DOCSLIB.ORG

Solar System Exploration: a Vision for the Next Hundred Years

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Solar System Exploration: a Vision for the Next Hundred Years IAC-04-IAA.3.8.1.02 SOLAR SYSTEM EXPLORATION: A VISION FOR THE NEXT HUNDRED YEARS R. L. McNutt, Jr. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Laurel, Maryland, USA [email protected] ABSTRACT The current challenge of space travel is multi-tiered. It includes continuing the robotic assay of the solar system while pressing the human frontier beyond cislunar space, with Mars as an ob- vious destination. The primary challenge is propulsion. For human voyages beyond Mars (and perhaps to Mars), the refinement of nuclear fission as a power source and propulsive means will likely set the limits to optimal deep space propulsion for the foreseeable future. Costs, driven largely by access to space, continue to stall significant advances for both manned and unmanned missions. While there continues to be a hope that commercialization will lead to lower launch costs, the needed technology, initial capital investments, and markets have con- tinued to fail to materialize. Hence, initial development in deep space will likely remain govern- ment sponsored and driven by scientific goals linked to national prestige and perceived security issues. Against this backdrop, we consider linkage of scientific goals, current efforts, expecta- tions, current technical capabilities, and requirements for the detailed exploration of the solar system and consolidation of off-Earth outposts. Over the next century, distances of 50 AU could be reached by human crews but only if resources are brought to bear by international consortia. INTRODUCTION years hence, if that much3, usually – and rightly – that policy goals and technologies "Where there is no vision the people perish.” will change so radically on longer time scales – Proverbs, 29:181 that further extrapolation must be relegated to the realm of science fiction – or fantasy. There is a great deal of new interest in However, as we have now entered the sec- space and space travel with the recent (Feb. ond century of aeronautics, we have a base- 2004) publication of the Aldridge Commis- line to look back on. We can look at what sion Report2, efforts on developing current people thought might happen in the previous space tourism, and the ongoing series of hundred years, what really did happen – and missions to provide scientific exploration why, and, perhaps more to the point, what it (notably of Mercury, Mars, Saturn, and cost. Pluto). NASA undergoes a “road mapping” Especially following the technical gains in activity on three-year centers that feed into rocketry and atomic power brought about by the overall Agency Strategic Plans, and this the second world war, there was a great deal type of planning has been extended in the of speculation of what we could, and would, recent work of the Aldridge Commission. do in space. Historically, space exploration Nonetheless, these exercises typically has always been aligned with an outward project only into a “far future” of typically 20 look. In the beginning, the vision was of 1 manned flights to earth orbit and beyond. formance required of the Crew Exploration While that outlook gave way to robotic Vehicle (CEV) if it is to be up to that task. probes always going to a destination first, it has always, at least to the majority of people, Key Mission Elements been with the idea that eventually humans would follow. For any mission there are four key ele- ments: the case for going, the means to go, The Art of Prediction an agreement to go by all stakeholders, and a source of funds sufficient to finance the Future predictions can, and many times, expedition. are misleading. An example is the prediction The reason for going for the Apollo mis- from the early days of the automobile that it sions was the geopolitical situation while the would be soon supplanted by personal air- reason for going for robotic missions has planes for local travel, a scenario yet to be been a combination of supporting Apollo borne out. At the same time, such predic- goals (early on), science mixed with geopoli- tions, if grounded in limits imposed by phys- tics (the U.S. and Soviet Union were both ics and chemistry and for which there is a sending missions to the Moon, Venus, and technology path, can work out. Usually, the Mars early on), and science with some level implementation is not as easy as originally of lingering international competition (Mars thought because the Devil always is in the Express and Mars Global Surveyor) and in- details. An example is Von Braun’s 6400- ternational cooperation (Cassini/Huygens). metric ton ferry vehicles for carrying 39.4 The means for going, space technology, metric tons to a 102-km orbit for building has a long history6 but significantly grew from Mars transfer vehicles4, 5. The propellants for the V-2 work of World War II and later inter- three stages were nitric acid and hydrazine. continental ballistic missile (ICBM) develop- The Space Shuttle is a single vehicle with ment programs during the Cold War. The detachable solid rocket boosters (using solid end of that geopolitical competition combined propellant) and a throwaway main tank car- with the current lack of deep-space commer- rying liquid oxygen (LOX) and liquid hydro- cial activity and limited Earth-orbital satellite gen (LH2). It is a 2040-metric ton vehicle that markets has led to slower development in can carry 24.4 metric tons to a 204-km orbit. many areas, especially where radiation The Shuttle has better performance but with hardness of electronics is an issue. less cargo because a realistic altitude is Stakeholders include advocates of a mis- higher than Von Braun envisioned. Von sion, non-advocate reviewers (whose job is Braun also envisioned the driving cost for his to see that invested monies are well spent), Mars mission being the $500M for 5,303,850 those who are forwarding funds, and those metric tons of propellant for the ferry ships to who can be impacted positively by success transport propellant and supplies to Earth and negatively by failure. A well thought out orbit (this translates to ~$3.6B FY96$) during strategy includes all stakeholders and pro- the 950 flights by 46 vessels in eight months vides both framework and substance of an (one ferry flight every 10 days, 6 ferries as- agreement to do the mission. sumed to be out of commission at any given Finally, there must be a source of funds time). Given the historical costs of building sufficient and available in the needed time- and operating four Space Shuttles, these are phasing to support the endeavor. Such pro- obviously not the resilient, cost-effective ve- grammatic support has typically come from hicles Von Braun had in mind. However, his the government exclusively for non- calculations may give some insight into some communications satellites. Typically new of the top level requirements of a human missions have significant new technologies mission to Mars that may translate into per- that require implementation (and sometimes 2 DRIVERS Science Questions Mission Science Objectives Distance / Objective Questions Time = Science Measurement Objectives Speed Required Instruments/Crew Instrument/Crew Resources and Data link Requirements Mission and Spacecraft Requirements Operational Data Product lifetime Analysis Product Science Result FIG. 1: Answering solar system science questions is a “system of systems” problem. unanticipated development) and involve the the Earth-moon system will be driven by, next step in a non-routine, non-recurring and/or framed in terms of, science return scenario of exploration. Costing of such en- from various solar system bodies. While be- deavors is tricky at best and requires some ginning with the Moon and Mars, the es- “adequate” level of reserves that can be poused vision in principal reaches throughout drawn upon to support the resolution of un- the solar system. The science objectives are anticipated development problems. At the thus the generic drivers that trace down same time, some members of the through the hardware requirements. Appro- stakeholder community will be pressing to priate analyses should then be capable of keep outlays as low as possible. While such providing results that answer the posed tensions are “obvious”, space missions, as questions. Demonstration of such closure (at with other large engineering endeavors, in- least in principle) is part of the strategy that volve large sums of money that are not easily must be developed up front (Figure 1). The turned off mid-project if the budget is ex- global requirements that drive the mission ceeded. Overruns and missed schedules design, implementing technologies, and es- are, and have been, tolerated on many indi- pecially cost include: (1) how far are we go- vidual programs, because the termination ing, how long can we take, is this a flyby, cost can be too high if sufficient funds have rendezvous, or return mission, i.e. what total already been spent. However, such overages velocity change capability is required, (2) can put a programmatic end to follow-on what are the data link requirements, band- missions. width, coverage continuity, and (3) what is the required operational lifetime – driven by System of Systems both point (1) and reserve requirements – and including hardware, autonomy, sparing Currently, and for much of the foresee- philosophy, and consumables, both for the able future, deep-space missions (defined as mission and for a human crew, if there is non-Earth orbit), and certainly those beyond one. 3 THE PAST Those who seen to think that the Moon is the goal of interplanetary travel should "Those who cannot remember the past are remember that the Solar system contains condemned to repeat it.” – G. Santayana7 eight other planets, at least thirty moons and some thousands of asteroids. The Beginnings total area of the major bodies is about 250 times that of the Earth, though the The conquest of the solar system has four giant planets probably do not pos- been a favorite theme of science fiction writ- sess stable surfaces on which landings ers for well over a hundred years.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Space Launch System for Exploration and Science. K
    45th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2014) 2234.pdf THE SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM FOR EXPLORATION AND SCIENCE. K. Klaus1, M. S. Elsperman1, B. B. Donahue1, K. E. Post1, M. L. Raftery1, and D. B. Smith1, 1The Boeing Company, 13100 Space Center Blvd, Houston TX 77059, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], mi- [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Introduction: The Space Launch System (SLS) is same time which will simplify mission design and re- the most powerful rocket ever built and provides a duce launch costs. One of the key features of the SLS critical heavy-lift launch capability enabling diverse in cislunar space is performance to provide “dual-use”, deep space missions. This exploration class vehicle i.e. Orion plus 15t of any other payload. launches larger payloads farther in our solar system An opportunity exists to deliver payload to the lu- and faster than ever before. Available fairing diameters nar surface or lunar orbit on the unmanned 2017 range from 5 m to 10 m; these allow utilization of ex- MPCV/ SLS test flight (~4.5t of mass margin exists for isting systems which reduces development risks, size this flight). Concepts of this nature can be done for limitations and cost. SLS injection capacity shortens less than Discovery class mission budgets (~$450M) mission travel time. Enhanced capabilities enable a and may be done as a joint venture by the NASA Sci- variety of missions including human exploration, plan- ence Mission Directorate and Human Exploration Op- etary science, astrophysics, heliophysics, planetary erations Mission Directorate using the successful Lu- defense, Earth observaton and commercial space en- nar Reconnaissance Orbiter as a program model.
    [Show full text]
  • Breakthrough Propulsion Study Assessing Interstellar Flight Challenges and Prospects
    Breakthrough Propulsion Study Assessing Interstellar Flight Challenges and Prospects NASA Grant No. NNX17AE81G First Year Report Prepared by: Marc G. Millis, Jeff Greason, Rhonda Stevenson Tau Zero Foundation Business Office: 1053 East Third Avenue Broomfield, CO 80020 Prepared for: NASA Headquarters, Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) and NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Washington, DC 20546 June 2018 Millis 2018 Grant NNX17AE81G_for_CR.docx pg 1 of 69 ABSTRACT Progress toward developing an evaluation process for interstellar propulsion and power options is described. The goal is to contrast the challenges, mission choices, and emerging prospects for propulsion and power, to identify which prospects might be more advantageous and under what circumstances, and to identify which technology details might have greater impacts. Unlike prior studies, the infrastructure expenses and prospects for breakthrough advances are included. This first year's focus is on determining the key questions to enable the analysis. Accordingly, a work breakdown structure to organize the information and associated list of variables is offered. A flow diagram of the basic analysis is presented, as well as more detailed methods to convert the performance measures of disparate propulsion methods into common measures of energy, mass, time, and power. Other methods for equitable comparisons include evaluating the prospects under the same assumptions of payload, mission trajectory, and available energy. Missions are divided into three eras of readiness (precursors, era of infrastructure, and era of breakthroughs) as a first step before proceeding to include comparisons of technology advancement rates. Final evaluation "figures of merit" are offered. Preliminary lists of mission architectures and propulsion prospects are provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office May 1988
    CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE MAY 1988 A SPECIAL STUDY THE NASA PROGRAM IN THE 1990s AND BEYOND The Congress of the United States Congresssional Budget Of'f'ice NOTES All costs are expressed in 1988 dollars of budget authority, unless otherwise noted. All years are fiscal years, except when applied to launch schedules. PREFACE The United States space program stands at a crossroads. The momentum of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) program over the last 20 years has brought NASA to a point where new activities will require substantial increases in the agency's budget. Critics of the NASA program have called for even more ambi- tious goals, most prominently an expansion of manned space flight to the Moon or Mars. Fiscal concerns, however, may limit even the more modest set of activities envisioned by NASA. This special study, requested by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Trans- portation, examines the broad options for the U.S. space program in the 1990s. In keeping with the mandate of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to provide objective nonpartisan analysis, the report makes no recommendations. David H. Moore, of CBO's Natural Resources and Commerce Division, prepared the report under the supervision of Everett M. Ehrlich. Frances M. Lussier of CBO's National Security Division and Michael Sieverts of CBO's Budget Analysis Division provided valu- able comments and assistance. Many outside reviewers made useful comments and criticisms. Amanda Balestrieri edited the manuscript. Margaret Cromartie prepared early drafts of the report, and Kathryn Quattrone prepared the final draft for publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Propulsion System Modeling for the Proposed Prometheus 1 Mission
    NASA/TM—2005-213892 AIAA–2005–3891 Electric Propulsion System Modeling for the Proposed Prometheus 1 Mission Douglas Fiehler QSS Group, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio Ryan Dougherty Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California David Manzella Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio September 2005 The NASA STI Program Office . in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected the advancement of aeronautics and space papers from scientific and technical science. The NASA Scientific and Technical conferences, symposia, seminars, or other Information (STI) Program Office plays a key part meetings sponsored or cosponsored by in helping NASA maintain this important role. NASA. The NASA STI Program Office is operated by • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, Langley Research Center, the Lead Center for technical, or historical information from NASA’s scientific and technical information. The NASA programs, projects, and missions, NASA STI Program Office provides access to the often concerned with subjects having NASA STI Database, the largest collection of substantial public interest. aeronautical and space science STI in the world. The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- mechanism for disseminating the results of its language translations of foreign scientific research and development activities. These results and technical material pertinent to NASA’s are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report mission. Series, which includes the following report types: Specialized services that complement the STI • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of Program Office’s diverse offerings include completed research or a major significant creating custom thesauri, building customized phase of research that present the results of databases, organizing and publishing research NASA programs and include extensive data results .
    [Show full text]
  • Comet/Asteroid Protection System (CAPS): Preliminary Space-Based System Concept and Study Results
    NASA/TM-2005-213758 Comet/Asteroid Protection System (CAPS): Preliminary Space-Based System Concept and Study Results Daniel D. Mazanek, Carlos M. Roithmayr, and Jeffrey Antol Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia Sang-Young Park, Robert H. Koons, and James C. Bremer Swales Aerospace, Inc., Hampton, Virginia Douglas G. Murphy, James A. Hoffman, Renjith R. Kumar, and Hans Seywald Analytical Mechanics Associates, Inc., Hampton, Virginia Linda Kay-Bunnell and Martin R. Werner Joint Institute for Advancement of Flight Sciences (JIAFS) The George Washington University, Hampton, Virginia Matthew A. Hausman Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research The University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado Jana L. Stockum San Diego State University, San Diego, California May 2005 The NASA STI Program Office . in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected advancement of aeronautics and space science. The papers from scientific and technical NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) conferences, symposia, seminars, or other Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA meetings sponsored or co-sponsored by NASA. maintain this important role. • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, The NASA STI Program Office is operated by technical, or historical information from NASA Langley Research Center, the lead center for NASA’s programs, projects, and missions, often scientific and technical information. The NASA STI concerned with subjects having substantial Program Office provides access to the NASA STI public interest. Database, the largest collection of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. The Program Office is • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- also NASA’s institutional mechanism for language translations of foreign scientific and disseminating the results of its research and technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.
    [Show full text]
  • 982-R120461 October 1, 2005
    982-R120461 October 1, 2005 PROMETHEUS PROJECT National Aeronautics and Space Administration Final Report Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California [This page intentionally left blank] 982-R120461 PROMETHEUS PROJECT OCTOBER 1, 2005 FINAL REPORT Signature Page Name Title Date Signature Randall Taylor Prometheus Project Closeout Manager i 982-R120461 PROMETHEUS PROJECT OCTOBER 1, 2005 FINAL REPORT [This page intentionally left blank] ii 982-R120461 PROMETHEUS PROJECT OCTOBER 1, 2005 FINAL REPORT Acknowledgement The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), a division of the California Institute of Technology, manages the Prometheus Project for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Prometheus Nuclear Systems Program. iii 982-R120461 PROMETHEUS PROJECT OCTOBER 1, 2005 FINAL REPORT [This page intentionally left blank] iv 982-R120461 PROMETHEUS PROJECT OCTOBER 1, 2005 FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Identification................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Summary......................................................................................................1 1.3 Project History .........................................................................................................2 1.4 Scope of Final Report ..............................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Interstellar Travel Or Even 1.3 Mlbs at Launch
    Terraforming Mars: By Aliens? Astronomy 330 •! Sometime movies are full of errors. •! But what can you do? Music: Rocket Man– Elton John Online ICES Question •! ICES forms are available online, so far 39/100 Are you going to fill out an ICES form before the students have completed it. deadline? •! I appreciate you filling them out! •! Please make sure to leave written comments. I a)! Yes, I did it already. find these comments the most useful, and typically b)! Yes, sometime today that’s where I make the most changes to the c)! Yes, this weekend course. d)! Yes, I promise to do it before the deadline of May6th! e)! No, I am way too lazy to spend 5 mins to help you or future students out. Final Final •! In this classroom, Fri, May 7th, 0800-1100. •! A normal-sized sheet of paper with notes on both •! Will consist of sides is allowed. –! 15 question on Exam 1 material. •! Exam 1and 2 and last year’s final are posted on –! 15 question on Exam 2 material. class website (not Compass). –! 30 questions from new material (Lect 20+). –! +4 extra credit questions •! I will post a review sheet Friday. •! A total of 105 points, i.e. 5 points of extra credit. •! Final Exam grade is based on all three sections. •! If Section 1/2 grade is higher than Exam 1/2 grade, then it will replace your Exam 1/2 grade. Final Papers Outline •! Final papers due at BEGINNING of discussion •! Rockets: how to get the most bang for the buck.
    [Show full text]
  • Entire Issue in PDF Format
    AMERICAN RANDONNEUR VOLUME 23 • ISSUE #3 FALL 2020 IN THIS Bikepacking the WestX Trail, 2020 — JAY FICHIALOS Cycling During the Novel Coronavirus Pandemic — MARY FOLEY ISSUE High Hopes Dashed but a Silver Lining Emerges — DAVID NALL NEW, Northern Transcontinental Mid July to Mid August 34 days, 3,700 miles, 110 miles per day We changed 1,000 miles of this route and added two more days across the midwestern states. This tour begins in Everett, Washington and crosses the northern states of Washington, Idaho, Montana, Pacific Atlantic Cycling Tour Wyoming, South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, www.pactour.com Vermont, Massachusetts before ending in Portsmouth, Lon Haldeman and Susan Notorangelo New Hampshire. This tour is almost filled with Contact us... 262-736-2453 50 riders on the waiting list [email protected] Southern Transcontinental Planning Ahead for 2021 Celebrating Lon and Susan’s 100th Cycling Event Across America Due to the ever changing Covid-19 virus Early September to early October This will be a 27 day tour from San Diego, California to restrictions all tours and dates are subject Tybee Island (Savannah) Georgia. Most days average to change. 110 miles. We will cross the country through a variety of terrain and visit many historical sites along the way. PAC tour will have a full schedule of popular tours for the 2021 season including our Arizona Desert Cycling Camp. Many of these tours have been filling up one year in advance. We are listing these tours now so you can Andes to the Amazon in Peru prepare to sign up when registration opens.
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenge of Interstellar Travel the Challenge of Interstellar Travel
    The challenge of interstellar travel The challenge of interstellar travel ! Interstellar travel - travel between star systems - presents one overarching challenge: ! The distances between stars are enormous compared with the distances which our current spacecraft have travelled ! Voyager I is the most distant spacecraft, and is just over 100 AU from the Earth ! The closest star system (Alpha Centauri) is 270,000 AU away! ! Also, the speed of light imposes a strict upper limit to how fast a spacecraft can travel (300,000 km/s) ! in reality, only light can travel this fast How long does it take to travel to Alpha Centauri? Propulsion Ion drive Chemical rockets Chemical Nuclear drive Solar sail F = ma ! Newton’s third law. ! Force = mass x acceleration. ! You bring the mass, your engine provides the force, acceleration is the result The constant acceleration case - plus its problems ! Let’s take the case of Alpha Centauri. ! You are provided with an ion thruster. ! You are told that it provides a constant 1g of acceleration. ! Therefore, you keep accelerating until you reach the half way point before reversing the engine and decelerating the rest of the way - coming to a stop at Alpha Cen. ! Sounds easy? Relativity and nature’s speed limit ! What does it take to maintain 1g of accelaration? ! At low velocities compared to light to accelerate a 1000kg spacecraft at 1g (10ms-2) requires 10,000 N of force. ! However, as the velocity of the spacecraft approaches the velocity of light relativity starts to kick in. ! The relativistic mass can be written as γ x mass, where γ is the relativistic Lorentz factor.
    [Show full text]
  • The HARPS Search for Earth-Like Planets in the Habitable Zone I
    A&A 534, A58 (2011) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117055 & c ESO 2011 Astrophysics The HARPS search for Earth-like planets in the habitable zone I. Very low-mass planets around HD 20794, HD 85512, and HD 192310, F. Pepe1,C.Lovis1, D. Ségransan1,W.Benz2, F. Bouchy3,4, X. Dumusque1, M. Mayor1,D.Queloz1, N. C. Santos5,6,andS.Udry1 1 Observatoire de Genève, Université de Genève, 51 ch. des Maillettes, 1290 Versoix, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected] 2 Physikalisches Institut Universität Bern, Sidlerstrasse 5, 3012 Bern, Switzerland 3 Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris, UMR7095 CNRS, Université Pierre & Marie Curie, 98bis Bd Arago, 75014 Paris, France 4 Observatoire de Haute-Provence/CNRS, 04870 St. Michel l’Observatoire, France 5 Centro de Astrofísica da Universidade do Porto, Rua das Estrelas, 4150-762 Porto, Portugal 6 Departamento de Física e Astronomia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, Portugal Received 8 April 2011 / Accepted 15 August 2011 ABSTRACT Context. In 2009 we started an intense radial-velocity monitoring of a few nearby, slowly-rotating and quiet solar-type stars within the dedicated HARPS-Upgrade GTO program. Aims. The goal of this campaign is to gather very-precise radial-velocity data with high cadence and continuity to detect tiny signatures of very-low-mass stars that are potentially present in the habitable zone of their parent stars. Methods. Ten stars were selected among the most stable stars of the original HARPS high-precision program that are uniformly spread in hour angle, such that three to four of them are observable at any time of the year.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstellar Spaceflight
    SPACEFLIGHT TOMORROW Interstellar Can We Travel to Other Stars? Small self-replicating probes could be launched on interstellar journeys. Creating a galactic Internet may yield even greater benefits by Timothy Ferris iving as we do in technologically triumphant times, we are inclined to NEAREST STARS to the solar system view interstellar spaceflight as a technical challenge, like breaking the are depicted in this view of the Milky Way galaxy as seen from 500 light- Lsound barrier or climbing Mount Everest—something that will no years above the galactic plane. The doubt be difficult but feasible, given the right resources and resourcefulness. green lines between the stars (inset) represent high-bandwidth radio This view has much to recommend it. Unmanned interstellar travel has, in a sense, beams in a hypothetical communi- already been achieved, by the Pioneer 10 and 11 and Voyager 1 and 2 probes, which cations network linking alien civiliza- were accelerated by their close encounters with Jupiter to speeds in excess of the sun’s tions. Such an interstellar network escape velocity and are outward-bound forever. By interstellar standards, these space- would allow intelligent species to craft are slow: Voyager 1, the speediest of the four at 62,000 kilometers per hour share knowledge without incurring (39,000 miles per hour), will wander for several tens of thousands of years before it the tremendous expense of traveling encounters another star. But the Wright brothers’ first airplane wasn’t particularly to other stars. speedy either. A manned interstellar spacecraft that improved on Voyager’s velocity by the same 1,000-fold increment by which Voyager improved on the Kitty Hawk flights could reach nearby stars in a matter of decades, if a way could be found to pay its exorbitant fuel bill.
    [Show full text]
  • Another Unit of Distance (I Like This One Better): Light Year
    How far away are the nearest stars? Last time: • Distances to stars can be measured via measurement of parallax (trigonometric parallax, stellar parallax) • Defined two units to be used in describing stellar distances (parsec and light year) Which stars are they? Another unit of distance (I like this A new unit of distance: the parsec one better): light year A parsec is the distance of a star whose parallax is 1 arcsecond. A light year is the distance a light ray travels in one year A star with a parallax of 1/2 arcsecond is at a distance of 2 parsecs. A light year is: • 9.460E+15 meters What is the parsec? • 3.26 light years = 1 parsec • 3.086 E+16 meters • 206,265 astronomical units The distances to the stars are truly So what are the distances to the stars? enormous • If the distance between the Earth and Sun were • First measurements made in 1838 (Friedrich Bessel) shrunk to 1 cm (0.4 inches), Alpha Centauri • Closest star is Alpha would be 2.75 km (1.7 miles) away Centauri, p=0.75 arcseconds, d=1.33 parsecs= 4.35 light years • Nearest stars are a few to many parsecs, 5 - 20 light years 1 When we look at the night sky, which So, who are our neighbors in space? are the nearest stars? Altair… 5.14 parsecs = 16.8 light years Look at Appendix 12 of the book (stars nearer than 4 parsecs or 13 light years) The nearest stars • 34 stars within 13 light years of the Sun • The 34 stars are contained in 25 star systems • Those visible to the naked eye are Alpha Centauri (A & B), Sirius, Epsilon Eridani, Epsilon Indi, Tau Ceti, and Procyon • We won’t see any of them tonight! Stars we can see with our eyes that are relatively close to the Sun A history of progress in measuring stellar distances • Arcturus … 36 light years • Parallaxes for even close stars • Vega … 26 light years are tiny and hard to measure • From Abell “Exploration of the • Altair … 17 light years Universe”, 1966: “For only about • Beta Canum Venaticorum .
    [Show full text]