Why artificial gravity is not possible?

[jaiii]

Yes in this experiments wos wrote that it is possible anti gravity but I think
in futhute if I decresse mass I can icreasse to.

In attachmen I sent this article.

BTW knew you new about it.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yes in this experiments wos wrote that it is possible anti gravity but I think
in futhute if I decresse mass I can icreasse to.

In attachmen I sent this article.

BTW knew you new about it.

I didn't know about, but I did read the article. Honestly, it didn't satisfy me, so I googled one of the authors, and found a wikipedia article which led me to...
http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0603/0603033.pdf

Which is over my head in too many areas for me to comment. I can only speak from past experience in learning this material, that this appears to be a personal theory which someone is exploring. I know of know link between a magnetic moment, and gravity... or magnetism and gravity at all. One is, after all, a force, and the other is the geometry of spacetime.

I'm not going to make assumptions, but given the time that's passed without replication of results... eh... seems blue-sky to me.

 

[jaiii]

I agry ,but I heard there are more experimnts about it (Mr Podklentov for example) and thing it is future.

By

 

[FtlIsAwesome]

I was reading earlier posts... What are the cons of pseudo-gravity caused by rotation?
Such a craft can still accelerate along the rotation axis to move. An object rotating in space would spin indefinitely, making it the most energy efficient compared to counterrotating and continuous acceleration. A small craft need not be wheel shaped, it can have a counterweight on a cable for a kilometer or so (to provide 1 g without corolis affects the cable will be about 2 km long).
I'm under the impression that spinning stations and ships would be the best method for pseudo-gravity... if this is not true please explain why.

 

[nismaratwork]

I was reading earlier posts... What are the cons of pseudo-gravity caused by rotation?
Such a craft can still accelerate along the rotation axis to move. An object rotating in space would spin indefinitely, making it the most energy efficient compared to counterrotating and continuous acceleration. A small craft need not be wheel shaped, it can have a counterweight on a cable for a kilometer or so (to provide 1 g without corolis affects the cable will be about 2 km long).
I'm under the impression that spinning stations and ships would be the best method for pseudo-gravity... if this is not true please explain why.

One of the major drawbacks is the you have variable gravity in that situation unless you're talking about a gargantuan structure with large areas that are not inhabited. Meanwhile you still have people who can't cross the "wheel", unless they go through diminishing g until they hit the hub, then back up.

 

[Huttate]

Why have artificial gravity at all?

I would have thought that the benefits of freefall outweigh the drawbacks.

The question then would be addressing the drawbacks.

If muscle atrophy could be prevented through electro-stimulation during sleep or somesuch, what other drawbacks need to be addressed?

 

[DaveC426913]

Why have artificial gravity at all?

I would have thought that the benefits of freefall outweigh the drawbacks.

The question then would be addressing the drawbacks.

If muscle atrophy could be prevented through electro-stimulation during sleep or somesuch, what other drawbacks need to be addressed?

It is an unnatural way to live. While freefall may be fine for highly-trained personnel on short-duration flights, eventually regular people will want to be able to do regular things (like, say eat their lunch some other way than from a squeeze bag). You can't train every single passenger for free-fall. You'll get broken arms, spilled liquids and free-floating safety hazards galore.