'Mouse-Tronaughts' to Test Low-Gravity in Space

RandBlade writes "The Telegraph has an article about plans to launch mice into space with simulated low-gravity for five weeks, to test the effects of low-gravity on their bodies. This "will be the first time mammals of any kind have lived in partial gravity for an extended period." Hopes are that this will provide information useful for plans to launch men to Mars, which has one-third of the gravity of Earth."

Comments

First time for mammals

[baryon351]

> This "will be the first time mammals of any kind have lived in > partial gravity for an extended period."

As opposed to those reptilian astronauts.

Re:First time for mammals

[hokanomono]

The point is: there is no documented experiment of humans living in partial gravity for an extended period.

Pardon?

[Wingchild]

This "will be the first time mammals of any kind have lived in partial gravity for an extended period."

Skylab? Mir? The International Space Station? People coming back from hundred-day tours in space, their muscles weak from Low-G muscle atrophy, having to undergo extended rehabilitation and physical therapy to rebuild muscle mass after coming earthside?

Did I imagine all that?

Re:Pardon?

[worst_name_ever]

RTFA... partial gravity != microgravity.

Re:Pardon?

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

I think you missed the bit about "simulated low gravity." They're not going to be in "zero-g" or microgravity.

The point of the experiment, if I understand it correctly, is to determine to what degree a low gravity (as opposed to micro-gravity, which is what the space stations experience) environment differs in effect on mammals from Full Gravity and Micro-gravity environments.

Mouse-Tronaughts?

[Tirel]

so people in space are what? Homo-tronaughts?

Re:Mouse-Tronaughts?

[NanoGator]

"so people in space are what? Homo-tronaughts? "

That's what we were prepared to call Lance Bass.

'naut' == 'naught'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not!

Reproduction in space

[tjstork]

Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature? We can conceivably provide a breathable habitat, running water, etc. But, it is becoming clear that gravity plays a fairly strong role in the development of living things from fertilized egg to adulthood. Perhaps it might be impossible to reproduce on the moon or mars, because there is not enough gravity. Or, maybe you can but there will be a statistical risk of some undiscovered birth defect.

It may turn out that the only viable planet to really colonize is Venus, then, it becomes a question of, what do we do with 10^20 tons of carbon dioxide!

Re:Reproduction in space

[Pedrito]

Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature?

There's no reason that human babies couldn't be conceived and come to term in low or even zero-g. Yes, it's been done with other 'Earth creatures'. Besides some insects, there were some fish that were bred on Skylab, I believe. As I recall, the Earth born parents were unable to control their swimming in zero-g, but the babies had no problem. I assume human babies would also adapt natural abilities in zero and low-g that astronauts learn to clumsily do.

But the fact is, human bodies are poorly adapter to low and zero-g for several reasons. Radiation and muscle atrophy are one problem, but bone loss is another serious problem. Thus it's likely that any humans or other complex animals born in zero or low-g wouldn't live very long. Probably not even long enough to reproduce.

The only way for humans to evolve to be able to surivive would be for the conditions of low-g living to be slowly introduced over many generations or to somehow short-cut evolution.

Re:Reproduction in space

[Richard W.M. Jones]

Can people reproduce on other planets? Can any earth creature?

I don't know, but I'm willing to give it a try!

Rich.

Re:Reproduction in space

[tgd]

I'm not sure why that was modded up, as its genereally wrong.

To be more accurate, bone loss and muscular atrophy aren't problems in space, they're problems when you leave space. They don't degrade because you're in space, they degrade because you don't need them.

There's NO evidence that medically someone who lived in 1/3g and stayed there would have any more problems than here.

In zero G, sure some muscles will atrophy, the ones you don't need. Your skeleton weakens, because it doesn't NEED to be as strong.

Re:Reproduction in space

[DrLudicrous]

I hope your tube is heat-resistent, because when mars and venus are on opposite sides of the sun, guess what happens?

Animal Cruelty

[queen of everything]

I'm sure we'll have lots of posts about "animal cruelty". Is it better to test on mice or humans? Which life is worth more? Would it be fair to send humans to Mars and just watch their bodies essentially turn to jello from the lack of gravity? Those that spent time on the ISS are dealing with the consequences of little or no gravity for an extended period of time.

I'm not saying that it is necessarily "right" to test on animals, but from a scientific point of view, it will bring us much closer to knowing the effect of the conditions on Mars and will bring us closer to having manned missions and even maybe a space station there one day.

I remember doing this

[ReidMaynard]

with those solid rocket kits back in the 1960's.

We did it with hamsters, if I remember the control hamster got fatter than astro-hamster, but since there were just the two hamsters, well ...

You mean astromouse ?

[theefer]

The word astronauts come from the greek : astro (stars), nautike (navigation). So astronaut litteraly means star navigator, and mouse-tronaut would mean mouse navigator, which lacks some sense here.

I'd rather have said astro-mouse (star mouse) instead. Or if anyone has the greek word for mouse ...

Re:You mean astromouse ?

[NonSequor]

Actually astrum (star), is Latin. And nauta is Latin for sailor. So you need the Latin word for mouse which is mus (pronounced like the English word moose).

Enhanced Gravity

[vontrotsky]

In high school I did a project which involved growing plants in simulated hypergravity (produced by centripetal acceleration), then tried to extrapolated into the low gravity regime.

Up to 140% of normal, the plants grew faster with increasing "gravity". From this I reasoned that lower gravity conditions (moon, mars) would be healthy for plants.

Of course, NASA's results may vary. Especially when using mice.

Jeff

Re:They contradict themselves in the article

[nomadic]

Oh, wait a sec - it's the Daily Telegraph. Seriously, it's like the British newspaper equivalent of Slashdot.

So the readers actually do all the work of writing articles, and tomorrow's edition will have the same exact story?

isn't this pointless?

[bob_jenkins]

I would have thought the effects of gravity scale with weight. Mice are so small, they're nearly surface-oriented instead of gravity-oriented anyhow. They've got almost no gravity-induced features in the first place.

Re:isn't this pointless?

[madpierre]

Hamster + Wheel + Dynamo = Electricity

No more flat batteries in our mars rovers.
And as a bonus the Hamster could be trained
to re-boot the cpu in case of glitches.

Re:They contradict themselves in the article

[Mwongozi]

Or you could try reading the article. Partial gravity is not the same as a weightless environment.

Re:They contradict themselves in the article

[Anonymous Coward]

*thwap*

zero gravity != partial gravity

Go thwap yourself then. Gravity is never equal to zero. Every object in the universe attracts every other. If you have a calculator, determine the force from gravity applied to a human on earth. Then, calculate again from 1,000 km away. It's a small difference.

In orbit, you experience weightlessness. IE, if you are travelling at 20,000 km/hour around the earth, and everything else on your spaceship is travelling at the same velocity, from your point of view you experience weightlessness. From earth, watching the spacecraft, everything looks normal.

Go read a high school physics book, will you? Pay attention to frames of reference.

Mice in space?

[FrostedWheat]

They're Pinky and the Brain?

Pinky: What are we gonna to tommorow night Brain?
Brain: Same thing we do every night Pinky. Try to take over the space capsule!

i think there's been a misunderstanding

[real_smiff]

People in space *are* Astronauts (from the greek astron, meaning star, and naut, meaning sailor).

Unfortunately this means 'Mousetronauts' are people who sail into mice. Right, perhaps someone should call the paper.

Re:i think there's been a misunderstanding

[Zalgon 26 McGee]

So what should we call Richard Gere?

Just a means of escape...

[interactive_civilian]

Those mice are just so damn clever.

Obviously, this is simply a means for more of them to escape and take data back to their own dimension before the Earth is destroyed to make way for a hyperspatial bypass route 5 minutes before its task is complete.

Cursed Vogons.

Of course, pretty soon NASA will be wishing that they had gotten us to Alpha Centauri to file our complaints...oh well...at least they won't be bitter for very long...

;-)

Re:They contradict themselves in the article

[NeoThermic]

>> If you have a calculator, determine the force from gravity applied to a human on earth. Then, calculate again from 1,000 km away. It's a small difference.

Sure! I'm Game!


Now, if a body of mass m is a distance r from the center of the earth, you know that the weight of the body is F given by the formula F=GmM/r^2 The gravitaional field strength is g = F/m = (GmM/r^2)/m = GM/r^2

(With me sofar?)

g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(6.4 * 10^6)^2
= 9.814 N kg^-1

Notice! We get a value which is gravity at earths surface...

Ok, so with the poster above... lets add on our 1,000 km ...

g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(6.401 * 10^6)^2
= 9.811 N kg^-1
Yes, we lost all of 0.001 N kg^-1... our poster above is right.

So, how can they make this worth while? Easy. Make them do a larger orbit, so that they are twice the distance r from the earth (notice above, you have to measure from the center of the earth...)

So, lets see how much N kg-1 our mice would have if they were twice as far out...

g=GM/r^2
= 6.7 * 10^-11 N m^2 kg^-2 * 6.0 * 10^24 kg/(12.8 * 10^6)^2
= 2.453 N kg^-1

Anyway, enough maths...
NeoThermic