Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On the devastating effects of a year in space

brisbanetimes.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 135 posts

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#41

Post by WalterBright »

chrishacken wrote: post #14
martyvis wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that lack of gravity seems to be a major risk factor for well-being I'm surprised a static structure like the ISS doesn't yet have a rotating centrifuge-like structure ala 2001: A Space Oddysey to at least ward off the effects during sleep and downtime

There actually was a proposal for one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X There's also this issue: "Another problem is that we do know of adverse effects that arise at high rotational rates of speed. The Coriolis Effect has to do with rotating reference frames and it can seriously screw with the inner ear. The only way to maintain a strong centrifugal gravity while keeping rotational speed low is to lengthen th…

One way to make it "big enough" is to put a weight on the end of a long cable, and spin the combination. It wouldn't need to be a full g either, some should be a lot better than nothing.

With a cable, though, there might be weird problems with oscillations.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#42

Post by foota »

whatshisface wrote: post #35
chrishacken wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There actually was a proposal for one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X There's also this issue: "Another problem is that we do know of adverse effects that arise at high rotational rates of speed. The Coriolis Effect has to do with rotating reference frames and it can seriously screw with the inner ear. The only way to maintain a strong centrifugal gravity while keeping rotational speed low is to lengthen th…

Zero-G also makes people sick, but astronauts can get used to it. If you put someone in a small spinning station for six months, would they also get used to the motion sickness? What if you found someone suffering from (and that had learned to live with) permanent vertigo?

Shouldn't motion sickness only happen when you have a reference frame? i.e., if you're on the space station you shouldn't be able to tell when it's spinning?

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#43

Post by [deleted] »

jack9 wrote: post #9
QAPereo wrote: post #5

...And this is why Mars for colonists is still very much a turgid fantasy. We need to dream less, and commit more to the hard and expensive org of solving these problems. Step 1: stop stripping NASA down to bare metal. Here’s some possible insight into the impact of radiation on their brains: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/05/space-radiation-may-d... this is in addition to bones, muscles, eyes, etc. Edit: the pr…

There's a strong sentiment that anything anti-mars-enthusiasm hurts humanity more than helps. There's absolutely nothing to support this idea, other than some misplaced notion of hope in the face of nihilism of our terrestrial problems. In proper pragmatic context, if we can't colonize the moon, sending people to Mars is a massive waste and overly dangerous. Nobody wants to admit to that, because movie fantasy has so…

[deleted]

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#44

Post by travisjungroth »

foota wrote: post #42
whatshisface wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zero-G also makes people sick, but astronauts can get used to it. If you put someone in a small spinning station for six months, would they also get used to the motion sickness? What if you found someone suffering from (and that had learned to live with) permanent vertigo?

Shouldn't motion sickness only happen when you have a reference frame? i.e., if you're on the space station you shouldn't be able to tell when it's spinning?

A rotating object isn't exactly the same as gravity. There's a rotational effect that exists, so you can tell the difference between being on the ground and in a centrifuge.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#45

Post by dredmorbius »

WalterBright wrote: post #41
chrishacken wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There actually was a proposal for one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X There's also this issue: "Another problem is that we do know of adverse effects that arise at high rotational rates of speed. The Coriolis Effect has to do with rotating reference frames and it can seriously screw with the inner ear. The only way to maintain a strong centrifugal gravity while keeping rotational speed low is to lengthen th…

One way to make it "big enough" is to put a weight on the end of a long cable, and spin the combination. It wouldn't need to be a full g either, some should be a lot better than nothing. With a cable, though, there might be weird problems with oscillations.

Or, alternatively, a zero-g banjo and opportunity for true space music.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#46

Post by KGIII »

larkeith wrote: post #34
rocqua wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still a daunting prospect for those expecting to return from mars to earth.

I had been somewhat under the impression that current colonization plans were one-way deals. Agreed that it'll be an issue once we have the infrastructure and desire to return to Earth.

Prior to colonization, I'd expect there to be visits which do not result in permanent residency on Mars.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#47

Post by dredmorbius »

yorwba wrote: post #40
jacquesm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ISS is simply too small for that. It would have to spin at a ridiculous rate in order to get to a level of gravity where the effects are no longer felt. And in this particular case that is actually a blessing because even if the space station would be able to do this the spaceship used for any interplanetary traveling would not and so no useful data for such a trip would be collected.

Since the centrifugal force for mass m, angular velocity w and radius r is mw²r, you only need w = sqrt(g/r) to reproduce Earth-like levels of acceleration. At r = 10 m, that's already less than 1 rad/s or 1/6 cycle/s. That doesn't seem ridiculously fast. And why wouldn't an interplanetary spaceship be able to spin fast enough? You could just build it as a space station with thrusters.

The O'Neil space station designs were premised on 1 RPM. Though a 3 RPM environment might be tolerable continuously, switching between rotating and non-rotating environments suggested a lower rate. See:

http://www.nss.org/settlement/ColoniesInSpace/colonies_chap0...

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#48

Post by CapitalistCartr »

yorwba wrote: post #40
jacquesm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ISS is simply too small for that. It would have to spin at a ridiculous rate in order to get to a level of gravity where the effects are no longer felt. And in this particular case that is actually a blessing because even if the space station would be able to do this the spaceship used for any interplanetary traveling would not and so no useful data for such a trip would be collected.

Since the centrifugal force for mass m, angular velocity w and radius r is mw²r, you only need w = sqrt(g/r) to reproduce Earth-like levels of acceleration. At r = 10 m, that's already less than 1 rad/s or 1/6 cycle/s. That doesn't seem ridiculously fast. And why wouldn't an interplanetary spaceship be able to spin fast enough? You could just build it as a space station with thrusters.

To make it Earth-like, and not make people nauseous, it has to have a diameter around 200 meters. Less than one G is practical, though. As little as 0.25 G might forestall the medical complications.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#49

Post by astrodust »

coleca wrote: post #36
markatkinson wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny I thought the same thing. Or even an in house doctor for check ups and assistance.

So it sounds like even NASA astronauts even have a crappy healthcare plan like the rest of us.

Many countries have universal healthcare, but the US has universally bad healthcare.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#50

Post by thatswrong0 »

baddox wrote: post #28
thatswrong0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well they do have those tied-down-with-a-spring treadmills, but that only covers you for the duration of your workout. I don’t know anything about constructing things for use in a space station, but I can’t imagine creating such a rotating structure would be easy, cheap, or safe.. a problem with a structure rotating quickly in space could quickly cause major safety issues for the ISS I’d imagine.

Resistance training is certainly still possible, but you still lose the normal ambient resistance you get on earth just from walking around and holding your limbs in place against gravity. The difference between low-gravity and someone on Earth who doesn’t exercise much is probably much larger than the difference between a non-exercising Earthling and an Earthling who exercises. Besides, that doesn’t really work for…

Great point about the treadmill.

I guess my point is that I just can’t imagine that all the brilliant people involved with the ISS _didn’t_ think of a rotating structure.. but even just getting a sizable non-rotating structure cost 150B.

I wonder what kind of health issues we’d see even with a rotating structure tho. Would living on such a structure really help prevent most of these issues?

Post reply on HN