you imagine having kids on a space ship and telling your kids this is your entire life, traveling on a ship. Nothing to do but go crazy.
I think everyone would lose there minds way before they would ever even make it a fraction of the way.
It's nothing but a wild dream in my opinion.
That's why a realistic Interstellar mission would be a robotic probe like any others used to explore every planet on Solar System!
Great video explaining the latest rocket technologies.
All you'll find when you arrive there is some Dollar Generals...
We will do it because its difficult. The same reason we crossed oceans on wooden ships. Many people died, they said its impossible and not worth it but we will do it anyway.
Because the secret societies "TOLD US SO" -with their "light years scenarios" HAHAH! LOL!
"Proxima" is a misleading term.
It's like we live in Kansas, and someone says a Thai restaurant in Bangkok is, "right around the corner."
The new engine is being assembled now.
Once in orbit, propellant is obsolete.
The rocket equation changes from ISP to a non stop run time warranty.
CTO
Douglas Renzoni
The existence of Earth-like planets is of relative non-importance in any destination star. Travelling between stars already requires the ability to live in space. Since you can expect to be able to do that for decades to centuries on the trip there it doesn't matter if you keep doing it once there. Besides, landing on a planet basically strands you there until you can overcome the gravity well and rebuild space infrastructure to easily transport on and off world. You're better off landing on low mass bodies with low escape velocity and building infrastructure in space first, then landing on the planet below with large amounts of pre-fab equipment to facilitate construction and transportation in the solar system. No Earth-like planet? Then just colonize asteroids, moons, icy bodies, and any of the other millions of other objects likely to be in orbit of a star. Then mine those out to build a network of space stations.
We're physically stuck to this solar system. We need to just deal with that limitation. Anything past that is just a delusion and a waste of time.
In other words, interstellar travels are just impossible. And probably will forever be.
Given the age of the universe and these planets and stars, humanity is less than milliseconds away from landing on planets around other systems.
Hypothetically, due to lack of gravity.. wouldn’t you only need enough fuel to take off, maintain and land? You don’t lose momentum in space. You only need to accelerate on take off
Therefore you wouldn’t need as much fuel storage space..
It will be easier to reach Proxima Centauri, than figuring out how we don’t destroy ourselves.🙃
It's depressing to know that if some kind of hyperspace travelling is not possible, we are locked to this solar system and galaxy.
If you think about it even science fiction material like Star Wars or Mass Effect is mostly confined to a singular galaxy. Intergalactic travelling through galaxy clusters seem impossible. Can't even imagine how could we achieve that
Would have to have some means to warp space time
Before a space craft or probe arrives at Proxima Centauri our technology will have advanced and we will have launched a second mission that will be there to greet it upon arrival. Also a third mission will greet our second mission. Then our fourth mission ……..
Lol
The logical conclusion is that we arrived 1000 years ago already!!! I like speculation like that, that exposes so much of the naive techno-optimism that comes with these interstellar travel fantasies.
by listening to this video, it becomes obvious that we will not be travelling to other planets until we've evolved as a species(how long will that take). Machines won't get us out of this solar system let alone to another one.
Here’s how we do it: We scan human minds, store them as data on a large robot spacecraft piloted by a Strong AI. This spacecraft will have the ability to gather resources and build additional robots and structures that the AI designs based on the situation.
Spacecraft launches, takes 50k to 100k years to make the trip, arrives, and starts setting up shop. Gathering resources, building helper robots, building factories, etc. It finds the most habitable planet in the new system and begins construction of human habitats, infrastructure, farms, etc. New synthetic human bodies are grown/3D printed, with (adaptations tailored to the new environment) and the scanned human minds are loaded into them. The humans wake up on a planet that already has cities and infrastructure ready to go.
This would require mind-uploading tech, strong AI, mastery of bioinformatics and cloning, the ability to 3D print living organisms, etc. All of that sounds positively doable compared to the prospect of inventing a warp drive.
Voyager 1 has been propagating through space for over 45 years at over 38000 mph, and yet it's still not even a full light day away from Earth.
If a ship travels at a constant 1g acceleration rate it would get to Alpha Centauri in just 3.6 ship/7.3 Earth years and this includes turning the ship around halfway to decelerate. It would achieve about .95% light speed after about 1 year. Not only is this by far the fastest way we can get to other worlds but the ship would have gravity the whole way. A 10 ton ship would need a mere 10 tons of continuous thrust.
All that is needed for this to become a reality is a fission rocket that can put out thrust for long periods and does not consume hydrogen or xenon. A true fission rocket should consume only uranium or plutonium. They are both jittery atoms that are on the verge of fissioning all by themselves, there should be a way to get them to fission in a linear fashion. What's needed is a controlled, time released nuclear explosion.
In an atomic bomb, fission occurs when neutrons hit the nucleus of uranium or plutonium atoms. This is because they will not tolerate an increase in mass. Due to the equivalence of mass and energy, the same should be true if you infuse them with energy. This might be as simple as having negatively charged atoms coming into contact with positively charged atoms or perhaps with laser energy.
With the constant 1g acceleration method a ship can span the entire diameter of our galaxy in 24 ship/113,000 Earth years. Systems with stars similar to our sun can be reached in under 10 ship years.
So in other words: in order to reach impossible goals, all you need to do is apply impossible methods, and voila, they cancel each other and the impossible becomes possible!
@@johelsen5776 the constant 1g acceleration method is the only realistic method for interstellar travel
@@shawns0762 It's not a method, it's just a description of a goal that we have to reach.
And yes we can do it, sort of... Just not long enough. Not NEARLY long enough. Not long enough by a LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG way. Not long enough EVER.
@@johelsen5776 Obviously it's a method. The rockets don't have to put out thrust for 3.6 years straight, a couple months would be good enough because they could be jettisonable or manually serviceable. A true fission rocket should be simpler than a chemical rocket. I have diagrams of 4 potential ways of doing this, many people have told me it may work, one was a nuclear physicist.
Why does nobody ever mention antimatter propulsion? I know it's kind of impossible with current technology, but so are all the rest of the propositions in this video (at the current time of course). Antimatter propulsion seems like the only realistic way to get as fast as possible to any destination in and outside the solar system, but nobody ever talks about it.
The most realistic is Nuclear Fusion tbh. If we can make nuclear fusion sustainable and energy efficient than we can reach speeds approaching 1/3 the speed of light
@@xavierwhitcraft1310 Correct me if I'm wrong, but most physicists I've talked to or physicists I've seen on youtube say that Fusion can't hold a candle to Antimatter propulsion in terms of the sheer amount of energy produced. I guess fusion is more realistic and it's probably safer, but antimatter seems like it should also be a candidate.
Antimatter is too scarce to use as a fuel source.
@@haircafekevin Imagine you could theoretically create more of it, enough to fuel a space ship. Is it useful then?
Because it's still super far. Even if it's the closest
We can’t even get to Uranus
0:17 “ Will we ever have the technology to reach the closest star to the solar system?”
Answer: No, humanity will splutter into extinction without ever leaving our back yard.
You're just as much fun at parties asI am, brother...
I agree. There are so many factors againt humans reaching another star. Transport is one of them. Speed - the proposed high speeds are deadly. There's no magnetic field and atmospheres to protect us. There's no gravity, so muscle mass is gone. Time - many things could go wrong and communication will take a long time. Plus so much more.
Also nobody wants us evil humans our track record is not about peace and freedom but of hate and greed.
Well ... the Sun is a star ... and it is pretty close to earth at approximately 4 light minutes .... so yeah, to answer the exact question posed, we have that technology now as proven by the Parker Solar Probe, sans humans onboard.
@@barkvarkie_fpv8623 I thought the sun is around 8 light minutes from earth?
To get to our star all you have to do is jump off earth and fall.
nah, lets all spend out time on twatter and not worry about anything sensible. 50 years ago we had the drive to do this sort of thing (which is where these concepts come from), but now we sit and get dumber every day. we are doomed. good news for the universe.
You forgot to mention plasma magnetic sails and dynamic soaring techniques which are much more promising than solar sails imo
The nano spacecraft are the future of space flight. The things they will discover I won’t be around to see but they will do wonderful amazing discoveries and journeys in the centuries to come
Far better to work on improving the resolution of telescopes like they have with microscopes. Technically a lot of what we could observe close up with a spacecraft we could do with a high power telescope.
Immediately after hearing your voice I I knew what kind of video thus would be