Artificial Gravity by TPage

FIREFLY EPISODE DISCUSSIONS

Artificial Gravity

POSTED BY: TPAGE
UPDATED: Sunday, October 22, 2006 23:05
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3429
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, October 7, 2006 10:34 AM

This isn't about any particular episode, but something that has always bugged me.

When Wash (or whatever pilot on a sci-fi series) is conducting evasive procedures in space why does the crew and luggage, etc. go flying? With artificial gravity you wouldn't feel the effects of the ship itself, although missile impacts and the like I could understand.

Am I the only one thinking this, am I wrong? Please someone say something.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 7, 2006 10:59 AM

DTUCK

I think it has to do with inertia. Gravity generators are good and all, but even the best of them can't cope with a sudden 5 g-force pull to starboard... it takes a second for it to realign itself.

In zero gravity, the problem would be amplified, since you've got the grav-generator working to hold everything to the 'floor', and the inertial dampers trying to keep everything in it's relative position on the ship... but when you introduce the force of a sudden banking or turn, or gods-forbid, a barrel-role... it would muck up the settings, and the systems would have to try to compensate, giving you the 'everything flies about for a few seconds' effect.

Not that I analyze this stuff religiously or anything... nope... uh-uh.

Anyhow... hope that helps.

__________________________________

The best way to get rid of temptation is to yield to it.

- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 7, 2006 11:00 AM

TPAGE

Sure, I'll go with that. Thanks.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 19, 2006 2:00 AM

RAINSTICK

i think it has also to do with the limitations and rules of television production.
first, the reason that every science fiction has artificial gravity is that producers/writers/actors cannot get past the fact that everything has to be shot on earth where everything is affected by gravity. if the issue was realism there should be no gravity in science fiction. i doubt it could be artificially created at all (whatever the technobabble), because it has to do with the mass and rotation of the earth (other planets have greater/lower gravity).
secondly, the fact that people and things are getting tossed around during flight manoeuvres has to do with making the situation accessible for the audience. we all know how we are pressed to the sides when a car takes a quick turn, or how we'd fall down when a bus or train stops unless we hold on to something. this connection, i think, makes the situation easier to relate to, and that's one of the reason why they did that. we would find it unnatural if people weren't tossed around from all the manoeuvres.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 21, 2006 10:52 PM

USMCHELLRAISER

In space- no jerking around due to inertia. If it took a second for the Gravity to compensate, any space ship accelerating to atmo escape velocity with people standing would leave bloody dents in the nearest wall behind the poor victim.

In Atmo- now you have real gravity working AND ArtGrav. It makes sense in "Serenity" how they whip about as they approach Miranda.

How to creat artificial gravity? A mini-black hole?

You should be able to create directionally specific artificial gravity by just canelling out via some sort of field all other gravity affecting people in the ship that didn't pull the direction you wanted. A piece of sand on Neptune would afect our gravity, we just can't feel it because gravity fields nearer to us are stronger.

"...let's not ruin an otherwise pleasant day with unnecessary bloodshed..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 22, 2006 2:29 AM

CITIZEN

The Earth's rotation has a negligible effect on it's Gravitational pull (about 0.5%) and only effects things that rotate with the planet.

Of course it would be fairly easy to demonstrate a believable gravitational system in Sci-Fi, using centrifugal force (as demonstrated in 2001 and 2010 for instance as well as the Human ships in Babylon 5). Of course this route restricts certain plot devices and enforces certain design considerations, which is why it isn't often favoured.

I don't recall ever seeing people thrown around in Serenity from manoeuvres made by Wash, I would imagine that any workable anti-inertia system would be linked into the flyby wire controls, so that it could predict what G-forces the crew were about to experience and simultaneously counteract them. When in a planets atmosphere, when under attack or when the ships motion is caused by something other than the pilots controls the compensating gravity fields are going to be slightly behind the g-Forces.

A miniature blackhole isn't a particularly practical method of Gravity creation, remember the gravity of a Blackhole is it's 'weight'. A blackhole has the same mass as the star it formed from, just incredibly concentrated. So to produce 1G gravity using a Blackhole you'd have to cart around a Blackhole that had the same mass as the Earth. It would make the ships fuel requirements a might large to shift that much mass.

There has been some successes 'altering' local gravitation with spinning superconductors, given the huge spinning ring between the engine module and the main habitable areas of Serenity, and that this is pointed out as the 'gravity ring' on the official serenity movie site I think it's fair to assume that some sort of spinning superconductor system for gravity generation is in use on Serenity.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 22, 2006 3:13 AM

CRUITHNE3753

I reckon in the 'Verse, all this artificial gravity and inertial dampener stuff is pretty much shiny new tech. Fireflies were originally not fitted with AG, hence the rather awkward arrangement of accessing the crew quarters, and the need for reaction engines. The flip site of artificial gravity is of course antigravity. Newer ships shouldn't need the big reaction engines Serenity has. Think about Trash - Monty must have a newer antigravity capable ship, otherwise Mal and YoSaffBridge would have been flattened by the down blast of conventional engines. And what about those rich kid's floating islands?

Another thought occurs - if you were to be able to create gravitational fields via the expenditure of a small amount of energy, rather than requiring a colossal amount of mass, then you're pretty much on the way to FTL. The one place in the universe where you can - in fact compelled - to travel FTL is falling into a black hole after crossing the event horizon. Gravitational fields are seen as a warping of spacetime. The word "warp" ring any bells?

Could be an interesting future development if there are future stories from the 'Verse... or might ruin the whole thing.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 22, 2006 3:57 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Cruithne3753:
I reckon in the 'Verse, all this artificial gravity and inertial dampener stuff is pretty much shiny new tech. Fireflies were originally not fitted with AG, hence the rather awkward arrangement of accessing the crew quarters, and the need for reaction engines. The flip site of artificial gravity is of course antigravity. Newer ships shouldn't need the big reaction engines Serenity has.

Lowered inertial drives are already in use, they reduce the fuel costs of reaction engines, and there is no reason to assume FireFlies haven't always had them. The secret to using Artificial Gravity in a storyline is limiting it. If any ship can use Gravitic Propulsion then you've got planet cracking supper weapons. I would surmise that the Gravitational technology cannot be used for propulsion, cannot be projected beyond the body of the craft.

Quote:
Think about Trash - Monty must have a newer antigravity capable ship, otherwise Mal and YoSaffBridge would have been flattened by the down blast of conventional engines.

Not really, the Harrier jump jet can take off vertically without 'flattening' everyone around it. They only need to fire the engines enough to lift the ship, they don't need to thrust enough to make orbital velocity right away.

Quote:
And what about those rich kid's floating islands?

Or the Chandelier in Shindig, both could be anti-gravity, or they could be some other technology.

Quote:
Another thought occurs - if you were to be able to create gravitational fields via the expenditure of a small amount of energy, rather than requiring a colossal amount of mass, then you're pretty much on the way to FTL.

You can't travel faster than the speed of light. You can travel between two points in less time than it would take a beam of light, for instance by travelling through a Wormhole, but you're local speed can never exceed (or even equal) the speed of light.

Quote:
Gravitational fields are seen as a warping of spacetime. The word "warp" ring any bells?

The Alcubierre Warp is usually the scientific theory for warp drives. Unfortunately it requires the rest mass energy of the entire universe and 'exotic' particles to create them.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 22, 2006 1:56 PM

CRUITHNE3753

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
You can't travel faster than the speed of light. You can travel between two points in less time than it would take a beam of light, for instance by travelling through a Wormhole, but you're local speed can never exceed (or even equal) the speed of light.

I was talking about the very exceptional case of being within the event horizon of a black hole.
A spacecraft would be accelerating towards the singularity under the force of gravity FTL in relation to matter outside the horizon. A nearby beam of light on the same trajectory would still be travelling at lightspeed in relation to it. Mind you, in this case nothing matters as it's all heading to oblivion at the singularity anyway.

Quote:
The Alcubierre Warp is usually the scientific theory for warp drives. Unfortunately it requires the rest mass energy of the entire universe and 'exotic' particles to create them.

In the real universe... after all, I am talking about a fictional one!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:05 PM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Cruithne3753:
I was talking about the very exceptional case of being within the event horizon of a black hole.
A spacecraft would be accelerating towards the singularity under the force of gravity FTL in relation to matter outside the horizon. A nearby beam of light on the same trajectory would still be travelling at lightspeed in relation to it. Mind you, in this case nothing matters as it's all heading to oblivion at the singularity anyway.

If you could travel faster than the speed of light inside the Schwarzschild radius of a Black hole, even if it was toward the singularity you could escape, possibly through a gravity slingshot. Any apparent speed increases beyond FTL would have to be a trick of warped time in comparision to other refrence frames.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE