Can a planet be a space craft?

>>17481516
Yes! Not necessarily its core but a variety of different methods could be used to redirect a planet's orbit. Hell, right now if the human race, as we know it, decided that shifting how our planet moves were absolutely our most important priority and dumped all resources into making that a reality, we could probably do it.

But not very well. In all likelihood we'd either end up just changing our rotation or tilt, or knock ourselves into a collision course with something around us. Aaaand we'd probably burn off a good portion of our atmosphere and water in the process.

>won't be habitable cause natural cycles interrupted
>won't go fast enough to get anywhere
>poor steering
>immense use of resources

Probably doable but no reason to do it

>>17481516
I mean theoretically speaking if the proper technology was available I assume one could build a man made exoskeleton "planet" around a star given the star had enough energy to supply/support the "planet" w an energy source.. which could then be designed to move around space if you could design a sort of engine that manipulated gravitational waves/frequencies n matter to get around... I'm no scientist, but I don't see why it isn't possible.

Earth is an organic spacecraft

All planets are

>>17481546
wouldnt call it organic since its mostly silicon based shit.

What do you think the moon is?

File: InvaderZim.jpg (7KB, 299x169px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 299x169px

>>17481516

That was already done in that one episode from Invader Zim

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caHOYFb4gNA

>>17481568
Hyperpenis.

>>17481573
That's definitely Planet X. You've been warned.

Not really, no. Such energies needed to take the earth out of its orbit would basically rip the earth apart.


>>17481573

I mean hypothetically if you built absurd rockets like this and some how fueled them, that would fuck up the earth to the point where there wouldn't be any point in moving it anywhere.

File: 1455602813500.jpg (37KB, 256x235px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 256x235px

>>17481533
Build a star sized enclosure that can withstand extremely high temperatures, while converting said heat into energy to power up an engine, or mechanism that could move the star that fuels it.

Then you bolt on a bridge, hangar , crew and flight decks, and
Voilà,

>>17481516
if you distort space maybe but the distance needed to cover in front of the planet and behind it might make it impractical

also the yield is well below scifi currently so it would be a long time before you break orbit and you would be flung without nay way to control flight path

conventional rockets are to weak and need oxygen even if its in liquid form

>>17481516
ultron did it.

>>17481516
Hi Kyle

John Lear pls leave

the sci fi novel, the sparrow, discusses using a an asteroid as a space ship

>>17481516
No, but the moon can.

>>17481703

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

Someone made a show about this exact topic.
Frisky Dingo.

>>17481516
I mean technically speaking if you managed to get enough propulsionary (is that a word?) force you could do it but there would really be no good reason to do it when you could just make a ship which would be better in basically every way for space travel.

>>17482012
The Annihilatrix used rockets, not the core of the planet.

Regardless, underrated show

>>17482044
This would suggest that the entire planets mass wasn't removed. If only the surface of the planet was somehow maintained in tact without collapsing, the mass would be substantially reduced and allow for non-discreet travel. While the inners could inhabit civilizations, propulsion systems etc etc.

>>17481516
Did you like the new star wars movie?

>>17481546
No anon, planets are gods.

>>17481546
>>17482741
stop roleplaying, planets are demons, i summoned one this one time

>>17481516
short answer is NO

>>17481516
How does an asteroid travel through space? Is it not the result of an exploding planet or star (in the early time of the universe) being flung out from it's source?

>>17482788
very interesting question

>>17482832
sure, but it was kind of rhetorical. In space you don't necessarily need a propulsion source, just an initial push, and from there the object keeps going. It can pick up speed from the gravitational force of other larger/massive objects (more gravitational potential - cosmic free loading) , like planets, black holes or potentially larger asteroids.

>>17482757
Not a bit. In fact, eventually, we want to find a way to do this. Huddling on an unguided planet is a bad idea. Sooner or later something's gonna get it!

A slightly better model is to ram a fusion drive through a gas giant, like say Neptune, and use its atmosphere as a fuel source. It's kind of cool to think that with a large enough body, you don't even have to build containment; gravity becomes field containment.

The best solution, obviously, is to build an artificial planet that's smaller in volume and much, much smaller in mass but in all other ways is a viable ecosystem with some serious shielding and march that around the galaxy.

>>17481533

That may be what the Atlanteans were trying to do. It also may be what ruined Mars.

>>17481616

What if you created a series of very small black holes to slowly pull the Earth out of orbit? Just enough energy to make temporary black holes and then you use the existing momentum to continue on a trajectory. The surface life and atmosphere would be destroyed, the water would likely be stripped off, the gravity would change significantly, but the inside could be turned into a giant cavern for habitation.

>>17483249
Stupid Mars!

>>17483260
Hypothetically, if a civilization was able to create and manipulate black holes like that, they would be well past the need to have to live on a natural planet or turn that natural planet into a spacecraft and would already be able to traverse the galaxy or universe in artificial space crafts.

>>17481516

Yes.

But abandon concepts like "habitable zone" or "atmosphere", all of that is thrown out of the window if you decide to transport an object the size of a planetoid.

Even with current technology it can theoretically be done.
However, by our understanding of physics there's no reason to move an entire planet unless you're running out of raw material in the local solar system, it's simply cheaper to harvest entire planets than it is to "steal" a planet from a nearby system.

If moving planets was viable, we'd be talking about a scenario where the vast majority of the solar system, all planets included, had already been harvested in order to build some form of megastructure, we're talking about concepts so far into the future the earth is not only dead and abandoned, the earth has been dismantled into raw materials.

>>17481546

The Earth is almost entirely inorganic, all known planets except Earth are entirely inorganic.

Out of all known systems, only the Earth and manmade vessels qualifies as being spacecraft.

File: tumblr_m3b5t74FDi1qmqh7go8_r1_250.gif (997KB, 245x281px) Image search: [Google]

997KB, 245x281px

>>17481516
Within the earth is a planet engine accessed through the southern pole entry.
This creates an artificial atmosphere to survive without the need for the sun.

of course and we will fuck our orbit

>>17484196

What is a planet engine? Could you please describe it?

>>17483371

From an energy conservation standpoint it might be preferable to the resources required to craft a spaceship the size of a moon. CERN may already be able to create small black holes and may be a few iterations from evolving into something that could create larger black holes.

>>17484196

Hitler and Martians and Reptars, oh my!

>>17484216

enormous terraforming/life support engine similar to that in the game septerra core.

>>17483260

Black holes are not the answer, and are entirely inadequate for this purpose (a black hole can't have a higher mass than it's input energy, in layman's terms, unless you feed it an entire solar system, it will have less gravity than a solar system)

Look up the concept of a Shkadov thruster, or a Class A Stellar Engine, for a stellar engine that actually CAN move entire planets however.

>>17484243
Well, that's easily disproven then.
Such an incredibly large facility is impossible to hide from prying eyes, if it existed even I would be able to detect it's existence.

File: 1287687739852.png (274KB, 365x500px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 365x500px

>>17481516
>CTRL+F
>Fleet of Worlds
>0 matches

TANJ

>>17484387
Don't you mean
>0 taste

>>17484453
flatlander detected

>>17484387
You beat me to it. Mr. Nivven has quite an imagination. Integral Trees, Ring World, the Fleet, Piercon's Puppeteers...

It's the heat, Morty. Industry keeps us warm in deep space. We're a god damn perpetual motion machine that set sail for Magellan's Cloud.