Star F***ers

Did anyone see the chat in the Sunday newspapers about sex and space travel. Some NASA scientists are pro, but the New Scientist link is anti.

http://www.universetoday.com/2008/07/12/nasa-needs-to-take-space-sex-seriously/

http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn8195

The drift in the discussion seems to be towards long term missions and interplanetary pregnancies. With Planet Earth facing increasing loss of resources and the potential of inhospitable climate, is NASA looking at jumping ship?

Are sex and spacesuits not somewhat incompatible ?

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Are sex and spacesuits not somewhat incompatible ?

I was hoping this was not going to get too technical

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Are sex and spacesuits not somewhat incompatible ?

I was hoping this was not going to get too technical

But Cactus, the technicalities come first. Pun not intended.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Are sex and spacesuits not somewhat incompatible ?

They usually put on the spacesuits only for spacewalks where they might have to direct a satellite module sensitively into a dock or screw something onto the outside of the ships body which has got loose such as a protective sheath used in re-entry.

They never put on the spacesuits for humping do they?

(and are they talking about long-term missions where the second generation will touch down on the intended planet? This is talking about interstellar travel - bad feckin sign lads)

Sex in zero gravity, the zero G spot, the imagination boggles.

It will be a very long time before our technology allows us to contemplate long journeys in space. We can't even get a biosphere to work on Earth and all those lovely discharges form the sun to survive.

I personally would love to go into space, see that type of expenditure as useful in that it forces extremely high standards and innovation.

By the way why don't we have lifts into space to platforms in geocentrical orbit. Reduce the cost of getting up and down from space and I think space exploration will take off.

Squire wrote:

By the way why don't we have lifts into space to platforms in geocentrical orbit. Reduce the cost of getting up and down from space and I think space exploration will take off.

If you read Kim Stanley Robinsons books on Mars colonisation you will see how he imagines how one of those lifts which is an enormous cable, is attacked during a war and falls dramatically as the planet revolves at 1000 miles an hour, wrapping itself around the planet like a whip, busting everything in its path ... that was the high point of the book. Earth has a stronger gravity so a lot more people would be flattened.

Maybe the cable material itself for the lift would be too long and expensive and would serve little industrial purpose at the moment except tourism so there wouldn't be enough return. Arthur C. Clarke played with this idea too in his lifetime.

(Kim Stanley Robinsons books for the book club!)

Squire wrote:

..

By the way why don't we have lifts into space to platforms in geocentrical orbit. Reduce the cost of getting up and down from space and I think space exploration will take off.

The whole lot would just fall back to earth.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Squire wrote:

..

By the way why don't we have lifts into space to platforms in geocentrical orbit. Reduce the cost of getting up and down from space and I think space exploration will take off.

The whole lot would just fall back to earth.

Centrifugal force versus gravity. I was thinking platforms powered by space based solar power. I think the big problem would be the cables, thought new carbon fibre cables are strong and light. To make space economical viable we need either high cost light weight cargo such as communications satellites or we need to make getting up and down a lot cheaper.

Auditor #9 wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Are sex and spacesuits not somewhat incompatible ?

They usually put on the spacesuits only for spacewalks where they might have to direct a satellite module sensitively into a dock or screw something onto the outside of the ships body which has got loose such as a protective sheath used in re-entry.

They never put on the spacesuits for humping do they?

(and are they talking about long-term missions where the second generation will touch down on the intended planet? This is talking about interstellar travel - bad feckin sign lads)

Weightlessness might be more of a problem. There is a debate going on as to which would be the most adverse to space travel - the stress of frustration or the danger of jealousy scraps on board. I think I remember a female astronaut on trial for attempted murder ....

I think anything that allows politicians feel for one moment they have an option to sorting out this planet should not be encouraged.

cactus flower wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Are sex and spacesuits not somewhat incompatible ?

They usually put on the spacesuits only for spacewalks where they might have to direct a satellite module sensitively into a dock or screw something onto the outside of the ships body which has got loose such as a protective sheath used in re-entry.

They never put on the spacesuits for humping do they?

(and are they talking about long-term missions where the second generation will touch down on the intended planet? This is talking about interstellar travel - bad feckin sign lads)

Weightlessness might be more of a problem. There is a debate going on as to which would be the most adverse to space travel - the stress of frustration or the danger of jealousy scraps on board. I think I remember a female astronaut on trial for attempted murder ....

I think anything that allows politicians feel for one moment they have an option to sorting out this planet should not be encouraged.

They should hunt down Romulans to relieve stress. Tis always good to smash a Romulan Warbird into the spacedust.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Squire wrote:

..

By the way why don't we have lifts into space to platforms in geocentrical orbit. Reduce the cost of getting up and down from space and I think space exploration will take off.

The whole lot would just fall back to earth.

The Space elevator on CIV4 doesn't and it looks well cool!

Dangerous addiction that Civilization game - I got CIV 4 last Thursday -booted it up Friday evening and the next time I looked at the time it was 7 pm Sunday evening - and I hadn't even got around to kicking the crap out of the Mongolians at that stage! ( Gave the Frenchies a good hiding tho - lesson to Napoleon - Never take on an opponent who has F22s and Cruise missiles with a Spartan Phalanx - might have worked in CIVII and CIVIII - this time not a hope bud!)

I think a space elevator will be perfectly feasible within the next 100 years or so - provided we dont wipe ourselves off the face of the earth first or the greens take over the world and have us all eating nuts and grubs and going to bed when the sun goes down. Arthur C has a book on it - cant remember the name off hand - but it is physically possible - whether we will have the materials -light enough and strong enough is another question.

Sex in orbit huh - I though Roger Moore already had the T-shirt for that one in Moonraker

Well I suppose given that Mars will be 2 year trip and if we are going to the Moon permanently - we might aswell set down roots there - the physical consequences will be enormous - primarily the bone density and blood pressure aspects - in time a new human subset will emerge.

Back to my washing - see ya later

Squire wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Squire wrote:

..

By the way why don't we have lifts into space to platforms in geocentrical orbit. Reduce the cost of getting up and down from space and I think space exploration will take off.

The whole lot would just fall back to earth.

Centrifugal force versus gravity. I was thinking platforms powered by space based solar power. I think the big problem would be the cables, thought new carbon fibre cables are strong and light. To make space economical viable we need either high cost light weight cargo such as communications satellites or we need to make getting up and down a lot cheaper.

These guys evidently think it's feasible:

Quote :

LiftPort Group, founded in April, 2003, is a group
of companies dedicated to building the LiftPort Space Elevator. Our
goal is to provide the world a mass transportation system to open up
the vast market opportunities that exist in space, many of which
haven't even been imagined yet, to even the smallest entrepreneur.
These new markets can only become viable through safe, inexpensive,
routine access to space. Our motto is, "Change the world or go home,"
and we strive each day to make that change a reality.

Primarily
targeting the hardware of the space elevator, the LiftPort Group member
companies are researching and designing the nuts and bolts in the
fields of carbon nanotube production, robotics, photo voltaics, power
beaming and targeting, and permanent floating structures for the ocean.
Outside of that, we also are responsible for project management, web
design, public relation, accounting, and legal issues for each member
company of the group.

Ha. They're funny guys. Clearly a joke for their own amusement.

The centrifugal force is miniscule compare to gravity, about 1/300th on the surface.

Just to get a 50% reduction in gravity requires an orbit of about 2600 kilometers from earths surface.

It's quite simply impossible.

Edo wrote:

Dangerous addiction that Civilization game - I got CIV 4 last Thursday -booted it up Friday evening and the next time I looked at the time it was 7 pm Sunday evening - and I hadn't even got around to kicking the crap out of the Mongolians at that stage! ( Gave the Frenchies a good hiding tho - lesson to Napoleon - Never take on an opponent who has F22s and Cruise missiles with a Spartan Phalanx - might have worked in CIVII and CIVIII - this time not a hope bud!)

God, I used to love Civilization, I've been clean for years though. I think those little anomalies where the phalanx takes out a battleship were part of the charm.

905 wrote:

Edo wrote:

Dangerous addiction that Civilization game - I got CIV 4 last Thursday -booted it up Friday evening and the next time I looked at the time it was 7 pm Sunday evening - and I hadn't even got around to kicking the crap out of the Mongolians at that stage! ( Gave the Frenchies a good hiding tho - lesson to Napoleon - Never take on an opponent who has F22s and Cruise missiles with a Spartan Phalanx - might have worked in CIVII and CIVIII - this time not a hope bud!)

God, I used to love Civilization, I've been clean for years though. I think those little anomalies where the phalanx takes out a battleship were part of the charm.

Myself and a friend played Civ I obsessively against each other for something like fortnight once. I have Civ 4, but I've put it on a high shelf....

I just love that counterweight. Like a game of conkers.

ibis wrote:

905 wrote:

Edo wrote:

Dangerous addiction that Civilization game - I got CIV 4 last Thursday -booted it up Friday evening and the next time I looked at the time it was 7 pm Sunday evening - and I hadn't even got around to kicking the crap out of the Mongolians at that stage! ( Gave the Frenchies a good hiding tho - lesson to Napoleon - Never take on an opponent who has F22s and Cruise missiles with a Spartan Phalanx - might have worked in CIVII and CIVIII - this time not a hope bud!)

God, I used to love Civilization, I've been clean for years though. I think those little anomalies where the phalanx takes out a battleship were part of the charm.

Myself and a friend played Civ I obsessively against each other for something like fortnight once. I have Civ 4, but I've put it on a high shelf....

Yeah - they have managed to iron out those little anomalies like cavemen kicking the seven shades out of a tank - Still tho its a big improvement and compared to Civ 1 - the graphics and automation are on a another planet - Civ 4 is major revamp from the previous 2 on an intellectual gameplay level - still feeling my way around it.

Still tho - I left it with my old man at his house - hes retired and has the time for that kind of carry on - way too dangerous to bring it back to the big smoke with me - more dangerous than cocaine in the wrong hands - "where did the last month go - oh yeah"

Nice picture. I get the idea but it doesn't make it possible.

The cable up as far as geostat orbit would weigh approx 1 millon tonnes based on 100Kg per meter (big cable) and taking decreasing gravity into account. So the counterweight would have to be of a similar size.

How de we get a 1 Million tonne dumbell into space ?

Where do we get all that steel from to make the cable ?

How do you balance such a huge system with such massive forces involved. A fraction of a percent imbalance would shear the cable, pull it from the ground, or the yoke would come crashing back to earth.

How do you get the cable up there to attach it ?

Really, it is comic book nonsense.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Nice picture. I get the idea but it doesn't make it possible.

The cable up as far as geostat orbit would weigh approx 1 millon tonnes based on 100Kg per meter (big cable) and taking decreasing gravity into account. So the counterweight would have to be of a similar size.

How de we get a 1 Million tonne dumbell into space ?

Where do we get all that steel from to make the cable ?

How do you balance such a huge system with such massive forces involved. A fraction of a percent imbalance would shear the cable, pull it from the ground, or the yoke would come crashing back to earth.

How do you get the cable up there to attach it ?

Really, it is comic book nonsense.

Good post.

I think it assumes technology where materials are lighter and stronger such as diamond stuff or carbon nano xyz.

In the Mars Trilogy I think the cable was lowered onto Olympus Mons being the tallest mountain on a planet with a lot lower gravity. I think they attached it to an asteroid too in that novel whose ideas were based on engineering structures.

In that novel too the string was knocked out during a war and gets wrapped around the planet twice as it comes down with the rotation of the planet, devastating everything in its wake and turning the Martian sand into glass with the heat.

A 65000 mile cable is previsaged by some lunatics which will wrap itself around the planet three times when the Clare Revolutionary Liberation Front knock it out with a redirected comet ...

There's something here
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=6bb30e039aac76997bd2f37c0ad3f1e4&t=110817

Heres what Arthur C had to say on the topic - and he knew his onions in regard to the whole space gig - but you will have to read the book to find out the details

From Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fountains_of_Paradise

Quote :

The Fountains of Paradise is a 1979 novel by Arthur C. Clarke. Set in the 22nd century, it describes the construction of a space elevator. This "orbital tower" is a giant structure rising from the ground and linking with a satellite in geostationary
at the height of approximately 36,000 kilometers (approx. 22,300
miles). Such a structure would be used to raise payloads to orbit
without having to use rockets, making it much more cost-effective.
In the novel, Clarke uses the life of the ancient king Kalidasa to
foreshadow the adventures of engineer Vannevar Morgan in his
single-minded determination to realize the space elevator. Subplots in
the novel include human colonization of the solar system and the first contact with extraterrestrial intelligence. Clarke also hypothesizes that religion in humans is a consequence of sexual reproduction, although the idea does not play a central role in the novel. The Fountains of Paradise
is set in the fictional island country of Taprobane, which Clarke has
described as "about ninety percent congruent with the island of Ceylon
(now Sri Lanka)". The ruins of the palace at Yakkagala as described in the book very closely match the real-life ruins at Sigiriya in Sri Lanka.
In the novel, Clarke envisions a microscopically thin but strong
"hyperfilament" that makes the elevator possible. Although the
hyperfilament is constructed from "continuous pseudo-one-dimensional diamond crystal" [pg.45] in the novel, Clarke later expressed his belief that another type of carbon, Buckminsterfullerene, would play the role of hyperfilament in a real space elevator.
The latest developments in carbon nanotube technology bring the orbital elevator closer to possible realization.
The epilogue shows an Earth with several space elevators leading to
a giant, "circumterran", space station that encircles Earth at
geostationary altitude. The analogy with a wheel is evident: the space
station itself is the wheel rim, Earth is the axle, and the six
equidistant space elevators the spokes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fullerene#Buckminsterfullerene

Quote :

Buckminsterfullerene


Buckminsterfullerene (IUPAC name (C₆₀-I_h)[5,6]fullerene) is the smallest fullerene molecule in which no two pentagons share an edge (which can be destabilizing; see pentalene). It is also the most common in terms of natural occurrence, as it can often be found in soot.
The structure of C₆₀ is a truncated (T = 3) icosahedron, which resembles a soccer ball
of the type made of twenty hexagons and twelve pentagons, with a carbon
atom at the vertices of each polygon and a bond along each polygon edge.
The van der Waals diameter of a C₆₀ molecule is about 1 nanometer (nm). The nucleus to nucleus diameter of a C₆₀ molecule is about 0.7 nm.
The C₆₀ molecule has two bond lengths. The 6:6 ring bonds (between two hexagons) can be considered "double bonds" and are shorter than the 6:5 bonds (between a hexagon and a pentagon).

I know its still all a bit fantasical - but unless somebody dreams it up and works it out in theory - it will never happen - Im hopeful - mankinds future and planet earths future depends on who quickly we can get out of our cradle and stablize the population here at about 1 billion.

There would be some insurance premium on a yoke like that though wouldn't there? Imagine it falling and literally wrapping around the planet at least twice ...

jaysess

Auditor #9 wrote:

There would be some insurance premium on a yoke like that though wouldn't there? Imagine it falling and literally wrapping around the planet at least twice ...

jaysess

Would make a nice straight canal across Africa though.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

There would be some insurance premium on a yoke like that though wouldn't there? Imagine it falling and literally wrapping around the planet at least twice ...

jaysess

Would make a nice straight canal across Africa though.

I'm going to derail this thread even more by saying it should be aimed at Australia too - places which could use a few more straight lines across their deserts which might get a bit greened if whipped by the big cable. Why don't humans do that regardless - let the sea into the Sahara with a few nukes ? Don't tell me there's some ecosystem there to protect.

What was this thread about anyway? O yeah, the elevator. I presume they'll make it so that it will fall apart into a squillion bits if it falls down so that the destruction will only be limited to a few pinguins in the North pole or wherever they live now.