Author Topic: Breakthrough Starshot  (Read 78998 times)

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 438
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #100 on: 04/19/2016 01:18 pm »
In fact, I suspect that this will be the final fate of this project -- it will end up being easier to directly image exoplanets from Earth than to pick up the signal from a tiny spacecraft so far away.  So, even if it eventually proves possible to do, I think it will be made obsolete by better uses of the same technology needed to make it possible.

They're talking about a 1 km² optical array for receiving the signals from the spacecraft! If you can build that, no need for sending spacecraft, just use the optical array directly. Having optical arrays in various places in the solar system should get you great resolution.

To be fair, direct imaging of exoplanets would require gigantic interferometers for high resolutions. See the image attached. For example for 32km pixels at 10 parsecs (32.6 light years) you need 144km2 of mirrors and a 100k km baseline. On the other hand it would take 196 years to get some data from a starshot probe.
Thanks to spectroscopy an exoplanet the size of Earth at only one pixel could still tell us a good deal. Though the smallest of the interferometers on that picture even at 10 pixels would be great. The IR version seems small enough to be doable but the atmosphere attenuates those wavelengths. So a high enough and wide enough mountain top may not exist.

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #101 on: 04/19/2016 01:58 pm »
In fact, I suspect that this will be the final fate of this project -- it will end up being easier to directly image exoplanets from Earth than to pick up the signal from a tiny spacecraft so far away.  So, even if it eventually proves possible to do, I think it will be made obsolete by better uses of the same technology needed to make it possible.

They're talking about a 1 km² optical array for receiving the signals from the spacecraft! If you can build that, no need for sending spacecraft, just use the optical array directly. Having optical arrays in various places in the solar system should get you great resolution.

To be fair, direct imaging of exoplanets would require gigantic interferometers for high resolutions. See the image attached. For example for 32km pixels at 10 parsecs (32.6 light years) you need 144km2 of mirrors and a 100k km baseline. On the other hand it would take 196 years to get some data from a starshot probe.
Thanks to spectroscopy an exoplanet the size of Earth at only one pixel could still tell us a good deal. Though the smallest of the interferometers on that picture even at 10 pixels would be great. The IR version seems small enough to be doable but the atmosphere attenuates those wavelengths. So a high enough and wide enough mountain top may not exist.

Also note that going to 128 km per pixel reduces the needed square km of mirror surface by an order of magnitude, and you still get enough detail to track cloud circulation patterns on an Earth-sized planet, and do differential spectroscopy against different types of surfaces imaged on a given planet.  All for less than 5 square km of mirror area per collection site as opposed to 144.  Much more do-able, especially if the mirror banks are space-based, than the Starshot technology.  And the much more limited one-to-two pixel images requiring far smaller mirrors, as noted above, will still be incredibly useful for finding planets with life-supporting (or even life-indicating) atmospheric conditions.

Of course, recall that getting detailed probe data from close-up is only one of the motivators behind Starshot.  The larger motivator, I think, is to send pieces of working terrestrial technology to other star systems within a single human lifetime.  It's as much about being able to say that there is something of Mankind actively collecting data in situ from other star systems as it is about the data collected, I think.
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13996
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #102 on: 04/19/2016 07:16 pm »
Jeff Foust –  ‏@jeff_foust

Grunsfeld, asked about Breakthrough Starshot, is broadly supportive of it, but adds it will not affect NASA’s own science/exploration plans.
9:47 a.m. - 19 Apr 2016

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/722466762810335232
« Last Edit: 04/19/2016 07:16 pm by Star One »

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #103 on: 04/20/2016 04:35 am »
In fact, I suspect that this will be the final fate of this project -- it will end up being easier to directly image exoplanets from Earth than to pick up the signal from a tiny spacecraft so far away.  So, even if it eventually proves possible to do, I think it will be made obsolete by better uses of the same technology needed to make it possible.

They're talking about a 1 km² optical array for receiving the signals from the spacecraft! If you can build that, no need for sending spacecraft, just use the optical array directly. Having optical arrays in various places in the solar system should get you great resolution.

To be fair, direct imaging of exoplanets would require gigantic interferometers for high resolutions. See the image attached. For example for 32km pixels at 10 parsecs (32.6 light years) you need 144km2 of mirrors and a 100k km baseline. On the other hand it would take 196 years to get some data from a starshot probe.

Compared to this project, things like the "sun focus" telescope seem easy.
(http://news.discovery.com/space/using-the-sun-as-a-magnifying-glass.htm)

Not every outlandish concept is a "starshot".   Sometimes it just doesn't make sense.

It's like Austin Powers telling the dealer to hold after getting 2 and 3, and proclaiming "I also like to play dangerously".

-----

Also, all those sails in the graphics are built for micro-g's.

If you want to carry 1 gram of concentrated load at 60,000g, it will weigh 60 kg...   So will need to attach to that sail with a huge array of nano wires, so as not to apply too much force in once location.  Remember that this sail is about 1 um thick if it to weigh only a few grams of 1 m2.

600,000 m/s2 is about the acceleration in a 1 m long gun barrel with a muzzle speed of 1000 m/s... and this sail is no bullet...

Also consider that the laser spot is not uniform, not if it's near the diffraction limit... how will the sail deal with differential forces on it in the axial direction?

This just makes no sense.


ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #104 on: 04/20/2016 04:55 am »
In fact, I suspect that this will be the final fate of this project -- it will end up being easier to directly image exoplanets from Earth than to pick up the signal from a tiny spacecraft so far away.  So, even if it eventually proves possible to do, I think it will be made obsolete by better uses of the same technology needed to make it possible.

They're talking about a 1 km² optical array for receiving the signals from the spacecraft! If you can build that, no need for sending spacecraft, just use the optical array directly. Having optical arrays in various places in the solar system should get you great resolution.

To be fair, direct imaging of exoplanets would require gigantic interferometers for high resolutions. See the image attached. For example for 32km pixels at 10 parsecs (32.6 light years) you need 144km2 of mirrors and a 100k km baseline. On the other hand it would take 196 years to get some data from a starshot probe.

Yes, getting that kind of resolution at 32.6 light years requires a huge array -- but, even if you do manage to send your 1 gram starship at 0.2c and somehow keep it operational for 163 years, after 196 years you *still* need to have a huge array to pick up the signal from your 1 gram probe 32 light years away -- probably even bigger than 144 km^2.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #105 on: 04/20/2016 05:00 am »
The larger motivator, I think, is to send pieces of working terrestrial technology to other star systems within a single human lifetime.  It's as much about being able to say that there is something of Mankind actively collecting data in situ from other star systems as it is about the data collected, I think.

A fair point.

But, if your goal is to send pieces of working terrestrial technology to other star systems within a single human lifetime, I suspect the more practical course would be to extend human lifetimes and send the probe at a slower speed.

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2467
  • Liked: 605
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #106 on: 04/20/2016 07:55 am »
Yes, getting that kind of resolution at 32.6 light years requires a huge array -- but, even if you do manage to send your 1 gram starship at 0.2c and somehow keep it operational for 163 years, after 196 years you *still* need to have a huge array to pick up the signal from your 1 gram probe 32 light years away -- probably even bigger than 144 km^2.

The biggest issue with all those interstellar probe concepts is how long it takes for the probes to reach their target. Unless we reach a point of technological stagnation making a huge investment in something that will deliver results hundreds of years later is utterly pointless. In particular when there are competing concepts like telescopes. Until we want to look at flora and fauna on a nearby exoplanet in detail I think interstellar probes make no sense.
 
« Last Edit: 04/20/2016 07:56 am by Oli »

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #107 on: 04/20/2016 03:04 pm »
The biggest issue with all those interstellar probe concepts is how long it takes for the probes to reach their target. Unless we reach a point of technological stagnation making a huge investment in something that will deliver results hundreds of years later is utterly pointless. In particular when there are competing concepts like telescopes. Until we want to look at flora and fauna on a nearby exoplanet in detail I think interstellar probes make no sense.
 
Nah, that's basically saying that Voyagers and Pioneers weren't worth doing, because we were going to have NERVA powered starships any day now that could get there faster.
Any technology and scientific knowledge frontier doesn't advance by itself, we actually need to make related investments and efforts.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #108 on: 04/20/2016 05:23 pm »
In terms of the "wait for better technology" argument, all I will say is that I am the guy who not only thinks we should send things out at the limits of current technology, I actually look forward to seeing (in a future life, I'm sure) the first interstellar probes being collected up, barely into their far-sub-C journeys, by museum ships using no-longer-by-then-new FTL technologies... :)
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #109 on: 04/21/2016 01:10 am »
My scant understanding of optical inferometers is that the processors have to be wildly fast to synch the signals, and that the problem gets worse the larger the distance between collectors.  Radio inferometers are easier because the wavelengths are so much longer than visible light.

I guess the good news here is that non-related advances in computing speed will naturally overcome the processing hurdles specific to optical interferometry, and in time, any telescope could be linked to create an array of any size.

More to the point of this thread though, photos of rotating planets would need to be very short duration photos to avoid smearing.  Otherwise, all you can do is measure average albedo, temps, atmospheric composition, etc....

Because of the short wavelengths, optical interferometers have to combine light from each telescope live. That's a complicated optical process.

Radio interferometers with much longer wavelengths can record signals and combine them later. As long as the observations are synchronized via atomic clocks.

The CHARA Array at Mount Wilson has a maximum baseline of 330 m, but that's with six 1 m telescopes for a total of less than 5 m2. Multiple km2 arrays are an incredible concept.

The engineering required for Breakthrough Starshot on many levels is incredible. Don't expect to see this happen anytime soon if ever.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #110 on: 04/21/2016 01:12 am »
JWST with a good starshade (which is in itself a big investment, actually) would allow you to do study of a nearby exoplanet. Even though you'd just see a single pixel, you could get light curves, could even get rough images of continents, detailed spectroscopy, etc, if you looked long enough and with the right instruments.

But yeah, very good point about "just" building a good space interferometer to image these things.

...however, beamed dust particles would be a MUCH more efficient way of doing interstellar propulsion. You have to do it in space, but it'd take orders of magnitude less power for a given thrust, even potentially allowing a crewed flight if you had a multiple-terawatt orbital array (this is a lot, but not more than the whole world's power combined). Additionally, you wouldn't be bound by the diffraction limit (although getting precise pointing would be a huge challenge). Uncrewed probes comparable in mass to our current probes (and equipped with a mag-sail to slow down on approach) could definitely be sent using such an approach to the nearest star system(s) within about half a human lifespan. Uncrewed probes could be sent with a, say, 10GW orbital array. That's not absurd.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #111 on: 04/21/2016 01:31 am »

Because of the short wavelengths, optical interferometers have to combine light from each telescope live. That's a complicated optical process.

Radio interferometers with much longer wavelengths can record signals and combine them later. As long as the observations are synchronized via atomic clocks.

The CHARA Array at Mount Wilson has a maximum baseline of 330 m, but that's with six 1 m telescopes for a total of less than 5 m2. Multiple km2 arrays are an incredible concept.
CHARA array has optical links between elements, which up until now has been the main techincal constraint for all optical interferometers.

According to the paper up thread, seems that this restriction is going awaybsoon and electronically linked array elements will become a real possibility soon, with the promise to extend baselines to kilometer ranges and beyond
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #112 on: 04/21/2016 01:57 am »

Because of the short wavelengths, optical interferometers have to combine light from each telescope live. That's a complicated optical process.

Radio interferometers with much longer wavelengths can record signals and combine them later. As long as the observations are synchronized via atomic clocks.

The CHARA Array at Mount Wilson has a maximum baseline of 330 m, but that's with six 1 m telescopes for a total of less than 5 m2. Multiple km2 arrays are an incredible concept.
CHARA array has optical links between elements, which up until now has been the main techincal constraint for all optical interferometers.

According to the paper up thread, seems that this restriction is going awaybsoon and electronically linked array elements will become a real possibility soon, with the promise to extend baselines to kilometer ranges and beyond

That will make extending baselines easier, but a collecting area measured in km2 is still a big issue. 1 km2 is equal to the collecting area of nearly 13 thousand 10 m telescopes! We currently have three.

JWST with a good starshade (which is in itself a big investment, actually) would allow you to do study of a nearby exoplanet. Even though you'd just see a single pixel, you could get light curves, could even get rough images of continents, detailed spectroscopy, etc, if you looked long enough and with the right instruments.

I think this would be a better way to go.

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3352
  • Liked: 553
  • Likes Given: 891
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #113 on: 04/21/2016 01:59 am »
According to the paper up thread, seems that this restriction is going away soon and electronically linked array elements will become a real possibility soon, with the promise to extend baselines to kilometer ranges and beyond
Note that is an intensity interferometer. It may be useful, but AFAIK it doesn't have the same capabilities as traditional optically linked interferometers or radio VLBI.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #114 on: 04/21/2016 02:24 am »
According to the paper up thread, seems that this restriction is going away soon and electronically linked array elements will become a real possibility soon, with the promise to extend baselines to kilometer ranges and beyond
Note that is an intensity interferometer. It may be useful, but AFAIK it doesn't have the same capabilities as traditional optically linked interferometers or radio VLBI.

That Wikipedia article seems out of date. It seems that even though direct phase information is lost, aperture synthesis images actually are still possible. But the math involved  is beyond me
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2467
  • Liked: 605
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #115 on: 04/21/2016 11:22 am »
The biggest issue with all those interstellar probe concepts is how long it takes for the probes to reach their target. Unless we reach a point of technological stagnation making a huge investment in something that will deliver results hundreds of years later is utterly pointless. In particular when there are competing concepts like telescopes. Until we want to look at flora and fauna on a nearby exoplanet in detail I think interstellar probes make no sense.
 
Nah, that's basically saying that Voyagers and Pioneers weren't worth doing, because we were going to have NERVA powered starships any day now that could get there faster.

To my knowledge the Voyagers and Pioneers fulfilled their scientific objectives within 10 years, Voyagers 1+2 cost $3.7bn in today's dollars. It's more as if trillions of dollars would have been spent in 1977 on an interstellar probe that arrives in 2077.

Ultimately an interstellar probe must not only come at reasonable cost but also be preferable to "real-time" alternatives for centuries to come (such as telescopes).

« Last Edit: 04/21/2016 11:22 am by Oli »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13996
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #116 on: 04/22/2016 04:37 pm »
More info in this new article.

Quote
The Starshot sail would fly edge-on to minimize the cross-section exposed to matter in the interstellar medium. Here we’re dealing with a lot of unknowns because we’ve only gotten one mission out beyond the heliopause, and it — Voyager — wasn’t designed to do the kind of measurements we’d like to have about the Local Interstellar Medium (LISM). But based on what we do know about local ‘bubbles’ in the medium and our Sun’s position in them, a fast mission to Alpha Centauri seems survivable at least by some of the craft thrown at it. Redundancy thus becomes crucial, which is why the plan is to send a large number of sails.

And here we arrive at yet another challenge, or ‘miracle’ if you will. We’ll look at getting a signal back to Earth on Monday, but the plan is to use the sail itself as an optical element, turning it into a phased receiver as well as a transmitter. The tolerances needed in doing this, and the technologies required to shape the sail at its destination, remain unexplored territory. We have to ensure that this element is not the showstopper. As you might expect, data reception back on Earth is to be handled through the enormous laser array that sent the craft.

That array also serves as a kilometer-class telescope, meaning it would have a useful future of continuing astronomical observation. And as a beamer, says Worden, the laser array is multi-purpose. A successful beamer could make possible any number of missions within the Solar System and beyond, including the gravitational lens FOCAL mission. We have to remember we’re not just targeting Alpha Centauri. “We’re convinced we can contemplate in this century, and perhaps in a single generation, expanding the human reach to the stars.” Note the plural.

http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=35473

Offline D_Dom

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
  • Liked: 481
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #117 on: 04/25/2016 10:02 pm »
Seems like this approach explains the steering. Can't say I understand the concept so I may be mistaken.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/news/news/releases/2016/nasa-begins-testing-of-revolutionary-e-sail-technology.html
Space is not merely a matter of life or death, it is considerably more important than that!

Offline Req

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
  • Liked: 434
  • Likes Given: 2580
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #118 on: 05/01/2016 03:18 pm »
According to the paper up thread, seems that this restriction is going away soon and electronically linked array elements will become a real possibility soon, with the promise to extend baselines to kilometer ranges and beyond
Note that is an intensity interferometer. It may be useful, but AFAIK it doesn't have the same capabilities as traditional optically linked interferometers or radio VLBI.

That Wikipedia article seems out of date. It seems that even though direct phase information is lost, aperture synthesis images actually are still possible. But the math involved  is beyond me

From the paper:

Quote
3.4. Image reconstruction from second-order coherence

While intensity interferometry possesses the advantage of not being sensitive to phase errors in the optical light path, ordinary two-telescope correlations also do not permit such phases of the complex coherence to be measured. These correlations provide the absolute magnitudes of the respective Fourier transform components of the source image, while the phases are not directly obtained. Such quantitites can be used well by themselves to fit model parameters such as stellar diameters, stellar limb darkening, binary separations, and circumstellar disk thicknesses, but actual images cannot be directly computed through a simple inverse Fourier transform.

While a two-component interferometer (such as the classical one at Narrabri) offers only very limited coverage of the Fourier (u, v)-plane, a multicomponent system provides numerous baselines and an extensive coverage of the interferometric plane. Already intuitively, it is clear that the information contained there must place stringent constraints on the source image. For instance, viewing the familiar Airy diffraction pattern (cf. Fig. 1 left), one immediately recognizes it as originating in a circular aperture, although only intensities are seen. However, it is also obvious that a reasonably complete coverage of the diffraction image is required to convincingly identify a circular aperture as the source.

Various techniques (most unrelated to astronomy) have been developed for recovering the phase of a complex function when only its magnitude is known. Methods specifically for intensity interferometry were worked out by Holmes et al. (2004, 2010, 2013) for one and two dimensions, respectively. Once a sufficient coverage of the Fourier plane is available, phase recovery and imaging indeed become possible. Nuñez et al. (2012a,b) applied this phase recovery to reconstruct images from simulated intensity interferometry observations, demonstrating that also rather complex images can be reconstructed. (However, a limitation that still remains is the non-uniqueness between the image and its mirrored reflection.)
« Last Edit: 05/01/2016 03:22 pm by Req »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13996
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: Breakthrough Starshot
« Reply #119 on: 05/13/2016 10:26 pm »
Jeff Foust –  ‏@jeff_foust

Among the winners of NIAC Phase 2 awards is a directed-energy study for the privately-funded Project Starshot:  http://go.nasa.gov/1Tb7TB3

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1