Artificial Gravity - General

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;21556996]What about creating something that has a LOT of mass? Then you'd create something with an actual gravity. (And slow down time because of the (Metaforical) dent in spacetime, but that's another matter...)[/QUOTE] But what about the energy you'd need to transport the mass you need for generating the gravity? What you want is to strap a rocket engine to a planet. (Which I think is an idea that is to be disscussed :v: )

Fucking artificial gravity, how does it work?

Ever since I was in about 3rd grade, I would think about things like this, and my solutions to the problem were everything you have, except for #3 and #5.

Hire black people to pull the astronauts' feet simulating gravity, throw them out to space when mission is complete. Cheap and effective.

[QUOTE=GOOD GRAMMER;21558726]Ever since I was in about 3rd grade, I would think about things like this, and my solutions to the problem were everything you have, except for #3 and #5.[/QUOTE] Really? I thought 5 and 1 were the least obvious. I knew that the Earth had gravity because it was so big though. Later I learned because it was mass, which didn't necessarily mean size. [QUOTE=Pocoyo;21558888]Hire black people to pull the astronauts' feet simulating gravity, throw them out to space when mission is complete. Cheap and effective.[/QUOTE] The fuck?

[QUOTE=Rubs10;21558922]The fuck?[/QUOTE] Rate him Useful. You know, sarcasm ratings.

But that would make races faster since all they have to do is go the opposite direction that the wheel is spinning

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;21547546]o you have this ship heading to Mars, but, en route, someone vomits due to nausea in freefall, the vomit touchs the control panels, the system goes crazy, and the ship's antimatter drive blows up, turning billions of dollars into a continent-sized nova. How do you fix this? Artificial Gravity. [B]#1 - Rotation[/B][/QUOTE] So, i guess you watched 'The Red Planet' then? [img]http://www.geeks.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Red-Planet.jpg[/img] Their 'wheel' sections rotates to create artificial gravity, and they go to Mars.

Although i think Eudoxia is rather smart for showing this, i dont think this is his original material.

1. Fill bucket with water. 2. Spin arm in circle. 3. Water stays at the bottom of bucket. 4. Apply concept to space stations. 5. Profit.

[QUOTE=Ori Child;21559954]So, i guess you watched 'The Red Planet' then? [img]http://www.geeks.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Red-Planet.jpg[/img] Their 'wheel' sections rotates to create artificial gravity, and they go to Mars.[/QUOTE] They didn't come up with the idea.

[QUOTE=Rubs10;21561495]They didn't come up with the idea.[/QUOTE] didn't say they did. but the op may have recently seen the film which prompted him/her to research the subject and 'enlighten' facepunch with the findings.

[quote]#4 - Magnetism Put magnets below the decks and on shoes. It allows people to hold on to surfaces, but in general it's not very good.[/quote] Fuckin magnets, how do they work? [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvmvxAcT_Yc[/media]

[QUOTE=LUHG!;21547613]He probably nicked it from somewhere and is trying to look smart.[/QUOTE] They teach you this freshman year or below.

Read Ringworld by Larry Niven. It's got a lot of great ideas like this, it even employs the same type of gravity caused by spinning the object.

[QUOTE=gol4z03;21560272]Although i think Eudoxia is rather smart for showing this, i dont think this is his original material.[/QUOTE] It's copy pasta off the Atomics Rockets website that details all this. Even the pictures.

Informative and interesting, but not as mindfucking as the last one. :golfclap: [editline]08:21AM[/editline] [QUOTE=CobraUnit;21560866]1. Fill bucket with water. 2. Spin arm in circle. 3. Water stays at the bottom of bucket. 4. Apply concept to space stations. 5. Profit.[/QUOTE] 6. Stop spinning, get covered in water. 7. Curse.

So what's the difference between artificial gravity and regular gravity.

[QUOTE=DeadorK;21565338]So what's the difference between artificial gravity and regular gravity.[/QUOTE] this is just an uneducated guess but couldn't the word "artificial" possibly mean something there [editline]02:53PM[/editline] i mean possibly it kind of describes the gravity since it's an attribute

[QUOTE=DeadorK;21565338]So what's the difference between artificial gravity and regular gravity.[/QUOTE] The outcome of the gravity is the same, but the way the gravity is achieved is different. Artificial just means that it has to be generated by technology (spinning, acceleration) rather then a huge object pulling you towards it.

Crazy terminology

[QUOTE=rosthouse;21565657]The outcome of the gravity is the same, but the way the gravity is achieved is different. Artificial just means that it has to be generated by technology (spinning, acceleration) rather then a huge object pulling you towards it.[/QUOTE] No, artificial gravity ISN'T gravity. It's exploiting some kind of effect to MIMIC gravity. Such as 'centrifugal' force.

[QUOTE=sltungle;21565769]No, artificial gravity ISN'T gravity. It's exploiting some kind of effect to MIMIC gravity. Such as 'centrifugal' force.[/QUOTE] I think there's a nice thought experiment from Einstein, that can be applied to this problem. [url]http://www.aei.mpg.de/einsteinOnline/en/spotlights/equivalence_principle/index.html[/url] But basicly said: gravity and acceleration are so close releated, that they can be treated in nearly the same way.

[QUOTE=rosthouse;21565934]I think there's a nice thought experiment from Einstein, that can be applied to this problem. [url]http://www.aei.mpg.de/einsteinOnline/en/spotlights/equivalence_principle/index.html[/url] But basicly said: gravity and acceleration are so close releated, that they can be treated in nearly the same way.[/QUOTE] If you're in a rocket that's accelerating it 'mimics' gravity. It's not actually, though. Gravity is the attraction of one body towards another, it's one of the four fundamental forces of nature. Acceleration is not.

[QUOTE=sltungle;21566250]If you're in a rocket that's accelerating it 'mimics' gravity. It's not actually, though. Gravity is the attraction of one body towards another, it's one of the four fundamental forces of nature. Acceleration is not.[/QUOTE] fundamental forces of nature go out the window when you involve Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Relative Acceleration is related to Gravity as they both involve spacetime directly.

Judging from the high acceleration needed, am I the only one who would vomit?

It only requires 1g of acceleration.

Cool.

It seems disorienting if a giant ring was continuously spinning really fast. It would be impossible to dock the space station without completely stopping the ring. Inhabitants would see the stars flying by which increases motion sickness.

[QUOTE=Number-41;21547907]Didn't magnets also attract non-magnetic substances, but only if they were ridiculously strong?[/QUOTE] There are different types of magnetism: Diamagnetism (objects wants to push out magnetic field), Paramagnetism (opposite) and Feromagnetism (strongest one). But for sure: With strong magnetic fields, you have an effect on every material. Near fast rotating neutron stars or even magnetars, fields can be that strong that it would simply rip you apart. [editline]02:51PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;21548797]We need to know about Higgs boson. If those guys in CERN actually prove it's existence, this shit could get interesting.[/QUOTE] The Higgs-Boson is quite irelevant for this. We better find the graviton - (or in other words: Find a fully quantized fieldtheory for gravity - which can be proven by experiments - and then try to figure out how to manipulate gravity) [editline]02:54PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Kyle902;21550863]Actually if the magnets are powerful enough you COULD actually be pulled down by them without having any metal on you.[/QUOTE] Actually pushed away from them, since you consist by 90% out of water and water is diamagnetic. Also, that would need many thousand Tesla which is unachievable at the moment. Maybe in the future but for that, we need new kinds of superconductors (with a higher value for their critical magnetic-field). [editline]02:56PM[/editline] [QUOTE=fskman;21552031]Give the ship a shell, and only have the innards turn? That way the outside of the ship isn't spinning, but the living compartments are.[/QUOTE] That won't help a bit. As soon as you want to move the ship, the inner parts have to be moved too. But because of their enormous angular momentum, this will still be a pain in the ass. [editline]02:57PM[/editline] [QUOTE=cyanidem;21552121]We need a science subforum[/QUOTE] We still have, but it's invisible: [url]http://www.facepunch.com/forumdisplay.php?f=318[/url] [editline]03:01PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Herr Sven;21556996]What about creating something that has a LOT of mass? Then you'd create something with an actual gravity. (And slow down time because of the (Metaforical) dent in spacetime, but that's another matter...)[/QUOTE] Matter is the most compact form of energy we know about (condensed energy). In order to "create" (you can't create or destroy matter = energy - just convert) mass (matter) we need energy. To store this energy, we should use it's most compact form to be efficient: Matter. See the problem? In order to "create" that mass, we need the actual mass. And it would be huge just to have a strong enough gravitational pull. [editline]03:02PM[/editline] [QUOTE=theseltsamone;21558482]Fucking artificial gravity, how does it work?[/QUOTE] Applying a force or pseudo-force onto your body using physical rules.