Would This Design Be Useful For Surviving Relativistic Impacts?
Let's say that I've developed a new engine that can accelerate at 1G continuously. Within about a year, I'm nearing the speed of light. Naturally, I recognize the danger of collisions with gas and dust. I have magnetic fields to sweep away ionized matter, but it doesn't work for non-ionized matter and it adds drag.
My chief engineer had an idea. He suggested we build a massive but thin solar sail and keep it in front of our ships, using our lasers to accelerate it at the same speed as our ship. This sail would suffer the brunt of any impacts from the interstellar medium.
So, is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
space space-travel solar-sails
add a comment |
Let's say that I've developed a new engine that can accelerate at 1G continuously. Within about a year, I'm nearing the speed of light. Naturally, I recognize the danger of collisions with gas and dust. I have magnetic fields to sweep away ionized matter, but it doesn't work for non-ionized matter and it adds drag.
My chief engineer had an idea. He suggested we build a massive but thin solar sail and keep it in front of our ships, using our lasers to accelerate it at the same speed as our ship. This sail would suffer the brunt of any impacts from the interstellar medium.
So, is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
space space-travel solar-sails
This is an extreme example of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield. It could work but needs tought (keep stable sail-shield attitude, etc...)
– b.Lorenz
3 hours ago
Nope, it will just make you get hit more. And I would advise to go 50-90% speed of light at max.. It is better to "waste" time and decrease energy of impacts and have ability to detect what is around you.
– Artemijs Danilovs
2 hours ago
1
Related: How to avoid objects when traveling at greater than .75 light speed. or How Not to Go SPLAT?
– Alexander
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Let's say that I've developed a new engine that can accelerate at 1G continuously. Within about a year, I'm nearing the speed of light. Naturally, I recognize the danger of collisions with gas and dust. I have magnetic fields to sweep away ionized matter, but it doesn't work for non-ionized matter and it adds drag.
My chief engineer had an idea. He suggested we build a massive but thin solar sail and keep it in front of our ships, using our lasers to accelerate it at the same speed as our ship. This sail would suffer the brunt of any impacts from the interstellar medium.
So, is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
space space-travel solar-sails
Let's say that I've developed a new engine that can accelerate at 1G continuously. Within about a year, I'm nearing the speed of light. Naturally, I recognize the danger of collisions with gas and dust. I have magnetic fields to sweep away ionized matter, but it doesn't work for non-ionized matter and it adds drag.
My chief engineer had an idea. He suggested we build a massive but thin solar sail and keep it in front of our ships, using our lasers to accelerate it at the same speed as our ship. This sail would suffer the brunt of any impacts from the interstellar medium.
So, is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
space space-travel solar-sails
space space-travel solar-sails
edited 3 hours ago
Cyn
4,980833
4,980833
asked 3 hours ago
AskerOfQuestions
283
283
This is an extreme example of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield. It could work but needs tought (keep stable sail-shield attitude, etc...)
– b.Lorenz
3 hours ago
Nope, it will just make you get hit more. And I would advise to go 50-90% speed of light at max.. It is better to "waste" time and decrease energy of impacts and have ability to detect what is around you.
– Artemijs Danilovs
2 hours ago
1
Related: How to avoid objects when traveling at greater than .75 light speed. or How Not to Go SPLAT?
– Alexander
2 hours ago
add a comment |
This is an extreme example of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield. It could work but needs tought (keep stable sail-shield attitude, etc...)
– b.Lorenz
3 hours ago
Nope, it will just make you get hit more. And I would advise to go 50-90% speed of light at max.. It is better to "waste" time and decrease energy of impacts and have ability to detect what is around you.
– Artemijs Danilovs
2 hours ago
1
Related: How to avoid objects when traveling at greater than .75 light speed. or How Not to Go SPLAT?
– Alexander
2 hours ago
This is an extreme example of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield. It could work but needs tought (keep stable sail-shield attitude, etc...)
– b.Lorenz
3 hours ago
This is an extreme example of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield. It could work but needs tought (keep stable sail-shield attitude, etc...)
– b.Lorenz
3 hours ago
Nope, it will just make you get hit more. And I would advise to go 50-90% speed of light at max.. It is better to "waste" time and decrease energy of impacts and have ability to detect what is around you.
– Artemijs Danilovs
2 hours ago
Nope, it will just make you get hit more. And I would advise to go 50-90% speed of light at max.. It is better to "waste" time and decrease energy of impacts and have ability to detect what is around you.
– Artemijs Danilovs
2 hours ago
1
1
Related: How to avoid objects when traveling at greater than .75 light speed. or How Not to Go SPLAT?
– Alexander
2 hours ago
Related: How to avoid objects when traveling at greater than .75 light speed. or How Not to Go SPLAT?
– Alexander
2 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Your shield is moving at nearly the speed of light. The peanut-sized chunk of space debris you're approaching isn't. Best case, the peanut rips through the shield at nearly the speed of light and hits your ship anyway. Worst case, when the peanut hits the shield, the shield burns up in a glorious glow of fusion, which you appreciate just before being consumed by the firestorm. (That XKCD is probably the most commonly linked XKCD on this site.)
The basic problems of shields have been known or guessed-at by SciFi writers for decades. It's why they stick with the ubiquitous "deflectors," which are never actually explained and magically move all potential debris out of the way, much like cows vs. the cow sweeps on old steam trains.
The problems with your proposed shield are (at least) ...
- It's not impenetrable (a massive + dense enough object will always go through it).
- It's consumable (it's not self-repairing or self-replacing).
- It will react to impacts (deliver enough energy over a large enough amount of area and it'll burn up like any other solid material).
- The energy needed to keep it in front of you must be at least equal to the impact energy of anything that hits it (you're using lasers for this...) or it falls back onto you.
Does this mean you can't use it in your story? Not at all. Most scifi readers either don't know enough about the science to realize these problems, or they're more like me where I'm in it for the story and don't worry about the little things.
However, to give you an idea about how issues like this can be resolved. You can adopt Larry Niven's solution: the General Products hull, which is basically impervious to everything other than visible light, antimatter, and gravity. Designed as a single molecule with "strengthened inner bonds," it's simply the best built armor in the universe. Can such a material exist? Not that we know — but that doesn't stop anyone from enjoying his stories.
add a comment |
What you have described is a "flimsy shield", which, by itself, can not be effective at relativistic speeds.
Incoming hydrogen and helium atoms, upon colliding will turn into potent radiation, for which this shield will provide no protection. Putting the shield at sufficient distance in front of the ship will help to disperse the radiation, but then there is a question of generating protective magnetic field in front of the shield (way ahead of where the field generators can be located).
The solution (within the realm of existing science) is having a massive shield. Unfortunately, calculations show that this shield has to be so massive that accelerating our spaceship to relativistic speed is becoming practically impossible.
But of course if you are willing to introduce new science (as of now, your question is neither "hard-science" nor "science-based") you can make this sail shield design work just as you want it to.
add a comment |
Is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
You are describing a very special kind of ablator.
The problem you have is that a collision at near light speeds will end up in thinga like nuclear fission and fusion. Then, instead of impacting against a rock at nearly light speeds, you will collide with your solar sail plasma debris + rock's plasma debris at near light speed. It might be less dense, but it might also be larger than the original rock, so you will be in trouble anyway.
But there is an alternative. Like in so many other aspects of life, attacking is the best form of defense in space travel as well. Use an Alcubierre Drive. It involves travelling inside a bubble of spacetime that destroys everything ahead of it, including the ship's destination, so it should also disintegrate any pesky space stones that happen to be in your way.
2
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
It is a good idea except for the sail.
You are accelerating a shield in front of you. You are using lasers. If you turn off the lasers you will accelerate through the shield, so the lasers have to stay on. It must be more than one laser to accelerate all parts of the shield uniformly.
Pack up the sail for some later use. Leave the lasers on; you have already budgeted for them. They will spray impressively in front of you off into space. They will hit obstacles in your way. Those obstacles will be illuminated. From your perspective they will be coming at you very fast, so fortunately your lasers are governed by fast-thinking computers.
Your many lasers are different wavelengths. The reflected wavelengths allow the computer to calculate the trajectory of the incoming mass according to which beams are interrupted. Your computers fire a BB at the approaching mass. It will become an XKCDesque shower of radiation and charged particles, which your magnetic shield and bulk shield can deal with. There is an option to fire another BB at recalcitrant masses.
For very tiny particles, the lasers themselves might be enough. They were going to push a sail, after all. They can push particles out of the way too.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135404%2fwould-this-design-be-useful-for-surviving-relativistic-impacts%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Your shield is moving at nearly the speed of light. The peanut-sized chunk of space debris you're approaching isn't. Best case, the peanut rips through the shield at nearly the speed of light and hits your ship anyway. Worst case, when the peanut hits the shield, the shield burns up in a glorious glow of fusion, which you appreciate just before being consumed by the firestorm. (That XKCD is probably the most commonly linked XKCD on this site.)
The basic problems of shields have been known or guessed-at by SciFi writers for decades. It's why they stick with the ubiquitous "deflectors," which are never actually explained and magically move all potential debris out of the way, much like cows vs. the cow sweeps on old steam trains.
The problems with your proposed shield are (at least) ...
- It's not impenetrable (a massive + dense enough object will always go through it).
- It's consumable (it's not self-repairing or self-replacing).
- It will react to impacts (deliver enough energy over a large enough amount of area and it'll burn up like any other solid material).
- The energy needed to keep it in front of you must be at least equal to the impact energy of anything that hits it (you're using lasers for this...) or it falls back onto you.
Does this mean you can't use it in your story? Not at all. Most scifi readers either don't know enough about the science to realize these problems, or they're more like me where I'm in it for the story and don't worry about the little things.
However, to give you an idea about how issues like this can be resolved. You can adopt Larry Niven's solution: the General Products hull, which is basically impervious to everything other than visible light, antimatter, and gravity. Designed as a single molecule with "strengthened inner bonds," it's simply the best built armor in the universe. Can such a material exist? Not that we know — but that doesn't stop anyone from enjoying his stories.
add a comment |
Your shield is moving at nearly the speed of light. The peanut-sized chunk of space debris you're approaching isn't. Best case, the peanut rips through the shield at nearly the speed of light and hits your ship anyway. Worst case, when the peanut hits the shield, the shield burns up in a glorious glow of fusion, which you appreciate just before being consumed by the firestorm. (That XKCD is probably the most commonly linked XKCD on this site.)
The basic problems of shields have been known or guessed-at by SciFi writers for decades. It's why they stick with the ubiquitous "deflectors," which are never actually explained and magically move all potential debris out of the way, much like cows vs. the cow sweeps on old steam trains.
The problems with your proposed shield are (at least) ...
- It's not impenetrable (a massive + dense enough object will always go through it).
- It's consumable (it's not self-repairing or self-replacing).
- It will react to impacts (deliver enough energy over a large enough amount of area and it'll burn up like any other solid material).
- The energy needed to keep it in front of you must be at least equal to the impact energy of anything that hits it (you're using lasers for this...) or it falls back onto you.
Does this mean you can't use it in your story? Not at all. Most scifi readers either don't know enough about the science to realize these problems, or they're more like me where I'm in it for the story and don't worry about the little things.
However, to give you an idea about how issues like this can be resolved. You can adopt Larry Niven's solution: the General Products hull, which is basically impervious to everything other than visible light, antimatter, and gravity. Designed as a single molecule with "strengthened inner bonds," it's simply the best built armor in the universe. Can such a material exist? Not that we know — but that doesn't stop anyone from enjoying his stories.
add a comment |
Your shield is moving at nearly the speed of light. The peanut-sized chunk of space debris you're approaching isn't. Best case, the peanut rips through the shield at nearly the speed of light and hits your ship anyway. Worst case, when the peanut hits the shield, the shield burns up in a glorious glow of fusion, which you appreciate just before being consumed by the firestorm. (That XKCD is probably the most commonly linked XKCD on this site.)
The basic problems of shields have been known or guessed-at by SciFi writers for decades. It's why they stick with the ubiquitous "deflectors," which are never actually explained and magically move all potential debris out of the way, much like cows vs. the cow sweeps on old steam trains.
The problems with your proposed shield are (at least) ...
- It's not impenetrable (a massive + dense enough object will always go through it).
- It's consumable (it's not self-repairing or self-replacing).
- It will react to impacts (deliver enough energy over a large enough amount of area and it'll burn up like any other solid material).
- The energy needed to keep it in front of you must be at least equal to the impact energy of anything that hits it (you're using lasers for this...) or it falls back onto you.
Does this mean you can't use it in your story? Not at all. Most scifi readers either don't know enough about the science to realize these problems, or they're more like me where I'm in it for the story and don't worry about the little things.
However, to give you an idea about how issues like this can be resolved. You can adopt Larry Niven's solution: the General Products hull, which is basically impervious to everything other than visible light, antimatter, and gravity. Designed as a single molecule with "strengthened inner bonds," it's simply the best built armor in the universe. Can such a material exist? Not that we know — but that doesn't stop anyone from enjoying his stories.
Your shield is moving at nearly the speed of light. The peanut-sized chunk of space debris you're approaching isn't. Best case, the peanut rips through the shield at nearly the speed of light and hits your ship anyway. Worst case, when the peanut hits the shield, the shield burns up in a glorious glow of fusion, which you appreciate just before being consumed by the firestorm. (That XKCD is probably the most commonly linked XKCD on this site.)
The basic problems of shields have been known or guessed-at by SciFi writers for decades. It's why they stick with the ubiquitous "deflectors," which are never actually explained and magically move all potential debris out of the way, much like cows vs. the cow sweeps on old steam trains.
The problems with your proposed shield are (at least) ...
- It's not impenetrable (a massive + dense enough object will always go through it).
- It's consumable (it's not self-repairing or self-replacing).
- It will react to impacts (deliver enough energy over a large enough amount of area and it'll burn up like any other solid material).
- The energy needed to keep it in front of you must be at least equal to the impact energy of anything that hits it (you're using lasers for this...) or it falls back onto you.
Does this mean you can't use it in your story? Not at all. Most scifi readers either don't know enough about the science to realize these problems, or they're more like me where I'm in it for the story and don't worry about the little things.
However, to give you an idea about how issues like this can be resolved. You can adopt Larry Niven's solution: the General Products hull, which is basically impervious to everything other than visible light, antimatter, and gravity. Designed as a single molecule with "strengthened inner bonds," it's simply the best built armor in the universe. Can such a material exist? Not that we know — but that doesn't stop anyone from enjoying his stories.
answered 2 hours ago
JBH
40.1k589192
40.1k589192
add a comment |
add a comment |
What you have described is a "flimsy shield", which, by itself, can not be effective at relativistic speeds.
Incoming hydrogen and helium atoms, upon colliding will turn into potent radiation, for which this shield will provide no protection. Putting the shield at sufficient distance in front of the ship will help to disperse the radiation, but then there is a question of generating protective magnetic field in front of the shield (way ahead of where the field generators can be located).
The solution (within the realm of existing science) is having a massive shield. Unfortunately, calculations show that this shield has to be so massive that accelerating our spaceship to relativistic speed is becoming practically impossible.
But of course if you are willing to introduce new science (as of now, your question is neither "hard-science" nor "science-based") you can make this sail shield design work just as you want it to.
add a comment |
What you have described is a "flimsy shield", which, by itself, can not be effective at relativistic speeds.
Incoming hydrogen and helium atoms, upon colliding will turn into potent radiation, for which this shield will provide no protection. Putting the shield at sufficient distance in front of the ship will help to disperse the radiation, but then there is a question of generating protective magnetic field in front of the shield (way ahead of where the field generators can be located).
The solution (within the realm of existing science) is having a massive shield. Unfortunately, calculations show that this shield has to be so massive that accelerating our spaceship to relativistic speed is becoming practically impossible.
But of course if you are willing to introduce new science (as of now, your question is neither "hard-science" nor "science-based") you can make this sail shield design work just as you want it to.
add a comment |
What you have described is a "flimsy shield", which, by itself, can not be effective at relativistic speeds.
Incoming hydrogen and helium atoms, upon colliding will turn into potent radiation, for which this shield will provide no protection. Putting the shield at sufficient distance in front of the ship will help to disperse the radiation, but then there is a question of generating protective magnetic field in front of the shield (way ahead of where the field generators can be located).
The solution (within the realm of existing science) is having a massive shield. Unfortunately, calculations show that this shield has to be so massive that accelerating our spaceship to relativistic speed is becoming practically impossible.
But of course if you are willing to introduce new science (as of now, your question is neither "hard-science" nor "science-based") you can make this sail shield design work just as you want it to.
What you have described is a "flimsy shield", which, by itself, can not be effective at relativistic speeds.
Incoming hydrogen and helium atoms, upon colliding will turn into potent radiation, for which this shield will provide no protection. Putting the shield at sufficient distance in front of the ship will help to disperse the radiation, but then there is a question of generating protective magnetic field in front of the shield (way ahead of where the field generators can be located).
The solution (within the realm of existing science) is having a massive shield. Unfortunately, calculations show that this shield has to be so massive that accelerating our spaceship to relativistic speed is becoming practically impossible.
But of course if you are willing to introduce new science (as of now, your question is neither "hard-science" nor "science-based") you can make this sail shield design work just as you want it to.
answered 1 hour ago
Alexander
18.7k42972
18.7k42972
add a comment |
add a comment |
Is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
You are describing a very special kind of ablator.
The problem you have is that a collision at near light speeds will end up in thinga like nuclear fission and fusion. Then, instead of impacting against a rock at nearly light speeds, you will collide with your solar sail plasma debris + rock's plasma debris at near light speed. It might be less dense, but it might also be larger than the original rock, so you will be in trouble anyway.
But there is an alternative. Like in so many other aspects of life, attacking is the best form of defense in space travel as well. Use an Alcubierre Drive. It involves travelling inside a bubble of spacetime that destroys everything ahead of it, including the ship's destination, so it should also disintegrate any pesky space stones that happen to be in your way.
2
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
You are describing a very special kind of ablator.
The problem you have is that a collision at near light speeds will end up in thinga like nuclear fission and fusion. Then, instead of impacting against a rock at nearly light speeds, you will collide with your solar sail plasma debris + rock's plasma debris at near light speed. It might be less dense, but it might also be larger than the original rock, so you will be in trouble anyway.
But there is an alternative. Like in so many other aspects of life, attacking is the best form of defense in space travel as well. Use an Alcubierre Drive. It involves travelling inside a bubble of spacetime that destroys everything ahead of it, including the ship's destination, so it should also disintegrate any pesky space stones that happen to be in your way.
2
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
You are describing a very special kind of ablator.
The problem you have is that a collision at near light speeds will end up in thinga like nuclear fission and fusion. Then, instead of impacting against a rock at nearly light speeds, you will collide with your solar sail plasma debris + rock's plasma debris at near light speed. It might be less dense, but it might also be larger than the original rock, so you will be in trouble anyway.
But there is an alternative. Like in so many other aspects of life, attacking is the best form of defense in space travel as well. Use an Alcubierre Drive. It involves travelling inside a bubble of spacetime that destroys everything ahead of it, including the ship's destination, so it should also disintegrate any pesky space stones that happen to be in your way.
Is this a good idea, or are we just going to get hit by chunks of shattered solar sail?
You are describing a very special kind of ablator.
The problem you have is that a collision at near light speeds will end up in thinga like nuclear fission and fusion. Then, instead of impacting against a rock at nearly light speeds, you will collide with your solar sail plasma debris + rock's plasma debris at near light speed. It might be less dense, but it might also be larger than the original rock, so you will be in trouble anyway.
But there is an alternative. Like in so many other aspects of life, attacking is the best form of defense in space travel as well. Use an Alcubierre Drive. It involves travelling inside a bubble of spacetime that destroys everything ahead of it, including the ship's destination, so it should also disintegrate any pesky space stones that happen to be in your way.
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
43.2k1198218
43.2k1198218
2
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
2
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
2
2
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
It may also, for some interpretations of the equations, superheat everything inside the bubble to stellar temperatures en-route or deliver a life-scouring gamma ray burst at your destination, but hey!
– Joe Bloggs
2 hours ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
Interesting. I though that sublight Alcbierre drives weren't subject to these problems, that they only occurred at FTL speeds?
– AskerOfQuestions
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
@AskerOfQuestions yes.
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
It is a good idea except for the sail.
You are accelerating a shield in front of you. You are using lasers. If you turn off the lasers you will accelerate through the shield, so the lasers have to stay on. It must be more than one laser to accelerate all parts of the shield uniformly.
Pack up the sail for some later use. Leave the lasers on; you have already budgeted for them. They will spray impressively in front of you off into space. They will hit obstacles in your way. Those obstacles will be illuminated. From your perspective they will be coming at you very fast, so fortunately your lasers are governed by fast-thinking computers.
Your many lasers are different wavelengths. The reflected wavelengths allow the computer to calculate the trajectory of the incoming mass according to which beams are interrupted. Your computers fire a BB at the approaching mass. It will become an XKCDesque shower of radiation and charged particles, which your magnetic shield and bulk shield can deal with. There is an option to fire another BB at recalcitrant masses.
For very tiny particles, the lasers themselves might be enough. They were going to push a sail, after all. They can push particles out of the way too.
add a comment |
It is a good idea except for the sail.
You are accelerating a shield in front of you. You are using lasers. If you turn off the lasers you will accelerate through the shield, so the lasers have to stay on. It must be more than one laser to accelerate all parts of the shield uniformly.
Pack up the sail for some later use. Leave the lasers on; you have already budgeted for them. They will spray impressively in front of you off into space. They will hit obstacles in your way. Those obstacles will be illuminated. From your perspective they will be coming at you very fast, so fortunately your lasers are governed by fast-thinking computers.
Your many lasers are different wavelengths. The reflected wavelengths allow the computer to calculate the trajectory of the incoming mass according to which beams are interrupted. Your computers fire a BB at the approaching mass. It will become an XKCDesque shower of radiation and charged particles, which your magnetic shield and bulk shield can deal with. There is an option to fire another BB at recalcitrant masses.
For very tiny particles, the lasers themselves might be enough. They were going to push a sail, after all. They can push particles out of the way too.
add a comment |
It is a good idea except for the sail.
You are accelerating a shield in front of you. You are using lasers. If you turn off the lasers you will accelerate through the shield, so the lasers have to stay on. It must be more than one laser to accelerate all parts of the shield uniformly.
Pack up the sail for some later use. Leave the lasers on; you have already budgeted for them. They will spray impressively in front of you off into space. They will hit obstacles in your way. Those obstacles will be illuminated. From your perspective they will be coming at you very fast, so fortunately your lasers are governed by fast-thinking computers.
Your many lasers are different wavelengths. The reflected wavelengths allow the computer to calculate the trajectory of the incoming mass according to which beams are interrupted. Your computers fire a BB at the approaching mass. It will become an XKCDesque shower of radiation and charged particles, which your magnetic shield and bulk shield can deal with. There is an option to fire another BB at recalcitrant masses.
For very tiny particles, the lasers themselves might be enough. They were going to push a sail, after all. They can push particles out of the way too.
It is a good idea except for the sail.
You are accelerating a shield in front of you. You are using lasers. If you turn off the lasers you will accelerate through the shield, so the lasers have to stay on. It must be more than one laser to accelerate all parts of the shield uniformly.
Pack up the sail for some later use. Leave the lasers on; you have already budgeted for them. They will spray impressively in front of you off into space. They will hit obstacles in your way. Those obstacles will be illuminated. From your perspective they will be coming at you very fast, so fortunately your lasers are governed by fast-thinking computers.
Your many lasers are different wavelengths. The reflected wavelengths allow the computer to calculate the trajectory of the incoming mass according to which beams are interrupted. Your computers fire a BB at the approaching mass. It will become an XKCDesque shower of radiation and charged particles, which your magnetic shield and bulk shield can deal with. There is an option to fire another BB at recalcitrant masses.
For very tiny particles, the lasers themselves might be enough. They were going to push a sail, after all. They can push particles out of the way too.
answered 50 mins ago
Willk
102k25195426
102k25195426
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135404%2fwould-this-design-be-useful-for-surviving-relativistic-impacts%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
This is an extreme example of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield. It could work but needs tought (keep stable sail-shield attitude, etc...)
– b.Lorenz
3 hours ago
Nope, it will just make you get hit more. And I would advise to go 50-90% speed of light at max.. It is better to "waste" time and decrease energy of impacts and have ability to detect what is around you.
– Artemijs Danilovs
2 hours ago
1
Related: How to avoid objects when traveling at greater than .75 light speed. or How Not to Go SPLAT?
– Alexander
2 hours ago