Astronaut to Run the Boston Marathon From Space

BostonBehindTheScenes writes "American astronaut Sunita Williams will run 26.2 miles on a treadmill on Patriot's Day (April 16th for those of you outside of Massachusetts) while runners on the ground will compete in the 111th Boston Marathon, according to this New Scientist article. And yes, she is an actual registered participant who qualified by finishing among the top 100 women in the Houston Marathon in 2006. NASA's press release touts this as yet another space first."

Pork.

[Morky (577776)]

I protest! She is wasting precious oxygen paid for by you the taxpayer.

She'll finish first, though

[Migraineman (632203)]

The ISS is moving at 7.726 km/s (I checked this morning - I'm running Orbitron to track a different satellite [navy.mil].) 26.2 miles converts to 42.165 km, so she should traverse the course length in about 5.5 seconds.

How many steps does it take to complete a marathon from low earth orbit? A one ... a two ... a three. Three.

Re:Pork.

[arivanov (12034)]

That should actually be the Russian taxpayer (primary life support is provided by the Zvezda module). And I do not particularly recall any historical period when the rulers of Russia gave a flying fuck about their cittizen's thoughts on governmental spending. In fact, modern Russian state is founded on government diverting taxation money from where it is supposed to go. That what Ivan Kalita (the Wallet) did to start the second Russian state and the tradition has carried on from there onwards.

Re:Pork.

[GreyPoopon (411036)]

Or does the fact that it might be a european taxpayer make it all ok?

Speaking as an American, I'm perfectly happy to let the Europeans pay my taxes. *duck*

Is this really fair?

[F-3582 (996772)]

Physiologically speaking, you don't have any gravity for your blood stream, specifically your heart, to handle. In my opinion you can't compare such a run to a real one!

Re:Is this really fair?

[MyLongNickName (822545)]

Lighten up. I seriously doubt her numbers will be "official". She is running on a treadmill in zero G. It is publicity for the Boston Marathon, and likely good physiological research for NASA.

Re:Is this really fair?

[martin-boundary (547041)]

Sometimes great publicity ideas can backfire. I hope they thought about attaching a dynamo and lightbulb combo to the threadmill, it's pretty dark up there in space and the worst thing would be if she tripped up and started falling continuously towards the earth....

Re:Is this really fair?

[khallow (566160)]

It's called zero gee by the people who fly people into space and refers to the acceleration of the astronaut's frame of reference. Freefall without rotation is a zero gee environment. Good enough for me even though technically the astronauts live in a 10^-3 or 10^-4 gee environment due to tidal forces and the mass of the ISS.

Re:Is this really fair?

[mdwh2 (535323)]

I think it's pretty clear that the OP is well aware that the spacecraft is not beyond the range of influence of the Earth's gravity (which is infinite, after all).

At the same time though, in General Relativity a gravitational field is equivalent to an accelerating frame of reference (or something like that...), so the sum total gravitational effects experienced in the spacecraft's frame of reference is near zero.

It could be argued that "zero gravity" is misleading as it will help perpetuate the common myth that weightlessness is due to being beyond the Earth's gravity, rather than it being cancelled out due to the acceleration, but nonetheless, that's a term used to refer to it, and I think it's clear that the OP wasn't misunderstanding the differences.

I'd question that labelling it as "scientifically inaccurate" constitutes POV, especially when it is backed up only by one person, who is described as a journalist and historian, not a scientist.

MOM!

[bigattichouse (527527)]

Moooooommm, Sunie's hogging all the oxygen again!

Sunie, Cut it out. Don't antaonize your sister.

But, I gotta win the maaarathonn.

Well, do it quietly, dear. Your sister has experiments to conduct.

Treadmill vs road

[Liquid Len (739188)]

Yes, I know this is Slashdot. But I'm a geek and a passionate marathon runner as well...
There's a big difference between running on a treadmill and on a road (besides the boring factor): the relative wind resistance you experience when you move has a very significant impact on your speed. A rule of thumb is that you have to subtract about 1 km/h to your treadmill speed in order to have an idea on how fast you can go on the road.

Re:Not to mention...

[Lord Bitman (95493)]

moving all your mass forward/uphill vs basically just bouncing up and down. And of course, in space, you don't even have the resistance of bouncing up and down.

Re:Not to mention...

[rly2000 (779141)]

She's going to have tethers to keep her down. As a runner, I think it would be an interesting approximation of running.

While the impact against the treadmill could well be compared to gravity, I wonder whether the zero-gravity will make it harder for her heart to pump blood to her legs. I couldn't imagine running upside down.

Also, having run on the treadmill, I think a good approximation of running outside would be to set the incline to about 1.5%. Of course, that starts to disproportionately work out your quads as opposed to your hamstrings.

Re:Not to mention...

[oni (41625)]

in space, you don't even have the resistance of bouncing up and down.

I don't think that resistance is quite the right word, but I agree with you in general - what she's doing shouldn't qualify as running the marathon. The biggest problem with long-term space travel is bone loss, and NASA has already proven that just tethering a person to a treadmil and letting them exercise doesn't fix the problem. They still lose bone mass. That's all the proof I need that what she's doing isn't the same as running on earth.

Still, there is a bright side to this. This might just be the longest run on a treadmill in zero-g. And since she has run marathons on the ground, she will be in a good position to report what the differences are and maybe this will lead to better zero-g exercise equipment.

Re:

[Mr. Underbridge (666784)]

Yes, I know this is Slashdot. But I'm a geek and a passionate marathon runner as well... There's a big difference between running on a treadmill and on a road (besides the boring factor): the relative wind resistance you experience when you move has a very significant impact on your speed. A rule of thumb is that you have to subtract about 1 km/h to your treadmill speed in order to have an idea on how fast you can go on the road.

I run as well (and cycle), and there's just no comparison. Treadmill surface

Re:Treadmill vs road

[Don_dumb (927108)]

Also being a runner and gymrat I have to disagree, I can run long distance fine, but simply cant stay on a treadmill for more than a few miles. There are really two reasons for this -

The first is that I (and many I know) find my actual running style is different on a treadmill than 'self-propelled'.
Second is the physcological factors - the fact that when out running, my mind has to do a certain amount of work paying attention to where I am going, the surface, other road/pavement users etc this means consiously I can 'turn-off', whereas on a treadmill I need to think about something, and even though the treadmills at my gym have TVs and they might even be showing something I am interested in, I still spend a great deal of time looking around, still in 'vigilant mode'; The fact that I *can* step off at any time, ultimately means that after 4 or 5 miles I *will* just do that, when you are 5 miles from home, you just keep going, you can stop but you still have to at least walk home -so I keep running.

The other factor that would make a treadmill marathon more difficult is the lack of crowd, people cheering on and other runners really do spur you on when things get tough.

Re:Treadmill vs road

[Quarters (18322)]

She'll already be moving close to 17500 mph. How much more of a headwind do you want her to have?

That place is gonna smell...

[sycodon (149926)]

...like a locker room.

Patriots' Day

[by Anonymous Coward]

For the unaware, Patriots' Day commemorates the Battles of Lexington and Concord which are considered to be the first skirmishes of the American Revolution, a conflict that was actually fought be people generally considered to be patriots.

We in Massachusetts have been observing this day long before a certain President co-opted the name to add a bit of jingo to the commemoration of a certain day in September.

Tell us what we REALLY want to know!

[erroneus (253617)]

Will she be wearing diapers?!

What next? Unix hacker to run the marathan from ..

[140Mandak262Jamuna (970587)]

... the C shell?

think of the aliens!

[symes (835608)]

Seriously, what would our outer-space neighbours think if they picked that moment to swing by and pay us a visit? They're just going to scratch their heads and think we're some backwards species that powers space flight by putting funny sweaty little creatures on treadmills!

Will she overheat?

[giafly (926567)]

No gravity means no convection. No headwind means little conduction.
Will they generate an artificial headwind using a fan, or does the International Space Station have powerful air conditioning already?

Running marathon on my couch

[steelerguy (172075)]

It looks like I will be running the marathon on my couch and quit possibly in my bed also, probably won't be doing too much running either, but hey...at least I am participating in the Boston Marathon (even though I not in the correct city or state or registered or even running).

Re:Patriot Day?

[by Anonymous Coward]

It celebrates the battles of Lexington and Concord of a certain war which you are not a patriot if you cannot name.

I'm a patriot, and I can name it. It was the war of the treasonous, ungrateful colonists ;-)