space station...just floating...or?

[speedo3]

hi all, I'm new here...mostly would like to know (and I admit, I don't know a lot about the missions etc.) if the space station is just floating on it's own, or is it attached somehow to the earth or...?<br />Also, how many people have been living on there?<br /><br />speedo3

 

[tmccort]

...<br /><br />Seriously?

 

[drwayne]

It is spinning around the Earth at the same speed that the curvature of the Earth is moving away from it. Its called an orbit.<br /><br />Wayne<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

since apparently I am the biggest ignoramus here, I shall contest the very existence of gravity and claim that the space station is moving in a straight line, but that the space around a planet itself is curved by the presence of matter. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[le3119]

It's attached to a big thick green leafy beanstalk. Good Greeeef! (Just venting after a long day)

 

[ambrous]

I think that the station is not moving at all, but the universe is rotating around it.

 

[wvbraun]

Welcome aboard, speedo<br /><br />The space station is in orbit. That means it circles the earth at a very high velocity (about 8 km per second) so that the centrifugal and gravitational forces that act on it are in balance. That's why it doesn't fall back to earth.

 

[drwayne]

Speedo, ignore the following comments, they are distracting trivia for anal retentive old fools (me)<br /><br />---------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />There actually is no such thing as a centrifugal force, it is defined as a pseudo-force, i.e. one that is only present in a non-inertial system.<br /><br />I used to teach the concept of centrigual force as a useful construct, but I was gently <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> persuaded when prepping for my orals to work through the concept of centripetal acceleration - the idea that there is a recipe for circular motion in which the acceleration of the system is given by <br /><br />v^2/R<br /><br />The equations come out the same, but one does not have to appeal to a pseudo-force that has no apparent mechanism.<br /><br />As always, feel free to file this perspective in the circular file.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[najab]

><i>Speedo, ignore the following comments, they are distracting trivia for anal retentive old fools...</i><p>Sadly, the first thing I thought when I read the post above was "there's no such thing as centrifugal force". <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /></p>

 

[nacnud]

I read it a centripetal force thinking 'no one uses centrifugal force, its imaginary' <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[drwayne]

I am torn. When it is brought up in intro physics, it comes up at a point in which they have been doing the whole vector add up all the forces in the problem technique out the yabo, so it *is* a convenient construct. And I don't think anyone has ever asked me what the source of the centrifugal force is, or even mentioned the fact that we are doing the problem in a frame which is accelerating (non-inertial).<br /><br />It is more easily digested than the concept of a centrepetal acceleration - but it helped a little that I simplifed it to "the recipe for circular motion is ..."<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[drwayne]

By the way, I was into my 20's before I ever heard the description that newsartist gave. It is one of the best. I gave a shorthand version in my first post, but he did it much better.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[drwayne]

THATS IT!<br /><br />(Remember that scene in "A Charly Brown Christmas" where Charly yells that it in response to a term about fear of everything)<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[drwayne]

Wow, Martin Caidin - there was an author.<br /><br />Interesting *and* authentic. Think about that one folks, how many historical authors are truelly both in this area.<br /><br />Wayne<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

'everything but the flak'. hahaha what a bunch of whiners. I'll try to read that book just to laugh at them, thinking how bomber pilots during the war had to deal with flak AND fighters. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[john_316]

Speedo<br /><br /><br />I want to mention also that the space station or called the ISS or international space station is being shadowed by my death star... LOL<br /><br />The space station currently holds 2 astronauts but will be back to 3 crew soon since the shuttle is now flying again.<br /><br />It currently orbits about 218 to 221 miles up in space in a elliptical orbit (shaped like an egg) and is travelling around 17,200 miles per hour, the ISS circles Earth 16 times a day.<br /><br />The station carries fuel to boost its orbit as the drag slows it down and thus brings the station closer to earth. The Russian Progress Supply rocket when attached to the ISS helps boosts it altitude with its rockets.<br /><br />The Progress and Shuttle supply the ISS with food, water, oxygen, fuel, and consumables each flight they take there. <br /><br />As soon as NASA fixes the ET problem with the Shuttle they will resume flights there and the crew will go back to 3 permenately and perhaps 6 crew in 7-8 years....<br /><br />Also hopes this helps...<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />

 

[syndroma]

Actually, it was Newton who first described such a cannon.<br />You can even try it here:<br />http://www.smaphysics.ca/phys40s/field40s/newtmtn.html

 

[CalliArcale]

Since the question of whether it's just floating or attached to the earth has been answered (the station is basically falling forever), I'll tackle the question of how many people have been living there! I very much enjoy making lists. ;-)<br /><br />The current 2-man crew is Expedition 11. Expedition crews consisted of 3 people while the Shuttle was available; Expedition 7 was the first two-man crew. In addition, there have been guests who have stayed for a week at a time during Soyuz taxi missions. Here are all the people who have ever been on board the station, starting with the long-duration crews (expeditions), to the short-term guests (taxi crews), to the visitors (Shuttle crews) who didn't actually "live" on board but did get to visit it.<br /><br />By the way, a "taxi crew" is a crew who flies up in one Soyuz, drops it off, switches their stuff over to the old Soyuz already docked at the station, and flies back in the old one. Soyuz spacecraft are used as the escape vehicles, and they have a shelf-life of about six months before they have to be replaced. Russia doesn't like to waste the seats on those taxi flights, though, and they'll put cosmonauts, foreign cosmonauts, or sometimes even paying guests in them. However, due to the neccesities of the time, one Soyuz was delivered empty: Soyuz TMA-2, to provide Expedition 7 with a way of getting home again.<br /><br />Please note: some lucky few got to visit or even live on the station more than once! I've listed them only in the category where they spent the most time. I've also put an asterisk by their names.<br /><br /><b>Long-duration crewmembers:</b><br />Ken Bowersox (Expedition 6)<br />Nicolai Budarin (Expedition 6)<br />Dan Bursch (Expedition 4)<br />*Leroy Chiao (STS-92, Expedition 10)<br />Frank Culbertson (Expedition 3)<br />Vladimir Dezhurov (Expedition 3)<br />Mike Fincke (Expedition 9)<br />Michael Foale (Expedition 8)<br />*Yuri Gidzenko (Expedition 1, Soyuz TM-34)<br />Susan Helms (STS-101, Expedition 2) <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>

 

[strandedonearth]

You're evil.... how about every person ever in space <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br />muahahahahahaahahaha