How can artificial gravity be created for space exploration?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of creating artificial gravity for space exploration, exploring various methods and implications of achieving this goal. Participants consider both theoretical and practical aspects, including centripetal acceleration, linear acceleration, and the potential use of magnetic forces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that artificial gravity can be achieved through centripetal acceleration, suggesting that this is a feasible method.
  • Others question the implications of standing orientation in a rotating spacecraft, noting that centrifugal force would act sideways.
  • One participant mentions the Coriolis force as a factor that must be considered in the context of rotational artificial gravity.
  • There is a suggestion that linear acceleration could also create artificial gravity, although this is described as less feasible.
  • Concerns are raised about the fuel requirements for maintaining constant acceleration, with one participant arguing that it would lead to free fall in interstellar space.
  • Some participants discuss the potential of using magnetic forces for propulsion, but others counter that without an external force, this would not lead to acceleration.
  • There is mention of previous discussions on the topic, indicating ongoing interest and exploration of the concept.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views on the feasibility and implications of different methods for creating artificial gravity. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the best approach or the practicality of the proposed ideas.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their proposals, such as the dependence on external forces for magnetic propulsion and the challenges of maintaining tangential velocity in a rotating system. The discussion also highlights the need for further exploration of engineering challenges associated with artificial gravity.

  • #31
Thread closed temporarily for Moderation...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
The thread is now reopened...
 
  • #33
I think that pause has released us all from the thread's grip.
 
  • #34
kimbyd said:
So if you're throwing a ball "up" in a rotating spacecraft , it'd move in a weird arc.
Weird only insofar as the conditioning you’ve had in living in standard Earth gravity.

It wouldn’t be “weird” after a few weeks. The brain is amazingly plastic.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale and sophiecentaur
  • #35
sophiecentaur said:
Is it really worth introducing Sci-Fi ('Fiction') ideas into an Engineering problem? We might as well have a man with a magic wand on board to take us wherever we want.
And before quoting Arthur C Clarke, his ideas came from informed sources. The only real error in his fiction was the time scale for his events - very optimistic.
Our current state of technology is a series of realized ‘fiction.’
 
  • #36
Digcoal said:
Our current state of technology is a series of realized ‘fiction.’
If you made two lists of SciFi ideas, with the fruitful ones in one list and the dead ends in the other, I think the dead ends would be in a huge majority. But that isn't a criticism of SciFi literature; a random bit of SciFi will be about as 'valuable' as any other bit of fiction.

We're straying into the realms of semantics. But I would disagree with the idea that 'fiction' is necessarily the route to technological solutions. Very often, it's Maths and concentrated thought that yield to advances in technology. The process of invention is very varied and will depend on the individual. But so much technological advance these days is based on group discussion.
But if you want to define fiction appropriately then you can get any answer you want to this question.
 
  • #37
sophiecentaur said:
Very often, it's Maths and concentrated thought that yield to advances in technology.
And the cases where it is not are usually happy accidents followed by carefully digging into a “that was weird”. Such happy accidents are hard for sci-fi writers to predict.

Any way, let’s not divert to a discussion about sci-fi
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 159 ·
6
Replies
159
Views
15K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K