Re: Sensor Range Question [Evasion]

On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, djwj wrote:

> Real Theoretical physics here, you have been warned:

You mean "real" from the point of science fiction, not fact, right?
Speaking as a theoretical physicist (and my research is in general
relativity), I'd have to disagree that any of the FTL systems proposed
inyour message are real in the sense of "real in our world".  But each
fictional universe defines its own physical laws, so what's "real" in
one
universe may not be "real" in another (or ours).

> >extremely long-ranged
> Not really, long range makes them expensive.
> 
> >and
> >extremely durable :-/
> Average durability, they would be too expensive otherwise
> 
> >You'll need huge amounts of them otherwise.
> Give the man a prize, He's got it. These things are so cheap that the
orbit
> is nearly saturated with them. They are small, easily replaceable, and
they
> blend in with the debris in an oort cloud. A system ship could carry
> hundreds of these things and replace lost ones quickly and easily.
Sensor
> readings are coallated at a main base, individual sensors are located
in
a
> method similar to GPS, replacements are sent out to fill any gaps....

I don't think you quite realize how big the Oort Cloud is.  It ranges
from
10,000 to 100,000 AU.  That's about 4 x 10^15 cubic AU you've got to
cover.	You say they aren't long range, so let's say each probe can
cover
a cubic AU (a -lot- of space).	If you can crank out 10 probes a day,
it's
going to take you approximately 3 billion years to have your net in
place...

Just some thoughts...

Keith

kwatt@astro.umd.edu
Univ. of Maryland Astronomy