Can a spaceship withstand acceleration in a vacuum?

AI Thread Summary
A spaceship can indeed experience structural integrity issues during acceleration in a vacuum, similar to the effects of gravity on Earth. While some argue that the absence of air resistance means the ship would move without problems, significant forces generated by acceleration can still lead to structural failure. The compression wave created by the engines pushing the ship can cause damage if the structure is not adequately designed to handle these forces. Additionally, inertia will resist acceleration, potentially leading to crushing in weaker sections of the ship. Therefore, proper engineering is crucial to ensure the spaceship can withstand these forces during acceleration.
Bussani
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
We all know that if you accelerate at 1g in a vacuum, you'd be pressed into the floor/wall of your spaceship in the same way that you're pressed into the ground on Earth; that is, you would have "Earth Gravity".

I got into a discussion with some people about the structural integrity of a spaceship, though. There were claims that it isn't important and that since there's no air to resist the acceleration in a vacuum, the ship would just move with no problem. Some people argued that if the structure wasn't sound enough and the acceleration force was large enough, the ship could crumple even with no air resistance, just from the back of the ship trying to push the front of the ship. I know that the force has to travel through the object as a compression wave, with molecules pushing the next molecules and so on, so it sounds right to me that the ship could be damaged by the force of the engines pushing it if the force was strong enough. Also, even with no air resistance, the mass of the front of the ship would still resist the change in acceleration due to inertia, so I can picture a poorly made middle-section of the ship being crushed as the back end tried to push the front end. Is that right?

Thanks for any thoughts.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes if the engines were in the back, the forces would be the same on the accelerating ship as if it was standing still on the earth, on its engines. If the engines were in the front, then the spaceship would be pulled apart when accelerating.

Obviously you have to design it to be strong enough to withstand these forces, but that's the least of your worries when designing a spaceship!
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
Back
Top