09-13-2019, 05:41 AM | #31 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
The problem is differences in delta-v and vector. Galactic escape velocity in our neighborhood is ~540 km/s, and we are talking about traveling ~15,000 km/s, so you would likely need to burn massive amounts of reaction mass to explore a wandering object. If it is not sharing the same vector, the problem is only magnified, so I think that most rogue object will be avoided rather than explored by interstellar STL missions. They are likely fairly common (a couple hundred per cubic light-year) and quite dangerous navigation hazards though.
|
09-13-2019, 08:01 AM | #32 | |
Night Watchman
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
Quote:
Meaningfully travelling between stars on a human timescale needs much higher speeds.
__________________
The Path of Cunning. Indexes: DFRPG Characters, Advantage of the Week, Disadvantage of the Week, Skill of the Week, Techniques. |
|
09-13-2019, 08:11 AM | #33 |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
That is an interesting setting on its own. A last ditch effort to survive a doomed system perhaps due to "insert star destroying technobabble here".
One could also avoid the stereotype of denizens regressing into low tech primitives, of course.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
09-13-2019, 10:16 AM | #34 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
Hypothetically, a swarm of dwarf planets could provide enough gravity to form an asteroid/come try cloud with a mass equivalent of the Kuiper Belt (RVM+2 to RVM+4). A TL10 society could colonize such an object and support a population between 4 billion and 15 billion people (depending on the RVM), though they would be dependent on fusion for energy (not a major issue at TL10). As long as they maintained their population levels above 500 million, they should not face any major issues beyond the threats of their environment.
|
09-13-2019, 10:16 AM | #35 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
A couple hundred per cubic light year is not a dangerous navigation hazard; the odds of a collision are about 2/10^18 per Earth-sized object per light year, and the odds of being close enough to care are not a lot higher.
|
09-13-2019, 10:38 AM | #36 |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
If there's not real technology and real physics, it doesn't seem like an interesting mystery to solve. It just comes down to a mix of "read the GM's mind" and "you'll succeed when the GM decides it's dramatically appropriate."
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
09-13-2019, 10:40 AM | #37 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
Quote:
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
|
09-13-2019, 10:45 AM | #38 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
Quote:
|
|
09-13-2019, 08:19 PM | #39 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
The population of the setting really does not matter that much as long as there are enough people to keep civilization going (for example, a TL10 society should need 500 million people). A colonization effort needs enough population to maintain civilization (or enough regular imports). In the case of a STL colonization effort, it will likely come in multiple waves rather than in one surge because of the sheer expense involved.
|
09-13-2019, 10:36 PM | #40 | |
Join Date: Feb 2007
|
Re: Realistic STL Interstellar Missions
Quote:
It's true that technology does not advance along the naïve exponentiating curve that some futurists like to imagine. It rises in S curves, slow-fast-slow, then later another S curve, as a rule, when some new development happens. But whenever one is planning for multi-decade time spans, the risk of an S curve surge (i.e. a breakthrough) is always present, and by its very nature unpredictable. That's also why trying to plan things centuries in advance is a crapshoot at best.
__________________
HMS Overflow-For conversations off topic here. |
|
|
|