If the Space Station could spin on a central axis how much speed would it need to create gravity?

[Moonglow]

Fun thread, and I actually learned something. Think that may be a first on here lol

Don't forget to pick up a magnet today to increase your aura magnetic field of flux...and you wonder why lint attaches itself to yous...

 

[deanrd]

So, in space there is a vacuum, is this vacuum measured at 14.7 psia?

That's as weird as saying that if you had a box filled with vacuum and at sea level, opened the box and let in atmosphere, where did the vacuum go?

 

[westwall]

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What the heck are you babbling about? Friction....in a vacuum?

OMG. You think friction only exists in an atmosphere?

How many kinds of friction do you think there are? Start there.

Do you guys have to be educated on even the most basic things?

Friction, as an aerodynamic variable, only exists where there is an atmosphere. Care to tell the class where the atmosphere is in a vacuum?

Oh stop. I can't take it any more.

There are four types of friction.

If you set a brick on the sidewalk and push it, it's difficult to push until it gets moving. Pushing against it until it starts moving is called static friction and is the strongest. Once it begins to move, it's called sliding friction. But if the brick were round and rolled, that would be called rolling friction and it's the weakest. Notice I mentioned three types of friction? Three demonstrable types of friction and no where did I mention air or gas?

The forth one is fluid friction. Now why it is only one and not two? Fluid and gas? Because gas is a fluid, just not dense. But their frictional properties are the same.

So if you had a space station with a rotating section, you would start with static friction until the section began rotating. Then you would move on to sliding friction where the rotating and non rotating sections were joined.

Now you could rotate the entire ship. But that would be unstable and much more difficult. Try to figure out why.

Actually, junior, there are FIVE types of friction. Static, sliding, kinetic, fluid, and rolling. If you're going to try and be superior don't make basic mistakes. It makes far more sense to rotate the entire station, wobble is the biggest issue in a near Earth orbit, but the further out towards the Lagrange Point the less of a problem that becomes. The other issue is the fuel needed to get the thing moving in the first place. Fuel is weight is cost.

Do me a favor Einstein,

Define Kinetic Friction
then
Define sliding Friction

Kinetic friction is the frictional forces between two surfaces in relative motion. This is variable depending on the normal force, and the nature of the surfaces moving.

Sliding friction is the force when SIMILAR materials are sliding over each other. As in when you rub your hands together, or two pine boards.


Kinetic friction, and sliding friction are very similar to each other, but they are different.

 

[Moonglow]

Bohr taught us well..For his time alive..I learned that in the 4th grade..

 

[Moonglow]

So, in space there is a vacuum, is this vacuum measured at 14.7 psia?

That's as weird as saying that if you had a box filled with vacuum and at sea level, opened the box and let in atmosphere, where did the vacuum go?

Humans and their experiments...in the computer world, the vacuum would have been populated..

 

[deanrd]

OMG. You think friction only exists in an atmosphere?

How many kinds of friction do you think there are? Start there.

Do you guys have to be educated on even the most basic things?

Friction, as an aerodynamic variable, only exists where there is an atmosphere. Care to tell the class where the atmosphere is in a vacuum?

Oh stop. I can't take it any more.

There are four types of friction.

If you set a brick on the sidewalk and push it, it's difficult to push until it gets moving. Pushing against it until it starts moving is called static friction and is the strongest. Once it begins to move, it's called sliding friction. But if the brick were round and rolled, that would be called rolling friction and it's the weakest. Notice I mentioned three types of friction? Three demonstrable types of friction and no where did I mention air or gas?

The forth one is fluid friction. Now why it is only one and not two? Fluid and gas? Because gas is a fluid, just not dense. But their frictional properties are the same.

So if you had a space station with a rotating section, you would start with static friction until the section began rotating. Then you would move on to sliding friction where the rotating and non rotating sections were joined.

Now you could rotate the entire ship. But that would be unstable and much more difficult. Try to figure out why.

Actually, junior, there are FIVE types of friction. Static, sliding, kinetic, fluid, and rolling. If you're going to try and be superior don't make basic mistakes. It makes far more sense to rotate the entire station, wobble is the biggest issue in a near Earth orbit, but the further out towards the Lagrange Point the less of a problem that becomes. The other issue is the fuel needed to get the thing moving in the first place. Fuel is weight is cost.

Do me a favor Einstein,

Define Kinetic Friction
then
Define sliding Friction

Kinetic friction is the frictional forces between two surfaces in relative motion. This is variable depending on the normal force, and the nature of the surfaces moving.

Sliding friction is the force when SIMILAR materials are sliding over each other. As in when you rub your hands together, or two pine boards.


Kinetic friction, and sliding friction are very similar to each other, but they are different.

That's nonsense. You just made that up.

The term sliding friction refers to the resistance created by two objects sliding against each other. This can also be called kinetic friction. Sliding frictionis intended to stop an object from moving.


https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...4.psy-ab..7.9.754...0i7i10i30k1.0.54npDhRclVA

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

A Brazilian MPH.

 

[deanrd]

So, in space there is a vacuum, is this vacuum measured at 14.7 psia?

That's as weird as saying that if you had a box filled with vacuum and at sea level, opened the box and let in atmosphere, where did the vacuum go?

Humans and their experiments...in the computer world, the vacuum would have been populated..

They were also inventors.

 

[BULLDOG]

The mating surfaces aren't frictionless. Over time, friction would grow and more and more energy would be needed to keep the station in motion. What happens when it wears out?

On earth,with a magnetic train, you have super conductors which keep the train suspended. The track won't wear out because of the lack of contact. In space, everything has to be covered and connected because people need to breathe.

What we actually need is to understand the force of gravity itself. If we can duplicate that force without needing to rotate massive amounts of structure, it would solve the problem. But science is only scratching the surface of understanding the nature of gravity. Yea, we can measure it, but we can measure all kinds of things without understanding the nature of whatever it is that's being measured.

Humans have been here millions of years, but we've only manage to use electricity in meaningful ways the last couple of hundred. It's like when idiots use the weirdly misleading and meaningless term "settled science", whatever that is in their tiny minds.
Man's knowledge of science has been growing at an exponential rate the last couple of decades and we still don't know hardly anything.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What the heck are you babbling about? Friction....in a vacuum?

When an astronaut in space rubs his gloved hands together, what do you call the resulting drag his hands exert on each other?

 

[deanrd]

The mating surfaces aren't frictionless. Over time, friction would grow and more and more energy would be needed to keep the station in motion. What happens when it wears out?

On earth,with a magnetic train, you have super conductors which keep the train suspended. The track won't wear out because of the lack of contact. In space, everything has to be covered and connected because people need to breathe.

What we actually need is to understand the force of gravity itself. If we can duplicate that force without needing to rotate massive amounts of structure, it would solve the problem. But science is only scratching the surface of understanding the nature of gravity. Yea, we can measure it, but we can measure all kinds of things without understanding the nature of whatever it is that's being measured.

Humans have been here millions of years, but we've only manage to use electricity in meaningful ways the last couple of hundred. It's like when idiots use the weirdly misleading and meaningless term "settled science", whatever that is in their tiny minds.
Man's knowledge of science has been growing at an exponential rate the last couple of decades and we still don't know hardly anything.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What the heck are you babbling about? Friction....in a vacuum?

When an astronaut in space rubs his gloved hands together, what do you call the resulting drag his hands exert on each other?

We've already been over that.
Westwall just makes up different kinds of friction for every scenario he imagines.

 

[miketx]

The concept is obviously sound so why is it not done to help the astronauts with muscle atrophy?

The current design of the space station would not allow any such thing. While the premise is correct, the shape of said station would have to be something like this:

So that as it rotated centrifugal force would tend to throw everything not tied down to the outer wall creating the effect of gravity. The effect would diminish the closer it got the the center hub, with the center hub NOT rotating as that would wreak havoc with those shuttles attached to it. How fast? I dunno.

However, the design of such a station that would make use of that effect would indeed create many a challenge for the designers.

 

[miketx]

The mating surfaces aren't frictionless. Over time, friction would grow and more and more energy would be needed to keep the station in motion. What happens when it wears out?

On earth,with a magnetic train, you have super conductors which keep the train suspended. The track won't wear out because of the lack of contact. In space, everything has to be covered and connected because people need to breathe.

What we actually need is to understand the force of gravity itself. If we can duplicate that force without needing to rotate massive amounts of structure, it would solve the problem. But science is only scratching the surface of understanding the nature of gravity. Yea, we can measure it, but we can measure all kinds of things without understanding the nature of whatever it is that's being measured.

Humans have been here millions of years, but we've only manage to use electricity in meaningful ways the last couple of hundred. It's like when idiots use the weirdly misleading and meaningless term "settled science", whatever that is in their tiny minds.
Man's knowledge of science has been growing at an exponential rate the last couple of decades and we still don't know hardly anything.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What the heck are you babbling about? Friction....in a vacuum?

When an astronaut in space rubs his gloved hands together, what do you call the resulting drag his hands exert on each other?

Friction.

 

[BULLDOG]

The mating surfaces aren't frictionless. Over time, friction would grow and more and more energy would be needed to keep the station in motion. What happens when it wears out?

On earth,with a magnetic train, you have super conductors which keep the train suspended. The track won't wear out because of the lack of contact. In space, everything has to be covered and connected because people need to breathe.

What we actually need is to understand the force of gravity itself. If we can duplicate that force without needing to rotate massive amounts of structure, it would solve the problem. But science is only scratching the surface of understanding the nature of gravity. Yea, we can measure it, but we can measure all kinds of things without understanding the nature of whatever it is that's being measured.

Humans have been here millions of years, but we've only manage to use electricity in meaningful ways the last couple of hundred. It's like when idiots use the weirdly misleading and meaningless term "settled science", whatever that is in their tiny minds.
Man's knowledge of science has been growing at an exponential rate the last couple of decades and we still don't know hardly anything.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What the heck are you babbling about? Friction....in a vacuum?

When an astronaut in space rubs his gloved hands together, what do you call the resulting drag his hands exert on each other?

We've already been over that.
Westwall just makes up different kinds of friction for every scenario he imagines.

Cut him some slack. He took a geology class that qualifies him as an expert on everything. It's all the same, don't ya know?

 

[BULLDOG]

The mating surfaces aren't frictionless. Over time, friction would grow and more and more energy would be needed to keep the station in motion. What happens when it wears out?

On earth,with a magnetic train, you have super conductors which keep the train suspended. The track won't wear out because of the lack of contact. In space, everything has to be covered and connected because people need to breathe.

What we actually need is to understand the force of gravity itself. If we can duplicate that force without needing to rotate massive amounts of structure, it would solve the problem. But science is only scratching the surface of understanding the nature of gravity. Yea, we can measure it, but we can measure all kinds of things without understanding the nature of whatever it is that's being measured.

Humans have been here millions of years, but we've only manage to use electricity in meaningful ways the last couple of hundred. It's like when idiots use the weirdly misleading and meaningless term "settled science", whatever that is in their tiny minds.
Man's knowledge of science has been growing at an exponential rate the last couple of decades and we still don't know hardly anything.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What the heck are you babbling about? Friction....in a vacuum?

When an astronaut in space rubs his gloved hands together, what do you call the resulting drag his hands exert on each other?

Friction.

Not according to wasteballs.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Gravity the force that attracts a body toward the center of the Earth. What is at the center of the Earth?

Iron core, basis of Earth's magnetic field...geodynamo, now look up magnetohydrodynamic..Now there's a .29 cent word, Yeeeeee-Haw!

What is at the center of the moon? Rock. Does it have gravity?

The center of Jupiter? The center of the sun?

Why do you go out of the way to prove you never made it past elementary school?

Everything has gravity. Even if it can't be measured. If there is an atom at the center of the moon, then yes, it has gravity.

Because it is electrically charged and has a magnetic field...

The moon does not have a magnetic field anywhere comparable to that of the Earth.

You should Google your ridiculous claims before posting them.

 

[Moonglow]

Gravity the force that attracts a body toward the center of the Earth. What is at the center of the Earth?

Iron core, basis of Earth's magnetic field...geodynamo, now look up magnetohydrodynamic..Now there's a .29 cent word, Yeeeeee-Haw!

What is at the center of the moon? Rock. Does it have gravity?

The center of Jupiter? The center of the sun?

Why do you go out of the way to prove you never made it past elementary school?

Everything has gravity. Even if it can't be measured. If there is an atom at the center of the moon, then yes, it has gravity.

Because it is electrically charged and has a magnetic field...

The moon does not have a magnetic field anywhere comparable to that of the Earth.

You should Google your ridiculous claims before posting them.

Google uses magnetics in their search field algorithms..

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Gravity the force that attracts a body toward the center of the Earth. What is at the center of the Earth?

Iron core, basis of Earth's magnetic field...geodynamo, now look up magnetohydrodynamic..Now there's a .29 cent word, Yeeeeee-Haw!

What is at the center of the moon? Rock. Does it have gravity?

The center of Jupiter? The center of the sun?

Why do you go out of the way to prove you never made it past elementary school?

Everything has gravity. Even if it can't be measured. If there is an atom at the center of the moon, then yes, it has gravity.

Because it is electrically charged and has a magnetic field...

The moon does not have a magnetic field anywhere comparable to that of the Earth.

You should Google your ridiculous claims before posting them.

Google uses magnetics in their search field algorithms..

STFU moron!

You have just about outlived your usefulness as a plaything.

 

[Moonglow]

What is at the center of the moon? Rock. Does it have gravity?

The center of Jupiter? The center of the sun?

Why do you go out of the way to prove you never made it past elementary school?

Everything has gravity. Even if it can't be measured. If there is an atom at the center of the moon, then yes, it has gravity.

Because it is electrically charged and has a magnetic field...

The moon does not have a magnetic field anywhere comparable to that of the Earth.

You should Google your ridiculous claims before posting them.

Google uses magnetics in their search field algorithms..

STFU moron!

You have just about outlived your usefulness as a plaything.

You are attracted to the nucleus depending on yer charge..You seem to have a massive negativity charge...

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Everything has gravity. Even if it can't be measured. If there is an atom at the center of the moon, then yes, it has gravity.

Because it is electrically charged and has a magnetic field...

The moon does not have a magnetic field anywhere comparable to that of the Earth.

You should Google your ridiculous claims before posting them.

Google uses magnetics in their search field algorithms..

STFU moron!

You have just about outlived your usefulness as a plaything.

You are attracted to the nucleus depending on yer charge..You seem to have a massive negativity charge...

If stupid was an electrical charge, you would be a lightning bolt!

 

[Moonglow]

Because it is electrically charged and has a magnetic field...

The moon does not have a magnetic field anywhere comparable to that of the Earth.

You should Google your ridiculous claims before posting them.

Google uses magnetics in their search field algorithms..

STFU moron!

You have just about outlived your usefulness as a plaything.

You are attracted to the nucleus depending on yer charge..You seem to have a massive negativity charge...

If stupid was an electrical charge, you would be a lightning bolt!

That creates its own gravitational field by magnetization.