Astronomers to Check Mysterious Interstellar Object for Signs of Technology - Sensationalist Headlines

Maybe the aliens and flying here just to purchase earths finest rum?

it's going to be a highly ornate shrine and on an altar in the middle is a piece of paper with a drawing of a dick on it

"this is an automated message, do not land, i repeat, do not attempt landing at any cost" and i bet someone will try anyway :(

[QUOTE=Dwarden;52973913]"this is an automated message, do not land, i repeat, do not attempt landing at any cost" and i bet someone will try anyway :([/QUOTE] I'm hoping the message will be: ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE USE THEM TOGETHER USE THEM IN PEACE

[QUOTE=Da Big Man;52968391]Not saying it is, but it isn't far fetched that if you were to make a less obvious [i]"I'm a spaceship"[/i] for safety reasons you'd make your ship look like an asteroid/install your spaceship into one.[/QUOTE] It's way easier to grab a big asteroid, hollow it out and then dump an engine on one end, than it is to build a fuckoff huge spaceship from scratch.

[QUOTE=Saber15;52974577]It's way easier to grab a big asteroid, hollow it out and then dump an engine on one end, than it is to build a fuckoff huge spaceship from scratch.[/QUOTE] I [I]really[/I] doubt that any civilization capable of deep-space travel would face much difficulty constructing what is for all intents and purposes a huge building.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;52968577]It really is, almost exactly[/QUOTE] I loved that book. I recommend it to everyone. [sp]It's a sci fi book about a strange cylinder flying through our solar system, and earth sends a craft to investigate it, and it isn't hostile[/sp]

[QUOTE=phygon;52974602]I [I]really[/I] doubt that any civilization capable of deep-space travel would face much difficulty constructing what is for all intents and purposes a huge building.[/QUOTE] I mean, you could, but why would you? To get the non-asteroid-shaped raw material into a place in which you can realistically construct and launch your huge space-building would be a huge pain in the ass compared to finding an already vaguely 'ship' shaped asteroid, hollowing it out, and then using the very material you took out to construct the guts of the ship. To build a 'proper' spaceship of that size would require doing it in space anyway, at which point why would you smelt everything down to fabricate bulkheads and hull panels when you have a perfectly good asteroid laying around?

[QUOTE=sltungle;52975053]I mean, you could, but why would you? To get the non-asteroid-shaped raw material into a place in which you can realistically construct and launch your huge space-building would be a huge pain in the ass compared to finding an already vaguely 'ship' shaped asteroid, hollowing it out, and then using the very material you took out to construct the guts of the ship. To build a 'proper' spaceship of that size would require doing it in space anyway, at which point why would you smelt everything down to fabricate bulkheads and hull panels when you have a perfectly good asteroid laying around?[/QUOTE] Because rocks are rocks and are not engineered materials designed for space travel? They're also insanely heavy, and any maneuvering at all would take an insane amount of power.

[QUOTE=phygon;52975076]Because rocks are rocks and are not engineered materials designed for space travel? They're also insanely heavy, and any maneuvering at all would take an insane amount of power.[/QUOTE] I think you underestimate both the complexity, effort, and weight of a 100% purpose built from scratch starship at these kinds of scales. Unless you are talking about a theoretically human civilization that has unlimited time, energy, and resources, creating an ark ship inside of a hollowed out asteroid is [I]widely[/I] regarded as being one of the most feasible options for constructing a starship. It's simply a very efficient use of resources and the downsides you are talking about are simply not a relevant. A spaceship's exterior doesn't need to be heavily engineered or streamlined, it just needs to be able to keep the insides inside and resist hypersonic impacts from space debris. As for the weight, how much do you think a spaceship made from the same mass is going to weigh...? A ship built from scratch wouldn't be any lighter.

[QUOTE=GunFox;52968961]How shitty would it be to discover it is some sort of alien craft that has been adrift in space for thousands of years and filled with potentially valuable tech only for us to not be able to reach it due to its speed.[/QUOTE] Literally the plot of rendesvouz with rama :v:

[QUOTE=Zombii;52975288]I think you underestimate both the complexity, effort, and weight of a 100% purpose built from scratch starship at these kinds of scales. Unless you are talking about a theoretically human civilization that has unlimited time, energy, and resources, creating an ark ship inside of a hollowed out asteroid is [I]widely[/I] regarded as being one of the most feasible options for constructing a starship. It's simply a very efficient use of resources and the downsides you are talking about are simply not a relevant. A spaceship's exterior doesn't need to be heavily engineered or streamlined, it just needs to be able to keep the insides inside and resist hypersonic impacts from space debris. As for the weight, how much do you think a spaceship made from the same mass is going to weigh...? A ship built from scratch wouldn't be any lighter.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand the reaction mass needed to move an asteroid. Properly selected and engineered alloys like aluminium, titanium or even high tensile steel are going to be far less massive than a hollowed out rock. [editline]14th December 2017[/editline] Also citation needed it's the most feasible.

[QUOTE=download;52968973]Ehh, we might be able to reach it if we build a small ship, put it in orbit, attach a very large tank of hydrogen to it and power it with a NERVA engine. Let me do the math and get back to you. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Dry weight of 10t, wet weight of 150t, and 1000s specific impulse gives us 26.5km/s delta-v. It's doable with current technology and would be suitable for a probe. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Scratch that, its velocity at 1AU was 49 km/s. We would need that speed from Earth to match its speed. Might be possible with a flyby, maybe. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] To get that speed we'd need 1600t of fuel for a 10t dry weight and an ISP of 1000s.[/QUOTE] How are you calculating this? Tsiolkovsky's?

I really hope this is something more than a weirdly shaped rock... I want to see us discover something related to another intelligent civilization before I die...

[QUOTE=r0b0tsquid;52975322]How are you calculating this? Tsiolkovsky's?[/QUOTE] Yes. deltaV=9.81*isp*ln(m_0/m_1)

[QUOTE=Zombii;52975288]I think you underestimate both the complexity, effort, and weight of a 100% purpose built from scratch starship at these kinds of scales. Unless you are talking about a theoretically human civilization that has unlimited time, energy, and resources, creating an ark ship inside of a hollowed out asteroid is [I]widely[/I] regarded as being one of the most feasible options for constructing a starship. It's simply a very efficient use of resources and the downsides you are talking about are simply not a relevant. A spaceship's exterior doesn't need to be heavily engineered or streamlined, it just needs to be able to keep the insides inside and resist hypersonic impacts from space debris. As for the weight, how much do you think a spaceship made from the same mass is going to weigh...? A ship built from scratch wouldn't be any lighter.[/QUOTE] The most feasible according to what, science fiction?

Imagine if we found a spaceship full of aliens, only to discovered they had been brutally murdered by something unknown.

[QUOTE=omarfr;52975905]Imagine if we found a spaceship full of aliens, only to discovered they had been brutally murdered by something unknown.[/QUOTE] Just send a science ship to scan the debris. We'll get some research options and at the very least [B]15 Physics.[/B]

What if it was an o'neill cylinder built into an asteroid? [editline]14th December 2017[/editline] It turns out the asteroid was an ark sent to our solar system to save us from imminent destruction but we missed it

or maybe it's ark from somewhere else , who knows maybe it's full of dead and relics

I want to believe.

[QUOTE=download;52975313]I don't think you understand the reaction mass needed to move an asteroid. Properly selected and engineered alloys like aluminium, titanium or even high tensile steel are going to be far less massive than a hollowed out rock. [editline]14th December 2017[/editline] Also citation needed it's the most feasible.[/QUOTE] The beautiful thing about reaction mass on asteroid ships is you just [I]don't care[/I]. It's already there. You scoop out the guts, reinforce the interior walls, and start flinging the crap you scooped out the back with a mass driver, or use a static laser in the departing system with an ablative coating or a photon sail to go a bit faster on departure. It's by no means fast, but if you want a generation ship, it's the cheap and lazy way to go.

[QUOTE=Saber15;52977585]The beautiful thing about reaction mass on asteroid ships is you just [I]don't care[/I]. It's already there. You scoop out the guts, reinforce the interior walls, and start flinging the crap you scooped out the back with a mass driver, or use a static laser in the departing system with an ablative coating or a photon sail to go a bit faster on departure. It's by no means fast, but if you want a generation ship, it's the cheap and lazy way to go.[/QUOTE] Yes, because with the real-life equivalent of a space noah's ark you want the cheap and lazy option.

[QUOTE=phygon;52977729]Yes, because with the real-life equivalent of a space noah's ark you want the cheap and lazy option.[/QUOTE] Cheap and lazy doesn't necessarily mean [I]bad[/i]. You [I]could[/I] dump a bunch of robots on a rock and have them grind it up for the base materials to build into a spaceship from scratch, but why bother? A proper space ship and a rock with an engine are both going to be vaporized if it has any kind of significant collision, and both are going to be so massive that they would take [I]centuries[/I] to get anywhere if you're intending to have a proper society and stable breeding population; if you're making a generation ship, you're already willing to gamble with the future generations of the inhabitants, so an extra century or two will hardly matter over a thousand year long flight. Space travel is perilous. It's better to hedge your bets and just pump out a bunch of dumb flying rocks than to build one fancy spaceship that goes faster but takes four times as long to build and has less spare mass for repairs. You don't even need to finish building a rock before sending it off; set up some farms, sink an engine into it, and leave some construction equipment laying around and let the passengers finish build it while mid-flight. They can use the debris for whatever they want; structures, whipple shields, you name it. Of course, if you want something fast for a reason, like an expedition, yeah a proper bespoke space ship is a better choice, but I don't think the economics of interstellar travel would make something like an expedition ([I]with a return trip[/I]) logical.

[QUOTE=Saber15;52977585]The beautiful thing about reaction mass on asteroid ships is you just [I]don't care[/I]. It's already there. You scoop out the guts, reinforce the interior walls, and start flinging the crap you scooped out the back with a mass driver, or use a static laser in the departing system with an ablative coating or a photon sail to go a bit faster on departure. It's by no means fast, but if you want a generation ship, it's the cheap and lazy way to go.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand the physics and engineering involved.

No no no guys, [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eon_(novel)#The_Stone"]it's Juno, coming back from the future![/URL] [editline]15th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=WhyNott;52969363]That's actually very similllar to the plot of one of Lem's short stories. [sp]A space pilot flying with a crew comes across a dead ancient alien spaceship in an interstellar asteroid belt, but is unable to communicate or tell anyone about this because his space faring company are a bunch of frauds and he has no equipment to make photos or provide any evidence about this, and half of his crew is mentally insane so noone would take his claims seriously. In the end the spaceships leaves the galaxy without anyone knowing about it, and the pilot nearly goes insane over it and can't sleep for weeks afterwards knowing that humanity lost a chance to study intelligent alien life due to budgetary restraints and awful organization.[/sp][/QUOTE] Ah, I love Lem. Weird mushy cold war fungus aliens that get graviton bombed. Lovely.

[QUOTE=omarfr;52975905]Imagine if we found a spaceship full of aliens, only to discovered they had been brutally murdered by something unknown.[/QUOTE] and a bunch of freeeee shiiiiit

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;52969783]I hope it doesn't have a disc of some exotic metal with some weird alien wang engraved into it. There's stories about that, but you wouldn't want to meet the crew. [img]https://i.imgur.com/5HIskIz.png[/img][/QUOTE] Absolutely hideous... [sp]We'll bang, ok?[/sp]

[QUOTE=Canary;52968388]Stray rail-gun round from a space battle far far away.[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;6q1IaWLsyrQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q1IaWLsyrQ[/video]

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52968946]Everyone on earth becoming reaper juice is still a better ending than ME3[/QUOTE] There's only one ending at the end of the day, destroying it as Shepard was indoctrinated. Although, I still do wonder who wakes up at the end?