This is why Star Trek's Enterprise has that forward-facing deflector dish. It wouldn't last very long without something to prevent such collisions.
this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
77 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
47919 readers
809 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
How the hell did they think of everything in the 1960s? Like, their science is good.
Didn't they have Arthur C Clark advising them or someone like that?
It's actually a legit concern with any (hypothetical) interstellar mission. Even hydrogen atoms will hit with significant force. Dust hits like nukes, and an asteroid is just game over.
The maxim used in a lot of sci-fi is an ablative armour plate. Often in the form of ice. Interstellar ships would likely aldo be needle like, to minimise their cross section. We could also use electric and/or magnetic fields to move smaller particles out of the way.
As for densities, I believe it's a couple of hydrogen ions per m^3 . Dust is rarer, but still present. It's only bigger rocks that are rare enough to just hope to avoid.
Didn't one of the space shuttles almost holed by a fleck of paint?
Challenger had a fleck of paint damage one of its windows on an early mission.
The ISS has been pinholed by debris a few times. Likely paint. The shuttle was damaged by foam breaking off, amongst other events.
By comparison orbital velocity is around 7km/s, while a bullet is around 0.367km/s. Any mismatch will push debris up to bullet speeds easily.
As for relativistic speeds. C is 300,000km/s assuming you get up to 1/3C (barely relativistic) you are moving at 100,000km/s or 14,000x faster than the ISS moves, or 39000x faster than a bullet. A 10g rock would hit with 10kilotons of energy. About 2/3 the energy of the first atom. bombs.
Depends on the strength of your navigational deflector.
There's an xkcd about this, it would basically become a nuke near the speed of light
By my back-of-the -envelope math it is 4,500,000,000 joules. The Hiroshima bomb is listed at approximately 10,000,000,000,000 joules. I bet xkcd is far more accurate, though.
How did you calculate that? The question didn't even mention a specific speed, just "near the speed of light".
The kinetic energy for a grain of sand near the speed of light is somewhere between "quite a lot" and "literally infinity" (which is, in a sense, the reason you can't actually reach light speed without a way to supply infinite energy).
Ke=1/2 M V^2 Not relativistic. So wildly low. But certainly a low bound. My point being that nuclear bomb grade energy is certainly in the ballpark.
Did you assume the sand as having no velocity relative to the object going C?
I did. See above
Yes. For the effects, look up pictures of the damage that space debris has on spacecrafts.
The fastest human made object moves at 1/1000 of the speed of light
Mind to post your favourite example?