'Mouse-Tronaughts' to Test Low-Gravity in Space 276
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."
First time for mammals (Score:5, Funny)
As opposed to those reptilian astronauts.
Re:First time for mammals (Score:4, Informative)
Re:First time for mammals (Score:2, Funny)
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:2, Informative)
zero gravity != partial gravity
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:3, Informative)
zero gravity != partial gravity
Go thwap yourself then. Gravity is never equal to zero. Every object in the universe attracts every other. If you have a calculator, determine the force from gravity applied to a human on earth. Then, calculate again from 1,000 km away. It's a small difference.
In orbit, you experience weightlessness. IE, if you are travelling at 20,000 km/hour around the earth, and everything else on your spaceship is travelling at the same velocity, from your point of view you exp
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure! I'm Game!
Now, if a body of mass m is a distance r from the center of the earth, you know that the weight of the body is F given by the formula F=GmM/r^2 The gravitaional field strength is g = F/m = (GmM/r^2)/m = GM/r^2
(With me sofar?)
g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(6.4 * 10^6)^2
= 9.814 N kg^-1
Notice! We get a value which is gravity at earths surface...
Ok, so with the poster above... lets add on our 1,000 km
g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(6.401 * 10^6)^2
= 9.811 N kg^-1
Yes, we lost all of 0.001 N kg^-1... our poster above is right.
So, how can they make this worth while? Easy. Make them do a larger orbit, so that they are twice the distance r from the earth (notice above, you have to measure from the center of the earth...)
So, lets see how much N kg-1 our mice would have if they were twice as far out...
g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(12.8 * 10^6)^2
= 2.453 N kg^-1
Anyway, enough maths...
NeoThermic
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:2)
No, let me open my eyes... we lost 0.003 N kg^-1
NeoThermic
You only added 1km, not 1000km. (Score:2)
Re:You only added 1km, not 1000km. (Score:3, Informative)
thats the effect of having the units in m in the equation and forgetting that your challenge has been set at 1000km
g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(7.4 * 10^6)^2
= 7.341 N kg^-1
So a diffrence of 2.473 N kg^-1
NeoThermic
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:2)
Consider a simple two mass system of m and M separated by r. Solve for the distance s from m where gravity is 0.
Gm/s^2=GM/(r-s)^2
m/s^2=M/(r-s)^2
m(r-s)^2= M s^2
m(r^2-2rs+s^2)=Ms^2
0=(M-m)s^2+2mrs-ms^2
So lving the quadratic for s, we have s=-mr/(M-m)+sqrt((2mr)^2-4(M-m))/(M-m)
Now granted this is temporary since the masses will likely be orbiting. It also assumes two masses i
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:3, Funny)
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:3, Funny)
So the readers actually do all the work of writing articles, and tomorrow's edition will have the same exact story?
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:3, Funny)
If the story is complaining about immigration or the European Union, then yes, you have a very good chance.
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:They contradict themselves in the article (Score:2)
I don't know about mice, I'd like to see us construc
Re:Humans ARE mammals (Score:2)
Pardon? (Score:3, Insightful)
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?
Re:Pardon? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Pardon? (Score:2)
Re:Pardon? (Score:4, Insightful)
The point of the experiment, if I understand it correctly, is to determine to what degree a low gravity (as opposed to micro-gravity, which is what the space stations experience) environment differs in effect on mammals from Full Gravity and Micro-gravity environments.
Mouse-Tronaughts? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Mouse-Tronaughts? (Score:4, Funny)
That's what we were prepared to call Lance Bass.
i think there's been a misunderstanding (Score:5, Funny)
Unfortunately this means 'Mousetronauts' are people who sail into mice. Right, perhaps someone should call the paper.
Re:i think there's been a misunderstanding (Score:4, Funny)
Re:i think there's been a misunderstanding (Score:2, Funny)
Re:i think there's been a misunderstanding (Score:2)
I have an illustration right here [simon-turner.co.uk].
Re:i think there's been a misunderstanding (Score:2)
'naut' == 'naught'? (Score:3, Funny)
But how long will it be before we see... (Score:2)
I am very sorry.
Reproduction in space (Score:5, Interesting)
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!
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
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.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
What makes you think that? Very low gravity might make a big difference, but different gravity isn't that big a deal. It just affects how high you can jump, how fast you can run, how far you can walk, etc. Certainly that will affect things, but why would it create changes such that the two groups could no longer interbreed?
Pygmies average 4 feet; Dinka average 7 feet. That shows how rad
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Insightful)
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
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
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?
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
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
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Funny)
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?
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Insightful)
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)
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)
I don't know, but I'm willing to give it a try!
Rich.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Funny)
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.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
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
Not enough water... (Score:2)
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.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Funny)
Make a lot of soda pop.
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
"Welcome to Planet Coke!"
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
Ship it to mars!
Re:Reproduction in space (Score:2)
Now this is all based on th
Animal Cruelty (Score:4, Insightful)
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)
"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.
Re:Animal Cruelty (Score:2)
Re:Animal Cruelty (Score:2)
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)
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
Re:I remember doing this (Score:3, Funny)
You misspelled flatter.
Re:I remember doing this (Score:2)
Muscle/Bone loss (Score:2, Insightful)
(On a side note, make sure you check out the caption in the article.)
You mean astromouse ? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd rather have said astro-mouse (star mouse) instead. Or if anyone has the greek word for mouse
Re:You mean astromouse ? (Score:2)
Re:You mean astromouse ? (Score:2)
Greek for mouse (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You mean astromouse ? (Score:5, Informative)
you are wrong (Score:2, Informative)
Re:you are wrong (Score:2)
You seem to fail to realize that a language can have multiple words that mean the same thing. Astra is a latin word. Take the latin phrase ad astra per aspera (to the stars through adversity) which uses the word astra. For a similar example in English, consider ocean and sea.
Re:No matter which way you slice it, he's still wr (Score:3, Funny)
*honk*
Why only mice (Score:2, Troll)
I have always wanted to see... (Score:2)
I bet they adapt to low gravity more quickly than any human.
Enhanced Gravity (Score:4, Interesting)
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)
Re:isn't this pointless? (Score:3, Funny)
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.
Re:isn't this pointless? (Score:2)
KFM - its preparation for spacefood (Score:2, Funny)
modify them to grow as big as rats.
Yum Yum
Because we want to make sure. . . (Score:2)
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)
Mice in space? (Score:5, Funny)
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... (Score:2, Funny)
One difference... (Score:3, Funny)
Actually nevermind, I probably don't want to know.
Re:One difference... (Score:3, Informative)
Just a means of escape... (Score:4, Funny)
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)
Surely the only reason this news hit slashdot is the obvious H2G2 reference?
This Is Good News (Score:3, Interesting)
That's HORRIBLE!!! (Score:2)
(joking of course, just in case someone doesn't get it and flames me for it
Isn't a moose kinda heavy to be sending up there? (Score:2)
The Moon (Score:2)
Re:The Moon (Score:2)
First new private space launch? (Score:2)
"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
Re:First new private space launch? (Score:2)
Optical is better for low G (Score:2)
What about PETA? (Score:2)
Re:What about PETA? (Score:2)
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.
Re:Isn't animal cruelty banned? (Score:2)
Yeah, the scientist could cut their fingers when they'll disect them [theonion.com] later on...
Re:Isn't animal cruelty banned? (Score:2)
Re:Isn't animal cruelty banned? (Score:2)
Re:How are the mice supposed.. (Score:2, Informative)
2.) you can't swim in space. swimming requires pushing against something (usually water), and it would take one hell of a lot of paddling to push enough air to push yourself.
3.) I'm sure they'll come up with some way of feeding the mice. They usually do think of almost everything for these missions, and I'm sure the article didn't want to talk about such a mundane and trivial topic
Re:..and then they'll cut them open. (Score:2)
Think more poetically (Score:2)
Stars, directly and indirectly, are what make the night sky so wonderful to look at.
And if that doesn't bring you around, consider the word "chromosome" and it's origins: "color" and "body." Words aren't required to stay intimately tied to their roots.
*honk*