6 Reasons Space Travel Will Always Suck
We love movies about space, but are continually bored by actual space travel. When's the last time you rushed to the TV to watch a space shuttle take off?
No, we all seem to be waiting for the future of space travel to get here, a future of huge, comfortable starships hauling us to other planets where adventure awaits. Hopefully ships with lasers, that can destroy other ships.
Unfortunately, it appears that even for your grandchildren, space travel will really, really suck. Mainly because...

The Fantasy:
If Battlestar Galactica taught us anything, it's that the starships are like the Love Boat, if it were filled with never ending robot orgies and counterproductive human sexual drama. It's perfectly natural for the crew to spend their off hours doing some space romance, or as experts call it: "Boldly going where Kirk has gone before."

Places like the cavern o' dicks.
The Reality:
Let's start with the physical challenges. First of all, being in space lowers your blood pressure and slows down the flow of blood overall. That means you almost certainly can't get a boner. So there's that.

"I'll take that challenge."
If you somehow are able to achieve a zero-G erection, you'd better damned well make sure you've got multiple forms of birth control in effect. Think about it; they're not going to stock an interstellar mission with tens of millions of dollars of extra supplies on the off chance an extra crew member will pop out of somebody's womb. But that's not the only reason a pregnancy in space would be bad news.
Experiments done on mice embryos have shown that a lack of gravity messes with an egg's ability to properly develop. Add to that the markedly higher doses of radiation an astronaut is typically exposed to, and the result is not going to be something whose picture you'd want to keep in your wallet.

Of course, we've avoided the most obvious reason: you don't have to have spent time around too many dating couples at the office to know how it screws up the team dynamic. Take the bickering and innuendo and breakups and crying, and imagine being stuck with that while sealed inside a huge metal tube for several years.

Dead. Both of them.
Even now, NASA doesn't allow married couples to go on the same trip (there has been one exception, where the couple got married right before launch and it was too late to change the plans). As NASA knows, the true power of love is its ability to make even brilliant, highly skilled people turn into kidnap/murder plotting, 500 mile driving, diaper wearing crazy people.
That simply can't happen on a starship--romantic entanglements would have to be forbidden. You'll have to be compatible with these people, if for no other reason than to make it less awkward when you're drinking their recycled pee.

"So... how 'bout them sports teams?"
Hey, speaking of recycled pee...

The Fantasy:
Big, comfy chairs, high ceilings, carpet. The Starship Enterprise is basically a damned star-hopping cruise ship.

The Reality:
Remember the Nostromo, the dim, filthy, depressing ship from Alien? Imagine that, but much, much more cramped. The luxurious starship from Star Trek is based on a couple of technologies that, as far as we know, will never, ever be possible:
A. Replicators that can instantly manufacture anything at all--food, clothing, spare parts--out of thin air;
B. A virtually unlimited, self-contained energy supply that requires very little room for storage.
Until somebody invents those things--and that may very well require the work of a wizard--space ships will continue to look more like this:


Many tons of equipment, wires and hoses crammed into every nook and cranny, with the humans basically just in the way.
If you're on a craft that has to take a decades-long trip and come back with something other than two dozen skeletons floating around inside, then every single spare inch of space--even more so than what you see up there--will be devoted to storage. Fuel, food, spare parts, medical supplies, machines to recycle your water and air; those are the systems whose sharp corners you will continually be banging your elbow on every time you make a sudden movement.
Those pics are from the International Space Station, which actually isn't a fair comparison since they aren't having to include all of the stuff it'll take to 1) get your sorry ass to another solar system, 2) accommodate for the fact that you're years away from help or resupply and 3) house lots and lots more people--you'll need doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. So it'd be more like a submarine:

Everybody packed together like sardines. For years. Why wouldn't the designers throw in some extra head room to make the voyagers more comfortable? Because every extra bit of ship is going to cost somebody millions--just getting cargo into orbit on board the space shuttle costs $20,000 a pound. That's also why you'll be drinking your own pee.

Remember to keep your pinky out so as not to appear uncivilized.
Yeah, the pee drinking thing. Water is heavy. You can't store much of it, and what you have is carefully rationed and recycled. The space station recycles sweat, urine, general humidity in the air, everything. Bathing is done with a damp wash cloth. So maybe it's less submarine and more filthy pirate ship.

The Fantasy:
Hell, even the Nostromo had normal gravity on board, everybody walking around as if they're back home on Earth. In Star Trek, even their tiny shuttles have it. They're certainly not floating around the cabin like a bunch of dumbasses, slamming their head into a cabinet because they forgot to strap themselves down before they went to bed.

Man, those guys on the Nostromo had it good.
The Reality:
First of all, you do need gravity. Human bodies just fall apart without it. Without that constant working of your muscles due to gravity pulling you to the ground 24 hours a day, those muscles--including your heart--begin to shrink and your bones become brittle. Eventually you become so weak that the exertion of just sitting in a bed in normal Earth gravity will kill you.
Modern astronauts are able to counter the worst of these effects with heavy exercise, but if you're going to be gone for decades (and more on that in a moment), you're going to have to make your own gravity. The only plausible way we've ever come up with for doing this is to spin the freaking ship around so fast that it pins you to the floor.
If you've ever been on a carnival ride you're already familiar with the "centripetal force" that seems to be squishing you against the seat. For all practical purposes, that is gravity. So you'd be living in a spinning ring, where the outside wall is your floor.
If living for years on board a huge carnival ride sounds like a nightmarish puke-a-thon, well, it probably would be. You might also notice that the cartoon man up there is continually walking uphill, no matter where he goes. If you're going to have everybody living in the same area, that's about the only way to do it.

Presumably, if you tripped you would just fall and fall and fall.
Other designs feature multiple separate compartments, spinning opposite each other with a tether in between. Which could also work, until somebody needs to go from one compartment to the next, at which point they get to experience the awesome feeling of gravity shifting half way through their walk down the hall. Again, keep a well-stocked station of vomit buckets along the way.
But hey, who cares about physical comfort? Take one look out the window and your blues will go away! You're in space, baby!
The problem is...









One wonderful dating site you might like to try is__ militarylover*com __Granted I haven't
Replybeen in the online dating world in awhile but I met some really cool people and made some
great relationships from that site.
Wow, that's great. We're all so happy for you.
I do frequently have difficulty finding the energy to move my ass around. I blame Einstein.
ReplyThere's no procreation in space...There can always be sex in space.
ReplyALL HAIL THE SPACE-DRAGON!
ReplyHow much you wanna bet space-faring peoples of the future will worship this Paganic Deity, since they'll be at the mercy of nature...........once again?
on point #2: Einstein also theorized that space wasn't flat, as we typically imagine it, but curved. He theorized that there were wormholes in space that would allow you to travel through it instead of around it. If one were to somehow access these wormholes, they would be able to cut through space making the journey to wherever you're going much faster than without them. Though, i suppose it would be any ones guess as to where the wormhole came out and if it were near any where you wanted to go.
ReplyDibs on my next energy drink being named "Your Fat Ass Requires Infinite Energy".
ReplyAny time infinity is used, it's basically scientist's way of saying, "we have no friggin' clue, but we kinda think it's gonna be large". They weren't found until after this article was written, and they're still investigating the findings to be sure, but scientists in Europe have found sub-atomic particles that can travel faster than the speed of light, and light has mass, however small, as well.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesIt's crazy, but with physicists at the University of Washington moving particles forward in time and particles acting on stimulus in experiments that happened AFTER THE EXPERIMENT ITSELF, it would seem that science, and physics in particular, is truly powered by our ability to imagine it...or, it's so fantastical that we've yet to imagine anything that is truly, theoretically impossible, except traveling backward in time, but that may be only because our knowledge hasn't reached the point where we understand how it's possible.
exactly they are called nutrenos or something like that and they have proven that they are extremily fast they showed that these nutreonos arive at there destination 60 nano seconds before light one nano second is is like a thousandth of a second ie these travel 60,000 times faster then the speed of light
That was probably some experimental mistake, we can't be sure for now. And even if it's true the restricted relativity theory won't be wrong, it will just need a few adjustments. It has been proven using atomic cloks, one flying in a plane and one in Earth. At the end of the flight the two clocks weren't synchronized.
It must be taken into account that this rule only applies to acceleration. If you're already past the speed of light, it doesn't affect you.
#2 is ignoring length contraction (also to do with special relativity). The distance to Alpha Centauri would be shortened by the same factor that time back on earth is being multiplied by.
ReplyAt 0.999 times the speed of light, the distance is ~22.4 times shorter. Getting to Alpha Centauri would only take a couple of months, and the effect ramps up fast (less than a month at 0.9999c).
Of course that still means we have to get close to the speed of light, which could be a potential difficulty.
Just a POTENTIAL difficulty?
Actually, a space *station* would need to spin in order to create artificial gravity. A space *ship* would more likely maintain a constant acceleration as close as possible to 1g.
ReplyBy constantly accelerating at 9.8m/s/s it would seem to the passengers that the ship had normal earth gravity. Once the ship reached the halfway point to wherever is was going there would be a brief period of varying "gravity" as the ship was turned around to face the exact opposite direction, and then it would begin decelerating at 1g.
The only periods without gravity would be the start, mid-point and end of trips. The rest of the time there would seem to be normal earth gravity.
In theory - but if the distance is too far, then you would accelerate to your maximum possible speed (physically, or as a limitation of your ship's capabilities) long before the halfway point if you maintained a constant acceleration.
There's also the opposite obstacle to overcome: If you artificially limit your acceleration so as not to overdo the artificial gravity effect it creates, stopping your ship from reaching its maximum speed as quickly as possible, then the length of your trip is instantly multiplied. The same holds true for deceleration.
Well... there are those subatomic particles that recently broke the light barrier...
ReplyThe key word there is subatomic.
And there's a pretty good chance they didn't actually break the light barrier either. >_>
Warp Travel Theory has been making progress. Google "Miguel Alcubierre" or read "Warp Speed" by Travis S. Taylor
ReplyA WITCH! WITCHCRAFT!
Submarines now adays are pretty roomy in comparasin
Replywell all i have to say is we better get to work on a starship with multiple redundancies to prevent engine failure and equipped with lasers to destroy nuc sized objects while being able to take grenades while equipped with artificial gravity and a tv room while being able to use wormholes (or slipstream space as Halo puts it) to be able to make a light year trip in an hour or less.
Replyi'm sure someone at nasa could do it...or at least get us to mars to have an official space federation of planets.
Stupid, annoying colde-hearted reality, always ruining our wet childhood dreams!
Reply Hide All See All 3 Replies"wet childhood"?
Wet dreams
thats hot. im getting it out..
Speaking of Skywalker going from desert to Star cWars Top Gun, my favorite teen space flick is The Last Starfighter. The kid saves the universe, comes home to the trailer park, shows off his lizard space buddy, invites his girl to with him, then is immediately called back into space to save the universe again. A teen wet dream. (And all this for the gussied-up equivalent of B-17 tail gunner.)
ReplyA BEEEEEEEEEEEEEE SEVHUNTEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN BAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMMMMEEEEEER
"B. A virtually unlimited, self-contained energy supply that requires very little room for storage"
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesWell, once we manage a nuclear fusion where the output is significantly higher than the input, this is totally feasable. ATM, spacecrafts use fission, and the energy density of uranium is about 90 000 000 MJ per kg. For hydrogen, which we need for fusion, the energy density is about 300 000 000 MJ per kg.
What the hell are you talking about? We don't use fission for space travel, we use liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen, hydrazine, etc. These are rocket propellants and can be a combination of liquid or solid fuel. We are very very far away from harnessing nuclear fusion power.
Yes, but does that equal infinity?
I didn't realize that ATMs use fission ...
One question on the centripetal force gravity creation method...if there are no windows in the space craft which is spinning, and therefore no visual reference point outside of everything moving the exact same speed and exact same direction, how with the absence of inertia of any kind would a person become motion sick? To the person inside the spinning craft everything would look as if it is standing perfectly still save the effects that the centripetal force would have. Sure it would be disorienting as all hell to have an "open" floor plan like in 2001: A Space Odyssey, but if there was an enclosed hallway it wouldn't be noticeable. Even considering that you would always be walking uphill, the abilities of designers and architects to use perspective to trick the eye into not perceiving it could basically negate any disorienting effects whatsoever. Or am I completely misunderstanding how that would work?
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesI think getting dizzy has more to do with the fluids in your inner ears. Spinning really fast messes with them, which is why if you go get a spinny chair, close your eyes and spin, you'll still get dizzy.
@GammaJk but if the whole ship was spinning you wouldn't notice the difference in air so it would be less noticeable. after all, the earth spins and we dont get dizzy.
thats why we should make a REALLY f*****g big ship so it doesnt have to spin very fast to pin us to the floor and different areas would haves different gravity effects so we could increase the amount of studying we could do in 1 to 0Gs.
kind of like how the deathstar worked before it went kablooie.
kinda like that earth thing i've been reading about constantly spins?
Um, question: Is centripetal force anything like centrifugal force?
sex in space is possible, and as for the whole "cant get a boner" thing, i watched a documentary on this and astronauts said that since thrs no gravity ur blood evenly distributes around ur body resulting in not only getting a boner but not being able to get it to go away
Reply Hide All See All 3 Repliesthats kind of awesome.
Actually that's kind of terrifying. Look up priapism.
You won't think it's so awesome Jeg when they have to cut it off. That is the end result of having a boner that never goes away. When dick pill ads say see a doc if an erection lasts for more the 4 hours, they really really mean it.
The Gravity-Tron is my favorite ride that seemed to be what exactly the article explained about force and spinning fast and stuff.
ReplyI also remember #2 being a fact on The Magic School Bus, about the time difference on earth compared to time while in space...wait or was that Bill Nye the Science Guy?
I am totally depressed right now. Thanks.
Replyyeah this really put a damper on my childhood.
My childhood just died after a massive stab wound from reality