maggiomail
- 4
- 0
Why can't we fill the balloon with the lightest substance available, i.e. vacuum?
The discussion revolves around the feasibility of using vacuum to fill a skydiving balloon instead of lighter gases like helium or hydrogen. Participants explore the implications of pressure differentials, material limitations, and environmental conditions at high altitudes.
Participants express multiple competing views regarding the use of vacuum versus lighter gases, the implications of pressure differentials, and the environmental conditions at high altitudes. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.
Limitations include assumptions about material properties, the effects of pressure at various altitudes, and the specific conditions that would affect balloon performance at high elevations.
The balloon would have to be rigid and withstand huge forces. With known materials, that would make it heavier than the air it displaces.maggiomail said:Why can't we fill the balloon with the lightest substance available, i.e. vacuum?
Pkruse said:Could fill it with Hydrogen, which is lighter than Helium.
maggiomail said:Why can't we fill the balloon with the lightest substance available, i.e. vacuum?
300 miles up, we have space with an extremely good vacuum (most satellites are there, flying for years without falling down). The density is way too low to use balloons there.maggiomail said:Wonder how big a part radiation and subzero temperatures would play, say, 300 miles up?
You can increase their maximal height with a valve, but that does not reduce the mass of the hull - at some point, air pressure is too low to generate the required lifting force.Helium balloons explode if they go sufficiently high, presumedly from excess pressure?
maggiomail said:Helium balloons explode if they go sufficiently high, presumedly from excess pressure?
It can't be as simple as to install a pressure relief valve..
Wonder how big a part radiation and subzero temperatures would play, say, 300 miles up?