WWK about Deep Space and Interstellar Travel By JohnMark Kempthorne
A ground-breaking Russian nuclear space-travel propulsion system will be ready by 2017 and will power a ship capable of long-haul interplanetary missions by 2025.
A manned rocket reaches the moon in less time than it took a stagecoach to travel the length of England.
America's first space station was Skylab, which was longer than a 12-story building and contained almost 12,000 cubic feet of living space.
At present the furthest space probe mankind has constructed and launched from Earth is Voyager 1, which was announced on December 5, 2011 to have reached the edge of our Solar System taking over 20 years to get there.
Some of the best candidates for future deep space engine technologies include anti-matter, nuclear power and beamed propulsion. The latter, beamed propulsion, appears to be the best candidate for deep space exploration presently available, since it uses known physics and known technology that is being developed for other purposes.
Speculation about Antimatter rocketry, such as the redshift rocket, includes the use of antimatter as fuel for interplanetary travel or possibly interstellar travel. Since the energy density of antimatter is vastly higher than that of conventional fuels, the thrust to weight equation for such craft would be much better than for conventional spacecraft.
At least 100 times the total energy output of the entire world would be required for the voyage to Alpha Centauri
The velocity for a manned round trip of a few decades to even the nearest star is thousands of times greater than those of present space vehicles. Accelerating one ton to one-tenth of the speed of light requires at least 450 PJ or 4.5 ×1017 J or 125 billion kWh, not accounting for losses.
When traveling near the speed of light, time dilation is much more noticeable.
Beamed propulsion seems to be the best interstellar travel technique presently available, since it uses known physics and known technology that is being developed for other purposes, and would be considerably cheaper than nuclear pulse propulsion.