[HN Gopher] One Revolution per Minute [video]
___________________________________________________________________
One Revolution per Minute [video]
Author : 0xf00ff00f
Score : 156 points
Date : 2023-10-02 11:35 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (erikwernquist.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (erikwernquist.com)
| prakhar897 wrote:
| Space ships will be the cruise ships of 2200. Atleast they won't
| pollute earth. :)
| jrussino wrote:
| Really beautiful.
|
| Why 0.5G and not 1G though? Aside from the narration that
| decision doesn't seem to have any impact on the video. I would
| expect that difference to have a noticeable effect on things like
| the posture of the plants, the design of the pool, the flight of
| the butterflies, the posture and gait of the man. Ever
| accidentally bump a drinking glass, but not enough to knock it
| over? A wine glass sitting statically on a table will look pretty
| much the same at 0.5G, but half the downward force means you're
| probably much more likely to accidentally knock it over. So would
| we really use the same sort of glasses on a space station like
| this?
|
| Aside from one line about "walk, don't run, don't jump", all of
| this would be arguably more realistic/accurate if they just
| called it 1.0G, so I find that decision to be curious.
| noman-land wrote:
| If the outer ring creates 1G then wouldn't the inner ring have
| to be lower? Since at the center, gravity will be zero.
| dtgriscom wrote:
| Acceleration of a point on a disc is as velocity squared,
| divided by radius. Since velocity of a point on a (rigid)
| disc is proportional to the radius, this simplifies to
| acceleration being proportional to the radius. Reduce the
| radius by half, and the acceleration reduces by half. And, at
| the center, acceleration is zero. (All this, of course, is
| assuming the angular rotation rate is constant.)
| dredmorbius wrote:
| _Regarding the dimensions, I wanted to make the structure as
| large as possible, while still getting a clear visual sense of
| the curvature in the interiors. That is how I ended up with the
| 450-meter radius and 1 RPM spin rate._
|
| From TFA, which consists (apart from the video) of 8 short
| paragraphs in its entirety.
| littlestymaar wrote:
| They wanted it to be 450m wide so that the curvature would be
| clearly visible on camera, and then _Two Revolutions per
| Minute_ is arguably a worse title than with One ;).
| muxator wrote:
| Actually it would have been sqrt(2) revolutions per minute :)
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| > Why 0.5G and not 1G though
|
| Then the ring would either have to be larger or faster. Both
| are harder to build.
| avmich wrote:
| Then the question is, why not smaller. Actually, why 0.5G is
| chosen as optimal.
| jrussino wrote:
| > Both are harder to build.
|
| Certainly harder for NASA to build in space, but not any
| harder for this author to build in a computer :-D
|
| Good point though:
|
| > Regarding the dimensions, I wanted to make the structure as
| large as possible, while still getting a clear visual sense
| of the curvature in the interiors. That is how I ended up
| with the 450-meter radius and 1 RPM spin rate.
|
| So it seems like he wanted to put specific constraints on the
| size/geometry and worked backwards from there.
| jrussino wrote:
| However, you could get ~1G by going to ~1.4 RMP or
| increasing the radius to ~900m (or finding some sweet spot
| in between), which doesn't seem like it would greatly
| impact the "vibe" he's trying to create.
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| Spinning this structure for 1G would only make the problems
| called out by the author worse. Much worse:
|
| > I believe that the perpetually spinning views would be
| extremely nauseating for most humans, even for short visits.
| Even worse, I suspect - when it comes to the comfort of the
| experience - would be the constantly moving light and shadows
| from the sun.
| hiccuphippo wrote:
| It seems to be a vacation ship. Who would go to one in space
| only to feel the same gravity as down here?
| heleninboodler wrote:
| This is gorgeous, but I wanted the cadence of the cuts to be just
| a _little_ bit slower. Maybe this was intentional in order to
| create unease /tension, but I always felt like I was just a
| couple seconds away from being done looking at whatever I was
| looking at when they switched scenes.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| That's been the style in video dating to at least MTV (back
| when it, you know, showed _music videos_ ).
|
| The style apparently has a name, _Post-classical editing_ :
|
| <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-classical_editing>
|
| I'm ... not particularly a fan myself and often slow videos
| considerably to savour the detail.
| tobr wrote:
| I have to say I prefer this over Crazy Frog (which was also
| created by Erik Wernquist).
| phatfish wrote:
| What the hell.
| SushiHippie wrote:
| Wow that's crazy
| https://web.archive.org/web/20120217105311/http://www.hitqua...
| mcwiggin2 wrote:
| Anywhere you are willing to share a copy of the music?
| abdusco wrote:
| Reminds me of the soundtrack of Tron: Legacy
| SushiHippie wrote:
| The artist of the music released "wanderers" another short film
| from Erik Wernquist without voice and just the music. Maybe
| he'll do the same for 1 rpm? https://youtu.be/pIubYfm-YO0
| js2 wrote:
| Grammatical nit in the voiceover: "sit or lie down", not "lay
| down."
| isoprophlex wrote:
| My god this is one absolutely breathtaking video. Well done.
| hiccuphippo wrote:
| >a short film I made to explore my fascination with artificial
| gravity in space.
|
| I don't like how videogames have artificial gravity in space.
| It's a videogame, you can reduce the gravity to zero, instead we
| get the same gravity as anywhere else. I feel like Fry the first
| time he goes to the moon in Futurama.
| thsksbd wrote:
| Id go insane with my environment pulsating at 0.016 Hz. It'd be
| like having a 60 second song on repeat, but visual. 60 s is short
| enough that I still have my short term memory of what was one rev
| before, but not fast enough to blur it away.
|
| It's a hunch, but Ithink, as humans, we don't do well with
| frequencies from 0.01 to 100Hz [1]. Most (all?) of human
| cognition happens there, and to me it feels like a recipe for a a
| cognitive resonance.
|
| [1] I find it cool that the range is centered about 1 s - a
| fraction of time we call "a moment" that, to me, best anchors the
| concept of "present".
| hwc wrote:
| The view gives me nausea; I don't want windows! I want my
| spacecraft to have thick skin and a Whipple shield!
| FigurativeVoid wrote:
| I'm not sure if it's true or not, but one of the plot points in
| The Expanse series is how necessary artificial gravity it is for
| human recovery.
|
| Without giving too much away, it assumes that humans need gravity
| to heal properly, otherwise things like bruises won't heal since
| you can't drain the fluids without gravity.
| itishappy wrote:
| It's a minor plot point in the Hyperion series by Dan Simmons
| as well. The "ousters" are a space-adapted race of humans who
| live most of their lives in zero-G, but they still need gravity
| to give birth.
|
| It's a great series, it's not as "hard" sci-fi, but the imagery
| is absolutely incredible.
| dmbche wrote:
| https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/36411/healing-of-b...
|
| Seems like it's true!
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| Yes, this is a fascinating topic; because although we know that
| 0.0G as in the International Space Station is unhealthy in many
| ways that 1.0G on Earth is not (1), the in-betweens are
| relatively unknown.
|
| e.g. How much of the health benefits of 1G do you get at 0.9 G?
| at 0.5G or 0.1G? Where's the inflection point?
|
| Would you still get the benefit if you rest in full gravity for
| 8 hours, and then move out of the ring section of a space
| station for the rest of the day? Would 1 hour per day in
| gravity do it?
|
| How would people's health be impacted by a long-term stay on
| the Moon (at 0.17G ) or Mars (0.38G) ?
|
| This is not well understood, and hard to study without more
| experimental data. Which would have to be gathered Off Earth.
|
| And we might need to know sooner or later.
|
| On the Moon you could do the Experiment on site, and bring
| people back on relatively short notice if it does not go well.
| But for Mars, if it doesn't work out there it's a long haul
| back, most of it at 0.0G.
|
| There have been proposals to build small spin rings in orbit to
| do the experiments on Astronauts, but these plans have not
| happened yet. (2)
|
| 1)
| https://davidson.weizmann.ac.il/en/online/sciencepanorama/da...
|
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11536970/
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect_of_spaceflight_on_the_h...
|
| 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X
| reaperman wrote:
| I also would be curious about effects of time spent at 1.1G,
| 1.5G, or 2G, including for those who grow up in it.
|
| > Would you still get the benefit if you rest in full gravity
| for 8 hours, and then move out of the ring section of a space
| station for the rest of the day? Would 1 hour per day in
| gravity do it?
|
| Again, curious if this is the case, would spending less time
| >1G but <2G be equivalent to spending larger amounts of time
| at 1G?
| HPsquared wrote:
| Does that imply that standing up helps healing?
| cpeterso wrote:
| The short film on Wernquist's YouTube channel:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiPmgW21rwY
| munchler wrote:
| A future where we have artificial gravity but still don't know
| when to say "lie down" instead of "lay down". Very realistic!
| recursive wrote:
| What would be unrealistic is if they spoke exactly the same
| dialect as us.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Clearly this is set after the great "eye-aye" vowel shift.
| jvanderbot wrote:
| My heart aches in a way I cannot explain when I watch this or
| think about space exploration in general. It's a mixture of
| inevitability, inspiration, pride, and sadness.
|
| I wonder if ancients felt this way about the sea, or sky, or
| mountains that seemed impassable to them, knowing or believing it
| was only a matter of time. Or did they wonder at areas just plain
| never-to-be-seen.
| gnramires wrote:
| If it helps, consider that the reality of space exploration is
| not quite the romantic vision we see :) [1]
|
| Let's assume we have advanced but still physically plausible
| technology. The universe is huge. The Solar system is huge.
| Getting anywhere takes forever! Months, to years (can be
| shorted with very large energy expense, but you only go faster
| with the square root of energy!).
|
| Shielding from radiation requires large barriers. So you need
| to spend most time in a relatively small quarters guarded by
| large mass barriers (magnetic fields might help a little too).
| Everything about living in space will probably be a mix of
| boring, hard/confined and extremely costly.
|
| This kind of yearning makes me remember something that Richard
| Feynman said. It's something like (paraphrasing) "We know
| almost everything about the universe, the nature of forces,
| even how life works; the forces that bind everything together
| are known to astounding, extraordinary precision -- pretty much
| all phenomena relevant at all to every day life. Yet when I
| meet someone who isn't a physicist, they will ask almost
| immediately "So what _don 't_ we know about physics? What
| unsolved problems are there?". There's so much we _do_ know and
| they 're not interested in that! And it's so fascinating!". (I
| think that deserves a name, like "Feynman syndrome", or
| something :P
|
| Like the physics we already _do_ know (and the mathematics as
| well) is astounding, fascinating, I think so is where we _can_
| go, and where we can observe. Like, the Earth (and its
| lifeforms!) is absolutely astounding. If you go a block around
| your house, with a keen eye, there are probably interesting
| enough things to spend a lifetime studying. A single species of
| insect, a species of tree, microscopic polen in the air,
| microorganisms, human-made systems, it 's just too much to
| tell. And you've barely left your home. Then there are all
| sorts of ecosystems and places on Earth, I bet most don't have
| to travel far to go to a place of natural beauty they've never
| been to. For reference, Jupiter seems to be about 600,000,000
| km away from us. It's interesting and beautiful for sure, but
| also... a giant blob of gas. If we were a little more thankful
| for what we do have, that's also unlocking a great treasure.
|
| Also, we don't value enough our imagination (and even computer
| games!) too I think. In a movie or computer game[2], you can
| make so it so the travel to Jupiter takes seconds (or minutes
| to hours, just to make it more exciting ;) ), and you get quite
| astounding views too in the comfort of your home. Telescopes
| and scientific missions do the same. Through fiction and
| fantasy, we can travel to places that don't even exist and have
| all sorts of exciting histories :)
|
| If you think about it, life right here on Earth is amazingly
| beautiful really -- but we have to look with the right eye
| (mindset and wisdom) to see it at all...
|
| That said, bring in the space movies :)
|
| [1] Nothing at all wrong with a little romanticism I think,
| that's good. But we shouldn't lose sights of reality...
|
| [2] I really wish computer games were more culturally valued,
| and not seen as a way to kill time, or an addictive past time.
| They're really our tool to travel to brand new worlds at our
| fingertips (of course, with great power comes great
| responsibility...), we should recognize that as our
| generation's great medium !
| dredmorbius wrote:
| It's also _extremely_ useful to recall that most of the
| tropes of SciFi TV, cinema and books are there for visual,
| narrative, budgetary, and literary necessity. Star Trek
| utilises transporters and warp speed not because they 're
| technically probably or scientifically valid ... but because
| spending days or millennia going from ship to surface or
| between stars in a galaxy is utterly nonviable for a
| television or film production Sets and locations are
| similarly frequently recycled or drawn from nearby
| opportunities (which is why The Entire Universe is now in
| British Columbia). _Star Wars_ 's light sabers and blasters
| are _visually_ appealing but nonsensical physically. Even
| "realistic" films such as _2001: A Space Odyssey_ remove such
| elements as the absolutely gigantic heat radiators the
| _Discovery_ would have needed if it were depicted in a
| technically-accurate manner.
|
| Similar depictions occur in fiction, most of which are fairly
| shallowly-disguised Western, Journey, or Empire sagas
| relocated in space, though without any actual foundations on
| physics. _Hard_ science fiction can sometimes make a few nods
| to reality, and often exists as a sort of "what if",
| exploring the potential consequences of some scientific or
| technological capability being realised, but again has very
| little basis in any known physics.
|
| And I write this as someone who was caught hook, line, and
| sinker by the von Braun vision of spaceships to the planets,
| Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, and others. As I've gotten older
| it's the _psychological_ and _social_ explorations which are
| more interesting: Le Guin, Stephenson (who tends to remain in
| near-Earth orbits), Bradbury, Butler, KSR, and the like.
|
| Not that the fantasy isn't still attractive at times, and
| with the capabilities for visualising potential space-scapes
| and starscapes, the visual imagery really is stunning, as in
| 1RPM here.
|
| (I'd watched before reading the description, and pretty much
| all the points Wernquist highlighted were ones I'd noted in
| the video itself.)
| nuancebydefault wrote:
| May I say your writing style is very beautiful and easy to
| read!
|
| Extra points for advocating for playing/exploring video
| games!
| tuatoru wrote:
| > there are probably interesting enough things to spend a
| lifetime studying.
|
| This is something that drives me nuts about wannabe
| photographers. They all immediately travel off to "exotic"
| locations to take pictures of "exotic" people and things.
|
| Your house and neighborhood is plenty exotic enough for a
| lifetime's work, if you have the eye.
|
| Your first three paragraphs are the answer to the so-called
| Fermi Paradox.
|
| If your species has adapted to spending tens of thousands of
| years in tiny craft isolated by vast distances from anything
| else, leaving that environment would be extremely risky and
| difficult.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| Even if humanity decides to live in the metaverse or
| something instead of spreading out further (which I doubt),
| someone somewhere is going to decide to make a Von Neumann
| probe eventually.
|
| IMO the only solutions to the paradox are either that
| intelligent life is really, really rare or civilizations
| wipe themselves out in some kind of filtering event.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a
| Wild Flower Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
| And Eternity in an hour
|
| -- William Blake, "Auguries of Innocence"
|
| <https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43650/auguries-of-
| inn...>
| api wrote:
| It's probably just adaptive to the species for some of us to be
| driven to set out on journeys to new places, and so we have it
| built into our emotions.
|
| The emotion it conjures up is rather nice, kind of bitter sweet
| and expansive at the same time. It seems to stimulate the
| imagination to contemplate it even if you never actually go
| anywhere.
|
| "Ships at a distance have every man's wish on board. For some
| they come in with the tide. For others they sail forever on the
| same horizon, never out of sight, never landing until the
| Watcher turns his eyes away in resignation, his dreams mocked
| to death by Time. That is the life of men."
|
| -- Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God
| DesiLurker wrote:
| I recently finished reading SciFis Delta-V and squeal Critical
| Mass by Daniel suarez. Loved this kind of hard scifi. in the
| second book he went into great details on how the first orbital
| station and complementary moon/asteroid mining platform was
| build and incrementally deployed. Definitely recommended if you
| are into it. It seems quite within the the reach of our
| capabilities, We just need to find a economic model that allows
| it.
| thangalin wrote:
| I'm writing a hard sci-fi novel and am looking for alpha
| readers. Contact me if interested:
|
| https://dave.autonoma.ca/
| jbott wrote:
| Erik also made "Wanderers" about this feeling, quoting Carl
| Sagan. Highly recommend watching it:
| https://erikwernquist.com/wanderers
| loganmarchione wrote:
| I thought this was the same person. Love Wanderers!
| samsolomon wrote:
| Erik has a ton of excellent work! I remember stumbling across his
| Wanderers video several years ago.
|
| https://erikwernquist.com/wanderers
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| Commentary by Karl Schroeder:
|
| > Beautifully rendered video of a wheel-shaped space habitat with
| artificial gravity. This shows viscerally what I pointed out in
| my Substack posts on the Single-Family Space Colony: that windows
| are a bad idea in rotating environments
|
| https://mastodon.social/@KarlSchroeder/111161480469784844
|
| A bad idea because: Since this is just a visualisation, the
| safety aspect is secondary to the way that it's quite
| disorientating, vertiginous, maybe even inducing of motion
| sickness.
|
| I expect that a more practical design would have observation
| decks, but not huge windows everywhere. But that wouldn't make as
| nice a visualisation.
| siavosh wrote:
| Glorious
| Ensorceled wrote:
| I get motion sick quite easily and need to crank the comfort
| settings in VR, but watching this on a 42" monitor didn't really
| cause any discomfort at all.
|
| It would be interesting to get a longer video from the dinner
| table for instance.
|
| The window frames really help, so I'm not sure the final scene
| with the gentleman looking out the window would be something I
| would do.
| danbruc wrote:
| Bringing the water in that pool into orbit will set you back a
| couple billion dollars.
| LandStander wrote:
| Water mined from the moon might be much cheaper by the time
| something like this is built. That being said, a giant sterile
| swimming pool seems like an odd feature for an interplanetary
| spacecraft. I'd rather see a well-balanced aquatic habitat, if
| anything.
| hwc wrote:
| or capture a small comet!
| dreadlordbone wrote:
| How much do you think the whole ship would cost?
| Keyframe wrote:
| Probably around one to several twitters.
| ravi-delia wrote:
| Plenty of water in space! One of a few things you don't need to
| bring from home- just mine it up there
| snakeyjake wrote:
| I'd just snag some off the asteroids being mined to supply all
| of the other construction materials.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Rounding error on the other costs involved, but sure.
| 83457 wrote:
| How large would a ring have to be to have 1g at 1 rotation per
| day? (Edit: earth day)
| Damogran6 wrote:
| Shooting from the hip, approx the circumference of the earth.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| If that were true, we'd all fling off of the surface of the
| planet!
| messe wrote:
| > Shooting from the hip, approx the circumference of the
| earth.
|
| You're quite a bit off.
|
| It's actually a little under 4 million km; several times the
| diameter of the sun.
| Damogran6 wrote:
| There's a reason why shooting from the hip isn't very
| accurate. :)
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| It's not that it's an "not very accurate" loose relation;
| there is no relation at all. The two numbers concern
| different forces - gravity inward due to mass vs.
| centrifugal force outwards due to spin.
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| > A ring with 1g at 1 rotation per day
|
| That's the parameters of a "Banks Orbital"
| https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/Orbital_(Wikipedia_versio...
|
| Which is:
|
| > For such an orbital to reproduce the equivalent to the
| Earth's gravity, whilst maintaining Earth's 24-hour period of
| rotation, it would need to have a diameter of approximately
| 3.71 million kilometres, and spinning at 486,000 km/hr.
| hwc wrote:
| And no known material has enough tensile strength to make it
| work!
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| > no known material has enough tensile strength
|
| I know that's true of Niven's ringworld, which is just
| unholy scale and parameters - 1 rotation like the earth
| does in a year, every 9 days! (1)
|
| And so it cannot be made from atoms, something with
| "tensile strength similar to the strong nuclear force" is
| needed (2)
|
| But is it true of Banks's more practical Orbital as well?
| This reference says yes: "No form of ordinary matter will
| support the tensions of a Banks Orbital's spin, so exotic
| matter is required." (3)
|
| 1)
| http://www.alcyone.com/max/reference/scifi/ringworld.html
|
| 2) https://larryniven.fandom.com/wiki/Scrith
|
| 3) https://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4845ef5c4ca7c
| gwbas1c wrote:
| It doesn't need to be that slow to avoid nausea. I've been to
| the top of the space needle with a rotating floor, and didn't
| feel any nausea.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| About 2 million km if GNU Units is serving me correctly:
| You have: (1 gravity) / (1/1440 * rpm)^2 You want:
| million km * 1.854336 / 0.5392766
|
| By comparison: You have: (0.5 gravity) / (1
| rpm)^2 You want: m * 447.12962
|
| (That's the scenario in the film here.)
|
| For 1 g at 1 RPM: You have: (1 gravity) / (1
| rpm)^2 You want: m * 894.25925
|
| And presuming 3 RPM is tolerable (a common assumption in early
| space station / space colony proposals): You
| have: (1 gravity) / (3 rpm)^2 You want: m *
| 99.362139
|
| (Almost exactly 100m or 330 ft.)
| jp57 wrote:
| That guy seems lonely out there past Neptune. Where is everyone?
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Must. Resist. Obvious. Lowbrow. Pun.
| hbrav wrote:
| Two things that came to mind:
|
| 1. Would the Coriolis force tend to set up a big overturning cell
| in that swimming pool? i.e. there would be circulation along the
| top, down one end, back along the bottom, and up the other side?
|
| 2. Is this some kind of suicide cruise? They just seem to head
| out into interstellar space at the end. The delta-V to return to
| Earth would be incredible. And no more gravity assists once
| you're past the major planets.
| unholiness wrote:
| By symmetry, you wouldn't expect circulation in a pool oriented
| perpendicular to the station's rotation. The Coriolis effect
| happens in the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere,
| but not along the equator.
| itishappy wrote:
| No horizontal circulation, sure, but the Coriolis effect can
| still cause vertical circulation.
|
| Check out these panels from one of my favorite web-comics
| (they do their research):
|
| https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2013-09-15
|
| https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2013-09-16
| Titan2189 wrote:
| That was pretty cool! Fascinating...
|
| Wonder how difficult it was to convince whatever physics engine
| to simulate water with curved gravity.
| hiccuphippo wrote:
| The water probably doesn't use physics. Instead it's a plane
| with a shader to simulate water.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Reminds me of the old-school demos in the 1990s that had 3d
| animations. It certainly has a lot of the same homebrew vibe, but
| it doesn't look "artificial." It looks better than the effects in
| (the movie) 2001.
| pja wrote:
| From his showreel, it seems Erik also created the animation of
| the final moments of the Cassini mission to Saturn:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrGAQCq9BMU
|
| Showreel: https://erikwernquist.com/showreel
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-03 23:00 UTC)