5 Horrific Ways You Would Actually Die in Space
- Thread starter Rhykker
- Start date
Sorta question number 3 there.
While it's true that space is essentially a rather large thermos flask, you are unlikely to suddenly end up in hard vacuum by yourself. It's more likely that you'd be surrounded by gases, which would also end up exposed to vacuum. When they expand into the vacuum, they will draw away heat.
While it's true that space is essentially a rather large thermos flask, you are unlikely to suddenly end up in hard vacuum by yourself. It's more likely that you'd be surrounded by gases, which would also end up exposed to vacuum. When they expand into the vacuum, they will draw away heat.
It's sad to say but I think one of the best film vacuum exposures is in Guardians of the Galaxy (outside of the ice crystals forming on them) Takes them a while to die and the capilliaries in their eyes are clearly bursting. And even the ice crystals can be explained because they're in a nebula, which could have ice floating in it, melting on skin contact, then refreezing...or sweat?
Hollywood decompression has always angered me.
In the real world. Only case I know of where decompression actually made person pop was a 1983 incident where 4 divers went from 9 atmospheres to 1 in .5 seconds. The unfortunate soul nearest the door actually exploded.
In the real world. Only case I know of where decompression actually made person pop was a 1983 incident where 4 divers went from 9 atmospheres to 1 in .5 seconds. The unfortunate soul nearest the door actually exploded.
Well, depends. If whatever caused the person to end up in hard vacuum also caused various injuries, say they got cut up by jagged bits of metal, then you could have problems. If someone was blown through a new hole in the side of a ship, or hit by shrapnel, their insides might want to come out even without vacuum.newwiseman said:
I am an appreciator of such music. Smashing good job old squire!Amgeo said:
Cant think of a favourite space death yet. They just arent colourful enough...
I enjoyed this article. So, let's pull out the old conspiracy theory bucket...
Magnetoshphere/radiation/Van Allen Belt/Apollo Missions.
Is the radiation in space prevalent enough to cause big problems for astronauts significantly out of Earth orbit (the Magnetosphere)? The Escapist has some smart folks. Any presentable hard facts on this? I read a few articles quite a while back about NASA putting a lot of effort into shielding for the proposed lunar return. But, I am extremely underinformed on this issue.
Magnetoshphere/radiation/Van Allen Belt/Apollo Missions.
Is the radiation in space prevalent enough to cause big problems for astronauts significantly out of Earth orbit (the Magnetosphere)? The Escapist has some smart folks. Any presentable hard facts on this? I read a few articles quite a while back about NASA putting a lot of effort into shielding for the proposed lunar return. But, I am extremely underinformed on this issue.
That still wouldn't cause a person to explode, even a perfect vacuum is only 0 psi and space is still marginally above that at as high as 0.00004Pa (0.0000000058psi). In space your blood will boil before you explode, various organs may rupture with that kind of change but I doubt it.thaluikhain said:
The only instance I've been able to find was an 8 atmosphere change in .5 seconds, no space craft is ever going up with much more than a single atmosphere of pressure (101.3 kPa or 14.7 psi). 9atm is 132.26 psi. To illustrate this quantity of air pressure, 100 psi is enough to shoot a 12 pound turkey almost 4000 feet.
Well, when the Apollo missions took place the sun was relatively calm, meaning few outburts and a strong magnetic field to shield from galactic cosmic radiation.Clankenbeard said:
This means the main component of the radiation received by the Apollo crews would've been solar radiation (meaning Ultraviolet, a few X-Rays, high energy electrons, high energy protons, and a few alpha particles).
Now if you don't have a magnetic field you can always clad yourself in other materials.
Ultraviolet can easily be stopped, so can alpha particles, discarding the odd x-ray burst which only comes during a solar flare (which were few and far between during the Apollo missions) the hardest radiation to stop would then be Electrons (or Beta- radiation). Now if you've listened in high-school nuclear physics, you'll know that Beta- radiation can be stopped by a thin sheet of Aluminium (thinner than the already thin hull of the LEM).
So while radiation is a risk, it isn't an insurmountable wall for astronauts pondering interplanetary travels.
The Van Allen Belts themselves have also been brought up by a few Apollo-hoaxers, but they clearly haven't been looking at the placement of the VAB's, nor the orbit and orbital inclination of the Moon, nor the resulting trajectory of the TLI (Trans-Lunar Injection), for the Apollo craft (which took them around the main components of the VAB's).
Here is an image of the trajectory superimposed on a chart over the main distribution of the VAB.
As you can see the craft doesn't fly straight through the main lobes of the VAB's (the inner consisting of high-energy Protons, the outer mainly of Electrons).
EDIT:
If you want a link with more info, and the numbers so you can calculate the trajectory yourself then here it is.
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/apollo11-TLI.htm
Huh, was not aware of this. All four divers were instantly killed.newwiseman said:
"Subsequent investigation by forensic pathologists determined Hellevik, being exposed to the highest pressure gradient, violently exploded due to the rapid and massive expansion of internal gases. All of his thoracic and abdominal organs, and even his thoracic spine, were ejected, as were all of his limbs. Simultaneously, his remains were expelled through the narrow trunk opening left by the jammed chamber door, less than 60 centimetres (24 in) in diameter. Fragments of his body were found scattered about the rig. One part was even found lying on the rig's derrick, 10 metres (30 ft) directly above the chambers. The deaths of all four divers were most likely instantaneous."
Sweet mother of mercy, that's the most horrific thing I've read in a while. The good news for space explorers is that going from a normal atmospheric pressure of one atmosphere to a vacuum (zero atmospheres) is not nearly that steep a gradient as going from a high-pressure environment of nine atmospheres to one atmosphere.
Thank you for that. I have spent a little time chasing down that "we never went to the moon" rabbit hole. This is the first instance where I have actually seen someone state that the 1969ish time period was largely devoid of solar flare acitivity. So shielding wasn't the issue that it is today. All they needed was tinfoil hats.MrFalconfly said:
The 70's were a really differnet time. It was culturally and politically acceptable to lose lives in the pursuit of sciencey goals. The world has changed--no more "Seat of your pants" rocket science.
Mmmm? No one's posted this yet? Well, I guess I will, then:
(I found it strangely topical, no matter whether you like CaH or not)
Great article. I didn't want to visit space before, and now I feel like doing it even less, but it was informative and well-written. I have a great respect for astronauts, who willingly risk all that shit happening to them.
(I found it strangely topical, no matter whether you like CaH or not)
Great article. I didn't want to visit space before, and now I feel like doing it even less, but it was informative and well-written. I have a great respect for astronauts, who willingly risk all that shit happening to them.
You know, I was actually wondering if I'd reached the "TLClankenbeard said:
R" line with that big post.I just started typing, and then looked at how big it was after I posted it.
Hang on a second.
Surely if you were exposed to a vacuum the water on the surface of your skin, eyes, and possibly in the capillaries would start to boil off right?
Well, doesn't a liquid changing into a gas absorb temperature in that state transformation to grant it latent heat?
Wouldn't this cause a rapid loss of body temperature?
The same way refrigerators work?
Surely if you were exposed to a vacuum the water on the surface of your skin, eyes, and possibly in the capillaries would start to boil off right?
Well, doesn't a liquid changing into a gas absorb temperature in that state transformation to grant it latent heat?
Wouldn't this cause a rapid loss of body temperature?
The same way refrigerators work?
Well I wasn't concerned with it killing you, just that it is reasonable for ice to form on the face (especially if sweaty) like seen in that one movie.Rhykker said:
Of course this would crack the skin and probably cause bleeding and then similar effects on deeper tissues. I suspect you'd be dead before you'd have to appreciate this thankfully.
Would the water in your body expand in pockets into gas?
Actually, I just looked it up. There have been animal studies (cruel I know) on the effects of vacuum on the body. Water does form into gas, you'd expand to almost twice your size unless restrained, soft tissues are damaged, you go blind, brain damage occurs and you die in about 11 seconds due to sudden loss of blood pressure resulting in the heart stopping.
I imagine it feels longer, also don't hold your breath or you lungs will burst so star trek TNG got that wrong.