Rotation within a vacuum vs rotation with a pressurized environment.

  • Thread starter Thread starter BAUCE
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rotation Vacuum
AI Thread Summary
An object can theoretically spin indefinitely in a vacuum, but placing it in a pressurized environment may cause it to slow down due to various forces. Calculating the time it takes for an object to stop rotating in such an environment involves understanding the forces acting on it, possibly including shape alterations. The discussion also touches on the challenge of capturing space debris, where stopping or matching the rotation is crucial. One proposed method involves surrounding the debris with a pressurized space to halt its spin, but this raises questions about feasibility. Conservation of momentum is a key principle that complicates this approach, suggesting that simply pressurizing the space may not effectively stop the rotation.
BAUCE
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
common sense tells me that if an object can remain spinning in the vacuum of space for eternity, than placing that same object within a pressurised environment will cause the object to slow to a stop. is there a way for me to calculate the time in which it would take an object to stop rotating within a pressurised environment? the goal would be to achieve the fastest time in stopping an object from spinning.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BAUCE said:
the goal would be to achieve the fastest time in stopping an object from spinning.
By what means? Changing the shape of the object?
 
A.T. said:
By what means? Changing the shape of the object?
thinking along the lines of trash in space. in order to reach out and grab a piece of debris, either it has to stop spinning, or the rotation must be matched. my thought is that rather than 'grabbing' it, surround it and pressurise the space around it so to stop the rotation.
 
BAUCE said:
thinking along the lines of trash in space. in order to reach out and grab a piece of debris, either it has to stop spinning, or the rotation must be matched. my thought is that rather than 'grabbing' it, surround it and pressurise the space around it so to stop the rotation.
Sorry, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Why would you do it?
 
BAUCE said:
thinking along the lines of trash in space. in order to reach out and grab a piece of debris, either it has to stop spinning, or the rotation must be matched. my thought is that rather than 'grabbing' it, surround it and pressurise the space around it so to stop the rotation.
That won't work because of conservation of momentum. We don't know your background. Do you understand "because of conservation of momentum" ?
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

B The physics of flywheel launchers (like tennis ball shooters)
2
Replies
60
Views
4K
Can a Spinning Astronaut Use a Tethered Bowling Ball to Gain Motion in Space?
Replies
2
Views
1K
How much time to pressure balance two air chambers
Replies
4
Views
1K
Rotation of free solid object in vacuum, location of axis of rotation
Replies
16
Views
5K
Thoughts on Newton's Bucket and the relativity of rotation
Replies
6
Views
2K
B Questions about momentum and force as well as normal force/friction
Replies
35
Views
3K
High gravity vs. high pressure: ref. Dragon's Egg?
Replies
5
Views
3K
I What Could Cause the Earth's Rotation to Dramatically Slow Down?
Replies
39
Views
7K
I Non-Inertial Relativistic Dynamics
Replies
18
Views
1K
Can someone explain the vacuum pressure created by water pressure on waders?
Replies
9
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top