What is the one space mission you would love to see in your lifetime

[fsci123]

Then it still doesn't mean much. If you're breaking the light speed barrier, well, even 90% of C is then slow...

Breaking the light barrier dosnt meen fast you could go like 1 nanometer faster than c and its still aint going to matter.

 

[Dambuster]

Breaking the light barrier dosnt meen fast you could go like 1 nanometer faster than c and its still aint going to matter.

To quote my old physics teacher: "UNITS"

 

[T.Neo]

Ahem... one nanometer/second faster than c is still faster than c. And it is still superlumuinal. 0.1 c is subluminal.

Even without the blatant physics issues, 1 nanometer/second faster than c is still extremely fast...

 

[Linguofreak]

I guess this would be a good place to ask this; if there were two Hubbles (or whatever the next large, space-based telescope is), and they were placed in solar orbit, one ahead of Earth by six months, one behind Earth six months, so that the distance between them was approx. 186 million miles, would there be an advantage to the 'stereoscopic' view that provided?

This does relate to something I'd like to see: Send out a constellation of three Hipparcos-style probes on solar escape trajectories spaced 120 degrees apart. That way, instead of using a 1 AU baseline for parallax distance measurements, you're using a baseline that's constantly growing until any two of the three probes fail. (One failed probe would lead to the loss of ability to measure parallax of stars near the line defined by the two remaining probes, but would still allow some degree of parallax measurements for stars far from that line). The longer the baseline, the further out you can get accurate distance readings by parallax.

 

[fsci123]

Ahem... one nanometer/second faster than c is still faster than c. And it is still superlumuinal. 0.1 c is subluminal.

Even without the blatant physics issues, 1 nanometer/second faster than c is still extremely fast...

OH yeah i just remembered relativity issues

 

[Urwumpe]

OH yeah i just remembered relativity issues

Not really relativity. Rather: c is the constant of the vacuum speed of light. c + 1 nm/s is more than c. 0.1c is less than c.

Relativity comes in play, when you try to calculate how long you need to accelerate to exceed c.

 

[C3PO]

Y'know, I don't think it's economic reasons as much as it's political reasons. There is plenty enough money, it's just that nobody is really willing to spend it.

It's important to recognise that the annual defence budget of the USA is a probably more than even the most blatantly expensive Mars mission eventualities...

I know the $ is there. It's just not going to be put into space missions.

 

[Rtyh-12]

I guess this would be a good place to ask this; if there were two Hubbles (or whatever the next large, space-based telescope is), and they were placed in solar orbit, one ahead of Earth by six months, one behind Earth six months, so that the distance between them was approx. 186 million miles, would there be an advantage to the 'stereoscopic' view that provided?/QUOTE]

You could have 3d view of stuff, although I'm not really sure how much advantage this would give, because you could simply wait until the Earth is on the other side. Also, I guess you mean that one probe is 6 months in front of the other, because the way you suggested it, they would be both exactly in the same spot.

Back on topic, I would really like to see the manned Mars landing, and a thorough exploration of Europa would be nice too...

Relativity comes in play, when you try to calculate how long you need to accelerate to exceed c.

Which is impossible anyway, so we are talking nonsense anyway.

 

[Ghostrider]

Well, if we're in the realms of almost impossibilities I propose this: build me a fully functional TARDIS and I'll fly a mission to stop the Daleks for good.:thumbup:

 

[HAL9001]

yes a flight over light speed would be cool - but I would love to be on the first manned mars-mission.

 

[Eccentrus]

the first manned Jupiter landing?

 

[C3PO]

the first manned Jupiter landing?

I think I'll sit that one out. :rofl:

 

[Izack]

the first manned Jupiter landing?

Good luck with that! Make sure your GP Hull is fully sealed!

 

[Iberville]

The best space mission that I would like to see in my life is... me on a Virgin Galactic flight! Suborbital or orbital, I don't care!

 

[fsci123]

the first manned Jupiter landing?

WOW you got a really good education there:rofl:

 

[Eccentrus]

WOW you got a really good education there:rofl:

the best the third world could ever offer... oh well, to be able to see that, means that I'll never die anyway :rofl:

But seriously though, manned landing on Mars, my parents saw the Apollo-11 and I would want to experience the cry, the joy, the tears that these kind of feat of human intelligence will bring.

 

[fsci123]

I SAY the best scenario ever and the greatest achievement humanity will do any time soon...
LUNAR WARFARE
I really want to see a war on the moon

 

[T.Neo]

I really don't know what to say to that comment. I wouldn't know what to say to a comment about lunar warfare, and I wouldn't know what to say to a comment about wanting to see a war...

 

[fireballs619]

I SAY the best scenario ever and the greatest achievement humanity will do any time soon...
LUNAR WARFARE
I really want to see a war on the moon

Why would this even be an achievement? If anything, it would be a setback to further manned exploration of the stars. And you want to see this...:facepalm:

 

[fsci123]

I really don't know what to say to that comment. I wouldn't know what to say to a comment about lunar warfare, and I wouldn't know what to say to a comment about wanting to see a war...

IN a philosophical perspective... Triumphs are made in the ways we fight, nourish and end war... Rocks then arrows then swords then guns.... Land,Sea,Air... and the last place is space... If humans develop the logistic support and the money to fight the war on the moon will be the next great step in human history