# Breakthrough Starshot?

I am trying to find out if there is any reason other than cost that Breakthrough Starshot is only looking at Alpha Centauri. It seems to me that once the laser system is in place that creating more nanocraft to go to other, even more interesting, places would be just a matter of mass production. I also wonder if a space-based laser satellite may be better as it may be able to accelerate the ships more slowly for a longer period of time. Is such a laser satellite using nuclear or solar power not feasible or again just too costly? I tried to find answers on their website, but was unsatisfied.

• There are several different questions here. Can you try narrowing it down a little? – SE - stop firing the good guys Jul 5 '16 at 15:39
• Perhaps this could be split into 2 questions: Why is Breakthrough Starshot only looking at Alpha Centauri, and Why aren't they considering using space-based laser satellites. We ask for questions that are narrow and specific enough for a fairly brief answer, and so the information is easy for others to find later. – kim holder Jul 5 '16 at 15:51
• At 0.2c-0.3c, Alpha Centauri is 15-20 years away, so it will take 20-25 years to get a result. More interesting is further away, making the wait longer, not to mention the need for more durable technology, and the further you go, the harder it will be to detect the signals sent back. But I think the key point is that it is described as proof of concept, and Alpha Centauri, being the nearest star, is the lowest bar to prove the concept. – Anthony X Jul 6 '16 at 1:30
• but I don't want to wait 25 years for proof of concept – Jack R. Woods Jul 7 '16 at 14:36
• @JackR.Woods That's easy to say when it's not your money funding the project. – called2voyage Jul 7 '16 at 19:29

Our current best estimate for the Star Shot ground-based approach is it will cost on the order of \$10 B. We estimate the space-based approach to cost on the order of \$100 B.