We know that at a certain point, G-forces will kill a human being. I believe we can survive 20 Gs, but I don't know for how long. that said, how much acceleration can humans handle in space travel..and how long will such acceleration take us to reach Mars?
The idea, I think is to accellerate at a reasonable rate, and use that accelleration as artificial gravity. Then flip the craft around, and decelerate at a reasonable rate, and use that deceleration as artificial gravity. At 20 G's, I'd weigh in excess of 4000 pounds. I don't think that's survivable for any extended period.
Traveling at high speeds is really unsafe as this article explains: In the previous chapter I showed how it was impossible to propel a spaceship to speeds near the speed of light. We saw that to propel NASA’s space shuttle to a speed 50% of the speed of light would consume the same amount of energy that the whole U.S. consumes in 108 years. (To slow the ship down would take another 108 years worth of energy.) I also showed that our most powerful fuel (nuclear power) would still be over 98 times too heavy (power-to-mass ratio) to get the ship to the desired speed. Some people, however, will still insist that technology can overcome all obstacles. They believe that traveling near the speed of light is an obtainable goal. Most of these people don’t realize that even if these speeds could be obtained, ultra high-speed space travel is still unrealistic. There is another limiting factor that most people have not considered. In ultra high-speed travel, speed itself becomes our biggest enemy. Ultra high-speeds cause three major problems. First, higher speeds increase the damage brought on by a collision. Second, higher speeds reduce the pilot’s ability to detect objects in his path. Third, higher speeds reduce the pilot’s ability to avoid objects once they have been detected. Running into large objects is bad at any speed, but running into something as small as a grain of sand can be destructive for high-speed travelers. In 1983, a small paint flake struck the space shuttle Challenger with such force that it gouged a small crater in the front window4.1 (see the picture above). The damage was so great the window had to be replaced after the flight (costing $50,000). Many windows, in fact, have been replaced over the years because of this problem. It is the speed of the impact that makes these small objects so destructive. If the shuttle had been hit by an object 1/35th the weight (mass) of an aspirin, it would have struck with the impact of a .30 caliber bullet. As you can see ... ultra high-speed impacts can be devastating to a spaceship. The impact by a pebble flying at 90% of the speed of light will produce energy equal to seven atomic bombs. There is no way of building a spaceship that can withstand this type of impact. Since, there will never be a way of being able to detect these small objects at great distances, ultra high-speed travel is not a realistic possibility. http://www.biblehelp.org/ufo4.htm Your spacecraft would also need to have a shield made of iron 1 mile thick in order to withstand small particles at light speed.
Depends on method of travel. Here's my thought The faster you go the more mass you gain. This law prevents us traveling faster than the speed of light We know that Higs Boson field imparts and transfers mass So if let's say if we transfer the mass gained from speed to the outside and directly in front of the ship then the mass in front of us will pull the ship(that now almost has no mass) forward. The faster the ship goes the more mass it gains. The more mass it gains the stronger the pull will be which will of course increase the speed of the ship So, if we were using this meathod, the answer would be unlimited
Just as long as the ship in front of you dosen't hit any random hydrogen atoms or specks of dust you might be okay---even though you'd have to live past 108 years.
Not necessarily. Mass can never reach the speed of light because the faster it goes, the heavier it gets. Soon it will come to the point that the mass will overcome speed and the object is stopped. If you just transfer the mass gained in front of the ship, you can use the mass to pull the ship forward.furthermore you can also transfer the mass of the ship too, making it have no mass It's like mass effect
Over the long term humans can only handle 1G of acceleration. But we can handle a few minutes at higher acceleration. Time of trip to Mars at 1G (check link for answer with travel times to other planets of the solar system): How fast will 1g get you there?
gaining g's from speed is only possible because of acceleration. After you obtain your desired speed you can keep it constant
yes, but my question was, if we factor in the max Gs we want humans to tolerate, how fast can we get to Mars without risking physical damage to the astronauts? keep in mind we would also have to decelerate at a certain point, and that would also create G forces
who knows. I just started studying engineer and haven't come across calculus Yet. But for someone to reach Mars in 2 weeks, you need to go 416,666mph. but the thing is.g force gained is mainly based on mass. Like I said, the faster you go, the heavier you get. We dont have to worry about mass so we don't have to worry about the g force because there won't be any
we should strive to get to Mars in one year. what sort of speed would we have to reach if we accelerated for the 1st half of the trip and decelerated for the 2nd half, total trip being one year?
Russia is building a nuclear rocket that can go to mars in 1 month. Its scheduled to be built in 1018 and by 2020 they will be readying for the mission
I'm sure they have ways the lessen the Gs Gained and if not Its obviously possible from calculations They probably push the human body to its limits
Those are problems of today. They will eventually be over come. As for humans being able to tolerate it, maybe some kind of suit? - - - Updated - - - Is that like some sort of perpetual motion machine?
The spacecraft has to accelerate and then decelerate before it reaches its destination. Assuming an acceleration equivalent to earth gravity, the maximum theoretical travel time would be 3 days: http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2012/08/30/flying-to-mars-in-three-days/ However, this would be extremely wasteful in terms of fuel. In case anyone was curious, it would take 1 year of constant acceleration at 1 earth gravity to reach 77 percent of the speed of light. 2 years to reach 97 percent of the speed of light. Travelling this fast would have the additional benefit of time dilation, meaning the occupants could reach their destination without physically aging.
Human Beings bodies cannot survive lon term exposure to any G-Force over 1 for much more than a few weeks as this wreaks havoc with our circulatory system. Gradual acceleration is the key but Interstellar Travel using any system of Propulsion is not viable. For that we would need to take inertia out of the equason...thus Gravitic Drives. AboveAlpha - - - Updated - - - Passage of Time on Earth would be an issue. Years would pass on Earth actually decades to centuries when traveling at such velocities. AboveAlpha
The perceived mass gain is only for a "stationary" observer. The person traveling would perceive no mass gain of themselves or their spaceship.
Yes you're mostly correct, I wrote the following before reading your post: To get to Mars it wouldn't be a g-force problem... minimum distance 34 million miles. At just over 1g, you gain 22mph every second (hence why falling a few seconds can be lethal). After a minute, you are going 1,320 miles per hour. After an hour, 79,200 mph. After a day, 1,900,800 miles per hour. The distance traveled is going to be about half of that value times the hours traveled, so a trip to mars would take a couple days with constant 1g acceleration and subsequent deceleration. But here's the part where we defer... just using arithmetic, your speed of light thing doesn't fit for me. Are you considering some other values that require you to not have constant acceleration? Speed of light is ~300,000,000 m/s, acceleration of gravity is 10.8 m/s^2. You can simply divide them for seconds, and then convert those seconds into days (divide by 60, then 60, then 24). I get 322ish. Overall conclusion though: g-forces aren't the limiting factor in space travel.
Say, they are researching things like EM Drives now. But, NASA says not to get our hopes up. But for space cruises that 1G acceleration or perhaps a bit less would still be a must! Take a load off your feet while still interacting with your environment in a normal way.
