We always talk about space travel and lots of films about outer space and all. But how much our science has achieved till now? With known methods how much time would we really take to reach to nearest star? What are known obstacles?|||Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion or also known as M2P2 designed by Dr. Robert Winglee of the University of Washington is probably the best way to travel to the another solar system, read these links to find out more and what it can do.
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/鈥?/a>
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headline鈥?/a>|||with known methods we can already reach the closest star with no obstacles save for food, waste and air.
The Sun is our closest star ;)
That aside, I assume you mean closest neighboor star... current technology will never get us there. We'd need cyrogenics and whoever goes will never be able to contact earth again due to the distance problem... plus the fact that we're limited to conventional fuels like nuclear or ion...
how about we settle the moon first, THEN we think about how to get somewhere interesting?|||Currently, our space ships are chemically propelled and burn a lot of fuel just to get out of Earth's tight grip of gravity!
The spaceship needs to get over 7 miles a second to break free, which NASA and their Russian counterparts have been capable of doing for nearly half a century!
Once free of gravity, these chemically operated vehicles can really pick up speed with very little additional fuel. However, acceleration does require fuel, and fuel requires large and heavy tanks! And so, missions seldom travel much faster than escape velocity once they are well away from the Earth, as seen in the old Apollo missions.
A good way of attaining increased velocity is to use the gravity of large mass objects such as the moon and planets, to sling shot into the desired directions.
Ion propulsion systems are being experimented with and nuclear powered ships are not a new concept.
Perhaps the most romantic and atavistic future concept spaceship is the sail-craft. It is not much unlike a sailboat, but instead of Earthly winds, driven by the sun, it relies on the direct winds of our sun!
If a space ship were to leave Earth on a trip to the nearest star (after our sun of course) and cruise at a constant velocity of 10 miles a second (about 50% faster than escape velocity) it would take about 80 thousand years to get there.
Better step on the gas! Or better yet, use a constant accelerating system where a comfortable and familiar 32 feet per second per second is maintained. This would shorten the transit time dramatically!|||The most powerful propulsion system yet designed is that of using nuclear bombs and a push-plate. Basically you drop a bomb out of the back of the ship and you have a very strong shield facing the bomb. The bomb them pushes you away with it's shock wave. Radiation is not an issue in space.
It's not possible to reach any star other than Sol within a human lifetime with current propulsion technology. You could reach another star by simply having a self-sustaining ship that would support multiple generations of astronauts. You couldn't reach your destination, but your decedents could if you started the trip.
As far as a self-sustaining ship though we're still quite a ways off from that as well, but it's certainly something that will be reached much sooner than a new propulsion system capable of nearing light-speed.
NASA and the rest of the world do not seem to be interested in that technology at all though so you can forget about an ETA.|||there are ion engines being developed which travel at super high speed and deliver continous thrust to reach hundreds of kilometers per second unlike the present gravitational sling which is very slow and reaches only about 5km/sec and also in the future nuclear engines will be develop which will allow us to travel near to the speed of light!
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
What is the quickest and cheapest way to travel from country to country in europe?
I have been to Germany and Netherlands and traveled around by train. I bought a Euro rail pass, but it was 260 dollars and only took me to 3 different cities. Is this the cheapest way to travel? Ryanair I hear is cheap, but I haven't done research yet. Any suggestions? Should I bus it?|||Definitely Ryanair or Easyjet
Have a look at their sites:
http://www.ryanair.com/en
http://www.easyjet.com/asp/en/book
/index.asp?lang=en
The only small problem of Ryanair could be the fact that the airports which its planes land at are never the central ones, but are a bit far from the city, so you have to take a bus in order to arrive in the city, it usually takes 1 hour about, but this is perfectly compensated by its prices...
P.S: don't trust those people who say that Ryanair is not safe, they're only sceptics that can't understand why its tickets can be so cheap, but they totally ignore that safety is not the thing which is "sacrificed", there are other things that allow Ryanair to be so competitive like the low number of workers, a "no frills" politic, the fact that the taxes of the ariports which are used by its planes are lower than the ones in the central airport etc etc...
Have a good Journey!|||The Quickest way would be to fly but not necessarily the cheapest.
Going by coach is really cheap but it takes a lot longer tho, A Euro rail pass is ok it depends which one you get tho.
Ryan air is cheap but you might be limited to where you can fly from certain countries because they have alot of flights from the uk but not necessarily say from France for Example.
I would get a coach pass or a Rail pass again and explore Europe from the inside as by plane you dont get to see any sites on your way to your next destination.|||It really depends on where you're going. A Eurail pass is usually only a good deal if you take a train trip nearly every day, and some of the trips are overnight so you save on hotels. I'd research the prices for individual tickets. The German rail site is a good place to look, even for trips to countries other than Germany..
Ryanair is a very cheap airline with a horrible reputation (although they weren't so bad when I flew them.) Europe has lots of other cheap airlines, too. The flycheapo site linked below is a good source to find out about them.
Long distance buses are also a possibility, but they're not particularly fast. I'd look for cheap flights.|||Well, I've bussed it, and one time I rented a car in France (driving to Germany) with three other people and split it (if you don't have a credit card, find someone who does, who wants to go too, and then everyone gives that person some cash).
Last time I went to Europe (2006), my girlfriend got our Euro rail passes here (in the US) and they were for unlimited service -- we hit about 10 different cites. If I remember right, the cost was about what you said you paid ($260/each person), although it might have been more, but it was unlimited service.
Check with AAA or a travel agent or go online, I know in many cases you can get a much better deal on Euro mass transit pases IF you buy the passes here before you go.
Anyway, Good Luck and Have Fun!|||cheapest way is railway that to euro rail pass.
Have a look at their sites:
http://www.ryanair.com/en
http://www.easyjet.com/asp/en/book
/index.asp?lang=en
The only small problem of Ryanair could be the fact that the airports which its planes land at are never the central ones, but are a bit far from the city, so you have to take a bus in order to arrive in the city, it usually takes 1 hour about, but this is perfectly compensated by its prices...
P.S: don't trust those people who say that Ryanair is not safe, they're only sceptics that can't understand why its tickets can be so cheap, but they totally ignore that safety is not the thing which is "sacrificed", there are other things that allow Ryanair to be so competitive like the low number of workers, a "no frills" politic, the fact that the taxes of the ariports which are used by its planes are lower than the ones in the central airport etc etc...
Have a good Journey!|||The Quickest way would be to fly but not necessarily the cheapest.
Going by coach is really cheap but it takes a lot longer tho, A Euro rail pass is ok it depends which one you get tho.
Ryan air is cheap but you might be limited to where you can fly from certain countries because they have alot of flights from the uk but not necessarily say from France for Example.
I would get a coach pass or a Rail pass again and explore Europe from the inside as by plane you dont get to see any sites on your way to your next destination.|||It really depends on where you're going. A Eurail pass is usually only a good deal if you take a train trip nearly every day, and some of the trips are overnight so you save on hotels. I'd research the prices for individual tickets. The German rail site is a good place to look, even for trips to countries other than Germany..
Ryanair is a very cheap airline with a horrible reputation (although they weren't so bad when I flew them.) Europe has lots of other cheap airlines, too. The flycheapo site linked below is a good source to find out about them.
Long distance buses are also a possibility, but they're not particularly fast. I'd look for cheap flights.|||Well, I've bussed it, and one time I rented a car in France (driving to Germany) with three other people and split it (if you don't have a credit card, find someone who does, who wants to go too, and then everyone gives that person some cash).
Last time I went to Europe (2006), my girlfriend got our Euro rail passes here (in the US) and they were for unlimited service -- we hit about 10 different cites. If I remember right, the cost was about what you said you paid ($260/each person), although it might have been more, but it was unlimited service.
Check with AAA or a travel agent or go online, I know in many cases you can get a much better deal on Euro mass transit pases IF you buy the passes here before you go.
Anyway, Good Luck and Have Fun!|||cheapest way is railway that to euro rail pass.
How to paint an aluminum travel trailer?
I've bought a 1988 Sunline Travel Trailer that I want to paint. Its aluminum and just looking for suggestions. I really don't have the money to have it painted professionally but I would like a professional look.|||Sorry but I have never seen one of the aluminum trailers home repainted that looked good. This is a job for professionals. Why don't you go to an auto (truck is better yet) supply to get aluminum cleaner to shine it up?
What may be the cost for three weeks' budget travel in France?
I am planning to travel to france with my family (total 3 persons) for three weeks in july 2011.How much money should we arrange for the travel excluding international air fare? We prefer budget travel.|||80 to 100 Euros a night, 80 to 100 Euros food a day, minimum. You're not saying where, what you want to visit, how you want to travel, and my crystal ball is not working so you'll have to look for the rest yourself.|||well im not sure and cuz ur not going to pay me to do ur job, the only advise is if u really want to save go to hostel.com its like $20 per person per nite intead of $120 per nit plus $20 per extra person rite. soo go luck
What is the cheapest and best way to travel from Berlin to Krakow?
I am traveling from Berlin to Krakow this summer and I have found very inconvenient, expensive ways of getting between the two cities but I feel there has to be an easier way. Any suggestions on the most efficient (night trains etc) and cheapest way to travel to Krakow from Berlin? Thanks!|||A $80 single way air ticket from Berlin to Krakow is kind of acceptable, about one hour flight with Air Berlin, what do you think?
How many countries do you travel to while in infantry Marine Corps?
How long do you stay at each port? How far can you travel away from the ship? Experiences.|||You can be stationed at places like Japan for a year or more. Your unit can go TDY there for a few months. If you go to someplace like Afghanistan it is usually a 7 month tour. Some places you will go for a few weeks. The Marine Corps does training with several countries. They have trained with PLA Marines in China, Indonesia, and other countries. They train with South Korea and in Norway annually. Whether you go to these places depends on what unit they send.
Most port calls range from a couple of days to several days or longer. In most places there is no limit as to how far you can go as long as you report back at the proper time. Sometimes you go for longer periods for peace keeping or humanitarian aid.
Here is an example: "After six months, six countries, six languages and six cultures, Landing Force Detachment, 2nd Battalion, 24th Marine Regiment, is set to head home.
The LF spent almost four months on USS Tortuga (LSD-46) in the Southeast Pacific region, stopping in Brunei, Indonesia, Thailand, and Cambodia in support of Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) 2010. CARAT is a series of bilateral exercises held annually in Southeast Asia to strengthen relationships and enhance force readiness." http://www.usmc.mil/unit/3rdmardiv/comba鈥?/a>
Another example: "MAHE, SEYCHELLES 鈥?Marines from the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit along with Sailors assigned to USS Nassau participated in a liberty port stop here June 25-28 to take some time off and visit the east-African island after being deployed at sea for approximately five months without a port call." http://www.usmc.mil/unit/24thmeu/Pages/2鈥?/a>
BTW, the MOS isn't really important in many cases. All the MEU's have support from many MOS's.|||In my tour in 1968 was 13 months in Nam, then few months at Qutomono Bay Cuba. Was in the states in between those missions. I was a supply clerk.|||your infantry damn i gotta hurry up so i dont have to wait so long
Most port calls range from a couple of days to several days or longer. In most places there is no limit as to how far you can go as long as you report back at the proper time. Sometimes you go for longer periods for peace keeping or humanitarian aid.
Here is an example: "After six months, six countries, six languages and six cultures, Landing Force Detachment, 2nd Battalion, 24th Marine Regiment, is set to head home.
The LF spent almost four months on USS Tortuga (LSD-46) in the Southeast Pacific region, stopping in Brunei, Indonesia, Thailand, and Cambodia in support of Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) 2010. CARAT is a series of bilateral exercises held annually in Southeast Asia to strengthen relationships and enhance force readiness." http://www.usmc.mil/unit/3rdmardiv/comba鈥?/a>
Another example: "MAHE, SEYCHELLES 鈥?Marines from the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit along with Sailors assigned to USS Nassau participated in a liberty port stop here June 25-28 to take some time off and visit the east-African island after being deployed at sea for approximately five months without a port call." http://www.usmc.mil/unit/24thmeu/Pages/2鈥?/a>
BTW, the MOS isn't really important in many cases. All the MEU's have support from many MOS's.|||In my tour in 1968 was 13 months in Nam, then few months at Qutomono Bay Cuba. Was in the states in between those missions. I was a supply clerk.|||your infantry damn i gotta hurry up so i dont have to wait so long
How feasible is it to travel to other solar systems?
If we could travel at the speed of light, it would be possible to escape time thereby negating the concepts of hours, minutes ~ years. Thus we could move from anywhere to anywhere in an quantified instant, making the most distant parts of this universe just a hop, skip and a jump away (minus the skip and the jump). Am I looking at all that correctly?
And how far are we from achieving that, short of a monumental breakthrough Quantum Physics?|||not feasible.
traveling to the nearest star (alpha proximia) with the fastest ship we have now would take approximately
34,000 years.
Traveling the speed of light (if it is possible) would still take 4 years 4 month. still not a very good plan..... especially if you want to go further, like say 20 light years away.
we are closer to the quantum breakthrough than traveling the speed of light (it takes WAY too much energy)
quantum tunneling should lead us much closer and quicker.
plus bypassing the speed of light and just teleporting would make these "trips" MUCH MUCH more feasible.
time travel.......... interesting concept. I think we could not move if we "stopped" time for us (the traveler)
and if we stopped time in the universe (all except us) we'd still have a long trip.
now time and space are supposed to be linked. if we can manipulate time, we could manipulate space.
so building a worm hole by manipulating space would be more feasible,
who knows?
Dr Mallett might know
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHC8z6ULs鈥?/a>|||Traveling at the speed of light, provided it was possible, it would still take a few years to reach the nearest planetary system. Probably the astronauts would have to be hibernated for such trips.|||you're looking at it correctly, however one can not say how far we are from developing that technology, it is just a theory %26amp; until some major breakthroughs occur a theory it remains. with current technology it would take too many lifetimes.|||Nope. You are wrong.
Even if we could travel NEAR the speed of light, the actual journey in Earth time would still take as long as the time light takes to go to the point of interest and back.
At a couple of g's of ship acceleration it is theoretically possibly to reach galaxies 10 billion light years away in a lifetime. But including the expansion of the universe it would take 50 billion years of Earth time to do that... in other words, there would be no Earth, no sun, no galaxy to come back to. It would all be gone. The universe would have grown old and dim. And all you would have done is to spend your life in a flying coffin.
Wanna go for a ride?
;-)
PS: there will be no breakthroughs in quantum mechanics. QM changes absolutely nothing about basic relativity. If you think that sucks, so be it. Nature is not impressed.|||It would take more energy than there is in the entire solar system to speed up a person to light-speed. If all the mass of the sun and planets was converted to energy, and somehow used to speed up one person and her equipment (1 ton), she would reach a speed of 0.999%26lt;total of 53 nines%26gt;998 of light speed.
Time dilation would then allow her to travel across the universe in less than a nanosecond (14 billion years back on Earth, which was somehow left out of the mass to energy conversion).
Now if we just had the engineering to convert the Suns mass to energy ... maybe in a few 1000 years.|||You can't escape time.|||There is so much negativity associated with this concept that to indulge in compliance immediately tandems the speculator to conform to the negative approach.Therefor the preferred result must be erroneously simple and immediately overlooked.
And how far are we from achieving that, short of a monumental breakthrough Quantum Physics?|||not feasible.
traveling to the nearest star (alpha proximia) with the fastest ship we have now would take approximately
34,000 years.
Traveling the speed of light (if it is possible) would still take 4 years 4 month. still not a very good plan..... especially if you want to go further, like say 20 light years away.
we are closer to the quantum breakthrough than traveling the speed of light (it takes WAY too much energy)
quantum tunneling should lead us much closer and quicker.
plus bypassing the speed of light and just teleporting would make these "trips" MUCH MUCH more feasible.
time travel.......... interesting concept. I think we could not move if we "stopped" time for us (the traveler)
and if we stopped time in the universe (all except us) we'd still have a long trip.
now time and space are supposed to be linked. if we can manipulate time, we could manipulate space.
so building a worm hole by manipulating space would be more feasible,
who knows?
Dr Mallett might know
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHC8z6ULs鈥?/a>|||Traveling at the speed of light, provided it was possible, it would still take a few years to reach the nearest planetary system. Probably the astronauts would have to be hibernated for such trips.|||you're looking at it correctly, however one can not say how far we are from developing that technology, it is just a theory %26amp; until some major breakthroughs occur a theory it remains. with current technology it would take too many lifetimes.|||Nope. You are wrong.
Even if we could travel NEAR the speed of light, the actual journey in Earth time would still take as long as the time light takes to go to the point of interest and back.
At a couple of g's of ship acceleration it is theoretically possibly to reach galaxies 10 billion light years away in a lifetime. But including the expansion of the universe it would take 50 billion years of Earth time to do that... in other words, there would be no Earth, no sun, no galaxy to come back to. It would all be gone. The universe would have grown old and dim. And all you would have done is to spend your life in a flying coffin.
Wanna go for a ride?
;-)
PS: there will be no breakthroughs in quantum mechanics. QM changes absolutely nothing about basic relativity. If you think that sucks, so be it. Nature is not impressed.|||It would take more energy than there is in the entire solar system to speed up a person to light-speed. If all the mass of the sun and planets was converted to energy, and somehow used to speed up one person and her equipment (1 ton), she would reach a speed of 0.999%26lt;total of 53 nines%26gt;998 of light speed.
Time dilation would then allow her to travel across the universe in less than a nanosecond (14 billion years back on Earth, which was somehow left out of the mass to energy conversion).
Now if we just had the engineering to convert the Suns mass to energy ... maybe in a few 1000 years.|||You can't escape time.|||There is so much negativity associated with this concept that to indulge in compliance immediately tandems the speculator to conform to the negative approach.Therefor the preferred result must be erroneously simple and immediately overlooked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)