- #1
- 764
- 20
Centrifuges have long been viewed as the means to provide artificial gravity in the zero-g of deep space. Space colony structures like the O'Neill cylinder and the Stanford torus.
Centrifuges could also work their magic on the surfaces of low-gravity planets. Conical or paraboloidal shaped "Tsiolkovsky bowls" may be dug into the grounds of the Moon and Mars.
But now we come to the most interesting hurdle, high-gravity planets.
In our future space colonizations, we may not be able to be picky, and might have to settle on high-gravity planets. That sucks.
I've been thinking about ways to reduce the apparent gravitational weight on the surface of high-g planets.
The only thing I can come up with is a ginormous circular belt which loops around a great circle of the planet.
As it spins, the inhabitants standing on it will feel lighter. However, it is way more wildly impractical than the other centrifuges, which are already pretty impractical beasts themselves.
What do you guys think? Is it near-impossible to ease the load on high-g planets?
Centrifuges could also work their magic on the surfaces of low-gravity planets. Conical or paraboloidal shaped "Tsiolkovsky bowls" may be dug into the grounds of the Moon and Mars.
But now we come to the most interesting hurdle, high-gravity planets.
In our future space colonizations, we may not be able to be picky, and might have to settle on high-gravity planets. That sucks.
I've been thinking about ways to reduce the apparent gravitational weight on the surface of high-g planets.
The only thing I can come up with is a ginormous circular belt which loops around a great circle of the planet.
As it spins, the inhabitants standing on it will feel lighter. However, it is way more wildly impractical than the other centrifuges, which are already pretty impractical beasts themselves.
What do you guys think? Is it near-impossible to ease the load on high-g planets?