SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
If we wish to colonize another world, finding a planet with a gravitational field that humans can survive and thrive under will be crucial. If its gravity is too strong our blood will be pulled down into our legs, our bones might break, and we could even be pinned helplessly to the ground.
Finding the gravitational limit of the human body is something that's better done before we land on a massive new planet. Now, in a paper published on the pre-print server arXiv, three physicists, claim that the maximum gravitational field humans could survive long-term is four-and-a-half times the gravity on Earth.
Or, at least you could if you are an Icelandic strongman – and Game of Thrones monster – who can walk with more than half a metric ton on your back. For mere mortals, the researchers say, it would need to be a little weaker.
[...] For the maximum gravity at which we could take a step, the team turned to Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson, an Icelandic strongman who once walked five steps with a 1430 pound log on his back, smashing a 1,000-year-old record[*].
[*] YouTube video.
What's the Maximum Gravity We Could Survive?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday September 22 2018, @11:54PM (6 children)
Yes, and no, to that. Let's just say that 50, 100, or 150 years after we plant our first space colony, the local residents will still be remarking about how stupid the earthmen who first came here were. Necessity being the mother of invention, tech will be invented on the spot, to solve problems that earth dwellers never imagined.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 23 2018, @12:33AM (2 children)
Won't matter if we plant our colonies in space 50, 100, or 150 years from now.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 23 2018, @12:55AM (1 child)
I'm not sure we're communicating very well.
In year XXXX we plant our first colony. In year XXXX +a month or two, the colonists discover an unforseen problem. They solve it. In year XXXX +1 they discover a couple more unforeseen problems, and solve them. In time, these solutions add up to "new technology", some of which would have been pretty useless on earth. That is, they build an entire new body of science, which earthdwellers would not, and in some cases, could not, have found.
In year XXXX +50, or +100, or whatever, the residents will be looking back, and mocking earth men and early colonists, much as people today mock medieval Europeans. "They were so BACKWARDS!! I'm sure glad I wasn't born then!"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 23 2018, @04:10AM
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday September 23 2018, @02:16AM (2 children)
This is what I was referring to, only I'll quote more of it: " The fact is, we don't know if we can put living human beings into other star systems yet. With today's tech, no we can't."
No one would deny there will be new problems once we get there, for sure. But we developed the necessary technology to put people there and find out many decades ago. Had the political will existed to do it, the project could have been planned before 1970, and even with many delays launched for Alpha Centauri (or wherever, sorry Sid) by now, had there been the political will to do so.
Does it get easier and more likely as technology improves? Sure. But don't pretend we're waiting for some crucial technology to make it possible. It's already possible, and has been for a long time.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 23 2018, @03:12AM (1 child)
Ohhhhh-kay, I think I can see what you're saying, and I can even accept the possibility. But, had we launched a ship to any of the closest stars in 1970, that ship would most likely only be exiting our own solar system, today. It might be near about where the Voyager craft are today, albeit on a different heading. Personally, I can't see us building such a ship on earth, then launching it. Nor do I see us launching the materials into space, then building it. I think it necessary to develop space mining, smelting, forging, and assembly, before we can build such a ship. Whether we are considering a generational ship, or a really fast ship, the ship is going to be massive, and the fuel requirements just as massive.
We'll have to get up there, before we can start getting things done. The idea of launching an interstellar ship from earth is just a pipe dream, IMO.
I'll readily give you the point that, if we had launched space mining endeavors in 1970, we would now be 48 years closer to launching an interstellar ship today. For far too long, we've been hung up on that silly space plane, and the ISS. It's time, and past time, to move beyond a shuttle and a low orbit space camp for a privileged few.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday September 23 2018, @05:08AM
It would be a colossal waste of calories, yes. Much better to build it in orbit, using materials mined from space insofar as possible.
"I think it necessary to develop space mining, smelting, forging, and assembly, before we can build such a ship."
Precisely. And we knew that then, and we had the technology then. But not the funding. That would have to wait until we won the cold war.
So we won the cold war, where's that peace dividend? It could have paid for a full set of HOMEs and plenty of mining startups as well.
Nope, can't afford space exploration, not possible. (Quick, someone start another war!)
"I'll readily give you the point that, if we had launched space mining endeavors in 1970, we would now be 48 years closer to launching an interstellar ship today. For far too long, we've been hung up on that silly space plane, and the ISS. It's time, and past time, to move beyond a shuttle and a low orbit space camp for a privileged few."
Indeed. It's nothing but bread and circuses for the science-loving crowd, and I'm afraid we're not a very important demographic so there isn't even a lot of that.
We can't claim to have even begun a serious space program while the LaGrange points sit uninhabited.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?