Is 1/3 gravity enough?

[bdewoody]

I saw the other night on a show about colonizing Mars that there is some concern over whether the gravity on Mars is enough for the human body to function over the long haul.&nbsp; I also wonder if after living on Mars for several years a person could stand the gravity on earth?&nbsp; Or is living on Mars a one way trip? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>

 

[baulten]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I saw the other night on a show about colonizing Mars that there is some concern over whether the gravity on Mars is enough for the human body to function over the long haul.&nbsp; I also wonder if after living on Mars for several years a person could stand the gravity on earth?&nbsp; Or is living on Mars a one way trip? <br /> Posted by bdewoody</DIV></p><p>No one knows for sure.&nbsp; We know that exercise can counteract the effects of low/zero gravity, but we don't know how much gravity would be needed to counteract it.&nbsp;</p>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I saw the other night on a show about colonizing Mars that there is some concern over whether the gravity on Mars is enough for the human body to function over the long haul.&nbsp; I also wonder if after living on Mars for several years a person could stand the gravity on earth?&nbsp; Or is living on Mars a one way trip? <br /> Posted by bdewoody</DIV></p><p>IMO, it's a very serious question.&nbsp; So far, prolonged exposure to low gravity can't really be countered by anything. Recovery, IIRC, begins immediately once normal gravity is restored.&nbsp; But, it seems the human body has an immediate and negative (from our point of view) reaction to low gravity. </p><p>Again, just my opinion, but it would seem that it is going to be necessary for a medical counter to the effects of low gravity or actually "living" on Mars would be much more of a question of survival than anything else.</p><p>Low gravity conditions effect the entire body and it responds accordingly. How these interactions could impact a person's long-term chances of survival aren't fully understood, AFAIK. Even the way drugs are processed by the body could be effected and treatments developed on Earth may not have the desired effect or may present more serious problems. </p><p>Truth be told, much more research needs to be done before we can even know the appropriate questions to ask regarding lifelong low-gravity living.</p><p>(Personally, I think it may not be possible without great advances in medical technology.)</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

<p>I suspect a return after a year or two on the surface is feasible.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; For longer periods there may be a point of no return.&nbsp; But then&nbsp;people who&nbsp;move to&nbsp;Mars permanantly may not want to come back.</p><p>Jon</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[baulten]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I suspect a return after a year or two on the surface is feasible.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; For longer periods there may be a point of no return.&nbsp; But then&nbsp;people who&nbsp;move to&nbsp;Mars permanantly may not want to come back.Jon <br /> Posted by jonclarke</DIV><br />That'd make sense.&nbsp; The longest time spent in space was a little over a year by a Russian cosmonaught, IIRC.&nbsp; I would suspect being on a body with 1/3 of Earth's gravity would help, but we can't say for sure.

 

[silylene old]

Also, considering the issues of living at 1/3 gravity,&nbsp;Mars isn't the only place.&nbsp;&nbsp; Mercury also would be about 1/3 gravity (about 38% of earth's).&nbsp; I think this small planet's colonization will be much later, however. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>That'd make sense.&nbsp; The longest time spent in space was a little over a year by a Russian cosmonaught, IIRC.&nbsp; I would suspect being on a body with 1/3 of Earth's gravity would help, but we can't say for sure. <br /> Posted by baulten</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>You&nbsp; mean "cosmonaut", of course.&nbsp; ;-)&nbsp; "Naut" comes from the same base as "nautical", but "naught" means "zero".&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The current single spaceflight endurance record is held by Dr Valeri Vladimirovich Polyakov.&nbsp; He's been up twice -- for 240.94 days starting August 29, 1998, and for a record-breaking 437.75 dats starting January 8, 1994.&nbsp; Both times, he served aboard Mir.&nbsp; Polyakov is number three for total spaceflight time, behind Sergei Avdeyev (three stints aboard Mir, the longest of which was 379.62 days, for a total of 747.59 days) and Sergei Krikalev (two flights to Mir, two aboard Shuttle and two aboard the ISS -- second Mir stint was 311.83 days -- for a whopping total of 803.40 days).<br /><br />There have been three missions in excess of one year, with one shared between two men, so there are four men who have been in space for over a year.<br /><br />Valeri Polyakov - 437.7 days aboard Mir<br />Sergei Avdeyev - 379.6 days aboard Mir<br />Musa Manarov - 365.9 days aboard Mir<br />Vladimir Titov - 365.9 days aboard Mir<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[bdewoody]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>IMO, it's a very serious question.&nbsp; So far, prolonged exposure to low gravity can't really be countered by anything. Recovery, IIRC, begins immediately once normal gravity is restored.&nbsp; But, it seems the human body has an immediate and negative (from our point of view) reaction to low gravity. Again, just my opinion, but it would seem that it is going to be necessary for a medical counter to the effects of low gravity or actually "living" on Mars would be much more of a question of survival than anything else.Low gravity conditions effect the entire body and it responds accordingly. How these interactions could impact a person's long-term chances of survival aren't fully understood, AFAIK. Even the way drugs are processed by the body could be effected and treatments developed on Earth may not have the desired effect or may present more serious problems. Truth be told, much more research needs to be done before we can even know the appropriate questions to ask regarding lifelong low-gravity living.(Personally, I think it may not be possible without great advances in medical technology.) <br />Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV></p><p>Low gravity as in 1/3 on Mars should be vastly different than virtual 0 gravity in orbit.&nbsp; Personally I would go in a heartbeat to the moon or Mars as I am vertically challenged.&nbsp; Gravity at 1 G is my biggest enemy.&nbsp; But if all my immune systems would fail at 1/3 G them maybe staying home is best.</p><p>I have a feeling the only way we will find out is by doing it,</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>