0-G problems

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