Travel to interstellar planets ...

[Jorge]

Several years ago I wrote something to the effect that barring something
straight out of science fiction, travel to planets around other stars will
not ever be achieved.. I stand by that statement.

Yet, agencies like NASA and others frequently and heavily promote the viability of interstellar travel.
For instance: http://search.nasa.gov/search/search...stellar+travel
Nowhere will you find that NASA is candid about the facts that make interstellar travel 'impossible'
except under science fiction scenarios. Why is this so?

There are some real and serious issues right here on Earth that could certainly use the tens of
billions of dollars that are spent trying to achieve the "myth" of interstellar travel.

On the interstellar travel ruse, I have a few ideas and this thread is to see what others think.

Three ideas are:

They promote the myth of interstellar travel .............................

(1) To obtain and maintain funding for their organizations and projects.

(2) A corollary to (1) is: to obtain job security, clout and political power for themselves.

(3) To exercise a Humanistic, materialistic worldview, e.g., "Man is in full control of his destiny."


Thus, my opening position is, "Barring something straight out of the pages of science fiction,
interstellar travel - to extrasolar planets - is a myth that is heavily promoted so as to extract
an endless stream of dollars and resources from a society that can hardly afford this luxury."

Comments ?

Jorge

[wattsr1]

Comments ?

Jorge

I reckon you put this up because you are chicken, not wanting to face up to your own goof up over the Barringer crater:-

1) At your True.Origin article you claimed that if it could be shown that big craters were caused by meteorite impact then there would indeed be very good evidence for an ancient earth.

2) In that article you looked at the evidence for determining big craters (like Barringer) to be of meteorite impact origin.

3) You dismissed the evidence (and so Barringer is most likely not of impact origin).

4) From that dismissal, you claimed that there was no need to shy away from a literal interpretation of Scripture, for the earth being young. The conclusion was obvious.

Now, here at TWeb, you admit that:-

5) Barringer is most likely of impact origin, in contradiction to your argument above.

6) Therefore, here at TWeb, you implicitly admit that there is very good evidence for the earth being ancient.

7) You are now too scared to face that fact.

Hence this OP is largely to take you away from the heat on you caused by that goof up.



Sad. Very sad.



That's my comment.

[RBerman]

How many things that we do every day today were considered "impossible" a couple of hundred years ago?

[Jorge]

How many things that we do every day today were considered "impossible" a couple of hundred years ago?

**************************************************************

I agree. Note, however, that I put "impossible" between quotes and also note
that I said, "barring something straight out of the pages of science fiction."

When the facts and the science are considered, I challenge you or anyone
to refute my opening statement. Go ahead ... give it a try ...

Jorge

[Jorge]

I reckon you put this up because you are chicken, not wanting to face up to your own goof up over the Barringer crater:-

1) At your True.Origin article you claimed that if it could be shown that big craters were caused by meteorite impact then there would indeed be very good evidence for an ancient earth.

2) In that article you looked at the evidence for determining big craters (like Barringer) to be of meteorite impact origin.

3) You dismissed the evidence (and so Barringer is most likely not of impact origin).

4) From that dismissal, you claimed that there was no need to shy away from a literal interpretation of Scripture, for the earth being young. The conclusion was obvious.

Now, here at TWeb, you admit that:-

5) Barringer is most likely of impact origin, in contradiction to your argument above.

6) Therefore, here at TWeb, you implicitly admit that there is very good evidence for the earth being ancient.

7) You are now too scared to face that fact.

Hence this OP is largely to take you away from the heat on you caused by that goof up.



Sad. Very sad.



That's my comment.

*********************************************************************

I posted my LAST say on the craters issue. Basta ya !
Kindly stick to the topic of this thread or find the nearest EXIT.

Jorge

[RBerman]

**************************************************************

I agree. Note, however, that I put "impossible" between quotes and also note
that I said, "barring something straight out of the pages of science fiction."

When the facts and the science are considered, I challenge you or anyone
to refute my opening statement. Go ahead ... give it a try ...

Jorge

Given that science fiction is an incredibly broad field that encompasses pretty much any concept in one way or another, you're basically saying, "The science we have now is insufficient for interstellar human travel, but future developments could change that." Who could argue with such a statement?

[Sparko]

Given that science fiction is an incredibly broad field that encompasses pretty much any concept in one way or another, you're basically saying, "The science we have now is insufficient for interstellar human travel, but future developments could change that." Who could argue with such a statement?

that was my take too. Like gee, what if we invent "warp drive" one day? Or even a really good Bussard Ramjet engine that runs off of interstellar hydrogen and can accelerate to a good fraction of the speed of light? That is definitely within the realm of possibility.

Or even using generation ships or slow ships if we could come up with a good way to put people in stasis.

Besides, I thought Jorge didn't even believe in extra solar planets?

[Cerebrum123]

There are significant problems you would have to overcome, and they are VERY unlikely to get anywhere near what's necessary at least for a VERY long time. Approaching speed of light would be nearly impossible even if we had something like the full power of our sun to run it, and moving at those speeds you have to take into account things like small dust and other particles(a collision with anything solid at that speed would be devastating). Then we would still need a place to even travel to(not counting stuff like terraforming, which would be extremely difficult on it's own) that could support life(unlikely in my view). Also, is there really anything out there worth that kind of expenditure to even find? Life on other planets is purely speculation(fueled by ToE), and there are Biblical reasons not to expect any "intelligent" life out there (especially considering we have barely anything here that qualifies under that ). Personally I believe that interstellar travel, even if possible, would still be pretty much useless(unless we had completely destroyed Earth, but I doubt that will happen in the way many people today think it will).

Also, Jorge, you really don't believe that there are extra solar planets?

[Sparko]

quantum teleportation.

[phank]

Of course interstellar travel is a standard trope in science fiction, but within that genre it generally falls into two categories - "fast" travel involving some as-yet-undiscovered characteristic of spacetime that permits shortcuts. This is necessary if any sort of interstellar empire or commerce is to be conducted. And "slow" (sublight) interstellar travel. The generation ship (basically a great big ship taking generations to get somewhere) was the first idea, but more recently this has morphed into conventional drive systems hooked to comets, asteroids, or other moveable objects large enough to contain very large stable communities. And yeah, these moving bodies might (or might not) someday approach some other star, but that's not really required. They're not looking for another planet, they ARE the planet.

[phank]

*********************************************************************

I posted my LAST say on the craters issue. Basta ya !
Kindly stick to the topic of this thread or find the nearest EXIT.

Jorge

Jorge ran away and he MEANS it!

[Jorge]

Given that science fiction is an incredibly broad field that encompasses pretty much any concept in one way or another, you're basically saying, "The science we have now is insufficient for interstellar human travel, but future developments could change that." Who could argue with such a statement?

**********************************************************

If you look at it that way then no one could argue. But that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that unless something RIGHT OUT OF SCIENCE FICTION comes along,
interstellar travel will never be achieved. We can have colonies on Mars - but not today,
future technical developments are necessary. But for travel to a planet outside of our
solar system, it will take a discovery that today is science fiction --- get it?

Try again ...

Jorge

[Tiggy]

Jorge ran away and he MEANS it!

Nah, he'll be back at least 5 times to tell us it was his last post. Wait for it.

BTW Jorge , you still need to explain the 49,000 year date of the Barringer crater. But you won't, because you're a

- T

[Jorge]

Of course interstellar travel is a standard trope in science fiction, but within that genre it generally falls into two categories - "fast" travel involving some as-yet-undiscovered characteristic of spacetime that permits shortcuts. This is necessary if any sort of interstellar empire or commerce is to be conducted. And "slow" (sublight) interstellar travel. The generation ship (basically a great big ship taking generations to get somewhere) was the first idea, but more recently this has morphed into conventional drive systems hooked to comets, asteroids, or other moveable objects large enough to contain very large stable communities. And yeah, these moving bodies might (or might not) someday approach some other star, but that's not really required. They're not looking for another planet, they ARE the planet.

******************************************************

The first thing you mention is science fiction. That's that.

The second thing you mention ignores many of the problems that would make such a mission
essentially a suicide mission. Obviously you'd be talking about a trip that is hundreds of
years long - one way - and there are no hardware stores or supermarkets to get supplies.
Therefore, everything -- EVERYTHING -- would have to be carried with them. So I agree
with you - they ARE the planet. Moving a PLANET belongs to the realm of science fiction.

Glad you agree with a Biblical Creationist (me), phank. Case closed!

Jorge

[Jorge]

quantum teleportation.

***************************************************************************

No problem .... SCIENCE FICTION !!!

Glad you agree with me.

Jorge