NationStates

Yes Im Biop wrote:

SquareDisc City wrote:Well that raises the old question of how long people are on the craft for, and in turn how long journeys take. If it is a long time, such negative effects could be controlled medicinally either by a conventional drug or by the ever-popular medical nanites, which unlike typical artgrav don't need to go beyond IRL physics.

The effect of Micro Grav on Bones is that it weakens them from lack of use. Take me. I'm 5'10 195lbs onm Earth. Now how would my bones feel after 2 month's of weighing 20 pounds? Lazy and weak. Only way i can think of counteracting this for long term in Sleep or what not is Insane calcium injections...

Mind you, calcium injections would actually make another physiological issue of life in low gravity even worse; as the bones atrophy and their cells are recycled, they release their calcium back into the bloodstream. Fairly quickly, the concentration of calcium in the blood goes up and the astronauts/crewmembers would develop a condition called hypercalcaemia, which has a raft of unpleasant side effects ranging from depression and insomnia to gallstones and intense nausea and the resultant vomiting.

Apparently osteoporosis drugs help counteract bone loss.

One possible idea I had for helping negate bone/muscle loss with near-term technology is to use those electrical muscle stimulators while sleeping. It would keep the body "active" and the bones under some amount of stress during what is otherwise a giant chunk of time with no activity at all. You're floating in a zero-g sleeping bag, so chances are you wouldn't accidentally shift or remove the electrodes like you could while sleeping in a bed under gravity.

SquareDisc City wrote:Well that raises the old question of how long people are on the craft for, and in turn how long journeys take. If it is a long time, such negative effects could be controlled medicinally either by a conventional drug or by the ever-popular medical nanites, which unlike typical artgrav don't need to go beyond IRL physics.

Centrifuges go beyond IRL physics?

Avenio wrote:

Yes Im Biop wrote:
The effect of Micro Grav on Bones is that it weakens them from lack of use. Take me. I'm 5'10 195lbs onm Earth. Now how would my bones feel after 2 month's of weighing 20 pounds? Lazy and weak. Only way i can think of counteracting this for long term in Sleep or what not is Insane calcium injections...

Mind you, calcium injections would actually make another physiological issue of life in low gravity even worse; as the bones atrophy and their cells are recycled, they release their calcium back into the bloodstream. Fairly quickly, the concentration of calcium in the blood goes up and the astronauts/crewmembers would develop a condition called hypercalcaemia, which has a raft of unpleasant side effects ranging from depression and insomnia to gallstones and intense nausea and the resultant vomiting.

I learned something today.
Also. Ouch way ouch

The solution is simple, and involves a little engineering. Just utilize rotating sections (to simulate the effects of a gravity field) of the ship as living and working quarters. Drugs, are not a good long term solution if they have moderate to long term side effects, and most do. The bones need more than calcium. Calcium is worthless without magnesium and other co-factors, such as Vitamins D and C as well as zinc. No nutrient acts alone and generally work in synastry with other nutrients for maximum utilization for the body.

However, sinse we have artificial gravity, these are moot points.

You could also just accelerate at 1 g, constantly.

Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen wrote:

Sskiss wrote:
Theoretically, not possible. Estimated maximum mass for a terrestrial planet is about 15 Earth masses, give or take. All things given equal, you might get something like three or four g's at the outside limit.

Not necessarily. If you count cthonian worlds as terrestrial, you can end up with some ridiculously large worlds. HD 149026 b is a gas giant with a core mass estimated at ~100 earth masses. Assuming that this diagram is roughly correct as far as core size goes, we have a heavy core with a radius ~.25 times that of jupiter, which leads to something silly like twelve gravities if the world were to turn cthonian due to further atmospheric loss. Bit of a stretch, admittedly, but an interesting possibility.

I vaguely recall hearing about this quite some time ago. Yes, hypothetically, it's certainly possible. Basically, the gas giant is within a certain proximity from its star, and it's atmosphere is steadily bled off over time. Eventually resulting in a Chthonian type body. Also, sinse there appears to be a fair number of "hot Jupiter's'" out there, such may actually be a little more than hypothetical. Thanks for the link.

Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen wrote:

SquareDisc City wrote:Well that raises the old question of how long people are on the craft for, and in turn how long journeys take. If it is a long time, such negative effects could be controlled medicinally either by a conventional drug or by the ever-popular medical nanites, which unlike typical artgrav don't need to go beyond IRL physics.

Centrifuges go beyond IRL physics?

No, centrifuges aren't "typical artgrav". Although novels at the harder end of science fiction do go in for them, some of Arthur C. Clarke's work springing to mind.

In the beginning my nations' ships had no artificial gravity apart from a small centrifuge containing a gym and sleeping quarters for the marines. My reasoning was it doesn't matter so much if the crew's bones and muscles atrophy, so they can work and sleep in zero G and use the gym to counter the worst effects. However, the marines have to be ready and able to deploy to a planet or other field of gravity at any moment so they must be granted full round the clock access to the centrifuge to keep them in fighting condition.

I later ditched the idea for several reasons. The first was that my engines already worked using artificial gravity, so thare was no technological barrier to introducing it to the ship for comfort reasons. Indeed, artificial gravity was already being used in the inertial dampeners to prevent the crew being knocked unconscious or jellied by accelerations of more than 70m/s², so if you're already using artificial gravity for inertial dampening then there seems little point in not recalibrating it a little bit to provide proper gravity. Finally, given your crew will generally have grown up and be used to living in some form of gravity, they'll probably be more efficient operating in artificial gravity than they would floating freely.

In short; if your ships can accelerate faster than ~70m/s² (depending on the exact biology of your crew, but it will be around this and not more than double for most organics - even augmented - who come from a roughly Earth-sized planet) then you must (with a very small number of exceptions) be using inertial dampeners. If you're using inertial dampeners then you have the tech to make artificial gravity and are using it. Ergo, if you are using inertial dampening then there's no reason not to give your ships artificial gravity simulating that of the crew's homeworlds or destination or whatever.

My favorite depiction of inertial suppression is that in Revelation Space, which was nice and straightforward and just lowered the inertial mass of everything in its area of effect. It didn't reduce acceleration effects (since that is not directly dependent on inertia), but reducing the inertial mass does make it easier to move about and does make your ship lighter, allowing higher acceleration. Of course, the human body might not like it all that much, since suddenly all its internal fluid and material is easier to move around than the body was evolved to handle...

Want really heavy acceleration but don't want some sort of inertial dampener? Immerse your crew in tanks of neutral-density fluid. You'll be good for really idiotic accelerations since the fluid will evenly distribute the forces on your body. Of course, that'll be limited to accelerations where your lungs won't collapse... but that's why you make the fluid breathable and fill all the crew's airways with it. At this point you'll be worrying about the collapse of smaller internal air cavities like the inner ear, but this is science fiction and you could probably come up with some fairly minor implants to allow them to be filled at will...

Your crew just has to get over the whole "OMG I'M DROWNING" instinct.

SquareDisc City wrote:

Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen wrote:

Centrifuges go beyond IRL physics?

No, centrifuges aren't "typical artgrav". Although novels at the harder end of science fiction do go in for them, some of Arthur C. Clarke's work springing to mind.

... Centripetal gravity isn't ridiculously common in science fiction.

What.

My understanding is that centrifugal gravity systems are problematic for people.

This is mostly due to the fact that even on fairly large rings, like hundreds of meters across, because you're being spun around, your feet are actually travelling at a higher relative speed than your head. It's a small difference but it's there, and I'm given to understand the while it shouldn't mechanically pose a problem it does TERRIBLE things with your sense of equilibrium.

Such that while you could simulate gravity, you'd spend most of that time crawling around disoriented because you get dizzy and fall over every time you try and stand up because the spinning is fucking with the little hairs in your ear that allow you to gauge your orientation.

In the future maybe we'll have a fix for that, or I may be mistaken since I read that over 10 years ago and can't even remember the source.

Yeah, it's commonly accepted that the rate of spin shouldn't be more than ~3 RPM, since that's when most people start having trouble acclimatizing themselves to it. For one earth gravity that equates to a centrifuge with a radius of a hundred meters; if you're willing to get away with lower g-forces you can go smaller. It's worth noting that modern studies suggest that you can get used to higher RPMs if you slowly work your way up, possibly allowing centrifuges with rotations as high as 8-10 RPM.

If all you're doing is providing "gravity" for your exercise area, though, you can just tell your astronauts to deal with it.

Of course you could always replace your astronauts troublesome "organs" and "bones" with high-efficiency prosthetic versions. Save you a bunch of trouble.

*sagenod*

There we go. Sending robots into space again.

Gaian Ascendancy wrote:There we go. Sending robots into space again.

Well, lets face it; flesh-and-bone sentiences weren't biologically adapted to the rigors of spaceflight or the vacuum. Robots can be built to specifications that it would take even genetically directed evolution millenia to accomplish.

Now uploading organic sentiences into the robots, that's my personal cup of tea.

G-Tech Corporation wrote:

Gaian Ascendancy wrote:There we go. Sending robots into space again.

Well, lets face it; flesh-and-bone sentiences weren't biologically adapted to the rigors of spaceflight or the vacuum. Robots can be built to specifications that it would take even genetically directed evolution millenia to accomplish.

Now uploading organic sentiences into the robots, that's my personal cup of tea.

It's certainly useful. Now, one could also (like the Escalan) partially crew ships with robot-like alien races. . .

Welcome to my Synthetic-Droid/Machiner Race. At least from an Rp standpoint. =^^=

And our 'current' biological bodies, aren't adapted to rigors of space travel. Can't say to the future when genetic engineering comes into play, (maybe) and/or cybernetic enhancements. I won't be around to see it, but then who knows what the future really will hold for space travel.

I use rotating sections rather extensively... Anti-grav is expensive and difficult for us to produce, so it only gets implemented in the more advanced designs. The cheaper designs still utilise rotating sections for cost effectiveness.

Edit: Rather large rotating sections I might add...

It got really quiet in here.


Uh... fighters vs missiles?

North Mack wrote:It got really quiet in here.


Uh... fighters vs missiles?

Nooooo!

Lets look at the thing I drew instead; Fighters v Missiles is possibly even more painful than Mechs v Tanks!

Ularn wrote:

North Mack wrote:It got really quiet in here.


Uh... fighters vs missiles?

Nooooo!

Lets look at the thing I drew instead; Fighters v Missiles is possibly even more painful than Mechs v Tanks!
*snip*

That is pretty sweet. But now you've sprung my trap card!

Fighter Tanks vs Missile Mechs.

Fissile Mancs. Get too many northerners together and kaboom.

North Mack wrote:

Ularn wrote:Nooooo!

Lets look at the thing I drew instead; Fighters v Missiles is possibly even more painful than Mechs v Tanks!
*snip*

That is pretty sweet. But now you've sprung my trap card!

Fighter Tanks vs Missile Mechs.

I'm actually designing a fighter tank at the moment. Basically, since I realised that with the justification I have for my antigrav technology means that if it can lift my hovertanks three feet off the ground then there's no reason it couldn't lift it thirty or three hundred feet. The result? I'm scrapping my tanks and APCs and replacing them all with equivalent sized gunships and dropships. Imagine a helicopter with an MBT's armour and weapons (including the main cannon) and you'll have an idea of what I'm going to be fielding as my armour support once I've written the transition between ground-based and air-mobile armour into my RPing.

SquareDisc City wrote:Fissile Mancs. Get too many northerners together and kaboom.

You made me lol - or at least snort humourously. Here, have a cookie!

The question of the hour is Who's got the Pandorica How useful are fighters against point-defense and missile spam?

Escalan Corps-Star Island wrote:The question of the hour is Who's got the Pandorica How useful are fighters against point-defense and missile spam?

Do we really have to do this?

Ularn wrote:

Escalan Corps-Star Island wrote:The question of the hour is Who's got the Pandorica How useful are fighters against point-defense and missile spam?

Do we really have to do this?

G-Tech put me up to it.