Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

JoeBethersonton50504 t1_j3v4y54 wrote

100 light years away.

So if we were on that planet and looking at earth with a super powerful telescope, we’d be looking at the roaring 20s. I think. Science is hard.

144

MrDangerMan t1_j3v7xcg wrote

And if we then got on a spaceship that travels at the speed of light and set out to go check out Earth, we wouldn’t show up until 200 years after the events witnessed through the telescope.

64

d0ctorzaius t1_j3vevis wrote

But when we arrive we wouldn't have significantly aged at all.

30

isthatmyex t1_j3welaz wrote

If you rode a spaceship a light speed for 100 years. Wouldn't you age 100 years?

E: If you were then to look back at earth. It would appear as if nothing had changed at all.

14

Arcanorum t1_j3wffr5 wrote

The faster you travel, the more time dilates. At the speed of light, time does not move at all.

From an outside observers perspective it would take 100 years. For anyone on the ship it would be instantaneous, if you assume no acceleration or deceleration period.

31

Optimal-Grass-8989 t1_j3x2s0d wrote

So… how would you pilot the ship or address any issues that come up, like repairs?

−8

Arcanorum t1_j3x44eh wrote

In this scenario the ship is moving at the speed of light so it is not experiencing time, just like the people inside it.

It cannot breakdown while moving at lightspeed, because no time can pass to allow failures to occur.

But matter can't actually go the speed of light, only energy can, so this is all just a fun thought exercise.

26

RonBourbondi t1_j3xfz95 wrote

So at 90% of the speed of light how does one do repairs?

3

Arcanorum t1_j3xgw1b wrote

In theory, exactly the same as any other spaceship.

Anyone attempting repairs is operating in the same inertial reference as the ship, so from their perspective it's no different from repairing a ship at any other speed.

13

RonBourbondi t1_j3xh9ad wrote

But by the time they make the repair couldn't they have arrived?

0

Arcanorum t1_j3xhstn wrote

Yes. Depending on the strength of the time dilation, a repair may not be possible to complete before the journey is over.

But anyone capable of getting a ship near lightspeed would also have the physics and math knowledge necessary to calculate their level of time dilation, so they could make logical decisions regarding necessary repairs.

6

Chronic_In_somnia t1_j3zm4rc wrote

The hard part comes when you want to stop lol

1

Pineapple--Depressed t1_j406org wrote

My grandpa used to always say, "it ain't the fall that kills you, it's that sudden stop at the end that gets you..." Imagine how long it would take to safely decelerate from near lightspeed.

5

Optimal-Grass-8989 t1_j3x78ph wrote

That’s a long to say you’re speculating 😂

Edit: yes, I’m specifically referring to your speculating on matter going the speed of light, and yes I’m still laughing.

−18

Arcanorum t1_j3x8v2i wrote

Time dilation as you approach the speed of light is not speculation, it's fact. Time slows down heavily the closer you approach lightspeed and does not pass at all for anything that can actually reach it.

Any discussion of matter going the speed of light is speculation, because it is impossible in our current understanding of physics.

14

jschubart t1_j3xffn6 wrote

If you traveled at the speed of light, you would need to not have any mass. If you were to travel near the speed of light (e.g. 99.9% the speed of light), to you about 4.5 years would have passed. To everyone else, 100 years would have passed.

Here is a nice calculator:

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/time-dilation

8

d0ctorzaius t1_j3wf17p wrote

At or near light speed, time dilation becomes a factor, so it would take 100 years to an observer but to the people in the ship, it would seem like a lot less time.

6

isthatmyex t1_j3wfm1f wrote

But if you were on the ship, it would still be 100 years is my point.

−8

SomeInternetRando t1_j3winvj wrote

No, to you on the ship, you'd just teleport instantly. Or at slightly below the speed of light, it'd still be a lot quicker than 100 years.

>it would still be 100 years is my point

To an observer on earth. But not to you on the ship. If you had a telescope on a ship travelling towards earth near the speed of light, it may feel like a day to you (depending on speed), and if you looked at Earth through the telescope, it would look like Earth was going in fast-forward so fast that 100 years only takes one day.

8

dagbiker t1_j3wvzng wrote

No, from your point of view it would be instant.

2

black_flag_4ever t1_j3vtrvv wrote

So in about 25 years, if this planet studies earth, it might start observing nuclear explosions on our planet.

9

TuesdayShuffle t1_j3w6nsr wrote

fuck.......you think we can delete the images before they open them?

14

SandersSol t1_j3weayd wrote

Basically light is a time machine in a way, or maybe a time capsule.

/r/showerthoughts

3

isinedupcuzofrslash t1_j3w4m5r wrote

What if we use a high power telescope to look at this other earth and see what their roaring 20’s are like?

2

Flesh-Tower t1_j3xnu4c wrote

And if in 20 years or so they keep looking they will see flashes from all the nukes being used lol

1

Juice_231 t1_j3v5o0i wrote

Can we get working on light speed travel so we can wreck that one too? 😆🤕

40

ActionFlank t1_j3vdut5 wrote

We don't deserve to infect another world.

18

Wastedmindman t1_j3wsey6 wrote

With the focus on “planet in inhabitable zone” I have an inkling that we might be the baddies when we solve the travel part.

2

newarkian t1_j3vrug8 wrote

Nestle already has “dibs” on any water there..

23

FlatulenceIsAVirtue t1_j3wuyby wrote

Good exercise, but Red Dwarfs aren't great stars to live near.

  • They're unstable, ejecting radioactive crap all the time.

  • The habitable zone is very close to the star - like Mercury close - exposing you to the aforementioned crap

  • Planets around these stars are likely 'tidally locked', meaning one side is always getting baked. Life would need to 'hide' in places like the light-darkness line or the poles.

But, the search and find are a good exercise.

20

bonesnaps t1_j3xgjgv wrote

I could use an extra limb though, since I can shitpost faster with three hands instead of two.

Prep the rocket and cryo chambers Jeffy boy.

2

fucktrutin t1_j3v667x wrote

Both exhilarating and spooky.

10

VagrantShadow t1_j3w29iz wrote

I'm excited to see us finding more planets in the goldilocks zone in the Universe.

As many stars are out there in the Universe, we can't be just the lucky ones to have this nice neighborhood that we live in.

10

whistlingbatter t1_j3vs6r3 wrote

Plan(et) B is not reachable by humankind. Save Plan(et) A first, Earth.

8

Spotid1 t1_j3vvk7r wrote

So this isn’t actually true, we could reach it with the correct technology in a single lifetime.

1

whistlingbatter t1_j3vvrok wrote

"correct technology". good luck with that, and with people on board.

7

Spotid1 t1_j3vwb8q wrote

Special Relativity implies that you could reach a star 100 light years away in less than 100 years. It’s actually pretty interesting.

4

Afraid-Detail t1_j3w0pwc wrote

No it doesn’t? I’m curious how you came to that conclusion.

1

Spotid1 t1_j3w23wo wrote

This is relative to the traveler, not from earth. The closer you get to the speed of light, the faster you move through time itself.

10

Afraid-Detail t1_j3w3wor wrote

I see what you mean, I was incorrect. Thanks for clarifying.

8

Pillowtalk t1_j3wsri2 wrote

I want to see a high resolution photo of a exoplanet in the habitable zone. I wonder if NASA is working on that

4

jethroguardian t1_j43cg1m wrote

The next generation of telescopes on the drawing board is to be able to detect them via direct imaging. Think 2030's.

For actually seeing details like continents and clouds in a picture, you'd need a probe (20 years minimum) or a telescope at 100 times the Earth-Sun distance that uses the Sun's gravitational lensing to turn it into a massive telescope.

2

Pillowtalk t1_j43hz5z wrote

That’s depressing, but thanks for the infos.

1

badassjohn5 t1_j3w8guc wrote

Time to deliver some good old fashioned American liberty.

3

Karmakazee t1_j3xahnu wrote

Hold up champ. We don’t know whether they have mineral resources yet.

3

badassjohn5 t1_j3xjpu8 wrote

Well that's true but they probably definitely have a few WMD's.

2

Fox_Kurama t1_j3zjes3 wrote

We should name it Romulus, and the first planet Remus.

2

CanadianDiver t1_j3zwdna wrote

Serious question.

How long do you think it will be before humans attempt to colonize a new planet or moon?

Do you think it will begin within our lifetime?

2

jethroguardian t1_j43ctft wrote

Mars, yes in our lifetime.

An exoplanet, i.e., another star system? At least 50 years off. At least. Just to launch it, and decades to get there.

1

Narrator2012 t1_j3vcqf3 wrote

A Mars colony is a bad idea

−4

Wsbkingretard t1_j3vpn5a wrote

We need food and water + energy+ home

4

SakanaSanchez t1_j3x5ap0 wrote

I feel like the big thing with colonizing space is that if we can reach another planet and sustain a colony there, we could make a space colony and save ourselves the troubles of dealing with landing on a planet.

3