Interplanetary Portals vs Gravity

  • Thread starter Malapine
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gravity
In summary, the cavorite in the story might be fake, but high temperature superconductors might be real.
  • #1
Malapine
15
5
For story purposes, I want a portal from the Earth to a sealed cave on the Moon. But how would gravity behave near such a portal?

A test mass on the moon end feels 1.6m/s^2 acceleration towards the center of the Moon, a test mass on the Earth end feels 9.8m/s^2 acceleration towards the center of the Earth. Does that mean objects on the Moon side of the portal would feel an additional acceleration of 8.2 m/s towards the portal and be flung out the Earth side at high velocity? Would Earthlings have to be running at some fraction of escape velocity to go thru the portal in the other direction? Will tidal forces rip their limbs off if the portal has little or no interior length?

[ Meta question: how to handwave it so it doesn't do anything like that, and people can hop back and forth with only mild disorientation? ]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The difference in gravity is not great, so whatever effects you come up with should not be much different than a sudden change in perceived weight. From less than what humans are used to to what humans are used to - not a whole lot to worry about. Maybe some vertigo as the inner ear tries to adjust.
As long as the portal is oriented upright, parallel to the vectors of gravitational forces, I don't see any reason for gravity to suck anyone in. Maybe if you placed the portal horizontally, leaning over it would suddenly expose you to the excess gravity and you could topple and fall in (assuming going from the Moon to Earth). But again, not that much of a difference and nothing a human body can't handle.
Of course, you could just say no gravitational interaction passes through the portal because 'that's how portals are'.
 
  • #3
Portals are difficult to get right.

First you need to decide if they are going to conserve energy. Consider a simple thing like a portal with one end at the bottom of a large body of water like a lake. And the other end is at the top of a hill. If the water pressure can "go around" the change in altitude, then it can act as a very high pressure pump. Say the portal was 10.6 meters under water, you get 1 atm of pressure for "free." That will pump a huge amount of water.

So if the portal does not conserve energy, you get some very interesting things. You can use it as a fairly large source of energy, for example.

If it does conserve energy, you get some different interesting things. Somehow, the portal has to "know" what the relative change in gravitational potential is outside and inside, and find a way to equalize. That will mean there must be some interesting forces acting down the portal on the things going through.

Alternatively, sending something through the portal might conserve energy by exerting forces on the portal itself. This is sort of like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz's_law Lenz's law modified for portals. So maybe the objects going through the portal don't feel strange forces, but the portal gets squeezed or stretched or something so that energy is conserved.
 
  • #4
If the portal does conserve energy, then shoving an object of mass m "uphill" from an energy-conserving Earth portal to a Moon portal would require:

(GmM🜨/R🜨) - (GmM☽︎/R☽︎)

Or about 6×10^7 J/kg, presumably supplied using some sort of hydraulic jack over an extended period of time.

Dropping an object "downhill" from an energy-conserving Moon portal to the Earth portal would abruptly give it 6×10^7 J/kg of kinetic energy, flinging it out the portal at 10.9 km/s to burn up like a meteor. Random dust from the cave would become lethal hypervelocity projectiles.

Conclusion: the portal had better not conserve energy if I want people making day trips to the Mall of the Moon.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Compare the other way to get to Moon by tinkering with gravity in a way that obviously (although the story understandably does not point it out) does not conserve energy.
Cavorite. A material which simply blocks gravity - without experiencing it.
It contains copper, and it forms in its effective form when the prepared cavorite cools to near room temperature - after preparation and thermal handling which is not disclosed. Well, high temperature superconductors contain copper and take effect on cooling after thermal handling. They were discovered in 1986. There was no reason someone could not have stumbled on high temperature superconductors in 1886, just nobody stumbled on the correct composition and thermal history. Cavorite might be real, we just have not stumbled on it.
In the story, the first time a sheet of cavorite was formed in the experiment, it blew up the house the experiment was carried out in... because the whole column of air above the sheet lost weight.
This was a mistake. The whole column should not have lost weight. It should only have happened if the whole mass of Earth were concentrated in the centre, with rest of Earth of low density.
Since the mass of Earth is widely distributed inside, the parcel of air immediately above a horizontal sheet would lose all weight... but the air higher above sheet should be attracted by Earth except the fraction shaded by the sheet - increasingly smaller fraction higher above the sheet.

If you place a sheet of cavorite in a vertical direction then air directly above the sheet experiences full Earth gravity because it sees the sheet edge on, with no part of Earth shaded. Air anywhere below the sheet would experience full Earth gravity because the sheet would shade heaven, no part of Earth.
But air beside and diagonally above the sheet...
Note that the reasoning for cavorite also applies to a portal into a small gravity.
You can always divide local gravity into a vector sum of components, chosen as you please. For example, if you are entering the portal, the gravity of one half of Earth will not be 4,9 m/s2 vertically down. It will be a bit more than that. And at some angle from vertical (Specific size and angle depends on actual mass distribution inside Earth. It would be vertically 4,9 m/s2 if Earth mass were in the centre). The gravity of one half of Moon would also be bigger than 0,8 m/s2, and also at an angle from vertical... different angle because of different internal mass distribution.
In the net, you would experience a force pulling you back towards Earth. But this would not be a force "ripping apart limbs" - it would be a force some fraction of Earth gravity. And it would change gradually, as the angular size of Earth and Moon seen through the portal changes.
 
  • Like
Likes jbriggs444

1. What are interplanetary portals and how do they work?

Interplanetary portals are hypothetical structures that allow for instantaneous travel between different planets or celestial bodies. They are often described as wormholes, which are shortcuts through the fabric of space-time. These portals are believed to be created by bending the space-time continuum using immense amounts of energy.

2. How do interplanetary portals differ from the force of gravity?

Interplanetary portals and gravity are two separate phenomena that govern the movement of objects in space. Gravity is a natural force that exists between all objects with mass, causing them to be attracted to one another. On the other hand, interplanetary portals are artificial constructs that allow for faster travel through space by bending the fabric of space-time.

3. Can interplanetary portals be used to escape the pull of gravity?

No, interplanetary portals do not have the ability to escape the pull of gravity. Gravity is a fundamental force that exists between all objects with mass, and it cannot be manipulated or overcome by artificial means. Interplanetary portals may allow for faster travel through space, but they do not affect the force of gravity.

4. Are there any potential dangers associated with using interplanetary portals?

There are several potential dangers associated with using interplanetary portals. The immense amount of energy required to create and maintain these portals could have adverse effects on the surrounding environment. There is also the risk of getting lost or trapped in the portal, as well as potential disruptions to the space-time continuum.

5. Is there any scientific evidence for the existence of interplanetary portals?

Currently, there is no scientific evidence to support the existence of interplanetary portals. They are purely theoretical constructs based on our current understanding of physics. However, scientists continue to study and research the possibilities of interplanetary travel through the use of portals, and advancements in technology may one day make it a reality.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
784
  • Classical Physics
Replies
5
Views
768
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
22
Views
997
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
86
Views
4K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
9K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top