Centrifugal Gravity: Understanding Its Effects on Objects

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nikolatesla20
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Centrifugal Gravity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "centrifugal gravity" generated by a spinning circular ring, exploring its effects on objects within that frame of reference. Participants examine the implications of tossing a ball in this environment, considering the nature of gravitational effects and motion in a rotating system.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the "gravity" experienced in a spinning ring is an artifact of the rotating frame of reference, with no actual force acting on objects like a tossed ball.
  • Others argue that a ball thrown upwards or forwards would eventually fall back down due to the motion of the ground, while a ball moving backwards would not return to the ground, leading to confusion about the nature of gravitational effects.
  • A participant proposes that if the ball is in a trajectory parallel to the spacecraft's center of mass, it would not come down, as the spacecraft moves around it.
  • There is a discussion about the conditions under which objects would fall back down, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of the ring's size and speed to maintain artificial gravity similar to Earth's.
  • Some participants mention the Coriolis effect as a factor to consider in this imperfect simulation of gravity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on how centrifugal gravity operates, particularly regarding the behavior of objects in motion and the conditions necessary for them to return to the ground. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the mechanics involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the effects of centrifugal gravity, including assumptions about air resistance and the specific conditions required for objects to behave as expected in a rotating frame.

nikolatesla20
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Centrifugal "gravity"

Imagine a giant circular ring, which spins to generate a type of "gravity" (think of the video game "halo" even)

My problem with this is:

1. A man is walking along this spinning ring. He feels gravitational effects no doubt.

2. The man takes a ball, and tosses it up high into the air.

3. The wind blows on the ball, forcing it backwards. So the ball no longer has the forward motion.

The problem with this "gravity" is I don't see how the ball is going to "come down" anymore. It is no longer in contact with anything that is spinning. The gravity only works when you are actually in contact with the spinning object thru some means.

Am I wrong?

-niko
 
Physics news on Phys.org
yes. you need no contact. the "gravity" is just an artifact of a rotating frame of reference, there is no force acting. the ball will move in a straight line as the ground moves in a circular arc toward the ball so it will appear that the ball is falling

as the ball's distance from the centre of the rotation changes though, other effects come into play
 
Last edited:
But if the ground is a circular arc, it will never "come to the ball" , because it is always still underneath it...
 
Here is a drawing of what I'm talking about..
 

Attachments

Last edited:
I think what you're trying to say is that it's possible to put a ball into a trajectory parallel to the motion of the spacecraft 's center of mass. The ball will move freely through space, while the spaceship moves "around it," never touching it.

You are correct that the ball, in such a trajectory, would never come "down" and hit the floor.

- Warren
 
the second pic is right if there's no air in the spaceship. you've effectively put the ball into orbit. the same as if you threw up a ball on the moon and applied a strong enough sideways force
 
Last edited:
chroot said:
I think what you're trying to say is that it's possible to put a ball into a trajectory parallel to the motion of the spacecraft 's center of mass. The ball will move freely through space, while the spaceship moves "around it," never touching it.

You are correct that the ball, in such a trajectory, would never come "down" and hit the floor.

- Warren

I have thought about how cool it would be to be in a ring shaped spaceship in which you normally stand on the walls normally, and take a fast vehicle and drive along it until you match the linear speed of the ship's rotation. Then you can get out of the car and feel like you're actually flying and you could be watching the ground move by at incredible speed, and so forth O.O! Of course, if this weren't in a vacuum, you would face some...problems.

If the radius of the ship was 100 meters, then you would only have to travel at 70 miles per hour (31 meters per second). This is if you wished to have the "artificial gravity" be similar to earth's.
 
kesh said:
the second pic is right if there's no air in the spaceship. you've effectively put the ball into orbit. the same as if you threw up a ball on the moon and applied a strong enough sideways force

However in my analysis, objects would only fall back "down" if you either threw them upwards, or forwards (in the same direction as the ring's spin). If any object moves backwards it would never come down. Well, it might eventually, if it's backward velocity was not enough to counteract the foward spin velocity. However, it would still give rise to a very imbalanced gravitation. Jump forward and you come down quick, jump backward and you stay up a long time.

Hm So I guess the size and speed of the ring have to be carefully chosen, because if it's too slow, it will be too easy to overcome the spin velocity, and get into orbit...

*ugh I'm so confused :P*

-niko
 
Last edited:
nikolatesla20 said:
However in my analysis, objects would only fall back "down" if you either threw them upwards, or forwards (in the same direction as the ring's spin). If any object moves backwards it would never come down. Well, it might eventually, if it's backward velocity was not enough to counteract the foward spin velocity. However, it would still give rise to a very imbalanced gravitation. Jump forward and you come down quick, jump backward and you stay up a long time.

Hm So I guess the size and speed of the ring have to be carefully chosen, because if it's too slow, it will be too easy to overcome the spin velocity, and get into orbit...

*ugh I'm so confused :P*

-niko
it is an imperfect simulation of gravity, definitely. you should look into the coriolis "force" for why
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K