From: omar vega [mailto:oevega@...]

> Are you really sure? Aren't there any experiments to
> prove what you said? I would like to know because I
> couldn't find any data in standard sources of
> information.
>
> > There ani't no such thing as a free lunch, LOL. The
> > effects of zero-
> > g are replicated here on Earth by being bedridden.
> > Simply sleeping
> > in a gravity environment won't help with the calcium
> > loss, muscle
> > atrophy. blood counts, etc because you get the same
> > on Earth by
> > sleeping.
> >
> > TangoMan

TangoMan is certainly giving you the straight scoop that lying in bed
here on Earth is a good analog for being in 0-G. NASA has done medical
studies in which they literally paid housewives to lie around in bed all
day.

Regards,

Mike Combs

From: omar vega [mailto:oevega@...]

> I agree with you, because I believe that in the long
> term humans will have to adapt to live in zero
> gravity.

Why do you believe this when it's no significant expense or great
engineering difficulty to provide a substitute for gravity via rotation?

> If Man need to change to achieve that, It may
> be the way to go. In nature it's called evolution.

Don't get me wrong; I bet some segment of space-based humanity probably
will chose to "evolve" in this direction. But I don't think all would.
I don't even expect that most will.

Regards,

Mike Combs

Mike:

That's what I wanted to hear: an informed answer.
It destroyed a good plot for a sci-fi tale,
but I have to accept the truth!

Thank you very much,

Omar Vega

--- "Combs, Mike" wrote:

Mike:

When I said "evolve" I mean in the long term; really
in the long term. Ten of thousands of years more, at
least.

Meanwhile, the only way to colonize space is by
building space settlements, as the ones proposed by
O'Neill. We all of us agree in that point, I think.

The only advantage (that I foresee) of humans adapted
to gravity, is that space cities could grow in three
dimensions, and would be more flexible and cheaper
than space settlements. But this is only speculation.
The only proposals that are based in facts, and sound
science, are the ones of rotating cities.

By the way, I believe in the future people will
populate the moon and mars building in their surfaces,
but I also believe that space settlement is the way
mankind will use to colonize Jupiter and Saturn. The
satellites of those planets may hold lots of
resources, and It just doesn't make sense to establish
posts in those surfaces. It isn't possible either to
land in those huge planets. So, there space settlement
have the lead.

Omar Vega

--- "Combs, Mike" wrote:

_____Zero-G Love_____

Performed by: Iijima Mari as Lynn Minmei

Zero-G Love, Zero-G Love
Zero-G Love, Zero-G Love

Kareto gakkouno kaerimichi
Itsumono kadono wakaremichi
Hitoga inaino misumashite
Yokokumo nashini kizu sareta
Watashi ichiou okotta furi
Dakedo, dakedo, dakedo
Atama fura fura, kokoro fuwa fuwa

Zero-G Love, Zero-G Love
Four, three, two, one, zero-G love

Karadaga kazeni notte tonoeyuku

Zero-G Love, Zero-G Love
==========================================
Xenophile (who has the English translation, if anybody is interested)

Evolution, in the natural sense, is a long drawn out process stretching into millions of years. Evolution is also a trial and error process in which a few evolutionary paths out of thousands may succeeds.

Our body as it is, without any meddling, will probably find it difficult to adjust to zero G. What modern medical science is capable of is another story. Future humans - aided by high profile growth of the medical/business establishment (lacking a sense of what is natural and what is unnatural) - may try to engineer a clone that does better in zero G, or perhaps a sandwiched human/machine
system.....

But when you come to think of it, living in zero g is silly. In the limited confines of the space station where astronauts are just trying to prove a point, not doing much useful work anyway, it may not matter. But imagine a large space hab one mile in diameter, where you happen to live, which does not have artificial g. How will life be there? You will have to sleep in a pouch or attach a safety belt when you sleep. or you cannot be sure where in the room you will be in the morning. To go to the toilet when you get up you will have to take the support of the walls, which will have grasping handles and crawl along like an old man. You can't walk because the first step you take will launch you and you will hit your head on the roof. To be able to walk you will have to wear magnetic shoes or some similar innovation. If you are angry during a meeting and bang your fist on the table, once again you will take off and hit your head on the ceiling. (In fact one thing you will need in a zero g environment is a helmet, or pretend you are an old man and move very very slowly). In a zero g environment the coordinate of anything which is not anchored down cannot be precisely defined and things will try to float away at the slightest excuse. Is there great freedom in a zero g environment? If you happen to be without your magnetic boots and take an indiscreet step you will launch yourself and you are not going to stop moving till you have moved for a mile and hit the other end of the Habitat. Of course you can move with the help of a backpack and thrusters - that will probably be your second skin. With backpack and thrusters you won't need your legs, so it will soon become fashionable to have them amputed. You will have to keep your young uns tightly strapped, if you let them loose there is no saying which end of the habitat they will end up. For careless guys, like most of us on earth, it is going to be an eternal mess-up.

Selvaraj

From: omar vega
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] 0-G problems

Mike:

When I said "evolve" I mean in the long term; really
in the long term. Ten of thousands of years more, at
least.

Meanwhile, the only way to colonize space is by
building space settlements, as the ones proposed by
O'Neill. We all of us agree in that point, I think.

The only advantage (that I foresee) of humans adapted
to gravity, is that space cities could grow in three
dimensions, and would be more flexible and cheaper
than space settlements. But this is only speculation.
The only proposals that are based in facts, and sound
science, are the ones of rotating cities.

By the way, I believe in the future people will
populate the moon and mars building in their surfaces,
but I also believe that space settlement is the way
mankind will use to colonize Jupiter and Saturn. The
satellites of those planets may hold lots of
resources, and It just doesn't make sense to establish
posts in those surfaces. It isn't possible either to
land in those huge planets. So, there space settlement
have the lead.

Omar Vega

--- "Combs, Mike" wrote:
> From: omar vega [mailto:oevega@...]
>
> > I agree with you, because I believe that in the
> long
> > term humans will have to adapt to live in zero
> > gravity.
>
> Why do you believe this when it's no significant
> expense or great
> engineering difficulty to provide a substitute for
> gravity via rotation?
>
> > If Man need to change to achieve that, It may
> > be the way to go. In nature it's called evolution.
>
> Don't get me wrong; I bet some segment of
> space-based humanity probably
> will chose to "evolve" in this direction. But I
> don't think all would.
> I don't even expect that most will.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike Combs
>

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, omar vega wrote:
> Richard:
>
> I agree with you, because I believe that in the long
> term humans will have to adapt to live in zero
> gravity. If Man need to change to achieve that, It may
> be the way to go. In nature it's called evolution.
>
> Omar Vega

Would restriction to a 0-G environment be enough to avoid or cope
with any difficulies brought about by living in 0-G? As I understand
it, that means losing bone density, muscle tone, the ability to fight
off illnesses...wouldn't this mean trouble for people who had lived
in 0-G conditions for a long time, regardless of whether they were
living in a 1-G or 0-G habitat, due to a general weakening of the
body?

> Selvaraj:

Living in a 0-G environtment is silly, of course, but
for us. I believe centrifugal space settlements is the
way to go; but I repeat: for us. Because we are the
ones that depend on gravity.

I wonder what would have though the first fish that
left the oceans to walk on land (a way to speak, of
course). He had though: Isn't it silly to live without
water in just a 2-d environment, without been able to
sweam, and felling all the weight of gravity against
us? And he may have answered itself: "In order to
survive we'll have to construct sweaming pools on the
land". That's the way we think of space colonization
right now, and it's quite logical to be so. We are not
adapted to that environment at all.

Adaptation to 0-G is a long, very long time business.
By natural selection would it take several mlllions of
years, at least. With genetics, it might take just
some
tens of thousand yeas. That's way out in the future,
so is not practical even to think about, I guess.

So, let's go back to the ground and continue to think
about our O'Neill environments.

Omar Vega

--- sraj wrote:

Omar,

This is not to disparage your idea. I got a little carried away imagining how funny life would be in zero g. Come to think of it, birds and insects will have no problem in controlled locomotion in a zero G hab - other than sensory loss if any!

Regards
Selvaraj

From: omar vega
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] 0-G problems

> Selvaraj:

Living in a 0-G environtment is silly, of course, but
for us. I believe centrifugal space settlements is the
way to go; but I repeat: for us. Because we are the
ones that depend on gravity.

I wonder what would have though the first fish that
left the oceans to walk on land (a way to speak, of
course). He had though: Isn't it silly to live without
water in just a 2-d environment, without been able to
sweam, and felling all the weight of gravity against
us? And he may have answered itself: "In order to
survive we'll have to construct sweaming pools on the
land". That's the way we think of space colonization
right now, and it's quite logical to be so. We are not
adapted to that environment at all.

Adaptation to 0-G is a long, very long time business.
By natural selection would it take several mlllions of
years, at least. With genetics, it might take just
some
tens of thousand yeas. That's way out in the future,
so is not practical even to think about, I guess.

So, let's go back to the ground and continue to think
about our O'Neill environments.

Omar Vega

--- sraj wrote:
>
> Evolution, in the natural sense, is a long drawn out
> process stretching into millions of years. Evolution
> is also a trial and error process in which a few
> evolutionary paths out of thousands may succeeds.
>
> Our body as it is, without any meddling, will
> probably find it difficult to adjust to zero G. What
> modern medical science is capable of is another
> story. Future humans - aided by high profile growth
> of the medical/business establishment (lacking a
> sense of what is natural and what is unnatural) -
> may try to engineer a clone that does better in zero
> G, or perhaps a sandwiched human/machine
> system.....
>
> But when you come to think of it, living in zero g
> is silly. In the limited confines of the space
> station where astronauts are just trying to prove a
> point, not doing much useful work anyway, it may not
> matter. But imagine a large space hab one mile in
> diameter, where you happen to live, which does not
> have artificial g. How will life be there? You will
> have to sleep in a pouch or attach a safety belt
> when you sleep. or you cannot be sure where in the
> room you will be in the morning. To go to the toilet
> when you get up you will have to take the support of
> the walls, which will have grasping handles and
> crawl along like an old man. You can't walk because
> the first step you take will launch you and you will
> hit your head on the roof. To be able to walk you
> will have to wear magnetic shoes or some similar
> innovation. If you are angry during a meeting and
> bang your fist on the table, once again you will
> take off and hit your head on the ceiling. (In fact
> one thing you will need in a zero g environment is a
> helmet, or pretend you are an old man and move very
> very slowly). In a zero g environment the coordinate
> of anything which is not anchored down cannot be
> precisely defined and things will try to float away
> at the slightest excuse. Is there great freedom in a
> zero g environment? If you happen to be without your
> magnetic boots and take an indiscreet step you will
> launch yourself and you are not going to stop moving
> till you have moved for a mile and hit the other end
> of the Habitat. Of course you can move with the help
> of a backpack and thrusters - that will probably be
> your second skin. With backpack and thrusters you
> won't need your legs, so it will soon become
> fashionable to have them amputed. You will have to
> keep your young uns tightly strapped, if you let
> them loose there is no saying which end of the
> habitat they will end up. For careless guys, like
> most of us on earth, it is going to be an eternal
> mess-up.
>
> Selvaraj
>
> From: omar vega
> To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 3:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] 0-G problems
>
> Mike:
>
> When I said "evolve" I mean in the long term;
> really
> in the long term. Ten of thousands of years more,
> at
> least.
>
> Meanwhile, the only way to colonize space is by
> building space settlements, as the ones proposed
> by
> O'Neill. We all of us agree in that point, I
> think.
>
> The only advantage (that I foresee) of humans
> adapted
> to gravity, is that space cities could grow in
> three
> dimensions, and would be more flexible and cheaper
> than space settlements. But this is only
> speculation.
> The only proposals that are based in facts, and
> sound
> science, are the ones of rotating cities.
>
> By the way, I believe in the future people will
> populate the moon and mars building in their
> surfaces,
> but I also believe that space settlement is the
> way
> mankind will use to colonize Jupiter and Saturn.
> The
> satellites of those planets may hold lots of
> resources, and It just doesn't make sense to
> establish
> posts in those surfaces. It isn't possible either
> to
> land in those huge planets. So, there space
> settlement
> have the lead.
>
> Omar Vega
>
> --- "Combs, Mike" wrote:
> > From: omar vega [mailto:oevega@...]
> >
> > > I agree with you, because I believe that in
> the
> > long
> > > term humans will have to adapt to live in zero
> > > gravity.
> >
> > Why do you believe this when it's no significant
> > expense or great
> > engineering difficulty to provide a substitute
> for
> > gravity via rotation?
> >
> >
> > > If Man need to change to achieve that, It may
> > > be the way to go. In nature it's called
> evolution.
> >
> > Don't get me wrong; I bet some segment of
> > space-based humanity probably
> > will chose to "evolve" in this direction. But I
> > don't think all would.
> > I don't even expect that most will.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mike Combs

Selvaraj:

Yes, but I think how amazing is the future that
humanity has right in front of it! I hope we just have
the opportunity of surviving our current problems and
climb to the stars.

Omar Vega

--- sraj wrote:

Selvaraj wrote:

> This is not to disparage your idea. I got a little carried
> away imagining how funny life would be in zero g. Come to
> think of it, birds and insects will have no problem in
> controlled locomotion in a zero G hab - other than sensory
> loss if any!

No, I think this is wrong. Bird and insect flight has evolved in a 1-g
field. Wing flaps are used for propulsion, but mostly for lift. The
movement of birds' wings is primarily arranged to support the mass of
the bird - lots of websites investigate flight and are worth a look. In
zero-G, I suspect a bird can learn to adapt the motion to all thrust
and no lift, but it'll come at a cost of less efficiency and potential
strains and wear & tear on the skeleto-muscular system. Zero-g birds
will presumably evolve away from their planet-bound forms and take on a
modified form of "penguin flight" - wings and mechanics evolved for
zero-G.

Regards,

Andy

From: Andrew Goddard [mailto:a.goddard@....uk]

> In zero-G, I suspect a bird can learn to adapt the
> motion to all thrust and no lift,

Arthur C. Clarke wrote a short story about a canary on a space station
who had done precisely that.

I was very encouraged by the fact that it was Skylab's experience that
spiders could eventually learn to successfully spin normal webs in 0-G.
If something with a brain much smaller than the head of a pin can modify
its behavior to adapt to 0-G conditions, then it makes me optimistic
that anything with a bigger brain could as well.

Regards,

Mike Combs

Andy,

You are probably right. Maybe a hummingbird may find it easier since it can sort of rotates its wings I think. Other birds will probably obtain some random velocity and then shape their wings to glide in the desired direction - hovering may not be possible for these birds. Most small flying insects seem to hover so they may not have much problem, and air resistance will keep them healthy. Insects that crawl too may not have problem since they obtain traction by some adhesive process.

Zero g will probably be OK for the smaller life forms (gravity is no big deal for them on Earth too - I think). For larger life forms one cannot fully predict what will happen in the long run, especially in an evolutionary process; either they will all become spindly or they could become super gigantic like whales!

By now I think either USA or Russia would have tried to find out how a bird adjusts in zero G in one of their space stations ??

Regards
Selvaraj

Mike wrote:

I was very encouraged by the fact that it was Skylab's experience that
spiders could eventually learn to successfully spin normal webs in 0-G.
If something with a brain much smaller than the head of a pin can modify
its behavior to adapt to 0-G conditions, then it makes me optimistic
that anything with a bigger brain could as well.

The issue is not brains. After all an earthworm can do things a human cannot do.

Regards
Selvaraj

From: Andrew Goddard
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 2:14 PM
Subject: RE: [spacesettlers] 0-G problems

Selvaraj wrote:

> This is not to disparage your idea. I got a little carried
> away imagining how funny life would be in zero g. Come to
> think of it, birds and insects will have no problem in
> controlled locomotion in a zero G hab - other than sensory
> loss if any!

No, I think this is wrong. Bird and insect flight has evolved in a 1-g
field. Wing flaps are used for propulsion, but mostly for lift. The
movement of birds' wings is primarily arranged to support the mass of
the bird - lots of websites investigate flight and are worth a look. In
zero-G, I suspect a bird can learn to adapt the motion to all thrust
and no lift, but it'll come at a cost of less efficiency and potential
strains and wear & tear on the skeleto-muscular system. Zero-g birds
will presumably evolve away from their planet-bound forms and take on a
modified form of "penguin flight" - wings and mechanics evolved for
zero-G.

Regards,

Andy

I believe the most complex adaptions to 0-G are those
that animals use to process visual information. In 1-G
all "brains" model their physical environment based on

G up-down direction. G's perpendicular plane matches
Earth surface. So, I believe brains have this G
directions somehow hardwired in the processing of
visual information.

When you take out that references, things start to
look and feel very weird. Notwithstanding we live in a
3-d world, our cities and our environment are mainly
2-D locations.

Omar Vega

--- "Combs, Mike" wrote:

I agree with the idea that taking fliers to the ISS would be an
interesting experiment. Hasn't this been done with some insects? If
not, then I would suggest taking several dragonflies, a humming bird
(two or three would be better), and a canary (again, several would be
better).

I believe that an Asimov story made a brief mention of a cat at a moon
base, who hunted mice that had escaped from a medical lab and then
started breeding. This was an orange, fat feline that leapt five
metres into the air whenever startled.

Xenophile (who volunteers Pumpkin, his fianc?s cat, for the mission)

Hi Group:

I like science fiction very much, and I colect
stories, and you guys have mentioned two stories that
sound very interesting to me: the spatial canary of
Arthur Clarke and the moon-base's cat of Isaac Asimov.
I wonder if you remember the titles of these tales to
get them somehow.

Omar Vega

--- Xenophile wrote:

--- In spacesettlers, omar vega wrote:

> Hi Group:
>
> I like science fiction very much, and I colect stories, and you guys
> have mentioned two stories that sound very interesting to me: the
> spatial canary of Arthur Clarke and the moon-base's cat of Isaac
> Asimov.
> I wonder if you remember the titles of these tales to get them
> somehow.
>
> Omar Vega

I'm not sure this is right, so don't send a hit squad after me if I'm
wrong, but I think the cat was in the third part of _The Gods
Themselves_. I know that the lunar brachiating was, and it was part
of what inspired me to create (well, create on paper... pixels... on
disc?) the sport of brachiation tag. That and the fact that I played
the earth-bound form back in schoolyard days.

Xenophile (no, those were NOT the best years of my life! May God help
me if I ever claim that they were!!)

Xenophile:

Thank you very much. I will look for Asimov's book.
I'd tried to read as much as I could of him, but I
think the guy wrote much faster that I could read. I
have about 450 more books of Asimov to go. By the way,
when you compare him with Shakespeare, Cervantes or
Borges, it surprising me how much Asimov could write.
I think he was one of the most prolific writers ever;
and this in a planetary scale.

Omar Vega

--- Xenophile wrote:

Google knows all. I see that the name of the Arthur C. Clarke short
story I remembered is "FEATHERED FRIEND", and it appears in the
collection "OF TIME AND STARS".

A quote:

We stared at each other for a minute; then, before I had quite
recovered my wits, she did a curious kind of backward loop I'm
sure no earthbound canary had ever managed, and departed with
a few leisurely flicks. It was quite obvious that she'd
already learned how to operate in the absence of gravity, and
did not believe in doing unnecessary work. (p.189)

Regards,

Mike Combs

From: omar vega [mailto:oevega@...]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 6:06 PM
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] Re: 0-G problems

Hi Group:

I like science fiction very much, and I colect
stories, and you guys have mentioned two stories that
sound very interesting to me: the spatial canary of
Arthur Clarke and the moon-base's cat of Isaac Asimov.
I wonder if you remember the titles of these tales to
get them somehow.

Omar Vega