Microgravity Makes Interstellar Travel Impossible, Say Experts

[Urh]

In space, no one can get a C-section.

All his other complaints may be perfectly valid, but science has had a method to circumvent the "giving birth through birth canal" concept for years and years.

Would you want to perform a C-section in a weightless environment? Or any surgery that involves cutting a person open for that matter? Surely you don't need to be a surgeon to realise what a complete clusterfuck a zero-g operating theater would be. Furthermore, the speculation about the effects of weightlessness on foetal development is presumably based upon observations of astronauts who have spent long periods of time aboard space stations and the effects the prolonged weightlessness has had on their bodies. Remember when the time comes for that space baby to be born (C-section or otherwise) it will have already spent 9 months in a weightless environment. While we simply don't know how a space baby will develop in utero until we actually try to make one, it is not unreasonable to speculate that their development will be profoundly affected by the absence of gravity.

EDIT: And it seems that they haven't touched upon broader hygiene issues that would inevitably arise aboard a spaceship on a multi-decade long mission. Towards the end of its life Mir was practically being eaten away by mold and fungus, and the ISS is running into similar problems right now. I don't know about anyone else, but I wouldn't want to step inside a space ship that's had people living inside it for 50-100 years straight.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

oh really?
well the totally fictional Hannelore Ellicott-Chatham would beg to differ!

she's the blonde. who grew up on a fictional space station.

OT: well you could use the same technique Jeph used with her: spinning station=artificial gravity.

 

[Woodsey]

Can't they just make spaceships that go vroom vroom better?

 

[synobal]

Wow what a poorly written summary. They seem to be saying that extended travel in space is impossible with out artificial gravity. This might be true, even likely is true but that doesn't mean we won't come up with artificial gravity or some means to travel huge distances in almost no time at all, via some other device something similar to the fictional stargate. I guess if you want to get lots of page views about people pointing out that your title is wildly inaccurate and stupid then ya I guess you should use it. If you want to have some sort of integrity though you should change it.

 

[Epona]

The experts have clearly missed every Star Trek episode.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Ok experts, you try it out. then we'll take your word as true.

Seriously...do scientist just make shit up just to piss off sci fi fans? cause i think they do.

remember when light speed couldnt be broken? yeah what then scientist!!! WHERES YOUR SCIENCE THEN!!!

There's that and then there's the whole fact that who really wants to embark on a journey that'll take hundreds of years anyway? Shouldn't scientists be a little more concerned with how to get us to the stars a lot faster, instead of how giving birth in zero-g would work? 'Cause I don't know about anyone else, but if I were to launch on a journey to the stars I'd want to live long enough to get there!

 

[TheXRatedDodo]

I heartily believe that anything is possible. After all, if you're exploring the concept of interstellar travel then surely you need the kind of bright eyed idealism needed to drive you to figure something like that out in the first place?

Eh, Science. Lol.

 

[XDravond]

Hmm sounds to me like a new way to practice "safe sex"...
"Honey where out of condoms. No worry we are in space"

I'm waiting for faster than light travel, artificial gravity,(actually usable) invisibility cloaks, world peace, etc... just because it hasn't been done yet does not mean it's impossible. For this we just need to do some "DNA-engineering"...

 

[unacomn]

"Over time, microgravity does lots of nasty things to organic life systems; it forces muscles to atrophy, weakens bones, impairs vision and lowers blood volume, amongst other things."

So does the job I've had for the last 3 years.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

Ok experts, you try it out. then we'll take your word as true.

Seriously...do scientist just make shit up just to piss off sci fi fans? cause i think they do.

remember when light speed couldnt be broken? yeah what then scientist!!! WHERES YOUR SCIENCE THEN!!!

that is entirely different, most physics dealing with space and what exactly makes up space in general is nothing but theory still.

However, we are able, and have, tested the effects of microgravity on humans for several years now.

Most of what they say is true, BUT, interstellar travel isn't impossible. You could create an artificial gravity ship fairly easily by having it rotate.

The downside of course is that the habitats would have to be built on the edges of the rotation, cutting valuable space down dramatically.


Still though, even if we did make a spaceship that was able to produce artificial gravity, we would still have to develop the technology to make it self sustainable.


Besides, there are no spare part stores or gas stations in space.


yet, anyway.

Altenatively, you could have the ship accelerate at a steady 1G until halfway there, then decelerate at 1 G the rest of the way. This, of course, comes with its own problems (for one thing, accelerating at 1G for 50 years will build up a lot of velocity, meaning that you reeeeeeaaaaally don't want to hit anything. Even a micrometeorite impact at C-fractional velocities would tear any ship to shreds.) But it's a simple solution, nonetheless.

Aside from reeeally not wanting to hit anything, maintaining 1G of thrust for several years would be infeasible. You'd need a fuel tank the size of a moon.

 

[Darks63]

More excuses as to why we cant go full out into space colonization mode. Really wish we could get started in my lifetime but it looks grim.

 

[Brad Shepard]

You know, experts also said we could never break the speed of light either, well, that was a bunch of bull.

Have babies in space, screw the experts.

 

[Robert Ewing]

We will find a way around this. Like we did with matter overtaking light on the motorway. If we can break every rule we knew about physics, we can pop out babies in space, if we give it some thought.

 

[Tilted_Logic]

What an interesting article. I don't think I've really pondered the idea of procreation in space, but the points made are definitely a huge hurdle in the quest to reach the stars.

Were we to find some way to either produce artificial gravity or cope with the lack-thereof, I've always wondered what it would be like to go on a journey that would take generations. I'm aware that children raised on a ship would know nothing of earth, and would therefore probably not have any qualms with living on a ship. But still... I mean, to go on such a journey means you are resigning your offspring to a preconceived goal that you had during your lifetime. What if they don't share your desires? What if they want to see Earth? How would you cope with such a situation? (If anyone knows of any science fiction novels that focus/cover this topic I would be highly interested in recommendations).

Oh, and as interesting as the article was, the part that truly got my attention was the name Athena Andreadis. I mean, how awesome is that? That's a name that's just screaming to have a spaceship named after it.

"Now boarding the Andreadis".

Hell. Yes.

 

[CortexReaver]

So, we have to become posthumans to travel across the stars? Great, this should force NASA and DoD to fund more research on the topics like advanced human-like AGI, molecular nanotechnology, bionics, biotech and so.

 

[CortexReaver]

More excuses as to why we cant go full out into space colonization mode. Really wish we could get started in my lifetime but it looks grim.

There is hope, if Singularity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity) will turn out to be real.

 

[DracoSuave]

Altenatively, you could have the ship accelerate at a steady 1G until halfway there, then decelerate at 1 G the rest of the way. This, of course, comes with its own problems (for one thing, accelerating at 1G for 50 years will build up a lot of velocity, meaning that you reeeeeeaaaaally don't want to hit anything. Even a micrometeorite impact at C-fractional velocities would tear any ship to shreds.) But it's a simple solution, nonetheless.

This provides another problem. As an accelerating or decelerating object, the spaceship is not concidered a neutral referance point regarding relativistic physics. Meaning that it will be increasing in kinetic energy from its own standpoint.

Meaning, that the ship and everything on that ship, will be steadily increasing mass.

This means that the amount of work the ship requires to maintain acceleration at the mid point of its voyage will be considerably greater than what it requires at the end points of its voyage. It isn't a line, but actually a quadratic curve, with the apex in the center.

The irony with this is that you'd require even more fuel, which in turn, would increase the mass at apex even more.