Submitted by JerryWasARaceCarDrvr t3_zneoux in space
EmperorGeek t1_j0gf9m8 wrote
You would plot a course to an area close to where you PREDICT the destination would be. Think of it like taking “lead” on a moving target. Then about half way there you drop below light speed and refine your trajectory. You would need to do this again when closer but far enough out so that you could make a meaningful course correction and slow down to manageable speeds when you reach your destination.
zoinkability t1_j0gle14 wrote
Pretty much this. OP should consider that during the 6 months it might take to get to Mars, Mars moves considerably, yet that is no barrier to our getting there accurately. Getting to a nearby star is not dramatically different in terms of the complexity of physics. By comparison with achieving FTL travel, predicting the path of a nearby celestial body is trivial.
In terms of “what if something happens while en route,” FTL travel would make that less of a problem rather than more. 25 years is a smaller proportion of a star’s lifetime than 25,000 years, so there is 1000x less of a chance of some major stellar event — and even 25,000 years is still very little and unless it’s Betelgeuse the likelihood of a (super)nova would be almost zero for most stars.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments