What will the real 22nd Century look like?

[sojourner]

1.Evidence to support my comment on NASA trying to find artificial evidence: From studies in ground-based centrifuges and rotating rooms, researchers have estimated that the
maximum angular rate for “comfortable” rotation is between 2 and 6 rpm. Higher rates
permit a shorter radius, less mass, and less kinetic energy for any particular centripetal
acceleration (apparent gravity). Unfortunately, higher rotation rates also yield higher levels of
Coriolis acceleration and cross-coupling with normal head rotations. These distort the apparent
gravity and can lead to motion sickness due to a sensory mismatch between the vestibular and
visual senses of motion. Because the Coriolis effects and rotational cross-coupling occur only
intermittently, during relative motion within the rotating habitat, they may take a crew member
by surprise if he or she has become disoriented with respect to the axis and direction of rotation.
(ok so your Constant acceleration is in there along with the spinning idea)
the slow rotation room at the Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, Pensacola,
Florida
HTML: http://www.federallabs.org/servlet/FLCLPRODisplayServlet?wLPROID=1185
(Sounds like a place they would do artificial gravity research in.)
The physical theory behind artificial gravity is as old as Isaac Newton's Principles. Nevertheless, there was no significant research into the human factors of artificial gravity until Sputnik inaugurated the "space race". With the beginning of manned space flight in the 1960s, there was concerted effort to determine the comfort criteria for rotating habitats. In the USA, much of this research took place in centrifuges, rotating rooms and rotating space station simulators at the Naval Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory (Johnsville, Pennsylvania), the Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory (Pensacola, Florida) and the NASA Langley Research Center (Hampton, Virginia). heres a link. http://www.spacefuture.com

I am sorry, you are confusing the use of centripetal force to simulate the effects of gravity with artificial gravity. Which I already mentioned. Once again, NASA is not researching artificial gravity. Nothing in your post relates to artificial gravity. It's all centripetal force.

Linking to a website for a random government research facility is not providing any kind of proof. I could link to a website showing spinning plates and say "looks like research into spinning space ships", but it wouldn't be true.

That last website might actually be good for you, but it doesn't support your argument in any way. I suggest you start reading more of the articles there.

 

[KJbushway]

Okay well me and you are going to dig at each other on this issue forever, i can go get more support for my claims that NASA IS researching Artificial Gravity. Because zero-gravity is a problem to our health. All I am saying is basically the 22Nd century wont look to different from today, there might be a moon base, there might even be more satellites around mars looking for a spot to put bases there too, but the real century of real colonization of our solar system is 23rd in my eyes.
I just realized that we spent this whole time arguing about how space will look like but have been neglecting what the actual earth will look like. The affect the humans have on the environment is bad. While the ozone hole is dissipating, the affects on the earth while it was there is still here with us today. I am in a state right now where the avg temp at this time would normally be 75. but the past three years its gotten hotter each time. First it was in the 80's until October,(2007) then my state had water emergency, you couldn't even was a car outside.(2009) today its supposed to be 80-75, it was 94.
In this case we need to concentrate more on earth than any program in space. Not that it needs to go to the waste side.

 

[KJbushway]

Just a little side note:

1. web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/artificial-gravity-0415.html
2. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37120546/
3. science.nasa.gov/science-news/science...nasa/.../07feb_stronggravity/
4. imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/.../980204c.html
5. www.space.com/.../artificial-gravity-tests-astronaut-health-100512.html
6. selenianboondocks.com/2010/06/agnep1/
7. www.flightglobal.com/.../nasa-rotating-spaceship-for-artificial-gravity-4459.aspx
8. www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/23660.php
9. www.physorg.com/news3921.html
10. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=2...=Ne=20&Ns=HarvestDate%7c0&N=4294964632+129+22

 

[sojourner]

Just a little side note:

1. web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/artificial-gravity-0415.html
2. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37120546/
3. science.nasa.gov/science-news/science...nasa/.../07feb_stronggravity/
4. imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/.../980204c.html
5. www.space.com/.../artificial-gravity-tests-astronaut-health-100512.html
6. selenianboondocks.com/2010/06/agnep1/
7. www.flightglobal.com/.../nasa-rotating-spaceship-for-artificial-gravity-4459.aspx
8. www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/23660.php
9. www.physorg.com/news3921.html
10. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=2...=Ne=20&Ns=HarvestDate%7c0&N=4294964632+129+22

LOL. Every one of those links leads to articles on using centrifuges to create centripetal force, Simulating the effects of gravity. This is not research into creating artificial gravity. You need to read those articles and learn the difference between medical research and physics.

 

[Deckerd]

I've seen quite a few artifical gravity ideas in films with a central hub and spinning section(s), which seems a sensible way to solve the problem. I wonder, though whether a spinning drum, like B5 wouldn't allow more surface area to have AG than modules on the end of arms.

 

[sojourner]

I've seen quite a few artifical gravity ideas in films with a central hub and spinning section(s), which seems a sensible way to solve the problem. I wonder, though whether a spinning drum, like B5 wouldn't allow more surface area to have AG than modules on the end of arms.

Of course it would. But depending on the situation it's not practical.

 

[KJbushway]

What no opinion on Earth comes first?

My Links, support the idea that NASA is looking into artificial gravity, something you keep saying they are not doing. Now I understand The difference between Medical research and physics. Now you got to understand that in this case NASA is using both to research artificial gravity. Those links are not about the whole article, its just showing that NASA has and is looking into artificial gravity. Type NASA ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY 2010. thats how i got those links. Whether right or wrong in your opinion, its show support of my comment that NASA has been looking into artificial gravity.

 

[T'Girl]

My Links, support the idea that NASA is looking into artificial gravity, something you keep saying ...

The first link lead to this article "New plans for artificial gravity tests in space using centrifuges may hold the key to helping future astronauts ward off the debilitating loss of muscle and bone due to ..." the problem with this, as other have noted, is that centrifuges do not generate a gravitational field, they do not create "artificial gravity." Now don't get me wrong, centrifuges could solve certain medical problem (while creating others), but again, they're not creating "artificial gravity."

 

[sojourner]

What no opinion on Earth comes first?

My Links, support the idea that NASA is looking into artificial gravity, something you keep saying they are not doing. Now I understand The difference between Medical research and physics. Now you got to understand that in this case NASA is using both to research artificial gravity. Those links are not about the whole article, its just showing that NASA has and is looking into artificial gravity. Type NASA ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY 2010. thats how i got those links. Whether right or wrong in your opinion, its show support of my comment that NASA has been looking into artificial gravity.

I fear that your poor grasp of the English language is hampering this discussion. You do not understand the difference between research into creating artificial gravity and research into the effects of simulated gravity. This is not opinion. This is fact. Please actually READ THE ARTICLES YOU LINKED.

They do not support your comment that NASA has been looking into artificial gravity.

 

[KJbushway]

Your right my typing isn't the best and I have tried working on that. Sometimes the brain goes faster than the hand. I have actually gone back an edited a lot of my old posts.
1. My comment of Earth comes first is still a valid point.
2. Like I said the articles aren't what the links are about, they just show that NASA has looked into artificial gravity, whether it was for medical research or how to effectively use it in space means that still in a small way I am right. I can call NASA if you want and ask them if either of us is right? Pretty sure I can find a researchers number. I mean from how you talk, you either inside NASA or friends with a bunch of them.

 

[KJbushway]

Those who insult first automatically loose the debate.

 

[AstroSmurf]

Play nice please. Heated debating is fine as long as you keep it clean and troll-free.

 

[sojourner]

Your right my typing isn't the best and I have tried working on that. Sometimes the brain goes faster than the hand. I have actually gone back an edited a lot of my old posts.
1. My comment of Earth comes first is still a valid point.

You have to get out of the car to fix a flat tire.

2. Like I said the articles aren't what the links are about, they just show that NASA has looked into artificial gravity, whether it was for medical research or how to effectively use it in space means that still in a small way I am right. I can call NASA if you want and ask them if either of us is right? Pretty sure I can find a researchers number. I mean from how you talk, you either inside NASA or friends with a bunch of them.

You're original comment was that NASA was researching artificial gravity. Not medical research, not simulated gravity through centripetal force, but true artificial gravity. This is simply incorrect. If you want to modify your position at this point and claim you were referring to research into the effects of artificial (simulated) gravity, fine. That is as close to what your referenced links will come to what you are talking about.


Edit to add more: I think you are getting hung up on the term "artificial gravity". The term is used pretty interchangebly to signify simulated gravity such as constant acceleration or centripetal force. NASA is researching those methods, but don't confuse that with "an artificial gravity device" as you put it. NASA is not researching some magical device it can put under the floor of a space craft to generate gravity.

And no, I do not work for NASA or have friends at NASA, but I do follow the space technology field closely. I read, a lot. You should too.

 

[Myasishchev]

Earth first! Make Mars our bitch!

 

[KJbushway]

Earth first! Make Mars our bitch!

 

[KJbushway]

Your right my typing isn't the best and I have tried working on that. Sometimes the brain goes faster than the hand. I have actually gone back an edited a lot of my old posts.
1. My comment of Earth comes first is still a valid point.

You have to get out of the car to fix a flat tire.

2. Like I said the articles aren't what the links are about, they just show that NASA has looked into artificial gravity, whether it was for medical research or how to effectively use it in space means that still in a small way I am right. I can call NASA if you want and ask them if either of us is right? Pretty sure I can find a researchers number. I mean from how you talk, you either inside NASA or friends with a bunch of them.

You're original comment was that NASA was researching artificial gravity. Not medical research, not simulated gravity through centripetal force, but true artificial gravity. This is simply incorrect. If you want to modify your position at this point and claim you were referring to research into the effects of artificial (simulated) gravity, fine. That is as close to what your referenced links will come to what you are talking about.


Edit to add more: I think you are getting hung up on the term "artificial gravity". The term is used pretty interchangebly to signify simulated gravity such as constant acceleration or centripetal force. NASA is researching those methods, but don't confuse that with "an artificial gravity device" as you put it. NASA is not researching some magical device it can put under the floor of a space craft to generate gravity.

And no, I do not work for NASA or have friends at NASA, but I do follow the space technology field closely. I read, a lot. You should too.

Yes, I follow the Space technology closely. The reading thing is quite different, I actually have read more in my life than you have or I am very close. I wasn't thinking of a small device that creates artificial gravity, I know they haven't created it yet.
I also knew that those ideas you wrote about were a focus of NASA.
The only thing I hadn't known about was the ill affects of zero gravity until 3 years ago. Around the time my space interests spiked. I had already been watching things like star trek and Stargate at the time (you probably wonder why I wrote that, I am just saying that star trek didn't peak my space interest at first, just intensified it later on.)

 

[RandyS]

Earth first! Make Mars our bitch!

Your name wouldn't be William Morgan Clark, would it?

 

[sojourner]

Yes, I follow the Space technology closely. The reading thing is quite different, I actually have read more in my life than you have or I am very close. I wasn't thinking of a small device that creates artificial gravity, I know they haven't created it yet.

But do you know they are not researching it either?

I also knew that those ideas you wrote about were a focus of NASA.
The only thing I hadn't known about was the ill affects of zero gravity until 3 years ago. Around the time my space interests spiked. I had already been watching things like star trek and Stargate at the time (you probably wonder why I wrote that, I am just saying that star trek didn't peak my space interest at first, just intensified it later on.)

Why did you spend so many countless posts claiming that NASA was doing something it wasn't?

Also, I really do get the impression that english is your second language. The way you structure your sentences and the grammar used in them is just - off. For exxample, the first sentence in the post above: Yes, I follow the Space technology closely. "The" is not needed before "space technology" and sounds out of place.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Socially or politically, who knows? China could push communism around the world, or some Chinese could have devised a whole new political system. I predict that Western domination of geo-politics may end in the middle of this century, after about 5 or 6 hundred years of Western Europe and now the USA being top dog. Economically, China may be the largest world economy perpetually, given the large population.

You're right up Cartman's alley with that one.

 

[Lazarus]

Also, I really do get the impression that english is your second language. The way you structure your sentences and the grammar used in them is just - off. For exxample, the first sentence in the post above: Yes, I follow the Space technology closely. "The" is not needed before "space technology" and sounds out of place.

Although to be fair putting two Xs in the word 'example' is pretty off as well...