Star Trek: Made in Costa Rica

[Karl Heidenreich]

The US technology had a great advantage by using the gathering of minds from all over the world. In the 30-40ies the central european and German scientists brought to the US the capability to beat Hitler in making a nuclear device and the radar. In the 50ies and 60ies the US used the German scientists to conquer the Moon and lead over the commies the exploration of the Space.

Since then NASA remained stucked, using a dangerous Space Shuttle without any prospect to build a better spacecraft or to have the posibility to re start the exploration of space using their homemade over expensive projects. By now, 2009, NASA is still using a 1977 craft with a reduced flotilla.

Now hope comes again in the figure of another foreign scientist, born not in Germany nor Hungary this time but from the town of Escazú of Costa Rica: Franklin Chang Diaz. Not one US astronaut had traveled in space as much as Diaz, who resigned from NASA four years ago to create the AD ASTRA ROCKET with two laboratories: one in Houston and the other one in Guanacaste.

This week Chang will begin the cooling of his superconductor magneto, process that will last three days to reach 5° Kelvin in order to put the engine to work in a vacum camera. If this test is successful and Chang achieves his plasma engine to work at 200 kilowats then all is settled to send the pieces to the International Space Station to build the operational prototype in space.

And... if that is also succesfull then the road that the Germans opened during the gray days of Penemunde and the glory days of Little Berlin, Texas and Apollo 11 will be ready again. This time to Mars, to Venus or farther.

Star Trek could still be a posibility. And was the work of a central american, chinese descendant from Escazú, Costa Rica. Maybe we can still build Enterprise with Photon Torpedoes, after all: built in Costa Rica.

Best regards,

Karl Heidenreich

[Bgile]

I saw Star Trek in the theater on Saturday. I thought from the heading you were going to tell me it was made in Costa Rica.

With all of it's flaws, the Space Shuttle will be missed. We will lack it's capability of bringing 7 people and a large payload to orbit. I don't see any near term replacement, either. We are going to have to rely on the Russians just to crew the ISS.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Bgile:

The NASA has been working for a time in the Orion and Ares projects. The Ares I with the Orion capsle (it looks like an Apollo one) will do the work of the Space Shuttle but cannot carry the same amount of crew members but it´s payload is huge.

The Ares IV and Ares V will be the ones to take a spaceship outside of Earth´s orbit in order to let Chang´s engine to start. It´s important for humankind to begin the expansion in space and colonize. We, the human race, have a much greater future than to be saving whales or the tropical forest.

The Space Shuttle´s main achievement was during the Cold War because it let Reagan to display his bluff to the ruskies with his Star Wars initiative. Even after Challenger Reagan did a superb job with the help of those vessels. But the program stucked after Cold War: no replacement and the incapacity of putting in orbit a US space station. And this was only because of funding.

I believe that one of the small group of good things Bush left was the program to re start NASA, maybe there still the posibility to have a future in space.

On the other hand, do you saw Star Trek? It was great isn´t it! The problem with me is that I like a lot ST, specially the original crew. It seems we will have Kirk and Spock for while now. That´s very good. And the klingons are around, expect some good battles there.

Best regards,

[Bgile]

I don't think the new vehicle has an air lock or a manipulator arm for assembling things in space. It seems to me that our capability is going to be less than in the days of the Saturn V booster.

I wasn't real crazy about the idea of some Romulan and his crew building a space ship all by themselves which could take on a Federation fleet and destroy it. It doesn't seem credible. Other than that, they did a good job of casting young versions of the original crew and I liked them all.

[RF]

I have seen most of the Star Trek films and I think they are good entertainment, although some of the plots are not perhaps too credible or realistic. However my main feeling about Star Trek is that most of the films, particulary the later ones, contain a lot of political correctness, particulary the ones featuring Patrick Stewart, which is not too surprising as Stewart was and still is a supporter of the British Labour Party and particulary of Tony Blair.

Leaving that aside, one issue with space travel and Star Trek is the ability to use ''warp drive'' the ability to travel faster than the speed of light. The General Theory of Relativity, as I understand it, holds that travel faster than the speed of light is not possible. If that is the case then deep space travel on the scale of Star Trek is out. Currently it takes space probes ten years to reach the Kuiper Belt in the outer solar system, the latest probe ''New Horizons'' is scheduled to reach Pluto in 2015. I t would take at least a century under our current technology for a probe to get to Proxima Centauri, the closest star to Earth outside of our solar system.

Unless there is a way of circumventing the General Theory of Relativity then Star Trek cannot be converted from science fantasy to science fiction, let alone science fact.

[lwd]

...The General Theory of Relativity, as I understand it, holds that travel faster than the speed of light is not possible. ...

It is unfortuantly or maybe fortunatly a bit more complicated than that. FTL particles (tachyons) are theoretically possible and there have been experiments that imply information has moved at supra light speeds in very controled experimental circumstances. One thing I do remember from college physics is that if you can travel or communicate at FTL speeds then one of three assumptions often made about the universe is incorrect.
1) Causality
2) That the Universe is Isotropic
3) I don't remember this one right now.

Invalidating causality causes big problems for all of science. On the other hand there are some indications that no 2 may be incorrect.

[RF]

My understanding is that time is based on the speed of light. Therefore at the point of singularity (the centre of a black hole) time stands still and matter is crushed/destroyed by the gravitational pull. To travel faster than the speed of light implies time goes backwards, so that you finish a journey before you start it, basically the ability to travel through time. I have seen a number of propositions about matter being able to move alledgedly faster than the speed of light but is there any actual proof? After all, we have not yet been visited by people from the future....

[Karl Heidenreich]

I do believe that by today the superconductor has achieved it´s temperature. But there are no news of what´s happening with the plasma engine.

[Bgile]

There are a number of things that modern science cannot explain. For example, when a mother knows something has happened to her child, absent any physical information.

We do a number of things today that were difficult to understand several hundred years ago. No one can say with much credibility what will be possible in the future.

[Karl Heidenreich]

There are a number of things that modern science cannot explain. For example, when a mother knows something has happened to her child, absent any physical information.

We do a number of things today that were difficult to understand several hundred years ago. No one can say with much credibility what will be possible in the future.

I can´t agree more with this. You are 1,000,000, 000% right!

[lwd]

My understanding is that time is based on the speed of light.

Not so much based on as related to. As one approaches the speed of light there is a time dillation effect with respect to an observer who watches one approach said speed. The effect by the way is symetric.

Therefore at the point of singularity (the centre of a black hole) time stands still and matter is crushed/destroyed by the gravitational pull.

Actually a case can be made that once you pass the event horizon you are in a different universe. Things can't really be crushed or destroyed if time is standing still. However as one approaches the event horizon the variation in gravitational forces will destroy most objects.
[/quote] To travel faster than the speed of light implies time goes backwards, so that you finish a journey before you start it, basically the ability to travel through time.[/quote]
That indeed is one interpretation. Note that it doesn't have to be physical travel either the potential to send data faster than light has similar implications.

I have seen a number of propositions about matter being able to move alledgedly faster than the speed of light but is there any actual proof? After all, we have not yet been visited by people from the future....

Tachyons are theoretically possible so there is a good chance they exist but they also cannot theoretically interact with normal sub light matter. So it's not clear how they would be detected or what the implications are.

[lwd]

....We do a number of things today that were difficult to understand several hundred years ago. No one can say with much credibility what will be possible in the future.

There is a saying about this that goes something to the effect of: "If an old and respected scientist tells you that we will be able to do something in the future he is probably right. If he says we will not be able to do something he is probably wrong."

[Karl Heidenreich]

Well, the costarrican astronaut and scientist Franklin Chang Díaz did it! The plasma engine works just fine: September 30th, 2009 at noon. Another date like Manhattan Project but this time to conquer the stars!

The link is in Spanish, due that it is from the local newspaper but I think you can find it elsewhere in the net:

http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2009/octubr ... 09817.html

Best regards,

Karl

[Kyler]

I saw Star Trek in the theater on Saturday. I thought from the heading you were going to tell me it was made in Costa Rica.

With all of it's flaws, the Space Shuttle will be missed. We will lack it's capability of bringing 7 people and a large payload to orbit. I don't see any near term replacement, either. We are going to have to rely on the Russians just to crew the ISS.

I thought the same direction in the title as well.

[Kyler]

There are a number of things that modern science cannot explain. For example, when a mother knows something has happened to her child, absent any physical information.

We do a number of things today that were difficult to understand several hundred years ago. No one can say with much credibility what will be possible in the future.

I can´t agree more with this. You are 1,000,000, 000% right!

Very true, a similar principle exists in twins, I have had a few instances of that growing up with my twin brother.