Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

'Mouse-Tronaughts' to Test Low-Gravity in Space 276

Posted by CmdrTaco from the rodents-in-space dept.
RandBlade writes "The Telegraph has an article about plans to launch mice into space with simulated low-gravity for five weeks, to test the effects of low-gravity on their bodies. This "will be the first time mammals of any kind have lived in partial gravity for an extended period." Hopes are that this will provide information useful for plans to launch men to Mars, which has one-third of the gravity of Earth."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

'Mouse-Tronaughts' to Test Low-Gravity in Space More

'Mouse-Tronaughts' to Test Low-Gravity in Space

Comments Filter:

  • First time for mammals (Score:5, Funny)

    by baryon351 ( 626717 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:41PM (#8218669)
    > This "will be the first time mammals of any kind have lived in > partial gravity for an extended period."

    As opposed to those reptilian astronauts.

    • Re:First time for mammals (Score:4, Informative)

      by hokanomono ( 530164 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:47PM (#8218721) Homepage
      The point is: there is no documented experiment of humans living in partial gravity for an extended period.
    • Yeah, but who gets to clean the cage?

  • Pardon? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Wingchild ( 212447 ) <brian.kern@gmail.com> on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:42PM (#8218681)
    This "will be the first time mammals of any kind have lived in partial gravity for an extended period."

    Skylab? Mir? The International Space Station? People coming back from hundred-day tours in space, their muscles weak from Low-G muscle atrophy, having to undergo extended rehabilitation and physical therapy to rebuild muscle mass after coming earthside?

    Did I imagine all that?

  • Mouse-Tronaughts? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tirel ( 692085 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:44PM (#8218693)
    so people in space are what? Homo-tronaughts?

  • 'naut' == 'naught'? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:44PM (#8218694)
    Not!
  • Mouse on Mars [mouseonmars.com]?

    I am very sorry.

  • Reproduction in space (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tjstork ( 137384 ) <todd.bandrowsky@ ... UGARom minus cat> on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:45PM (#8218703) Homepage Journal

    Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature? We can conceivably provide a breathable habitat, running water, etc. But, it is becoming clear that gravity plays a fairly strong role in the development of living things from fertilized egg to adulthood. Perhaps it might be impossible to reproduce on the moon or mars, because there is not enough gravity. Or, maybe you can but there will be a statistical risk of some undiscovered birth defect.

    It may turn out that the only viable planet to really colonize is Venus, then, it becomes a question of, what do we do with 10^20 tons of carbon dioxide!
    • if anything, babies would be larger due to the ability to grow larger with fewer bad effects.

      in that case, humans on the moon would be taller but weaker than earth humans and perhaps one day be diffrent enough that they would be considered a diffrent species.
      • in that case, humans on the moon would be taller but weaker than earth humans and perhaps one day be diffrent enough that they would be considered a diffrent species.

        Doubtful. Pygmies can still reproduce with Dinkas.

        But then, any sort of isolation between groups of the same species eventually produces different species, so this doesn't say much.

      • if anything, babies would be larger due to the ability to grow larger with fewer bad effects.

        Thank you Doctor.

        But seriously folks, we just don't know.

        We do know that evolution makes a lot of assumptions about an organism's environment, and that gravity is one assumption that could be strongly relied on for the last three billion years, from the origin of life on earth until Laika's the dog's first orbit in 1957.

        We also know that the genetic sequencer, as long as it is, is nowhere near long enough to pr

        • We also know that the genetic sequencer, as long as it is, is nowhere near long enough to provide an actual "blueprint" of the organism being built.

          Mmmmm, so it's just a checksum, then?

          • We also know that the genetic sequencer, as long as it is, is nowhere near long enough to provide an actual "blueprint" of the organism being built.

            Mmmmm, so it's just a checksum, then?

            No.

            It's data, but unlike a blueprint, there's not enough information to specify the placement of every cell, or every connection between neurons.

            A better analogy (but still only an analogy) would be to a recipe: a recipe specifies the amounts of ingredients, and in the case of a marble (two batter) cake, may even speci

      • humans on the moon would be taller but weaker than earth humans and perhaps one day be diffrent enough that they would be considered a diffrent species.

        So basically they will become elves?

    • You build a huge tube from venus to mars, throw in a few pumps, and move the CO2 over to the red planet! Viola! Two planets terrarformed for the price of one!

    • Re:Reproduction in space (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Pedrito ( 94783 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:14PM (#8218939)
      Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature?

      There's no reason that human babies couldn't be conceived and come to term in low or even zero-g. Yes, it's been done with other 'Earth creatures'. Besides some insects, there were some fish that were bred on Skylab, I believe. As I recall, the Earth born parents were unable to control their swimming in zero-g, but the babies had no problem. I assume human babies would also adapt natural abilities in zero and low-g that astronauts learn to clumsily do.

      But the fact is, human bodies are poorly adapter to low and zero-g for several reasons. Radiation and muscle atrophy are one problem, but bone loss is another serious problem. Thus it's likely that any humans or other complex animals born in zero or low-g wouldn't live very long. Probably not even long enough to reproduce.

      The only way for humans to evolve to be able to surivive would be for the conditions of low-g living to be slowly introduced over many generations or to somehow short-cut evolution.
      • First, radiation is independant of low-g. Although they may of course occur together.

        But have you thought about that bone "loss" (much more that the bones will grow less from the beginning) is maybe not even a problem under those conditions? That the human body simply adapts to the conditions of its environment? Bones we need on the earth would be overkill on the moon! Same is valid for muscles.
        • Bones we need on the earth would be overkill on the moon! Same is valid for muscles

          That could well be true, however a lifetime of zero-g could mean you would never be able to leave space (so you'd have the same problem, in reverse).

          As soon as you tried to land on a planetary body with noticeable gravity, your skeleton would probably be unable to support your own weight. Unless you also underwent significant weight loss - in which case you would find yourself abnormally frail, and could easily suffer a

      • Re:Reproduction in space (Score:4, Insightful)

        by tgd ( 2822 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:59PM (#8219267)
        I'm not sure why that was modded up, as its genereally wrong.

        To be more accurate, bone loss and muscular atrophy aren't problems in space, they're problems when you leave space. They don't degrade because you're in space, they degrade because you don't need them.

        There's NO evidence that medically someone who lived in 1/3g and stayed there would have any more problems than here.

        In zero G, sure some muscles will atrophy, the ones you don't need. Your skeleton weakens, because it doesn't NEED to be as strong.

    • Re:Reproduction in space (Score:4, Funny)

      by Richard W.M. Jones ( 591125 ) <{rich} {at} {annexia.org}> on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:21PM (#8218977) Homepage
      Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature?

      I don't know, but I'm willing to give it a try!

      Rich.

      • Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature?

        I don't know, but I'm willing to give it a try!

        Rich.

        Rich, Rich, Rich.

        NASA, given its recent history, really needs more successes to name. Do you really think the first humans NASA will pick to reproduce on other planers will be Slashdot posters?

        At the very least, NASA is going to want people with experience procreating -- or those having had the opportunity to procreate -- here on Earth.

    • I have heard a lot about Venus which I must admit is unconfirmed, but very interesting. Supposedly it would be possible to render Venus almost hospitable by use of microbes. A bunch of rockets could simply crash into Venus releasing either genetically altered or natural microbes which will slowly change the global environment.

      Of course there are problems with this idea. Do we only get one try, then the planet's screwed? Earth has redundant systems which keep things stable, perhaps Venus has a similar
      • Basically, the problem is that there's not enough water in the Venusian atmosphere to support those microbes.

        A more workable approach, very long-term, is likely to be shielding Venus from some solar radiation using massive sunsails. The place would still be very short of water, though.

    • It may turn out that the only viable planet to really colonize is Venus, then, it becomes a question of, what do we do with 10^20 tons of carbon dioxide!

      Make a lot of soda pop.
    • Larry Niven, in his "Known Space" science fiction series, solved this problem for asteroid settlers by having one asteroid colony spun up to nearly a full G inside. Pregnant women and families with young children would live there until the basic developmental stages had been completed. Given that you can produce a full G on demand anywhere given enough mass and enough power to spin it up, this seems a viable solution, *if* in fact lower-gee development proves to be an insurmountable problem.
    • Floating in the womb, surrounded by amniotic fluid considerably denser than water, is as close as most humans ever come to living in 0-g. I suspect that of all portions of the human life cycle, fetal development would be the least impacted by taking place in low gravity. (And pregnancy, and delivery, would probably be a lot less unpleasant for the mother, too.) OTOH, once the babies are born, we're going to have to figure out how to get them lots of exercise so their muscles and skeletons develop somewhe
    • what do we do with 10^20 tons of carbon dioxide!

      Ship it to mars!
    • There is a great anime called Planet ES [animenfo.com] and in one episode one of the characters meets a girl on the moon who was a 'Lunarian', a person who was born and raised on the moon. She looks like an early 20's girl, but in reality she's 12. Apparently the low gravity let her grow larger faster, although I didn't get the reason why she appeared to age quicker aside from size. But she could never leave the moon because her bones were too frail. The environment on Earth would crush her.

      Now this is all based on th

  • Animal Cruelty (Score:4, Insightful)

    by queen of everything ( 695105 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:46PM (#8218710)

    I'm sure we'll have lots of posts about "animal cruelty". Is it better to test on mice or humans? Which life is worth more? Would it be fair to send humans to Mars and just watch their bodies essentially turn to jello from the lack of gravity? Those that spent time on the ISS are dealing with the consequences of little or no gravity for an extended period of time.

    I'm not saying that it is necessarily "right" to test on animals, but from a scientific point of view, it will bring us much closer to knowing the effect of the conditions on Mars and will bring us closer to having manned missions and even maybe a space station there one day.

    • Re:Animal Cruelty (Score:2, Insightful)

      by roy23 ( 159499 )
      At least the humans would have a choice.

      "Our task must be to free ourselves... by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature and it's beauty."
      - Albert Einstein

      Roy.
    • I'm thinking you're right on the money here. I've seen these experiments and I just think there's an absolutely appalling lack of cruelty in them. Where have our pioneers gone? Why, when I was your age a man just didn't feel right in a lab coat if he didn't have a dozen vivisections under his belt by breakfast.

    • I'm sure we'll have lots of posts about "animal cruelty".

      Nope... yours is the only post about animal cruelty... no one here is opposed to sending those filthy disease ridden things into space. And to answer your question about which life is worth more, I'll have to pose another question: "Which is the life that actually wants to go up there and who has the ability to choose?" In other words, if a volunteer wants to risk his body turning to jello for some scientific advances then so be it... a mouse never

  • I remember doing this (Score:4, Funny)

    by ReidMaynard ( 161608 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:46PM (#8218714) Homepage
    with those solid rocket kits back in the 1960's.

    We did it with hamsters, if I remember the control hamster got fatter than astro-hamster, but since there were just the two hamsters, well ...
  • I was wondering if any Slashdotters new if the muscle and bone loss is only a problem if the astronaut returns to earth, or even if they stay in the low gravity environment.

    (On a side note, make sure you check out the caption in the article.)

  • You mean astromouse ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by theefer ( 467185 ) * on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:47PM (#8218719) Homepage
    The word astronauts come from the greek : astro (stars), nautike (navigation). So astronaut litteraly means star navigator, and mouse-tronaut would mean mouse navigator, which lacks some sense here.

    I'd rather have said astro-mouse (star mouse) instead. Or if anyone has the greek word for mouse ...

  • Why only mice (Score:2, Troll)

    by Hao Wu ( 652581 )
    Chinese Hamster make better research model. These days Nasa seems racists against asian.
  • ...cats on the moon.

    I bet they adapt to low gravity more quickly than any human.

  • Enhanced Gravity (Score:4, Interesting)

    by vontrotsky ( 667853 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @12:55PM (#8218787)
    In high school I did a project which involved growing plants in simulated hypergravity (produced by centripetal acceleration), then tried to extrapolated into the low gravity regime.

    Up to 140% of normal, the plants grew faster with increasing "gravity". From this I reasoned that lower gravity conditions (moon, mars) would be healthy for plants.

    Of course, NASA's results may vary. Especially when using mice.

    Jeff

  • isn't this pointless? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bob_jenkins ( 144606 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:01PM (#8218846) Homepage Journal
    I would have thought the effects of gravity scale with weight. Mice are so small, they're nearly surface-oriented instead of gravity-oriented anyhow. They've got almost no gravity-induced features in the first place.
    • Hamster + Wheel + Dynamo = Electricity

      No more flat batteries in our mars rovers.
      And as a bonus the Hamster could be trained
      to re-boot the cpu in case of glitches.
  • When you get to Mars you'll want something to eat that doesn't squeeze out of a tube. Kentucky Fried Mice could be a start. First colonise the mice then
    modify them to grow as big as rats.

    Yum Yum
  • that when we spread the rodent infestation of our space ships across the galaxy that the wee ratty things are happy and healthy?

    And all these centuries we've been trying to kill any of the buggers that managed to get on board. Just wait until they get into the triticale stores. Then they'll be sorry.

    KFG

  • Mars society (Score:3, Interesting)

    by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:12PM (#8218920) Journal
    is behind this. They are planning on succesfully longer trips and at varying amounts. Hopefully, NASA, et. al. will design a platform to place on the ISS which will do this constantly.

  • Mice in space? (Score:5, Funny)

    by FrostedWheat ( 172733 ) on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:30PM (#8219024)
    They're Pinky and the Brain?

    Pinky: What are we gonna to tommorow night Brain?
    Brain: Same thing we do every night Pinky. Try to take over the space capsule!
  • Mice leaving the planet... what do they know that we don't?

  • One difference... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Gudlyf ( 544445 ) <<moc.ketsilaer> <ta> <fyldug>> on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:37PM (#8219071) Homepage Journal
    ...is that humans won't be floating around in low-gravity with five weeks of their own feces flying around them. Have you ever seen the amount of dung those little buggers put out on an hourly basis?! It's absurd! How do they plan to handle that?

    Actually nevermind, I probably don't want to know.

    • Re:One difference... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Artifakt ( 700173 )
      Foo still falls through wire screen floors in 1/3 G nicely. Even for older experiments in microgravity, a small downward air flow, adding only about a 0.5 cm/second/second to the forces acting on the mouse, was enough to keep things about as clean as most privately owned mice have it.

  • Just a means of escape... (Score:4, Funny)

    by interactive_civilian ( 205158 ) <mamoru&gmail,com> on Sunday February 08, 2004 @01:43PM (#8219129) Homepage Journal
    Those mice are just so damn clever.

    Obviously, this is simply a means for more of them to escape and take data back to their own dimension before the Earth is destroyed to make way for a hyperspatial bypass route 5 minutes before its task is complete.

    Cursed Vogons.

    Of course, pretty soon NASA will be wishing that they had gotten us to Alpha Centauri to file our complaints...oh well...at least they won't be bitter for very long...

    ;-)

    • MOD PARENT UP (Score:2, Funny)

      by MtlDty ( 711230 )
      The first thing I thought of when I saw the mice/space thing was HHGTTG. And I had to scroll all the way down to find a comment linking the two, AND ITS MODDED OFFTOPIC??

      Surely the only reason this news hit slashdot is the obvious H2G2 reference?

  • This Is Good News (Score:3, Interesting)

    by schnarff ( 557058 ) <alex&schnarff,com> on Sunday February 08, 2004 @03:16PM (#8219788) Homepage Journal
    I attended a lecture by Dr. Robert Zubrin, widely known for his Mars Direct [nw.net] plan, this past Friday at the National Geographic Society [nationalgeographic.com] HQ in Washington, DC, where he made the good point that we need research on artificial gravity for missions to Mars much more than we do research on zero-gravity. Basically, the reasoning is that on a 2.5 year Mars mission, 1.5 years would be in Mars gravity, and the transit time would likely be spent in a 1-G artificial environment, since zero-G deconditioning for a 6-month trip would leave astronauts in poor shape to do their research on Mars once they got there. Since acheiving an artificial 1-G environment is easy through the use of centripital force, I'm glad to see at least the first steps in this sort of research are being done.
  • Animal testing is just plain wrong!

    ...

    ..

    ...

    (joking of course, just in case someone doesn't get it and flames me for it ;))
  • So, for those of us who believe the moon mission(s) actually happened, why doesn't this qualify?
    • Forgot to mention one thing: though it mentions they were "on the moon for a few days", it doesn't talk about the travel there - which was under "partial gravity" for the entire trip, and took a substantial amount of time, each time they went.
  • I'm surprised nobody has brought this up:

    "The team hopes to send the mice into orbit in 2006 with a Falcon spacecraft, currently under development by SpaceX [spacex.com], a Californian company."

    Assuming that the X-Prize launches stay suborbital, this could be the first new privately-built orbital launcher, excluding the old corporate launchers from Boeing/Lockheed, and rockets sourced from the Russians.

    That being said, why stop at 5 weeks? Why not send up a rocket capable of holding supplies for the mice for mont
  • Am I the only one here who thought about it this way?
  • PETA is going to go fucking bonkers when they hear about this one!
    • Fsck PETA sideways with a chainsaw.

      Bunch of morons. "Yea, the human race evolved to be the pinacle of creation and we should all just die out so that we don't inconvenience any of the other life forms."

      Fsck that.

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Close