its been done. it was on tv here in the uk a year or two ago IIRC, can't remember the name.

 

It was called space cadets, I watched it!

 

I thought the bonding in Haemoglobin stopped it being ferromagnetic, but I can't really remember....

I thought the bonding in Haemoglobin stopped it being ferromagnetic, but I can't really remember....

 

I don't think so, though I can't really remember either...how embarrassing...

iron is only ferromagnetic when it is in a crystaline form. in haemoglobin iit is ionic and bound to active sites. it is no longer ferromagnetic. even its electronshells are no longer that of iron.

 

humans and other animals have been exposed to incredibly strong magnetic fields before(strong enough to pull the iron out of your blood if it were in a ferromagnetic form) and not come off any the worse for wear.

Hmmm...I suppose I was wrong on that one,

good catch Klaynos & insane_alien.

The best way to mimic gravity on the space station is to tether it to another space station - or object of equivalent mass. Then you move both masses so that they both move in a circle about a point approx halfway down the tether. Centrifugal 'force' gives the illusion of pulling outwards, which permits simulation of gravity.

The only need for artificial gravity on a space station is to enable humans to survive in a microgravity environment. Life-threatening microgravity effects show up primarily in the bones and in bodily fluid systems; the effects on the gravity receptors (mostly inner ear) are debilitating but not lethal.

 

Currently, it is not practical to build a space station which can mimic gravity through rotation. NASA is working on a slew of other techniques to deal with the problem. You can Google NASA JSC Human Adaptation and Countermeasures Lab to get some idea of what they're doing with this.

In order to perfectly simulate gravity, all of the body's particles must be under acceleration towards the desired floor surface, other wise some parts would still be wieghtless, and you would feel it. Thus something like the rotation of the station would be better than magnets, as they would simply hold one down, likelt rather uncomfortably. And kill all of NASA's snazy computers they won't share with us!

I think that you seriously overestimate space station computers ... they are built for extreme reliability, not computing power.

the idea of it is good, but stimulating gravity would be nearly impossible, as you would have to have not only all parts of your body accelerating, but also you would need to figure out the exact rotation that it owuld take to properly stimulate earth's gravity. Thus meaning that it would be nearly impossible.

willawoga

 

It is not impossible, or even terribly difficult - just not practical at this time. The amount of rotation required is easily calculated using standard equations. The problems are the practical difficulties that come with living and working in a spinning world. For example : how can you get a good look at Planet Earth if it is (apparently) rotating around you rapidly?

 

As I said earlier, all that is needed for simulated gravity is a long tether, and a counter weight. Each rotates around each other. However, it would make it almost impossible to work effectively on the space station.

the idea of it is good, but stimulating gravity would be nearly impossible, as you would have to have not only all parts of your body accelerating, but also you would need to figure out the exact rotation that it owuld take to properly stimulate earth's gravity. Thus meaning that it would be nearly impossible.

 

What? It's extremely possible to make and do calculations required to simulate the gravity on earth. However, it is unpractical to make a space station like that because of costs and such. And why even make a space station like that in the first place when one of the most prized possessions of entering space is no gravity?

The best way by far is build square building in space. NO, we do not have sliding to the corners since we are not on a rotating planet that counter-points the circumferential force generated by spinning. If we build square buildings in space the we have more space and easier mechanics. Think about it!

The best way by far is build square building in space. NO, we do not have sliding to the corners since we are not on a rotating planet that counter-points the circumferential force generated by spinning. If we build square buildings in space the we have more space and easier mechanics. Think about it!

 

Ya what? How do square buildings simulate gravity?

Ya what? How do square buildings simulate gravity?

 

They don't.

Perhaps he means that while it doesn't simulate gravity, it will be so disorienting to the astronauts that they'll pass out and simulating gravity won't even matter anymore.

I say we accelerate the space station so that the forces acting on our bodies are equal to 1g.

 

I win.

 

and umm, this magic acceleration you speak of will come from where.among other problems IE/ docking with much slower shuttles, running out of speeds to go to.

 

and to replicate earths gravity, 9.81m/s/s we would have to speed up at said rate meaning in a day they would be going 8 314 799.04 m/s, 2% the speed of light, in less than a week were going faster than the speed of light