Editing 2079: Alpha Centauri
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
| − | {{w|Alpha Centauri}} is the closest star system to our solar system, being | + | {{incomplete|Created by a SOLAR SAIL. It would be good to enumerate similar projects. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} |
| + | {{w|Alpha Centauri}} is the closest star system to our solar system, being 4.37 {{w|light-year}}s away. As such, there are numerous ongoing plans and projects to journey to, and explore the star system, especially since {{w|Proxima Centauri b}} was found in 2016 to possibly have liquid water oceans and a very thin atmosphere. Ponytail announces such a project using a {{w|Voyager program|Voyager}}-like probe. | ||
| − | However, | + | However, the offscreen person is against her idea, for the strange logic that "Alpha Centauri sucks". He says that he looked "online" and that the system "only has three stars". This is a pun regarding online reviews. |
===Star Rating Systems=== | ===Star Rating Systems=== | ||
| − | Online rating systems, such as {{w|Yelp}}, often use {{w|Star (classification)|star rating system}}s, with more stars indicating higher quality, up to an arbitrary maximum, such as five stars to indicate the best rating. Due to the nature of 5 star rating systems, | + | Online rating systems, such as {{w|Yelp}}, often use {{w|Star (classification)|star rating system}}s, with more stars indicating higher quality, up to an arbitrary maximum, such as five stars to indicate the best rating. Due to [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/937:_TornadoGuard the nature of 5 star rating systems], [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1098:_Star_Ratings anything scoring less than 4 out of 5 in a 5 star rating system is crap]; and in a 10-star rating system, scoring a mere 3 stars out of a possible 10 stars would be ''exceedingly'' low quality. The Alpha Centauri star system has 3 ''physical'' {{w|star}}s: Alpha Centauri A, Alpha Centauri B, and Proxima Centauri. The offscreen person has misconstrued this fact of the system as some kind of review. |
| + | |||
| + | A previous comic, [[1098: Star Ratings]], points out that star ratings below 4 out of 5 tend to be seen as "crap". | ||
The title text furthers the pun. Some online star rating systems also allow partial stars, such as a half-star, to allow more precision in rating (e.g. rating 2.5 stars instead of being forced to chose 3 stars or 2 stars), or display an average collective rating as partial stars (e.g. showing 2.5 stars when five people have rated 3 stars and five people have rated 2 stars). Alpha Centauri's "half star" refers to Proxima Centauri, a {{w|red dwarf}}, which is a type of low-mass star. According to the offscreen person, this barely qualifies it to be a star. Furthermore, Proxima Centauri is nearly 13,000 AU (0.21 light years) away from the other 2 stars in the system, so it was long unknown whether Proxima Centauri was gravitationally bound to the Alpha Centauri star system. | The title text furthers the pun. Some online star rating systems also allow partial stars, such as a half-star, to allow more precision in rating (e.g. rating 2.5 stars instead of being forced to chose 3 stars or 2 stars), or display an average collective rating as partial stars (e.g. showing 2.5 stars when five people have rated 3 stars and five people have rated 2 stars). Alpha Centauri's "half star" refers to Proxima Centauri, a {{w|red dwarf}}, which is a type of low-mass star. According to the offscreen person, this barely qualifies it to be a star. Furthermore, Proxima Centauri is nearly 13,000 AU (0.21 light years) away from the other 2 stars in the system, so it was long unknown whether Proxima Centauri was gravitationally bound to the Alpha Centauri star system. | ||
| Line 20: | Line 23: | ||
All numbers are rounded after subsequent calculations. | All numbers are rounded after subsequent calculations. | ||
| − | According to [https://www.space.com/41447-parker-solar-probe-fastest-spacecraft-ever.html space.com] the fastest spacecraft ever will be the | + | According to [https://www.space.com/41447-parker-solar-probe-fastest-spacecraft-ever.html space.com] the fastest spacecraft ever will be the Parker Solar Probe which will reach 430,000 mph (692,000 km/h) as it reaches its closest point orbiting the sun. This is just over half of 1% of the needed speed of the Alpha Centauri vehicle proposed in the comic. The Voyager 1 spacecraft, launched in 1977, is currently traveling at about 38,000 mph (61,000 km/h). |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | 4.367 light years / 35 years = 0. | + | 4.367 light years / 35 years = 0.12477 light years/year |
0.12477 light years/year * 5.879e+12 miles/light year = 733,484,000,000 miles/year | 0.12477 light years/year * 5.879e+12 miles/light year = 733,484,000,000 miles/year | ||
| Line 30: | Line 31: | ||
733,484,000,000 miles/year / 365 days/year / 24 hours/day = 83,000,000 Miles/hour / 1.60934 miles/kilometer = 134,000,000 Kilometers/hour | 733,484,000,000 miles/year / 365 days/year / 24 hours/day = 83,000,000 Miles/hour / 1.60934 miles/kilometer = 134,000,000 Kilometers/hour | ||
| − | The above math assumes a constant speed, and requires a speed of ~0. | + | The above math assumes a constant speed, and requires a speed of ~0.0001c. Assuming a constant acceleration from rest (non-relativistic math follows): |
35*365.25*24*60*60 = 1.10e+9 seconds in 35 years | 35*365.25*24*60*60 = 1.10e+9 seconds in 35 years | ||
| Line 56: | Line 57: | ||
Further, the top speed is fast enough to require a recalculation using relativistic physics to model the problem. This means that the energy budget will need to increase, as the relativistic mass of the probe will increase, requiring more force (and thus more energy) to accelerate and decelerate near its top speed than this calculation returns. | Further, the top speed is fast enough to require a recalculation using relativistic physics to model the problem. This means that the energy budget will need to increase, as the relativistic mass of the probe will increase, requiring more force (and thus more energy) to accelerate and decelerate near its top speed than this calculation returns. | ||
| − | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot Active], laser based propulsion methods require currently non-existent and purely | + | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot Active], laser based propulsion methods require currently non-existent and purely specualtive laser and materials technologies, as well as a powerplant equivalent to 12,500 of the [https://www.power-technology.com/features/feature-largest-nuclear-power-plants-world/ World's Largest Nuclear Plant] to transport sub-gram masses on this timescale. This also assumes that any probes can be steered accurately enough across interstellar distances to come close enough to image with any resolution the bodies they will be passing at a non-trivial fraction of c. |
Short of FTL travel or near-perfect mass-energy conversion technology, transporting more than a fraction of a gram of material to Alpha Centauri in a human lifetime will be unachievable. Short of an enormous breakthrough in power generation, transporting even a fraction of a gram is impossible. | Short of FTL travel or near-perfect mass-energy conversion technology, transporting more than a fraction of a gram of material to Alpha Centauri in a human lifetime will be unachievable. Short of an enormous breakthrough in power generation, transporting even a fraction of a gram is impossible. | ||
| Line 74: | Line 75: | ||
[[Category:Space probes]] | [[Category:Space probes]] | ||
[[Category:Online reviews]] | [[Category:Online reviews]] | ||
| − | |||
