What will the real 22nd Century look like?

[ProtoAvatar]

NASA isn't studying artificial gravity because it can only be produced two ways. That doesn't sound right, because as I just read trying to find my proof, a spinning centrifuge isn't good for the health of the astronauts because it causes motion sickness and can lead to disorientation. Regular constant acceleration really isn't a true problem solver either, it requires that you bring your weight in fuel.

KJbushway, as far as humankind's current knowledge is concerned, there are ONLY two ways to simulate gravity - rotation and acceleration.
And humanity has no ideea how to generate star trek like artificial gravity; we don't even have a theoretical fundament upon which to build.
Deal with it.

Also - just because you don't like that there's no way of generating true artificial gravity (that humanity is aware of) means there must be a way of generating artificial gravity?
I already told you, KJbushway - the universe won't start changing its laws just because you don't like them.


About NASA projects - at present, NASA is NOT trying to find ways to generate true artificial gravity - search all you want, you won't find any projects along those lines.

As to past projects, if such an artificial gravity project existed, 3 things are true about it:
-it was based on theoretically suspect/practically unproven science;
-it was small scale;
-it produced no positive results.

 

[KJbushway]

NASA isn't studying artificial gravity because it can only be produced two ways. That doesn't sound right, because as I just read trying to find my proof, a spinning centrifuge isn't good for the health of the astronauts because it causes motion sickness and can lead to disorientation. Regular constant acceleration really isn't a true problem solver either, it requires that you bring your weight in fuel.

KJbushway, as far as humankind's current knowledge is concerned, there are ONLY two ways to simulate gravity - rotation and acceleration.
And humanity has no ideea how to generate star trek like artificial gravity.
Deal with it.

And - just because you don't like that there's no way of generating true artificial gravity (that humanity is aware of) means there must be a way of generating artificial gravity?
I already told you, KJbushway - the universe won't start changing its laws just because you don't like them.

One I never said that I was looking for the star trek solution to artificial gravity. My post were that NASA is researching it. Now while on my way to finding support, I found out that many space researchers including those at NASA were not happy about some of the reports that came back with test subjects feeling nausea and disorientation. They even listed it as a concern on many programs that NASA has put out. Even the Russians don't like the problems that come with the current ways of artificial gravity.
Whether its medical research or researching trying to IMPROVE what they already know about AG, NASA is conducting experiments and researching.
Where talking about the 22nd century. Of course humans don't now the way of creating true artificial gravity. But guess what helps that? Research. I don't care that there is only two ways, doesn't hurt my feelings. So we can drop the whole just because you don't like routine now.

 

[KJbushway]

Hey I think this thread was supposed to be a leeetle more lighthearted than what you're doing.

If the original poster hasn't complained about the direction the thread has taken there is really nothing we can do. Threads tend to take on a life of their own and all I can do is drag everyone back on topic when it is needed. And despite some folks being stuck in what seems to have become an endless loop, right now they are on topic. I am keeping a close eye on things though. I always do.

I am trying to stay nice. I went back on target with my crazy look into the 22ND century. Its from the old over-active imagination.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

KJbushway

"But guess what helps that? Research."
Research into what? How to build smow-men?
Until we will have a theoretical base upon which to build, practical research is useless. As of now, we only have general relativity and the Higgs boson conjecture - none of which offer a way for trek artificial gravity.
To put it simply, we don't even know where to begin.

"About NASA projects - at present, NASA is NOT trying to find ways to generate true artificial gravity - search all you want, you won't find any projects along those lines.

As to past projects, if such an artificial gravity project existed, 3 things are true about it:
-it was based on theoretically suspect/practically unproven science;
-it was small scale;
-it produced no positive results."

 

[sojourner]

Sorry I know its a lot to read. I really did try to find a shorter article.

Yea, you need to read it yourself, particularly the sentence directly after the one you bolded.

Spacecraft size dictates that any AG centrifuge tested in the foreseeable future be of limited radius (on the order of 1-3 m).

As well as the rest of the article which deals solely with centrifugal force artificial gravity. Despite the use of the words "artificial gravity" in the article, no where in it do they mention the creation/research of an "artificial gravity device" as you purport. All they talk about are tests using centrifugal force based setups.

Lets do an experiment ourselves. Define the following terms as you understand them. Maybe we can straighten out what I think is just a terminology issue.

Artificial gravity - are you referring to the magical kind of artificial gravity we see in science fiction?
Centrifugal force - do you include this in your definition of "artificial gravity"?
research - when you say NASA is researching something do you know the difference between research into the effects of something (medical research) and research into the development of something?

Edit to add more:

Whether its medical research or researching trying to IMPROVE what they already know about AG, NASA is conducting experiments and researching.

Sorry, this has not been your stand for the past 6 pages on this thread. You have been trying to prove that NASA is working on an "artificial gravity device". I have pointed out several times that NASA is only doing medical research into the use of centripetal force for simulated gravity and you have discounted and borderline ignored it at every turn.

 

[KJbushway]

Sorry I know its a lot to read. I really did try to find a shorter article.

Yea, you need to read it yourself, particularly the sentence directly after the one you bolded.

Spacecraft size dictates that any AG centrifuge tested in the foreseeable future be of limited radius (on the order of 1-3 m).

As well as the rest of the article which deals solely with centrifugal force artificial gravity. Despite the use of the words "artificial gravity" in the article, no where in it do they mention the creation/research of an "artificial gravity device" as you purport. All they talk about are tests using centrifugal force based setups.

Lets do an experiment ourselves. Define the following terms as you understand them. Maybe we can straighten out what I think is just a terminology issue.

Artificial gravity - are you referring to the magical kind of artificial gravity we see in science fiction?
Centrifugal force - do you include this in your definition of "artificial gravity"?
research - when you say NASA is researching something do you know the difference between research into the effects of something (medical research) and research into the development of something?

You can get off the device part, I have said many times now that whether its Medical or to improve knowledge and function of already known techniques, they are doing research.

 

[sojourner]

^Which as I said, was not your original standpoint. If you want to say now you agree that NASA is only doing medical and known techniques research and not trying to build some magical gravity device, then I think we can call this debate over.

 

[KJbushway]

1. I only mentioned artificial gravity DEVICE. In my first two comments. and i mentioned a artificial gravity method in my third. But for the most part I have been saying the same thing
NASA is researching artificial gravity.
On your posts
post 61
You mention that NASA isn't researching artificial gravity.
Post 73, you changed it up a little to your current point of few, but still said that NASA isn't researching artificial gravity.

So it looks like we both changed a little bit.
So the argument is still valid, because you keep saying NASA isn't researching Artificial gravity. Even mentioned that NASA is researching Medical, so thats making me half right.

 

[sojourner]

 

[KJbushway]

Sorry, I told myself I wasn't going to refer back to posts like you but I had too. Looks like everyone makes mistakes when writing. Some are just better with the grammar.

 

[sojourner]

 

[AstroSmurf]

sojourner using a single emoticon for one post is almost acceptable. Doing it twice in a row is bordering on spamming and/or trolling. Please do not do it again. You need to actually discuss the topic and not just roll your eyes at another poster.

 

[sojourner]

^Yeah, sorry, that second one wasn't needed.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

There's no way to have any idea what the 22nd century will be like.

 

[sojourner]

^The only thing we know for certain is it will be in the future.

 

[T'Girl]

What will the 22nd Century? I doubt we will venture far in space. The World will be overpopulated unless there was a worldwide war. If there was a worldwide war, it was nuclear, and no

Veering wildly back onto the OP (hope no one minds).

As far as the overpopulation of Earth, it seems as countries become "developed" and "westernized," the population growth eases and in many cases populations actually begins to reduce, which causes a separate group of problems.

The big war that started in the Congo twelve years ago was non-nuclear and still managed to kill five and a half million people, so apparently we can have lovely large World Wars without nukes.

we probably still won't be back to the moon or mars

Thinking about the current American space program just makes me sad. Two years ago China flew a three man orbital mission, two days ago they launched a moon orbital probe, their timeline is to land a Chinese astronaut on the moon in nine and a half years.

.

 

[KJbushway]

Agreed humans do love war to pass time, but on the other hand while a third world war could happen in the 22nd century, it is a good means of population control, sad enough as it is.
China is well one its way, the years part if a bit scary, but they will do it. Yes, the americans seem to have slowed down, but I hope that when the future generations come into the scene, maybe they will be excited and kick it back into gear.

 

[TheLobes]

Earth first! Make Mars our bitch!

Thats a Gribble of an idea!

 

[KJbushway]

yeah i was thinking the same thing.

 

[darkshadow0001]

The real 22nd century will probably be a cruel place with over-population, dwindling natural resources and continued warming of the planet. I also imagine we'll see some de-evolution in technology and the way we're governed. World War III will be fought as a conventional war and some of it will possibly be fought on North American soil.

I have three children, none of which I see reaching the year 2101 (the youngest is three).

I don't think it'll be that bad. If for some reason we get some President that will bring the deficit down, we will have a brighter future. Since the Clintons are a part of this presidency, I don't understand why they don't try and bring the debt down again instead of letting it rise.

Technology is progressing and I think if we work hard we can have a profitable and memoriable 22nd century. Hopefully Reality TV will be a dead thing by then, I so have not watched a lot of TV because of that stuff...