Artificial Gravity

[Polish3d]

sv_gravity xxx of course

 

[Particle]

Originally posted by: Einstein Element

Originally posted by: Particle
What about cold fusion? Isn't that as powerful as the sun? How could a spacetime gravity warp be created from something like that? They are currently building a fusion plant in France. Would all of that energy need to be going on at once or does it need to be in mass form like a planet? Although at the core resides more energy.

cold fusion hasn't been replicated in any more experiments except that first one that got all the scientific publicity, has it?

Here are two links.

The ITER project in France:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

'Hot' Fusion' experiment:
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2004/ldx.html

Originally posted by Woodchuck2000

What we need to do is find a way of sticking a proverbial two fingers into spacetime and adjusting its curvature to counteract gravitational effects. It's theoretically possible but as to how to adjust the curvature in real life? Not a clue.

I was reading about Light Cone theory on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone
(I find I can get allot of info from the Net these days despite books + there are allot of good books on the Internet also lately.) So, I think it says that, with two Light Cones, each light cone has to 'meet' at a 45 degree angle thus creating an attraction discrepancy creating the appearance of gravity. A spacetime warp. It seems similar to a general light bending theory.
Does the earth's magnetosphere or Solar wind have something to do with this as well?

by BitByBit
just as collapsing stars whose rising energy levels warp space to such a degree that the surrounding space tears also get replaced with a black hole.

Allot of this also reminds me of a weather storm with the tornados representing black holes. If the pressure becomes too much then a tornado is created to bring pressure from one side of the storm to the other.

 

[patentman]

Bah i didn;t read the rest of the thread before I posted. Someone already posted what I was going to say.

 

[egkenny]

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 ?

Artificial gravity was demonstrated in space even before 2001 a Space Odyssey came out. It was first demonstrated with the Gemini 11 mission which was launched on September 12, 1966. The Gemini spacecraft was connected using a 30 meter tether to an Agena spacecraft. A slow rotation was initited by the Gemini spacecraft for 2-1/2 orbits around the earth.

 

[SilthDraeth]

Originally posted by: Particle
What about cold fusion? Isn't that as powerful as the sun? How could a spacetime gravity warp be created from something like that? They are currently building a fusion plant in France. Would all of that energy need to be going on at once or does it need to be in mass form like a planet? Although at the core resides more energy.

Actually that isn't a cold fusion plant. Though it is fusion.

 

[SilthDraeth]

Double post. Sorry.

 

[the splat in the hat]

yes its possible , you can creat a small amount of gravity by spinning something , or for a large scale idea , one humans have not done yet but a shinning ''eg'' of it would be in the Babaloyn 5 movies/series, the Babaloyn station is designed in prinsible to have a massive rotational section, spinning at a rate that would produce the gravity needed to walk upright etc etc, yes its still sci fi at the moment, but humans could build such a thing, maybe not quite that scale but yes its is possible, we can creat gravity even though we dont even have an inkling of gravities make up, ie, what is gravity ? what actually is it ?
anyways yes its possible............

 

[Woodchuck2000]

Originally posted by: egkenny

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 ?

Artificial gravity was demonstrated in space even before 2001 a Space Odyssey came out. It was first demonstrated with the Gemini 11 mission which was launched on September 12, 1966. The Gemini spacecraft was connected using a 30 meter tether to an Agena spacecraft. A slow rotation was initited by the Gemini spacecraft for 2-1/2 orbits around the earth.

At the risk of being the thread pedant, that's not artificial gravity as far as I'm concerned simply because gravity itself is not involved (or at least the gravitational attraction between the masses involved is negligible).

Artificial gravity implies the manipulation of spacetime to create actual gravitational effects. Manipulating actual gravitational fields is still beyond even our theoretical capabilities to the best of our knowledge.

Circular motion provides a similar end product in a range of extremely simple cases but it's never going to be able to, for instance, attract a distant body in free space.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: Woodchuck2000

Originally posted by: egkenny

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 ?

Artificial gravity was demonstrated in space even before 2001 a Space Odyssey came out. It was first demonstrated with the Gemini 11 mission which was launched on September 12, 1966. The Gemini spacecraft was connected using a 30 meter tether to an Agena spacecraft. A slow rotation was initited by the Gemini spacecraft for 2-1/2 orbits around the earth.

At the risk of being the thread pedant, that's not artificial gravity as far as I'm concerned simply because gravity itself is not involved (or at least the gravitational attraction between the masses involved is negligible).

Artificial gravity implies the manipulation of spacetime to create actual gravitational effects. Manipulating actual gravitational fields is still beyond even our theoretical capabilities to the best of our knowledge.

Circular motion provides a similar end product in a range of extremely simple cases but it's never going to be able to, for instance, attract a distant body in free space.

All the effects are the same though. You are manipulating spacetime in the reference frame of the person going around in the circular part of the ship to make it identical to the spacetime found in a gravitational well...

 

[Woodchuck2000]

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: Woodchuck2000

Originally posted by: egkenny

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 ?

Artificial gravity was demonstrated in space even before 2001 a Space Odyssey came out. It was first demonstrated with the Gemini 11 mission which was launched on September 12, 1966. The Gemini spacecraft was connected using a 30 meter tether to an Agena spacecraft. A slow rotation was initited by the Gemini spacecraft for 2-1/2 orbits around the earth.

At the risk of being the thread pedant, that's not artificial gravity as far as I'm concerned simply because gravity itself is not involved (or at least the gravitational attraction between the masses involved is negligible).

Artificial gravity implies the manipulation of spacetime to create actual gravitational effects. Manipulating actual gravitational fields is still beyond even our theoretical capabilities to the best of our knowledge.

Circular motion provides a similar end product in a range of extremely simple cases but it's never going to be able to, for instance, attract a distant body in free space.

All the effects are the same though. You are manipulating spacetime in the reference frame of the person going around in the circular part of the ship to make it identical to the spacetime found in a gravitational well...

That I can't disagree with
I just didn't want the less highly-technical amongst us thinking that they're identical in mechanism as well as effect.

 

[Particle]

Why isn't the international spacestation spinning for 'artificial' gravity or insta-gravity, Gravity-on-Demand. I made those up.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: Particle
Why isn't the international spacestation spinning for 'artificial' gravity or insta-gravity, Gravity-on-Demand. I made those up.

no offense but you really need to educate yourself before engaging in a discussion such as this one.

 

[Yanagi]

If its not been posted yet. www.americanantigravity.com

 

[Particle]

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th

Originally posted by: Particle
Why isn't the international spacestation spinning for 'artificial' gravity or insta-gravity, Gravity-on-Demand. I made those up.

no offense but you really need to educate yourself before engaging in a discussion such as this one.

I think there is a little confusion. I meant why didn't they build a space-station that spins for artificial gravity or would it have been better to do that? I was asking why they couldn't have built a spinning station to create weight. Would it be better.

 

[DrPizza]

Just a shot in the dark at the answer to your question:
Because if the area the astronauts are living in is spinning, then either relative to the astronaughts, the equipment is moving, or the equipment is stationary. If it's also spinning, with the astronauts, then it probably creates some problems in terms of operation. example, if you're in a playground, is it easier to take a picture of the slide while you're standing on a stationary merry-go-round, or while standing on a spinning merry-go-round?

Now, if the equipment isn't in the gravity simulated environment which is spinning, but the astronauts are, it makes it difficult for them to work on it. The solution would be to stop the spinning, then restart it after repairs or use of equipment was completed. However, this would require a lot of extra fuel.

edit: ooops,
"astronauts"
Why do my fingers always type -aughts? Mind of their own.

 

[Mrpilot007]

I'm surprised no one has defined gravity for this discussion:

(physics) the force of attraction between all masses in the universe;

especially the attraction of the earth's mass for bodies near its surface;

"the more remote the body the less the gravity";

"the gravitation between two bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them";

"gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love"--Albert Einstein

 

[Particle]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Just a shot in the dark at the answer to your question:
Because if the area the astronauts are living in is spinning, then either relative to the astronaughts, the equipment is moving, or the equipment is stationary. If it's also spinning, with the astronauts, then it probably creates some problems in terms of operation. example, if you're in a playground, is it easier to take a picture of the slide while you're standing on a stationary merry-go-round, or while standing on a spinning merry-go-round?

It could be a problem for science experiments because of minute (but still large in terms of experiments) gravity differences from the center axis of rotation??? It's not like a giant planet's more stable gravity. Any sort of scientific testing would have to be done close quarters or maybe in the center of the station where there was no gravity simulated. As far as regular everyday use it could be allot more comfortable for the astronauts.
Hmm, maybe later on they can add a spinning-wheel to the outside of the current station. The current station can be used for science while the outside wheel for recreation and lesser admin tasks. So docking would have to be done with the center unit still as now.

 

[Gravity]

Originally posted by: Particle
Why isn't the international spacestation spinning for 'artificial' gravity or insta-gravity, Gravity-on-Demand. I made those up.

Instant? I think not! Upon request perhaps....

 

[Gamingphreek]

Additionally, i remember a long time ago, i heard someone say that all objects have gravity. For instance, us humans have gravity, but we are simply too small for it to affect anything. Is this true?

So this is indeed true to a certain extent?

-Kevin

 

[egkenny]

# Is it possible to generate artificial gravity by spinning a part of the space station? If so, will you use it for exercise to keep astronauts in space longer?

Yes, by rotating a habitat in space the resulting outward pointing centrifugal force can be made to appear like gravity, thus: "artificial gravity."

However, the ISS will employ no spinning parts, for several reasons: (1) its main purpose, after all, is the maintenance of a microgravity environment for science and technology research, which rotation would negate; (2) it would require the provision of a special rotational joint and airtight seal which would be complex, heavy and expensive, (3) the rotating section would have to be designed stronger and therefore be heavier than a module for use in microgravity, (4) a space station with rotating elements is highly sensitive to mass imbalances: it would start to wobble (nutate) like an unbalanced tire, which would necessitate additional heavy and expensive wobble damping lest the microgravity in the non-rotating section would be affected to the detriment of research, and (5) creating centrifugal force by rotation around a radius as short as the ISS design permits introduces undesirable disturbances on the motion/position sensing organs in the human inner ear, such as coriolis force and cross-coupled accelerations. However, the ISS will include a special module (the CAM) with a 2.5-meter centrifuge inside so that researchers can investigate all these open questions and study the effects and role of gravity at various levels on physical, chemical and biological processes. That work may eventually lead to the development of spaceships employing artificial gravity for long-duration missions into deep space.

 

[egkenny]

The atractive gravitational force between two bodies is given by:

F = G * m1 * m2 / r^2, where G is the gravitational constant.

The gravitational force is relatively weak. As an example, two SUVs, each with a mass of 3000 kilograms and placed with their centers of gravity 3 metres apart, will attract each other with a force of about 67 micronewtons. This force is approximately equal to the weight of a large grain of sand.

 

[the splat in the hat]

as l understand it gravity is in the realm of the quantum world physic's and we dont really know what gravity is at all, we can only see its energy or force output, ie gravity, so just what physicly is gravity ?

 

[Woodchuck2000]

Originally posted by: Mrpilot007
I'm surprised no one has defined gravity for this discussion:

(physics) the force of attraction between all masses in the universe;

especially the attraction of the earth's mass for bodies near its surface;

"the more remote the body the less the gravity";

"the gravitation between two bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them";

"gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love"--Albert Einstein

Not strictly true - gravity can also affect particles with zero mass. The sun causes a measurable deflection in the light passing nearby from distant stars. Photons are expected by most physicists to have zero mass (zero non-rest mass) and therefore they shouldn't be affected if we use that definition of gravity.

 

[Auryg]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Additionally, i remember a long time ago, i heard someone say that all objects have gravity. For instance, us humans have gravity, but we are simply too small for it to affect anything. Is this true?

So this is indeed true to a certain extent?

-Kevin

Yes.

As a matter of fact I once saw a demonstration on some physics video where a piece of paper..or something.. was attracted (although only slightly) to an aircraft carrier.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Auryg

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Additionally, i remember a long time ago, i heard someone say that all objects have gravity. For instance, us humans have gravity, but we are simply too small for it to affect anything. Is this true?

So this is indeed true to a certain extent?

-Kevin

Yes.

As a matter of fact I once saw a demonstration on some physics video where a piece of paper..or something.. was attracted (although only slightly) to an aircraft carrier.

I am so massive, that I attract the earth with a force of over 200 pounds.