zlacker

Then just provide spin gravity for the crew habitat.

>>Robotb+(OP)
“just”

It's theoretically possible for sure, but we've never done that in practice and it's far from trivial.

>>little+D1
Good points. Spin “gravity” is also quite challenging to acclimatize to because it’s not uniform like planetary gravity. Lots of nausea and unintuitive gyroscopic effects when moving. It’s definitely not a “just”

>>little+D1
Yeah, “just.”

Every child on a merry go round experiences it. Every car driving on a curve. And Gemini tested it once as well. It’s a basic feature of physics. Now why NASA hasn’t decided to implement it in decades is actually kind of a mystery.

>>Robotb+xL
1g of acceleration is enormous compared to a child in a merry go round actually.

> And Gemini tested it once as well.

From Wikipedia:

They were able to generate a small amount of artificial gravity, about 0.00015 g

So yes, you need an effect 60 000 times stronger than this.

And you want that to be relatively uniform over the size of an astronaut so you need a very big merry go round.

Nuclear fission is also a basic feature of physics, that doesn't mean engineering a nuclear power plant is straightforward.

>>little+ZQ
It’s not, actually. I’ve swung my kids around at multiple gees.

>>Robotb+vT
Kids enjoy having their head and feet at different levels of gravity.

When was the last time you spun yourself around in a desk chair?

>>Robotb+xL
If it’s that straightforward, why haven’t you done it?

>>Robotb+xL
Relevant Scott Manley video: https://youtu.be/nxeMoaxUpWk?si=QOO9KJCGS_Q8JeyR

Relevant tom Scott video: https://youtu.be/bJ_seXo-Enc?si=m_QjHpLaL8d8Cp8b

There is a lot of research, but it’s not as simple as operating under real gravity. Makes many movements harder and can result in getting sick.