Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
devrimci_kürt

a baby in space?

Recommended Posts

i imagine there would be some interesting newtons third law reaction forces going on(BABY CANNON!). and it would be even more messy than it is on earth as you'd have all sorts of fluids floating around your nice clean spaceship. but the birth itself would be possible.

 

the zero-g environment may have negative effects on the babies development, primarily muscular and bone development. that would be an issue.

 

i think that births in space would be required to be performed in a simulated gravity environment(both for safety and hygene) and for studies into the development of humans in space has more study behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The birth itself should be very possible; many animals give birth in water, which has some of the same properties in terms of lack of noticable gravity.

 

Development would be the problem - even inside the van Allen belts, there's enough radiation to serious screw up a developing fetus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no reason for giving birth in zero gravity, nor for extended human space missions in zero gravity. Artificial gravity, by means of cabin rotation, is a must for long-term human space exploration. Giving birth in space is only something that would happen during long multi-generational space missions to the stars. Robotic probes are far more cost-efficent than sending people anywhere further than the Moon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The history ch. with there series the universe had an episode of sex in space.

http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=389084

 

If I remeber right a birth wouldn't be impossiable but the biggest issue is the zero G and how it would affect limbs, organs, bodily functions etc.

Interesting episode where they go through how sex in Zero G would happen. Not that any asstronauts admitted to but, I wouldn't be surprised is there has already been some "play":eyebrow: in space haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from likely physical development issues, there is also a psychological development issue. Babies are instinctively afraid of heights, and floating around in a spaceship might scare them shitless. Not that a baby in space would be a good idea in the first place, not anytime soon anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bearing in mind the very serious medical impact on adults working in weightlessness for long periods (both loss of muscle and loss of bone), and the very vulnerable nature of a developing baby, I would say that gestation in weightlessness would be disastrous and I doubt such a baby would be born alive. Even if so, it would probably be deformed.

 

As has already been said, providing artificial gravity is not difficult. Merely tether two space habitats together and rotate them around their centre of mass. If this is done, then gestation and a healthy birth may be possible.

 

That is, if you take care of the radiation problem. That is a real hassle. In theory it could be done by generating the correct and very powerful magnetic fields around the space habitat. However, we cannot do that yet. Otherwise, a physical shield would do it, but it needs to be thick. Getting such mass into space is a logistical and economic nightmare. If the shield was water, about 10 metres thick is required!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I have thought is how to calculate the horoscope of a baby born in space. I mean horoscopes are earth centered, and could not possibly work on, say mars. Of course, this is not a surpsrise, as they are complete poppycock anyway and so do not work even upon Gods own earth! :eyebrow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing, missions into space are very physically demanding. Astonauts must be in tip-top physical condition, like a fighter pilot. A pregnant woman should never be subjected to such abuse as strenuous physical conditioning before launch and then withstanding several G's to fly into orbit, followed by weightlessness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bearing in mind the very serious medical impact on adults working in weightlessness for long periods (both loss of muscle and loss of bone), and the very vulnerable nature of a developing baby, I would say that gestation in weightlessness would be disastrous and I doubt such a baby would be born alive. Even if so, it would probably be deformed.

 

As has already been said, providing artificial gravity is not difficult. Merely tether two space habitats together and rotate them around their centre of mass. If this is done, then gestation and a healthy birth may be possible.

 

That is, if you take care of the radiation problem. That is a real hassle. In theory it could be done by generating the correct and very powerful magnetic fields around the space habitat. However, we cannot do that yet. Otherwise, a physical shield would do it, but it needs to be thick. Getting such mass into space is a logistical and economic nightmare. If the shield was water, about 10 metres thick is required!

 

Yes but AG (artificial gravity) isn't as easy as one thinks. First of all rotation creates a moment on your balancing organ when you turn to a side in such a concept and several factors impact on what is known as a ocmfort zone (4 parameters mainly I believe). But anyway.. going back to the birth if in zero g env... disastrous!!!!! as people say.. bone and vascular system detrimental effects!!


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged
Apart from likely physical development issues, there is also a psychological development issue. Babies are instinctively afraid of heights, and floating around in a spaceship might scare them shitless. Not that a baby in space would be a good idea in the first place, not anytime soon anyways.

 

I am not sure I would agree on this one. 'instinct' is a very vague concept.

 

A baby born in such an environment quickly adapts.. the so calld instincts of fear at first.. is the sudden breathing, the no longer nourishment through the umbellical? chord.. etc. however.. balance organ deprivation in such an environment could make the baby cry far more.. but not due to an instinctive fear really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure long-term effects such as bone disorders will apply. The OP asked about giving birth in space, not pregnancy and carrying to term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok sayonara.. but then another poster is right aboutmentioning the dangers of sending a highly pregnant woman into space with g forces and all.. but ok.. if we pretend she can get up into space in a nice way from soem celestial object.. and just to carry out the birth.. I guess the dangers would like far more for the woman giving birth than the child. (weightlessness, the strains on the body due to pressure differences in the cardiac system etc etc.). not to mention as someoen pointed out the free flowing goo ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the goo might be less of a problem than people think. When blood exits a wound in low gravity it runs across the surface of the skin (unless it's coming from an arterial rupture of course, in which case it is going to get messy).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The pregnancy period of a "space-Mom" is somewhat comparable to a pregnancy period of a woman practicing extreme sports who decided to conceive a child during a high-altitude expedition," says Mrs. Serova.

 

I guess giving birth in space is possible. If not, where did aliens came from? Just like here on earth, giving birth happens in different ways depending on the environment, the mom and the child will just adapt the environment they are in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the rest of the thread. Between the physiological issues and the radiation level, no human could carry a fetus to term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Read the rest of the thread. Between the physiological issues and the radiation level, no human could carry a fetus to term.

 

Shield the radiation and provide artificial gravity. It might not be ideal, but surely it is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shield the radiation and provide artificial gravity. It might not be ideal, but surely it is possible.

 

Assuming they're possible, yes. But, as I understand it, the former isn't really feasible (you'd need a LOT of lead), and the latter would require one of those big, wheel-shaped spinning stations like in 2001, and I highly doubt we have the money for that.

 

Radiation concerns are actually pretty big, and IIRC, were getting some serious discussion during the whole "let's go to mars" thing, since that would involve months and months away from any sort of protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assuming they're possible, yes. But, as I understand it, the former isn't really feasible (you'd need a LOT of lead), and the latter would require one of those big, wheel-shaped spinning stations like in 2001, and I highly doubt we have the money for that.

 

Radiation concerns are actually pretty big, and IIRC, were getting some serious discussion during the whole "let's go to mars" thing, since that would involve months and months away from any sort of protection.

 

I think we can afford to recognize that it is possible. From there we can look at the costs and benefits of making things "homey".

 

How thick would the lead have to be to shield as well as the highest inhabited elevations on Earth? Can any other material do it more efficiently? The cost of getting it up there is probably the biggest factor.

 

How small a wheel could be used comfortably?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand, magnetic fields would work as radiation shields, too. I agree lead is not likely, though I'm pretty sure there are other, lighter materials that are effective.

 

As for gravity, you don't actually need a spinning wheel. You can just have your habitat tethered to a counterweight, and have the two revolve around one another. That would have the same effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I understand, magnetic fields would work as radiation shields, too. I agree lead is not likely, though I'm pretty sure there are other, lighter materials that are effective.

As for gravity, you don't actually need a spinning wheel. You can just have your habitat tethered to a counterweight, and have the two revolve around one another. That would have the same effect.

 

I like that.The habitat could revolve without rotating and allow the inhabitants to observe there surroundings in a normal manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revolve without rotating? I'm not sure what you mean, but I don't think so. The "gravity" would always be directed away from the counterweight. Hence as the two revolve around one another, its direction is constantly changing. It's the same idea as the spinning wheel, just using only two opposite points, and only occupying one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I understand, magnetic fields would work as radiation shields, too.

 

For alpha and beta radiation, sure, but will they affect gamma?

 

I agree lead is not likely, though I'm pretty sure there are other, lighter materials that are effective.

 

Probably, but simple density is part of what makes good shielding - the more atoms the radiation runs into, the more likely it'll be absorbed/blocked/whatever.

 

As for gravity, you don't actually need a spinning wheel. You can just have your habitat tethered to a counterweight, and have the two revolve around one another. That would have the same effect.

 

True, but wouldn't it make more sense, if you're going to spend the effort to haul the counterweight up there anyway, to make it functional in some way.

 

Then again, I guess it doesn't need to be living space to be functional - it could be just batteries, water stores, CO2 scrubbers, etc, all connected via the cable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Revolve without rotating? I'm not sure what you mean, but I don't think so. The "gravity" would always be directed away from the counterweight. Hence as the two revolve around one another, its direction is constantly changing. It's the same idea as the spinning wheel, just using only two opposite points, and only occupying one of them.

 

The habitat portion would rotate once per revolution the way you described.

 

All very nice when you don't look out the window.

 

But when you want to observe what is going on outside the background will appear to be rotating, so you apply a counterspin to stop the rotation, making it not rotate, just revolve, and it will look normal. Might feel a little odd while your doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were to have a baby in space or bring one up there this would be the result...bahahahaha:D

hakdhakdh.bmp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.