12
   

Planet made of Ships

 
 
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 09:38 am
Every object has gravity so my thought is, if you got enough space ships together (think sci-fi ships) and somehow kept them together, could you make a planet made of ships? My thought is, combine enough ships, initiate an oxygen bubble around the thing, spin it like we spin a space station to make gravity, and make a giant mothership made of smaller ships that you could walk from one deck to the other. My main problem with it is what's the technicals of it. How would you combine the ships or get oxygen? I just need some possible technicals for this.....
 
jespah
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 09:44 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
I'm mainly bumping your topic (which is an interesting idea, to be sure) but I suspect you've got to have A LOT of volume to get an atmosphere to stick around. As in, Mars can barely do that, so you'd need to be thinking of a structure over half the size of the Earth.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 09:49 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
Sounds more steam punkish than science fiction. The best case scenario I see is to create a lattice work of ships in some kind of improvised Dyson sphere instead of making a quasiplanet with ships all the way to the artificial core.

Still, the amount of ships used to build even a tiny dwarf planet or a moon like satellite is difficult to conceive.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 10:47 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
Remember, enough gravity crushes things on the inside. The core of most decent sized planets is molten metal just because of the gravitational force.

That same gravity is what holds atmosphere in place, so even if you start with a bunch of interconnected ships, by the time you got to a mass sufficient to hold any decent atmosphere in place, you would have crushed most of the ships into molten metal at the core.
0 Replies
 
JustNonsenseAndSugar
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 10:51 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
My main thought was to use a ships artificial gravity and no open decks. If we can put people on the International Space Station (The dimensions of the completed ISS research facility will be approximately 356 feet (109 meters) by 240 feet (73 meters), or slightly larger than a football field. When completed, the ISS will weigh around 450 tons (408,000 kg), or 450 times the weight of an average car.) why not combine a bunch of ships by internal passages then spin the entire combined structure to create an artificial gravity?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 10:51 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
You misunderstand gravity.

1. The ships already have gravity. They attract each other. You don't need to do anything to "make gravity". Gravity is a attribute of all matter (and ships are made out of matter).

2. If the ships are massive and dense enough to have enough gravity to hold an atmosphere, the ships would almost certainly be crushed (perhaps by their own gravity).

3. You might want to read about Dyson spheres. They have figured into more than a few science fiction stories (e.g. the Bobiverse series... which is awfully fun to read).


blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 10:53 am
If such a conglomeration was being designed, you've come up with perhaps the least energy efficient way to go about it. Each of those ships you are imagining as necessary to build up sufficient gravity to bind them together as a sort of planetoid would have to be designed and constructed costing endless amounts of materials, labor and money. So that doesn't seem very realistic or likely. Much better if you were to suppose that the great mass of this thing was made up of naturally existing mass (asteroids, say) and simply moved to a location. You clearly wish that the ships are connected but that wouldn't have to be via each ship's interlocking doors. Some other means (some sort of tubing, perhaps) would do the trick and leave much needed room for the natural mass you've brought in for gravity/ballast.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 10:54 am
@maxdancona,
Another fine point (from a former Physics teacher... I can't help it).

Spinning creates an outward force... away from the center of the "fake planet". When this technique is used to simulate gravity, the people are walking on the inside of the outside wall of the space station (with their heads facing toward the center).

This is opposite from a planet, where the gravity pulls toward the center and the people's head (generally) face away from the center.
JustNonsenseAndSugar
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 10:56 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
I merely wondering the possibilities, no matter how outlandish it sounds. I just need the potential problems or possibilities.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 11:03 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
I was just looking up the calculations on how much gravity is needed to hold an atmosphere. By the way... spinning makes it more likely that the atmosphere will escape. It is not an easy calculation.

The basic math is that the RMS value for velocity of a molecule in the atmosphere has to be lower than the escape velocity (given the mass of the structure and the temperature of the atmosphere).

This little question has sparked my curiosity. I haven't done all the math yet, but I am pretty sure that you are going to need to crush the space ships (meaning that the interior can't be used).
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  3  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 11:42 am
@JustNonsenseAndSugar,
A recent Sci-Fi adventure movie called Valerian and the city of 1000 planets, featured a giant ball of ships which accumulated over centuries forming a type of space station. However, even that didn't have enough mass to hold things together by gravity, all the ships were just latched onto each other.

There are a lot more efficient structures that can be built in space to achieve a low materials to surface area ratio. And with spin you can give it a fake gravity. The "Ringworld" type designs come to mind as some of the most efficient.

For a more low-cost and robust type of solution to space habitation, I favor hollowing out asteroids. You get a relatively protected environment and you can use the asteroid for raw materials, so you don't need to ship them in. You can also do it just as a byproduct of the mining process itself. It's a "two (or three) birds with one stone" type of situation.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 12:17 pm
I think a better approach would be to have a barren planet that has attracted millions of ships over the years and become a colony. Venus is a good example. Earthlike gravity, but the surface is unusable.
JustNonsenseAndSugar
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 12:24 pm
@engineer,
Thanks much for the idea!
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 02:49 pm
What about the Death Star?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 05:43 pm
You may be interested in "The Diabolic" by SJ Kincaid
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 05:56 pm
As Roswell has already mentioned, there is the ring world concept from Larry Niven's 1970 novel. It could be constructed from the technology we already have, but it would be material intensive. In our star system, such a structure could be constructed from the "asteroids" in our asteroid belt.

You can read about the Ringworld series of novels by clicking here.

There is, however, a good reason why this is a subject of fiction. In the real universe, where are you going to come up with the funds, and who would ordain and oversee the construction and the maintenance?

http://www.comparativegeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Halo-Ringworld-660x400.jpg

It has been proposed that such a structure could be built in a ring around a star, to harvest the energy output of the star.

http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/16/15726/Ring_World.1.jpg
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 09:16 pm
I make my living in resource development. The biggest reason that resources are a big business is that they dont disappear offn the planet. Till now.

Gonna leave a big hole in the ground. I suppose we could always designate a planet just for parts. Theres lots of Titanium in the iron on Mars. But you guys are talking Uranus size
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jan, 2018 09:17 pm
Huh?

I'm not sure about the topic, but I am sure you missed it.
0 Replies
 
JustNonsenseAndSugar
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Jan, 2018 06:39 am
@izzythepush,
I don't know Star Wars hardly at all. I'm more looking for a ramshackle community.
0 Replies
 
JustNonsenseAndSugar
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Jan, 2018 06:40 am
What? This doesn't apply to any of my posts.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Does Space Exploration Make Sense? - Question by thegalacticemperor
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
Meteorite Caught On Camera In Canada - Discussion by InfraBlue
Space Spiders - Discussion by edgarblythe
Rover's on Mars - Discussion by edgarblythe
If the Universe has no beginning? - Discussion by edgarblythe
Pluto - Discussion by edgarblythe
My God! It's Full of Stars! - Discussion by RushPoint
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Planet made of Ships
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/24/2019 at 12:14:50