Artificial Gravity

[Gamingphreek]

Can we achieve artifical gravity yet. And i dont mean strapping magnets to our feet or anything.

Also, being able to and having done are 2 differnt things. Have we ever succesfully accomplished this feat.

-Kevin

 

[Wahsapa]

LOL!!!

if it has EVER been done before EVERYBODY would have known about it by now...

 

[Gamingphreek]

Ok... then a better question is... "is it possible"

-Kevin

 

[Wahsapa]

science still has a long ways to go. nobody knows yet.

i remember reading somewhere that inside the circle of a praticle accelrator things become less heavy(some gravity field or something)

iv also read something about magnifying the gravity of heavy elements(like 114)

so far nothing yet

 

[imported_Hamzter]

Originally posted by: Wahsapa
science still has a long ways to go. nobody knows yet.

i remember reading somewhere that inside the circle of a praticle accelrator things become less heavy(some gravity field or something)

iv also read something about magnifying the gravity of heavy elements(like 114)

so far nothing yet

Hmm, I don't know why 'things' become lighter, I believe they could get heavier though, as the particles are travelling near the speed of light, according to relativity the faster a particle is travelling, the more mass it has. The closer the particles get to c, the closer to infinity the mass becomes (this is one explanation of why you can't go faster than the speed of light, at this speed the mass is infinite, and so requires an infinitely large force to accelarate it any further).

Never heard of magnifying the gravity of heavy element though, google seems to come up with alot of crazy people that claim to have built ZPE devices with nothing more than a washing up bottle, 3 rubber bands and a roll of sticky back plastic!

I'm pretty sure no one's ever been able to create artificial gravity, I don't know enough about the subject to comment whether it may be possible or not, and quite possibly no one knows, seen as no one's entirely sure what gravity is yet.

 

[Cattlegod]

Well the easy way is to have a rotating spaceship where all the stuff you use is on the walls of the spaceship. Other than that, no.

 

[timxpx]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
Well the easy way is to have a rotating spaceship where all the stuff you use is on the walls of the spaceship. Other than that, no.

wasn't that in 2001 a space odyssey ?

 

[BitByBit]

All you need is enough concentrated energy to warp space.
When an object accelerates for example, its KE increases, and the surrounding space becomes warped as a result.
Unfortunely, the energy required to do this is well beyond anything we're able to produce today, and probably this century.

 

[f95toli]

Originally posted by: timxpx

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
Well the easy way is to have a rotating spaceship where all the stuff you use is on the walls of the spaceship. Other than that, no.

wasn't that in 2001 a space odyssey ?

It's been in a lot of things (I think it was first proposed 75 years ago), including plans for new space stations (ISS is too small) and ships to Mars.
It is sort of an obvious solution to the problem of gravity in space and I think we will see it being done in a not-too-distant future.

 

[TheoPetro]

Originally posted by: BitByBit
All you need is enough concentrated energy to warp space.
When an object accelerates for example, its KE increases, and the surrounding space becomes warped as a result.
Unfortunely, the energy required to do this is well beyond anything we're able to produce today, and probably this century.

i thought it was mass that warps spacetime. although mass can be convirted to energy i didnt think that energy had that property of mass. like a singularity is just a vary large amount of mass thats concentrated at a point. and wouldnt things like stars exploding cause a sudden warp in spacetime ? i didnt think this happened but then again im just a freshman physics major w/ alot to learn

 

[Loki726]

Originally posted by: TheoPetro

Originally posted by: BitByBit
All you need is enough concentrated energy to warp space.
When an object accelerates for example, its KE increases, and the surrounding space becomes warped as a result.
Unfortunely, the energy required to do this is well beyond anything we're able to produce today, and probably this century.

i thought it was mass that warps spacetime. although mass can be convirted to energy i didnt think that energy had that property of mass. like a singularity is just a vary large amount of mass thats concentrated at a point. and wouldnt things like stars exploding cause a sudden warp in spacetime ? i didnt think this happened but then again im just a freshman physics major w/ alot to learn

The distinction between mass and energy is obscure at best. Objects with high energy actually have more mass than the same objects with lower energy. Take for example a helium atom. If you weigh the atom by itself and then weigh the individual protons/neutrons/electrons and add them up, you will find that they have different masses. This is because the helium atom contains energy in the form of nuclear bonds.

It is hypothesized that stars exploding would cause ripples in space time, but not in the way you are thinking. If you consider the star a "closed system" and have it explode, by conservation of energy, the total mass/energy of the system cannot change and therefore would continue to bend spacetime in the same way to an observer outside the system. However, it is theorized that accelerating masses can cause gravity waves, or ripples in space-time, much like a vibrating electron can emit electromagnetic radiation. I think Einstein proposed this and we have only in the last 10-15 years have started to see some examples of gravity waves. I think someone won a nobel prize for an example of them sometime in the 90's.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Can we achieve artifical gravity yet. And i dont mean strapping magnets to our feet or anything.

Also, being able to and having done are 2 differnt things. Have we ever succesfully accomplished this feat.

-Kevin

Haven't you ever ridden one of those rides at an amusement park, that spins around and you stick to the walls? Thats kinda like artificial gravity..

 

[TheoPetro]

so high energy particles warp spacetime? like do they make waves kinda like magnetic field lines around a wire w/ a current? im guessing that they dont need a medium to proprogate right? do photons/electrons exhibit this? and does it happen in those huge particle accelerators

 

[unipidity]

No. You cant 'prduce' a force from nothing. You cant have 'artificial' gravity any more than 'artificial' force.

And centrifugal acceleration is not in any way shape or form artificial gravity. Its barely a force at all.

Energy and mass, the equivalence of which we all have heard of, warp spacetime. The 'metric' of the local area- the matrix that defines the way in which a product is made- changes.

And no-one uses the concept of relativistic mass outside of popular science books anymore; to my knowledge.

 

[BitByBit]

Circular motion is possibly one of the least understood areas of physics.
There is no such thing as 'centrifugal force'. There is, however, centripetal force.
This is the force required to keep an object in circular motion, and is given by the equation:

F = mv^2 / r

Where v^2 / r gives the acceleration toward the centre of the orbit.

What people call centrifugal force is really inertia.

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Circular motion is possibly one of the least understood areas of physics.
There is no such thing as 'centrifugal force'. There is, however, centripetal force.
This is the force required to keep an object in circular motion, and is given by the equation:

F = mv^2 / r

Where v^2 / r gives the acceleration toward the centre of the orbit.

What people call centrifugal force is really inertia.

Simply put, when you are rotating in a circle you are under constant acceleration. When you are standing on a planet with gravity, you are under constant acceleration. For all intensive purposes, its effects are exactly the same as gravity.

 

[BitByBit]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Circular motion is possibly one of the least understood areas of physics.
There is no such thing as 'centrifugal force'. There is, however, centripetal force.
This is the force required to keep an object in circular motion, and is given by the equation:

F = mv^2 / r

Where v^2 / r gives the acceleration toward the centre of the orbit.

What people call centrifugal force is really inertia.

Simply put, when you are rotating in a circle you are under constant acceleration.

As I implied.

When you are standing on a planet with gravity, you are under constant acceleration. For all intensive purposes, its effects are exactly the same as gravity.

Not quite.
What you feel is the compression caused by gravity and the reaction of the ground you stand on.
Acceleration is caused by an unbalanced force. The force applied to my body due to gravity is exactly balanced by the reaction of the ground. If the ground beneath me were to suddenly disappear, then I would start to accelerate.

When an object is in orbit however, the acceleration toward the centre of that orbit is caused by an unbalanced force. In a planetary orbit for example, that force is caused by gravity, and is given by mg.

 

[statik213]

easy, figure out how to generate gravitons and then create a field of gravitons.

Well, there's supposed to be a particle like a photon called a graviton --- there's no evidence of it yet-- that propagets gravitational fields..... so if we can control those things we should be able to `make` gravity...

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: BitByBit

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Circular motion is possibly one of the least understood areas of physics.
There is no such thing as 'centrifugal force'. There is, however, centripetal force.
This is the force required to keep an object in circular motion, and is given by the equation:

F = mv^2 / r

Where v^2 / r gives the acceleration toward the centre of the orbit.

What people call centrifugal force is really inertia.

Simply put, when you are rotating in a circle you are under constant acceleration.

As I implied.

When you are standing on a planet with gravity, you are under constant acceleration. For all intensive purposes, its effects are exactly the same as gravity.

Not quite.
What you feel is the compression caused by gravity and the reaction of the ground you stand on.
Acceleration is caused by an unbalanced force. The force applied to my body due to gravity is exactly balanced by the reaction of the ground. If the ground beneath me were to suddenly disappear, then I would start to accelerate.

When an object is in orbit however, the acceleration toward the centre of that orbit is caused by an unbalanced force. In a planetary orbit for example, that force is caused by gravity, and is given by mg.

So 9.8m/s^2 isn't quite acceleration? What do you think causes the compression you feel standing on the ground? Constant acceleration. Think about it a little bit harder.

 

[vtohthree]

Going back to the graviton idea, anything with a mass is supposed to have a gravitational force. The same thing applies to tidal waves, the water is pulled by the gravity of the moon(a big mass). I don't have the knowledge to confirm but I believe mass density plays a role as well. Wow the universe is absolutely mind boggling when you think about all the planets aligning...ok enough of that.

This is a little off topic but I always wondered the opposite, if we could emulate microgravity in a stationary chamber. I mention the stationary chamber part because obviously microgravity is simulated by using airplanes and drop tower effects all the time, such as an airplane plunging downwards and everything flies up in microgravity inside the chamber, and same with the drop tower(broken-elevator-free-falling)effect.

 

[inveterate]

LOL,, Gravitons,,, why not Gravity Gnomes,,, the ones in my imagination are Blue,, scientists think they're green,, But I know they're BLUE

 

[unipidity]

Bah. Force fascists. Centrifugal is just as valid within its frame of reference as centripital is within its. It does exist. Just not *really*.

A stationary chamber (relative to the Earth) clearly cannot ever experience microgravity since its not in an inertial frame. Which is what microgravity IS, isnt it?

 

[Hedrik]

The gravity Gnomes are blue. The Leprechauns (leptons) are green.

And just to throw in the monkey wrench: the quantum foam of empty space gives us a 'zero point' against which to measure - a base reference frame. It may also serve as the elusive 'aether' through which mass-energy can be said to propogate...

 

[BitByBit]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
So 9.8m/s^2 isn't quite acceleration? What do you think causes the compression you feel standing on the ground? Constant acceleration. Think about it a little bit harder.

The force due to gravity and the reaction of the ground causes the compression!
I think you need to think a little harder. An unbalanced force produces an acceleration. The force due to gravity is balanced by the reaction of the ground.
If that were not the case, then you would indeed accelerate.

 

[vtohthree]

Originally posted by: unipidity
Bah. Force fascists. Centrifugal is just as valid within its frame of reference as centripital is within its. It does exist. Just not *really*.

A stationary chamber (relative to the Earth) clearly cannot ever experience microgravity since its not in an inertial frame. Which is what microgravity IS, isnt it?

What does inertial frame have to do with a stationary microgravity chamber? I mention stationary because microgravity chambers do exist by they are defying gravity by accelerating as fast as gravity only in the opposite direction. Nasa experiments with microgravity all the time in the other two examples I mentioned earlier, through a drop tower and by plunging airplanes with people inside of them, haha(quite funny to watch). I was just wondering if it existed, if there was another way NASA does it to emulate the astronaut experience.

edit: Anyways, if you could seclude the forces of gravity or counteract it in a chamber that is stationary is my question. It could mean a step closer to this artifical gravity... however I don't know if gravity can be explained to the full extent yet. The actual source of gravitational forces.