Timeline for Could artificial gravity help send large spacecrafts into space?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2021 at 15:42 | comment | added | Slarty | Yes if you can make gravity "turn off and onable" then anything that involved gravitational potential energy can be recharged for free. Unless of course there is a compensatory energy cost associated with the set up process. This was not clear in the question, but would tend to defeat the purpose if true. | |
| Sep 20, 2021 at 14:09 | comment | added | user458 | I re-read this, and I think you must be thinking of the wormhole/gravity problem. If you put the exit point about the entry point, then you could dump water in it and it would fall forever between the two wormholes. Place a turbine between them and it's free energy forever. There's debate on whether that violates physical laws, but it's very similar to what you say here. | |
| Sep 20, 2021 at 9:49 | comment | added | Chronocidal | @frеdsbend Exactly; our current launch systems expend a lot more energy than just the amount needed to raise an object to orbit. Reducing the waste energy is not the same as achieving free energy. | |
| Sep 19, 2021 at 17:58 | comment | added | Goodies | I think the key of SF is consistency of the underlying physics, rather than being limited to current availability of knowledge on a subject. Other answers have pointed out how little we actually know about gravity. In SF you extrapolate existing knowledge, and doing that, you may present certain new things as scientific fact. Your anti-gravity could e.g. be based on bending local space-time into a certain shape. Space time is a known phenomenon in current physics. Changing the shape of space-time is done with a heavy mass.. or.. in this case.. by using LiveInAmbeR's handwavium generator. | |
| Sep 19, 2021 at 17:08 | comment | added | LiveInAmbeR | @Slarty That is also assuming that the artificial gravity device uses 0 energy, which is impossible. | |
| Sep 19, 2021 at 16:57 | comment | added | user458 | There's no reason to assume the energy needed to draw up water is less than the energy that could be captured when it falls back. On the contrary, there's every reason to assume the opposite. | |
| Sep 19, 2021 at 15:38 | history | answered | Slarty | CC BY-SA 4.0 |