The Human Race!

[ZONE 51]

For space travel the greatest thing we need is to discover a new energy to power the ships engines, that can be recycled on the spaceship, something infinite, safe, cheap, and light, with no risk of explosion.

On earth its worries of fuel shortage, and a battle of the oil, but if we can discover this new energy, it would be used as a power source, so thats what we need to do.

Only a certain amount of material can be taken into space on each journey , maybe several craft going up to the moon at once?

Edited September 7, 2010 by nimbilus

[summer blizzard]

For space travel the greatest thing we need is to discover a new energy to power the ships engines, that can be recycled on the spaceship, something infinite, safe, cheap, and light, with no risk of explosion.

On earth its worries of fuel shortage, and a battle of the oil, but if we can discover this new energy, it would be used as a power source, so thats what we need to do.

Only a certain amount of material can be taken into space on each journey , maybe several craft going up to the moon at once?

There are several sources of power that exist, they are just veiwed as too expensive.

In addition, ask yourself this, why was Concorde taken out of service - Too much danger and too expensive. Same applies to Space Exploration.

The need to minimise risk applies to everything, 40 years ago this was not the case.

I think that is a valid point, profit margins are just too important now, Concorde was actually making a small profit however because they could make 60% more from a 747 they scrapped it.

Well the signs are there. Steadily failing infrastructure that cannot be repaired as the costs are two high. Reduction of services because they cannot be paid for. Britain is trying to be a military power it can't afford the hardware. USA is struggling with it's own economy at one time it would be able to manufacture it's way out of trouble but it's struggling to do that.

I hardly think that is the result of civilisation declining, it is ust that people are reluctant to replace it with something better. Service reduction is a cause of a flawed economy, though i do agree about Britain and the USA.

[ZONE 51]

Yes health and safety guidelines are extremely tight, and have become tighter this decade, and they would especially be for space exploration.

i think it would be possible to send building materials to the moon un-manned, then the astronouts could live on a station orbiting the earth(like the ISS) with a small ship to go to the moon with tools, equipment, to build the moon base, the base would be the research center, this would save numerous earth launches, and fuel.

Edited September 9, 2010 by nimbilus

[The watcher]

I thought that perpetual energy was just impossible.

I like risk....bring concorde back.

[ZONE 51]

Concord may have just been able to clip the earth's outer atmosphere, but you cant go to the moon in one, it would be pretty stylish though!

[summer blizzard]

I thought that perpetual energy was just impossible.

I like risk....bring concorde back.

Theoretically, perpetual energy is possible, the problem being you would need huge amounts of energy in the first place, i also agree with Concorde, it was a brilliant feat of engineering however it again backs up my point that in 50 years that has been the fastest mainstream airoplane, we simply have not advanced enougth, i am all for ever greater computing power/AI, however there are so many areas where we are pretty stagnant.

Personally, i would like to see NASA/ESA ect.. come up with a detailed programme of missions to each of the eight planets and their moons over the next twenty years. I also think that afterward we should then begin creating bases to mine/explore/live regardless of the cost.

I also think that the Iinternational space station looks really outdated, bring on Virgin Galactic.

[ZONE 51]

Who wants to go on a oneway trip to MARS?!! yes no return, check out www.dailymail.co.uk thursday 28th october paper.

[knocker]

Theoretically, perpetual energy is possible, the problem being you would need huge amounts of energy in the first place, i also agree with Concorde, it was a brilliant feat of engineering however it again backs up my point that in 50 years that has been the fastest mainstream airoplane, we simply have not advanced enougth, i am all for ever greater computing power/AI, however there are so many areas where we are pretty stagnant.

Personally, i would like to see NASA/ESA ect.. come up with a detailed programme of missions to each of the eight planets and their moons over the next twenty years. I also think that afterward we should then begin creating bases to mine/explore/live regardless of the cost.

I also think that the Iinternational space station looks really outdated, bring on Virgin Galactic.

I think we should sort our own planet out first. It's really not acceptable that over a million children still die each year from malaria, the majority under five. A small outbreak of West Nile disease in 'advanced' countries and everyone starts hyperventilating.

[Coast]

I'm afraid I think it's all down to money. I just don't think we can currently justify spending the amounts that the first space race cost.

There's no point going to the moon now, been there - done that. Mars is the next big one but I'm not sure we can sustain space exploration with the current world economic crises. When it comes to spending the money we've got, we need to look at life on this planet first I guess.

[cyclonic happiness]

I think it just too early for us as a species to be going any further than the moon (and even that I'm starting to not believe anymore).

Perhaps we'll be able to make contact with another race at some point and swap some technology? I think that is the only sensible thing to expect or we just sit tight for a couple of hundred more years until we get more advanced.

[ZONE 51]

...." or we just sit tight for a (couple of hundred) more years until we get more advanced."

great idea! cant wait maybe a few greys on da head and a walking stick by then... 0:

[ZONE 51]

Its actually a good point, i think future people are going to see space travel as normal, visiting planets we could'nt get near with a probe 0: , only joking ,really though i think anything sent would arrive at some point, whether it be a probe or radio waves, we could sent a craft to the furthest star we see and it would get their in one piece, our technology and science developments and strategies are incredible as they are! just think we just need funding to do what we dream about...space travel with a return ticket home.

[Stu_London]

In response to the opening post. I am not sure that manned or unmanned spacecraft at 0.1 warp (or 67 million miles per hour) is possible or even theorectically possible.

Happy to be corrected if wrong

[SP1986]

You would be surprised at the steps theoretical physicists are making, if string theory and theory of everything is validated to a certain extent then space travel becomes a matter of how much energy can we source rather than a matter of if.

One suggestion is that if we can harness the control of many individual atoms then we will be able to make nano-ships, tiny ships which can visit star systems within a short time, as relay information back.

It is very unlikely we will see the development of starships in our lifetime, or even in the next 300 years... but with the advent of quantum physics we will make important steps...