24 Jan 09
Watching 2001: A Space Odyssey got me thinking. If you're running around the inside of a cylinder along the circumference in space, is it essentially the same as running on a flat surface in terms of energy it takes to run?
The guy was wearing some kind of shoes that kept him glued to the ground, so he wasn't floating around.
Any ideas?
24 Jan 09
Originally posted by prosoccerA runner in a cylinder in space doesn't have to have 'glue shoes'. The 'centrifugal force' makes the job.
Watching 2001: A Space Odyssey got me thinking. If you're running around the inside of a cylinder along the circumference in space, is it essentially the same as running on a flat surface in terms of energy it takes to run?
The guy was wearing some kind of shoes that kept him glued to the ground, so he wasn't floating around.
Any ideas?
But (depending of the radius of the cylinder) the coriolis effect makes you feel that you are falling farward all the time. You have to compensate for this by leaning backwards. This makes the runner look funny.
24 Jan 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasUnless perhaps, you ran the other way? 🙂
But (depending of the radius of the cylinder) the coriolis effect makes you feel that you are falling farward all the time. You have to compensate for this by leaning backwards. This makes the runner look funny.
24 Jan 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasBut which way will the toilet flush?
A runner in a cylinder in space doesn't have to have 'glue shoes'. The 'centrifugal force' makes the job.
But (depending of the radius of the cylinder) the coriolis effect makes you feel that you are falling farward all the time. You have to compensate for this by leaning backwards. This makes the runner look funny.
25 Jan 09
Originally posted by prosoccerDepends on size of cylinder and speed of rotation. We are all running on the outside of a sphere but we all percieve it as flat.
Watching 2001: A Space Odyssey got me thinking. If you're running around the inside of a cylinder along the circumference in space, is it essentially the same as running on a flat surface in terms of energy it takes to run?
The guy was wearing some kind of shoes that kept him glued to the ground, so he wasn't floating around.
Any ideas?
Coriolis effect only matters for small cylinders,
How small? ... dunno .. somebody work it out!
In terms of energy I would make an educated guess that the work done (energy) is equivalent to Force x Distance so that the more you perceive the surface as flat the closer it would be to actually running.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
26 Jan 09
Originally posted by wolfgang59The flatter the cylinder was/looked (i.e. if a big one) would lead to a loss of certipetal force on the feet vs the floor and so wouldn't the runner drift away?
Depends on size of cylinder and speed of rotation. We are all running on the outside of a sphere but we all percieve it as flat.
Coriolis effect only matters for small cylinders,
How small? ... dunno .. somebody work it out!
In terms of energy I would make an educated guess that the work done (energy) is equivalent to Force x Distance so that the more you perceive the surface as flat the closer it would be to actually running.
26 Jan 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasCentrifugal force doesn't exist, or at least not in the way you used it there; I'm not sure if you were trying to make a funny... 🙂
A runner in a cylinder in space doesn't have to have 'glue shoes'. The 'centrifugal force' makes the job.
But (depending of the radius of the cylinder) the coriolis effect makes you feel that you are falling farward all the time. You have to compensate for this by leaning backwards. This makes the runner look funny.
It's centripetal force.
27 Jan 09
Originally posted by forkedknightpretty sure this was how he was using the idea of "centrifugal force," though you're right - as newtonian physics would define "force," it doesn't really exist. however, within the perspective of the rotating system, it has real, physical, perceptible meaning.
Centrifugal force doesn't exist, or at least not in the way you used it there; I'm not sure if you were trying to make a funny... 🙂
It's centripetal force.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/physics/PHY6.HTM
27 Jan 09
Originally posted by forkedknightThat's why I used quote/unqutoe around the word 'centrifugal' force just to avoid such a comment. I thought you would understand what I meant.
Centrifugal force doesn't exist, or at least not in the way you used it there; I'm not sure if you were trying to make a funny... 🙂
It's centripetal force.
'Centrifugal' force cannot be interchanged with 'centripetal' force. You know that...
27 Jan 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasIf it's a cylinder a thousand meters in diameter, you probably wouldn't notice the difference between that and gravity. But wouldn't the centripital effect get greater the faster you ran?
A runner in a cylinder in space doesn't have to have 'glue shoes'. The 'centrifugal force' makes the job.
But (depending of the radius of the cylinder) the coriolis effect makes you feel that you are falling farward all the time. You have to compensate for this by leaning backwards. This makes the runner look funny.