- #1
Spockishere
- 12
- 4
- TL;DR Summary
- I'm intrigued to hear your answers on this one.
let's say i would like to drop by one of my pals on a certain planet, 7ly away. I got to 42 years but it doesn't really sound correct.
That speed is about ##\frac c 6##. So, yes, about ##42## years. Although a little less.Spockishere said:Summary: I'm intrigued to hear your answers on this one.
let's say i would like to drop by one of my pals on a certain planet, 7ly away. I got to 42 years but it doesn't really sound correct.
Thanks for the warm welcome! I used this formula ( 1/(sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)). And i just simplified it to one constant speed for the whole trip.berkeman said:Welcome to PF.
Can you show us your calculation that got you to 42 years? Did you assume any acceleration/deceleration times, or just simplified it to that speed for the whole trip?
That's the one! It's the gamma factor. But, for ##v = \frac c 6##, we have:Spockishere said:Thanks for the warm welcome! I used this formula ( 1/(sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)). And i just simplified it to one constant speed for the whole trip.
Spockishere said:Summary: I'm intrigued to hear your answers on this one.
but it doesn't really sound correct.
I wasn't really doubting the results, i just hoped they were wrong. I was curious as to how a space voyage would feel like at those distances. 42 years is a lot haha. And thanks.Grinkle said:Out of curiosity, why were you doubting the results? IMO, actually doing some math before posting a question puts you in pretty exclusive club. ;-)
Even at ##0.5c## the gamma factor is only about ##1.15##. That's still not very significant. You need to get up to ##0.8c## where the gamma factor is ##1.67## to make a real difference.Spockishere said:I wasn't really doubting the results, i just hoped they were wrong. I was curious as to how a space voyage would feel like at those distances. 42 years is a lot haha. And thanks.
But you are better than Apollo 12 and Apollo 13. They even needed ##0.5 ms## more from relativistic effects, mainly gravitational time-dilation.Spockishere said:I wasn't really doubting the results, i just hoped they were wrong. I was curious as to how a space voyage would feel like at those distances. 42 years is a lot haha. And thanks.
The time it takes to travel 7 light years at 50000km/s would be approximately 140 years. This is because one light year is equivalent to about 9.46 trillion kilometers, so 7 light years would be 66.22 trillion kilometers. Dividing this distance by the speed of 50000km/s gives us 1.3244 billion seconds, which is equal to about 140 years.
Currently, it is not possible for humans to travel at 50000km/s. This speed is much faster than the speed of light, which is considered the universal speed limit. Additionally, the technology and resources needed to travel at this speed are not yet available.
The speed of light is about 299,792,458 meters per second, which is equivalent to about 1079252848 km/h. This is significantly faster than 50000km/s, which is only 0.005% of the speed of light.
One of the main challenges of traveling at 50000km/s is the immense amount of energy required. It would also be difficult to control and navigate a spacecraft at such high speeds. Additionally, the effects of time dilation would also need to be taken into account.
The distance traveled is directly proportional to the time it takes to reach a destination at 50000km/s. This means that the farther the distance, the longer the time it would take to reach the destination. For example, traveling 14 light years at 50000km/s would take approximately 280 years.