Difference between revisions of "Talk:Artificial Gravity"

Revision as of 13:47, 17 April 2006

Magnetic fields?

Is it a good idea to subject the astronauts to magnetic fields strong enough to produce an attraction of 0.5 g? That's a lot of magnetism. --The Killer Rabbit aka Nevin 13:42, 16 April 2006 (EDT)

I couldn't think of a way to increase the gravity beyond 0.1 g. A 22 meter object rotating at 2 RPM generates about 0.1 g. You'd need a 400 meter object rotating at 2 RPM to generate a field of 1 g. Since the habitat, when rotating, has a radius of about 22 meters, and 2 RPM is the most rapid rotation possible without inducing nausea and sickness, we're stuck at 0.1 g. (All the facts are on wiki/artificial gravity) --Foo1 17:55, 16 April 2006 (EDT)

Skylab used a system where the astros' boots slotted into grids on the floor. --The Killer Rabbit aka Nevin 18:44, 16 April 2006 (EDT)

But we need real gravity or else our bones would melt. The problem is not staying on the floor; but making sure that your bones don't liquefy.--Foo1 22:18, 16 April 2006 (EDT)

Gravity Simulation

Alright, this one has to be good. How do you plan to simulate .2g? There are some places where pseudoscience were always required because we simply can't simulate it. Low gravity is one of them. The astronauts won't feel low gravity, so yo simply can't pretend it exists. During in-flight EVA's, the astros walk on the surface of the AYSE drive to do repairs. When on planets, they walk on the planet surface. Why do the planets feel like earth gravity? Because that Habitat creates a very limited field in the surrounding area to make it so. This is for health reasons, so the astronauts don't lose any bone mass, etc. (or whatever other reason you feel like making up). You can use a different explanation if you want, but I'd really avoid trying to say you have low gravity when it is impossible to simulate. - Avacar 08:36, 17 April 2006 (EDT)

I am positivly stumped...though I beg people not to replace my article with some random graviton-crazy physics proposal. --Foo1 12:09, 17 April 2006 (EDT)

Interesting attempt to explain it away. As an alumnus, I must leave it up to all of you together to decide whether that's plausible enough. At least it does remove the need for some strange pseudoscience explanation (which is good), but you're once again telling the astronauts what they feel, which is dangerous. In general, I try not to put the astronauts in a situation where they can directly argue with observed/recorded info, as this can lead to conflicts. Will the astros experience 1g (because of their mental state) but the instruments record .2g (or whatever)?- Avacar 14:47, 17 April 2006 (EDT)