# interstellar travel

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Bxmkr, May 19, 1999.

1. ### BxmkrRegistered Member

Messages:
4
My big passion is interstellar travel. The idea of traveling to the stars and other planets just rocks my tits.

I love to talk about it and explore how to do it. Of course, I have a couple of thoughts about how to do it. I would be greatly appreciative if some of you out there would contribute commentary on this subject as I have been putting together this project for a lot of years and would like to hear from others.

First of all: I propose that the preferential will acts directly upon matter at a sub-atomic level.

I speculate that at least one "other continuum' permeates this one.

I infer, that since the human mind is composed of more than one aspect of cognizance, that human minds could be added together in certain logically conceived ways resulting in a sapient gestalt.

I beleive that the potentials manifested by these "gestalt beings" would exceed our expectations and would constitute a legitimate evolutionary accomplishment borne of inherent potential, intelligent extrapolation, and discovery of a greater self.

Just as no examination of the properties of oxygen coupled with a similar examination of hydrogen could ever lead to a prediction of the properties of water, so, we simply have no way of knowing, in advance, what the complete characteristic of a gestalt being might be.

I do expect, though, that teleportation and telekinesis would be a feature of those gestalts. Some with more modest potential and some with dramatic potential, depending on the number of persons interconnected.

Bertrand Russell was known to say that he was not looking for believers, he was looking for those who were willing to find out.

I, too, would prefer not to waste time on considerations of belief or disbelief, no one really knows anyway. That's why it's called discovery. Ever build a paper airplane? Did the first one work?

------------------
Bxmkr

[This message has been edited by Bxmkr (edited May 30, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Bxmkr (edited June 22, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Bxmkr (edited June 22, 1999).]

3. ### tigercubGuest

I recommend boblazar.com. He claims to have back engineered a ufo in area 51. Some items in his resume may be fudged, but he has detailed knowledge of the facilities there and a w-2 from Naval Intelligence. Instead of going faster-than-light, the people from Zeta Reticula are able to amplify gravity and warp space! The fuel they use is cool, too: element 115. One small piece can power a small ufo for 20-30 years (it generates anti-matter. Unfortunately, our government won't fess up, but the closest thing I have read is, "The day after Roswell" by Col. Philip Corso in Army Intelligence. Best thing written this century, after "A Course in Miracles."

5. ### Overdrive6Guest

Hi, I believe that antimatter is what is most likely going to take us to the stars. It will be at least 20 years before we even begin to seriously take into consideration an interstellar misson, and by then there may be better ways to get to the stars.(maybe cyrogenic sleep?) But currently antimatter is faster and probably cheaper than fusion and laser light sails.
I personally don't believe in ufo's and the government hiding ufo sectets from the public, but what do I know i'm only a kid... But if the government really has ufo technology then the reason they aren't releasing the info is definently for national security, and quite frankly I am glad that we have it and not countries like CHINA.
Our knowledge of antimatter engines is still in its infancy, and I garuntee that antimatter engines in the future will be better than any we can imagine right now. Current perdictions say that it will take 40 years to get to proxima centauri with antimatter engines, but with the advancement of technology in that field, 30-35 years would seem more obtainable (at a rate of 60-65% the speed of light)

-EXOSCIENCE ROCKS

7. ### BxmkrGuest

Thanks for the great information from overdrive6 and tigercub. I'd like to see a large crew, 392 would be a good number, acting within a harmonic field to produce a gestalt sapience. I suspect that some interesting potentials would be manifested, among them the ability to command matter at the sub-atomic level. Sounds far fetched I know but then so was gravity at the time. Yeah, right Newt, things fall down.

------------------
Bxmkr

8. ### PlatoGuest

In the 21 century we will probably explore our solarsystem and after that, who knows...

9. ### BxmkrGuest

A Sapient Gestalt doesn't seem that unreasonable when you think about it, an Intelligence composed of four to twenty-four people dynamically linked at the emotive level.

What I'm seeing is that pattern and form can be assessed and applied to manifest greater potential.

------------------
Bxmkr

10. ### Davespace7Guest

Antimatter is not an option, and will not be for a while, for interstellar travel. The reason is that there is no known way to get enough antimatter to fuel such an engine. As of now, there are only a few particle accelerators in the world, and they each produce a very limited number of antimatter particles each. Also, it is much too hard to contain antimatter. Although it has been contained in magnetic fields, physicists have little clue on how to keep the antimatter from annihilating the nozzle that it would expel through in the latest engine model (Can be found in the June issue of Popular Science).

Antimatter is intriguing, but it most likely will not be used in interstellar travel in our lifetime, unless there is some way to create antimatter much more abundantly.

------------------
davespace7@aol.com

[This message has been edited by Davespace7 (edited May 20, 1999).]

11. ### Davespace7Guest

Oh, and laser light sails ARE the cheapest way to travel to an interstellar place. It will most likely be the most efficient was to travel.

[This message has been edited by Davespace7 (edited May 20, 1999).]

12. ### BxmkrGuest

Bertrand Russel said that he was not looking for people to believe, but rather for people who were willing to find out.

------------------
Bxmkr

13. ### RodvikGuest

I tend to dismiss things like light sails and so forth as there is nothing wrong with the good old nuclear rockets idea except for the publics fear of them.

Space elevators seem like a pretty good option to get out of Earths gravity well although I suspect like all these schemes the devil is in the details.

Hehe can you IMAGINE the media frenzy that will happen if anyone seriously starts to design an anti-matter engine? Even I might be a tad concerned over that

14. ### woodyGuest

Yea i agree anti mater is a good idea in theory but like nuclear energy not that good of an idea in practice. containing the antimater is not an easy task even of a very strong magnetic feild could hold the anti mater what happens if it fails? BOOM! most likely.

------------------

15. ### Double OverdriveGuest

Yeah, Antimatter is very dangerous. I saw an "Outer Limits" once where an antimatter experiment lab was set up on the moon. On day something at this lab malfunctioned and released the antimatter, which annihalated the moon in 1 second. The effects of this disasterous explosion left 1/2 of the Earth completely fried. When this happened, the only humans who survived were those who were living on the Martian base. Which eventually the Mars pioneers killed each other.

(lets find safe methods of interstellar travel...)

-Double Overdrive

16. ### BxmkrGuest

What is needed here is a major leap forward in our thinking, a reassessment of fundamentals, a new way of configuring our conceptual tools, a temporary abandonment of those tools which we think are so useful, a fresh look at the situation, something manifestly new and different from that which has gone before.

Then we can reach the stars.

------------------
Bxmkr

17. ### gravitywavesGuest

To Overdrive6:

You said:
have it and not countries like CHINA."
Can u explain that? I don't think it's a good move at all.

18. ### SteveGuest

Here's an interesting new developement that I just read about. Scientists have developed a fusion reactor that's alot smaller than previous models, about the size of a desktop. Also, instead of costing $1 billion like previous models, this one only cost about$1 million. Now, they still haven't found a way to make the whole thing cost effective (so that more energy comes out of the reaction than what's needed to make it work), but the lower cost will make research much more accessable. And who knows, we might have fusion reactors for spaceships yet.

19. ### PlatoGuest

gravitywaves,

I think some of our US friends sometimes forget that the internet isn't just an American but a GLOBAL medium. There is a whole world out there reading everything that we write. But this is not a political forum so let's not get into it to much...

------------------
greetings,
Plato

20. ### Double OverdriveGuest

steve:

hmmm... that is really interesting. Do you know were you found out about this new fusion developement. We really need to find new ways of getting energy, and fusion seems to be the most popular. Maybe fusion power plants will be our main means of getting energy (they will probably still use hydrodynamic power, solar, and maybe wind??)

-Double Overdrive

<blink>P.S:</blink> I was formerly Overdrive6 and I am a US citizen, regarding gravitywaves question: If you are a chinese citizen this is not to offend you. I feel as if all communist countries pose some threat to the free world. It would be really scary if CHINA had ufo technology (as it was when Russia got the nukes...)

21. ### BxmkrGuest

Dear Sweet Jesus in heaven, is there somebody out there who would like to discuss how to do this or not?

------------------
Bxmkr

22. ### SteveGuest

I saw the article about the new fusion generator in this month's Scientific America. It was just a paragraph, but interesting for this space nonetheless. I've mentioned this before on another topic, but they also had a great cover story on space travel a few months back that everyone here should read to get a good feel of where the tech is now and where we're headed in the near future.

23. ### DragonMageGuest

Hey Bxmkr,

I agree with you on changing perspective in order to come up with ways to deal with the distance problems for reaching the stars. We are still talking about some of the same theories which have been discussed for years. Many credible scientists have even abandoned the possibility of faster-than-light travel.
So let's come up with some theories of our own and see where they go.

I have read the Bob Lazar information on gravity wave propulsion from his supposed tour of duty at Area 51. Now I am not sure if I believe all of his claims, but what about the "science" of using gavity distortions to propel a ship? I would appreciate any scholarly commentary on this subject.