What are the requirements for interstellar travel at different speeds?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the calculations for interstellar travel, specifically the energy, fuel mass, and time requirements for spacecraft reaching various percentages of light speed at 1 g acceleration. Participants clarify the meaning of "acceleration time at 1 gravity," emphasizing the integration of acceleration over time to determine speed. The conversation highlights the complexities of calculating fuel mass and energy requirements, noting that high specific impulse (Isp) propulsion systems can be inefficient due to low mass flow rates. There is a consensus on the need for substantial thrust and propellant storage to achieve sustained acceleration. Overall, the calculations provide valuable insights into the challenges of interstellar travel.
Jon0815
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Using information and calculators I found online, I have put together a series of tables illustrating the energy, fuel mass, and time requirements (both Earth and ship time, at 1 g acceleration) for a spacecraft to reach various percentages of light speed.

https://sites.google.com/site/interstellartraveltables/

I don't have a physics background myself, so I'd appreciate it if anyone who does could look it over and see if they spot any errors.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I'm not going to check all of the numbers, but all of the nonaccelerated numbers look reasonable.

What is meant by, "Acceleration time at 1 gravity"? Also, these types of calculations (fuel mass, energy requirements, etc.) are particularly enlightening (and more difficult) in the case of the accelerating starship. I see you've worked out timetables, but it's also interesting to see the absurd amount of fuel necessary to maintain these accelerations :)
 
What is meant by, "Acceleration time at 1 gravity"?

The time it takes to reach to reach the speed at 1 gravity acceleration. I'll change that to make it more clear.
 
Jon0815 said:
The time it takes to reach to reach the speed at 1 gravity acceleration. I'll change that to make it more clear.
I'm sorry, but this does not make sense.

g = 9.81 m/s2 is a measure of acceleration, and speed (or magnitude of velocity) is found by integrating the acceleration over time. If one accelerates at a constant acceleration of g, the v = gt + vo.

One also needs the specific impulse in order to determine the propellant mass flow rate to achieve a given thrust, and mass flow rate integrated over time will give the total propellant to be stored. If there is a huge mass of propellant, one will require a substantial thrust to get 1 g of acceleration, and one will need substantial mass in which to store the propellant.

Ideally, one has a high Isp, which means a lot of energy per unit mass of propellant. However, high Isp systems usually have low mass flow rates.
 
Astronuc said:
I'm sorry, but this does not make sense.

g = 9.81 m/s2 is a measure of acceleration, and speed (or magnitude of velocity) is found by integrating the acceleration over time. If one accelerates at a constant acceleration of g, the v = gt + vo.

Well, acceleration might be constant in the frame of the rocket, but will not be in the static Earth frame. But I think it's now clear what was meant.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
5K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
12K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
47
Views
21K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top