/sci/ - Science & Math

How are scientists supposed to do zero-g experiments in a space station that has gravity?

>>3131096
Eh? The ISS is in permanent free fall, there's no gravity there

>mfw OP thinks a small sphere containing 100 people will generate enough gravity to function like normal.

>>3131102
That's what I mean. They can do zero-g experiments on the ISS because it's in free fall. a space station like the one proposed by OP would have gravity, so zero-g experiments would be impossible.

>>3131111
>The sphere can be set to spin on an axis to create it's own gravity
... tangential velocity at the poles is ...?

>>3131112
Who said anything about it being small?

>>3131096
> implying the only science worth doing is space has to do with zero gravity

>>3131120
Fc = m*v^2/r

>>3131133 Fc = m*v^2/r
That would be the answer to "post some random letters please". Better luck next time.

>>3131138

its de centeptal frce ekawatuin

>The sphere can be set to spin on an axis to create it's own gravity, thereby eliminating the muscle atrophy and bone density loss that inhabitants would experience.
that would never work, youll have beter luck with a cylinder form.

>>3131138
>>3131120

Yeah. See, I don't know because I'm not a scientist. I did a google search for 'tangential velocity at the poles' and found a page that spoke about centrifugal and centripetal force.

Here's the link:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Physics-1358/centrifugal-force.htm

I expect scientists and engineers to be able to figure out how fast to set this thing to spin in order to create the kind of gravity needed to allow people to walk around on the inside of the thing.

>>3131160
Why?

ITT OP mistakes the cause of gravity to be global spinnans, rather than sheer mass.

A sphere would be structurally sound though, making it easier if one wishes to build a very large station that will inevitably have a micrometeorite problem.

>>3131170
Yeah. Fine. Make it super massive. Without any spin, folks will still be floating around on the inside of what is mostly a hollow sphere. It will need spin to create centripetal force to keep people grounded.

>>3131163
Hint: A website called allexperts.com isn't a good source on science. (Did I just call first semester mechanics science? Oh well)

>>3131170

How much of a micrometeorite problem does the ISS have? How do they deal with it? The Geodesic Space Station will be at least twice as massive, so one could conclude that the frequency of micrometeorite impacts would be roughly twice as high. Again, nothing insurmountable, but certainly worth considering.

>>3131189

Spinning is only worth it on a ring or cylinder shaped structure because half a sphere would be inaccessible and wasted if it is spinning on an axis.

>>3131169
lets take the earth, as it spins it moves fastest at the equator and there is no movement at the poles. there will alwys be 2 point with no movement anbd thus no aretivitial gravity. also, everything will get draged to the "equator" in your space station. to solve this use a sylende, everyeher it will spin at the same rate and have the same gravity. lost of speling mistakes and i dont kare.

we have one already its called the moon silly rabbit , granted its not "ours" but who ever put it there sure doesnt seem to want it

>>3131060
> What do y'all think of designing an orbiting space station that's a geodesic sphere?

If you want artificial gravity, you're better off with two pods connected by a beam.

The main problem is that a centrifuge needs to be large. For earth-like gravity, the radius needs to be at least a few hundred metres and possibly as much as a kilometre. If you try to get away with a smaller radius and just increase the rotation rate, the occupants get dizzy. And a sphere that size is completely beyond our current capabilities and funding.

Donut was here. Sphere is smalltime.

>>3131060 The sphere can be set to spin on an axis to create it's own gravity

>Nope.png

A ball or cylinder spinning on its axis is not going to produce artificial gravity in the same way as a box tethered to a counterweight will.

Everything would be totally fucked in a sphere.

There's probably a more efficient design. I don't see how a geodesic sphere is theoretically perfect.

>>3131060
Awosome idea, we should call it the death star

All of OP's reasons would apply just fine to a cylindrical space station, which has the benefit of being better than a spherical one.

>>3132220

Except his idea doesn't work at all on a sphere or a cylinder. You can't have something spinning on its axis to create gravity, your head will always be moving faster than your feet.

>>3132484 head will be slower than your feet.

>>3132484
isn't your head right now moving faster than your feet?

>Start thread about geodesic sphere space station at 12:40
>bump a little to get it started.
>go out with mom for lunch
>come back at 5:20 and thread is still on page 1.
>mfw

>>3132484

It wont make a noticeable difference if the sphere is reasonably big.

>>3131120

This. If you wan't a space station that has gravity, use a doughnut shaped one. Or a circle. Although I guess you can make that inside the sphere and use the rest of the sphere for experiments and stuff that don't need gravity (pretty much everything but humans).

>>3132547

mfw

>>3132484
There is no perceptible difference if the object that is rotating is large enough.

>>3131170

ITT a person who doesn't know inertial forces such as centripetal and centrifugal force are the same as gravity caused due to mass.

>>3132563
*the same from the perspective of the object upon which the "forces" are acting

>>3131426
>>3132547
Fuck yeah, torus master race.

>>3132547
DAMN RIGHT!

>>3132619

how would the forces work on any surface of the torus besides the equatorial ones?

>>3132619

>>3132701
No need for every surface to be occupied. A ceiling is fine too. Still better than a sphere, much less space wasted, more living space.

>>3132718

source?

>>3133911

I think it's a game where you manage a space station for alien customers.

>>3132718
What if we spin each section, while we spine the entire thing? Would that create the entire map with 1G ?

As in, rotate r1 and r2 (assuming flexibility

>>3133918

each section?

>>3131060

...

I actually like that idea.

although you'd need internal spokes if you wanted it to rotate, otherwise the stresses would be a bitch to the frame.

has anyone proposed/designed a torus/ring structure? id like to see the specifications