Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mordor.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!dual!mordor!@S1-A.ARPA,@MIT-MC:rsf@Pescadero From: @S1-A.ARPA,@MIT-MC:rsf@Pescadero Newsgroups: net.space Subject: Interstellar probes Message-ID: <1957@mordor.UUCP> Date: Sat, 25-May-85 17:46:37 EDT Article-I.D.: mordor.1957 Posted: Sat May 25 17:46:37 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 27-May-85 07:37:49 EDT Sender: daemon@mordor.UUCP Lines: 44 From: Ross Finlayson It seems to me that there are two basic psychological problems that are going to stand in the way of any interstellar mission taking place in the (very) near future. The first problem can be illustrated as follows: Suppose that we currently have the technology to send an (unmanned) probe to a nearby star, knowing that it would take 100 years to get there. Suppose also that we are fairly confident that in 20 years time, our technology will have improved sufficiently to allow the trip to be made in 50 years instead of 100. Given this scenario, would we seriously consider launching a probe in 1985? It hardly seems likely - it would make far more sense to wait until 2005, and thus save 30 years. However, come 2005, we might well feel that in another 10 years we would have the technology to make the trip in 30 years instead of 50. Thus, we would be tempted to postpone the mission until 2015, to save another 10 years. In other words, we would not send out a probe until we were confident that we could not advance the arrival time by waiting for further advances in technology. In an ideal world, this would be an optimal strategy. In practice, however, a technological stasis is likely to result. Many early probe designs will not get tested, and the actual rate of technological advancement is likely to be considerably retarded, to the extent that we might not reach the stars until several decades later than we could. (I suppose the `ideal' probe would be one that is able to adapt itself to advances in technology as they are discovered on Earth and radioed to the probe while in transit :-) The second problem is more obvious. Even if we were sure that we could not improve significantly on the 100 year transit time (at least, not within the next 100 years), how many people would be willing to support a multi-billion dollar project, the results of which only their great-great-grandchildren would see? I know I would, but many members of Congress seem unable to look further than their next election. Our friend Sen. Proxmire woud have a field day. Fortunately Columbus, Magellan, Tasman, Cook etc. weren't faced with these problems. Ross Finlayson Stanford CS Dept. ARPA: rsf@su-pescadero.ARPA UUCP: ...!{decwrl,ucbvax}!Glacier!Shasta!rsf