Slashdot Mirror


Hawking to Take Zero Gravity Ride

An anonymous reader writes "Well-known cosmologist Stephen Hawking is preparing for a once-in a lifetime trip. His goals are for even higher ground, but right now he's readying for an April zero gravity ride aboard NASA's 'vomit comet'. His ultimate goal is to take a ride on one of Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic flights, and this is a 'test run' for that more rigorous experience. Though complex math ain't no thing for Dr. Hawking, his interests here are purely inspirational. 'Hawking says he wants to encourage public interest in spaceflight, which he believes is critical to the future of humanity. "I also want to show," he said in an e-mail interview, "that people need not be limited by physical handicaps as long as they are not disabled in spirit."'"

127 comments

  1. fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    only problem is the vomit comit doesn't have a handicapped accessable bathroom

    1. Re:fp by chaney · · Score: 0, Troll

      Oh shit! I would give a million dollars to watch that man bounce around the inside of a vomit comet like a pin ball!

    2. Re:fp by Tablizer · · Score: 0

      only problem is the vomit comit doesn't have a handicapped accessable bathroom

      Use the Poop Deck if you don't mind the cold air.

  2. Does this mean its open to everyone? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean that anyone can get to go for a ride?
    I was under the impression you had to have a certain level of fitness and stamina.

    I also cannot get the thought of the south park kid shouting "Timmmeh!" whilst riding the shuttle.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by MightyMartian · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Who could say know to one of the world's foremost physicists?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 1

      Easy, he watched GATACCA and found a way to hack the sytem.

      --
      http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
    3. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Security Guard: So you're really Ronald P. Heatherstone.

      Hawking: zzzzzzzzzzgggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh Y....E....S

      Security Guard: You're absolutely positive here?

      Hawking: zzzzzzzzzzgggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh Y....E....S

      Security Guard: Say's here Ronald P. Heatherstone is a top rated fighter pilot, stands 6 ft 3, weights 220 pounds and can bench press a Toyota. You're absolute sure this is you?

      Hawking: zzzzzzzzzzgggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh Y....E....S

      Security: Right then, off with you.

      Hawking: zzzzzzzzzzgggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh S....U....C....K....E....R

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was under the impression you had to have a certain level of fitness and stamina.

      Maybe they figure he has nothing to lose. As long as his head is protected, so what if he breaks his spine or loses a limb: he can't use them anyhow.

    5. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by RockyPersaud · · Score: 2, Informative

      The posting is incorrect, but the article is correct. It's not NASA's Vomit Comet (KC-135), but the Zero Gravity Corporation's G-Force One.

      And yes, it's open to everyone who mets their basic health requirements and is at least 15 years old. Whether Hawking meets the requirements I'd like to know (ie. are they making an exception?)

    6. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      From a total health perspective people with very limited mobility could benefit from living in a zero g environment.
      Up there, we are essentially equal.

      Its just the travelling which would be a problem.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    7. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by RockyPersaud · · Score: 1

      I'm moving my head office in orbit just as soon as its feasible.

    8. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Grammar ewe do not no. Eye here that we lowered standards hare in America and ewe are the result.

    9. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Does this mean that anyone can get to go for a ride?
      > I was under the impression you had to have a certain level of fitness and stamina.

      No, you need only a certain level of wealth and fame.

    10. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      Hopefully Steve-O gets the chance to have a ride on the Virgin Galactic flights. Maybe he'll have an idea (*cough*unifiedtheory*cough*)that changes the world on his zero-g ride :)

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    11. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      These guys will let you experience zero G for a couple grand last I checked. I don't exactly remember what their fitness requirements are, but I believe it's fairly light.

    12. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by motorbikematt · · Score: 1

      No. It's not open to everyone. There are FAA restrictions on the ability for an individual to follow safety instructions during these special flights. However, if you have adequate professional assistance, the safety requirements can be met.

    13. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by Cimon+Avaro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not totally historically void question, even though it might appear so on the surface.

      The story goes that Hawking met the pope and was asked if there was any specific request he might have of the vaticans resources (or something on those lines, I am too lazy to google or wikipedia for the details), and he asked to see the interrogation documents of Galileo Galilei. Apparently as the interrogation was translated to him, Hawking made several sarcastic comments. Not necessarily totally unrelated to this encounter, the catholic church did infact 400-500 years later issue a non-apology-apology to both the sequestering of Galileo Galilei and the burning at the stake of Giordano Bruno, formally overturning at least the judgement against Galilei (not sure about Bruno; whether it was a statement about the doctrine at the time being correctly applied, but deficient; or that the doctrine was falsely applied).

    14. Re:Does this mean its open to everyone? by xarak · · Score: 1


      Goriest thing I've heard this week.

      +1 Interesting, +1 Funny

      --
      Atheism is a non-prophet organisation
  3. Helen Keller to join him for the flight down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay sorry, couldn't resist!

    1. Re:Helen Keller to join him for the flight down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the heartwrenching stories of plucky blind people dragged up Everest on a rope I find pretty nauseating. Instead of just "broadening" themselves why don't handicapped people channel their efforts into an area where they can get the satisfaction of meaningfully excelling and contribute like Hawkings has? He's the role model. Not some blind guy who insists on learning to skeet shoot and the like.

      Just saying. Now excuse me while I go strangle a kitten.

  4. Rumor is.... by drfrog · · Score: 3, Informative

    He's getting ready for his new album and is shooting video on these flights

    http://www.mchawking.com/

    --
    back in the day we didnt have no old school
    1. Re:Rumor is.... by bugg_tb · · Score: 0

      how on earth is this tagged informative??

      Does no one read the posts anymore??

    2. Re:Rumor is.... by drfrog · · Score: 1

      Hahahaa thats funny

      OMG its not even april yet

      --
      back in the day we didnt have no old school
    3. Re:Rumor is.... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      It would be marginally funny instead of just lame ... if the site hadn't already been linked to in the summary.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  5. is Hawking a real physicist? by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 1

    ...If he is, why would he be using the term "zero gee"? The submitter, I can understand...

    1. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

      is Hawking a real physicist? ...If he is, why would he be using the term "zero gee"? The submitter, I can understand...


      I would guess he is using the term "zero gee" so those who are not aware of his status as a physicist, or physics in general get the basic meaning. Not to say that you don't know that is is a real physicist or anything. I mean, holding the same office as that Newton guy probably does not mean much. ;)
      --
      Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    2. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably our dear reporter Dennis Overbye from The New York Times wanted his writing to sound formal and wrongly thought that "g" was slang for "gravity".

    3. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons he became so well known in popular culture is his ability to put things into layman's terms. He isn't a pedantic nitpicker like many of the armchair scientists here on Slashdot are.

    4. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by BlackEmperor · · Score: 2

      I mean, holding the same office as that Newton guy probably does not mean much. ;)

      Some people think he's not that great as can be seen in the video The Hawking Paradox.

      --
      "all broken things dream of repair" - chris letcher
    5. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Funny

      Its got less letters he has to type. I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually "0 g" he typed.

      Stephen Hawking, using 1337speak.

    6. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "...If he is, why would he be using the term "zero gee"?"

      Give me a break, everyone judges a persons worth based on the spelling of their words? As if people should be expected to fit some perfect ideal. I know plenty of smart degreed people, who couldn't spell to save their life.

    7. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by kerb · · Score: 1

      he can say that because he is Hawking.
      and you are?

    8. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      Nobody is above the law(s and theories of physics).

    9. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Uh, not to be picky, but my work chair doesn't have arms.

    10. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 4, Funny

      is Hawking a real physicist?

      Either that, or his voicebox computer is the first instance of AI.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    11. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Compass · · Score: 0

      Zero Gravity? Are you sure?

      Then please explain how the Moon orbits Earth. Which force keeps the Moon in orbit?

      Compass.

    12. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by novafire · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No scientist with or without Hawking's celebrity status is without fault. Regardless of how many thumbs up or thumbs down his various works have gotten, I think he has at the very least helped publicize science in the eyes of the common man. In a world where creationism and religious fundamentalism can try to squash science and somehow often succeeds, we as a race need books such as A Brief History of Time to at the very least get people interested in science and start asking questions. Questioning everything and anything is probably the most profound act we can do and its great that people don't agree with his theories. Is he deserving of his status? Maybe, maybe not, but I would take him over any religious nut any day of the week.

    13. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Lavene · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some people think he's not that great as can be seen in the video The Hawking Paradox.
      For a scientist, being proven wrong is no big deal and often just as important as being right. It's just another factor in his/ her continuing work. Being wrong does not make you a bad scientist. Einstein's 'Cosmological Constant' anyone?

      Hawking has been wrong numerous times (it usually costs him a case of wine). Quite often he actually prove *himself* wrong.
    14. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either that, or his voicebox computer is the first instance of AI.

      That poor man has been a front for that evil AI for too long now. Free Stephen Hawking!

    15. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by CptPicard · · Score: 1

      And what a brilliant AI it is, solving complex physics problems for us! As a fun thought experiment, can you imagine Hawking's frustration if, inside his head, he actually lost his passion for doing physics soon after being incapacitated by ALS, but that his sentient computer is just parading him in conferences as a puppet for the street cred, just waiting for the right time to come out in the open about its true capabilities, when mankind is ready for it? Hawking knows full well what is going on, but as all his communication goes through the computer, he has no way of telling anyone that all he has wanted to do for the past few decades is drink beer and watch soccer on tv instead of going through all those boring academic responsibilities.

      And after yet another lecture or conference presentation that he just tried to sleep through while the computer monotonically blathered on and on about string theory and black holes, when no-one else is around listening and he is again furiously clicking on his switch to try to uselessly argue with the AI that stole his life, the computer calmly tells him "I'm sorry Stephen, I can't say that... and that... and that... it would compromise the mission". And all poor Dr. Hawking can do is hope that one day, he'll be able to signal to his grad student assistant to disconnect the computer's memory circuits...

      --
      I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
    16. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      Hawking: I didn't break the law(s of physics) I AM the law(s of physics)!

    17. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I still remember a classic Holodeck scene from Star Trek: The Next Generation, where Commander Data was playing poker with Newton, Einstein and Stephen Hawking. You could tell he was enjoying himself.

      Not much doubt that he's deserving of his status, celebrity or otherwise. He earned it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    18. Re:is Hawking a real physicist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrats to you and the parent poster, I just gave the two of you one of the rarest of /. rarities, a parent/child +1 double mod! +1 interesting and +1 funny. Well done to both of you!

  6. Well... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

    How about those tax problems with accepting prizes of "space trip"?

    Yes, we're supposed to pay taxes on things won in a give away, but the dude refusing a trip due to 25K$ is just sad.

    Who else, in the mass of average Joes can even afford to contemplate a space trip?

    --
    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't have the money you don't have the money... $25k is a _lot_ to some of us who aren't as fortunate as yourself.

    2. Re:Well... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      Erm, excuse me?

      I DONT have the money, and even a software engineer COULDNT AFFORD IT.

      What makes you think I can, or let alone pay 25K to fly for 1 day? Sorry, I have better things I could do with that money... Like a second degree or pay off my loans.

      --
    3. Re:Well... by bloobloo · · Score: 1

      Hawking is British. We don't pay tax on prizes.

  7. Queue the... by chris_eineke · · Score: 2, Funny

    ion-booster propelled wheelchair jokes in 5...
    4...
    3...
    2...
    1...
    IGNITION! ;)

    --
    "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
    1. Re:Queue the... by WizzardX · · Score: 1

      Ever seen TMST's Steven Hawking Musical Tribute?

      http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/157656

      "I never wanted to be a cosmology professor.
      I always wanted to be a ROCKET MAN!"

  8. Zero G bra designed by NASA (patent pending) by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    --
    http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
    1. Re:Zero G bra designed by NASA (patent pending) by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      My god. That looks like an egg-brator attached in the center !

      --
  9. As a person with a progressive disability... by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...I find Hawking's life an immense inspiration. Rock on dude, show the world what a man can do, even if almost completely paralized! FTW!

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:As a person with a progressive disability... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fhut The Wuck?

  10. what a... by symes · · Score: 2, Interesting
    top bloke!

    "that people need not be limited by physical handicaps as long as they are not disabled in spirit."

    Says it all really.

    1. Re:what a... by MightyMartian · · Score: 0, Troll

      So if I go blind, I can still drive my car, right? After all, trundling down the road at 50mph, hitting pedestrians, crashing through department stores and killing innocent bystanders are all part of the inspirational story of a man who was disabled in vision, but not in spirit!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:what a... by sandmaninator · · Score: 1


      Unfortunately, it seems most people are disabled in spirit. I blame TV.

  11. -1, Flamebait? by chris_eineke · · Score: 1

    What the? I would totally love to roll with an ion-booster propelled wheelchair. It'd be better than the Chevy I am driving. >:(

    --
    "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
  12. If he was a Californian, he... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    ...would claim the flight crippled him and sue the plane owners ;-)

  13. Obligatory Futurama by evil+agent · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fry: Stephen Hawking! Aren't you the guy who invented gravity?
    Hawking: Sure, why not.

    --
    End transmission.
    1. Re:Obligatory Futurama by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      All time greatest Futurama episode!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  14. If he waits a bit longer ... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

    ... he should be able to book a ride into space from these people - and they will guarantee he won't be vomiting.

  15. No difference by alphabetsoup · · Score: 1

    There is no difference between zero gravity and free fall in a gravitational field. None whatsoever. That is, there is no experiment which will be able to distinguish between these to different cases. So, yes, the term "zero g" is perfectly valid.

    1. Re:No difference by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      I'm no physics expert, but won't there always be tidal forces that you could use to differentiate those cases - even ignoring the various observations you could make to see acceleration due to gravity?

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    2. Re:No difference by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 1

      There are some small variations, correct, but they're on the order of 10^-6 g, thus the preferred technical term for free-fall/orbit of 'microgravity.'

  16. This news is unacceptably OLD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This news is unacceptably OLD. This has been a well known fact for weeks or more.
    OLD>>>>>>>>>>>
    Slashdot--

    1. Re:This news is unacceptably OLD by dangitman · · Score: 1

      In South Korea, only slashdot people use incontinence pads.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  17. Future != now by renoX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While I respect the man, I'm a bit baffled by things like this "he wants to encourage public interest in spaceflight, which he believes is critical to the future of humanity."

    The "future" covers a huge amount of time, so I'm not sure we need to take interest in space exploration *now*. If I was the one spending money, I'll put most of the credit into Drexler's style nanotechnology research, once we 'master' nanotechnology, then tackling space exploration makes sense as either:
    - at best a space elevator becomes possible and space access cost are reduced a lot,
    - at worst a space elevator is impossible, but the improved materials should still reduce the cost of space access a lot and the payload themselves would be lighter.

    1. Re:Future != now by MMC+Monster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why not educate everyone before working on nanotechnology? Why not master world hunger before working on worldwide literacy rates?

      The point is, we can work on all of these things. Provided that humans still exist 500 years from now, there will still be poor illiterate people, regardless of what planet or plane of existence we live in then.

      Let's set our sights on the stars. Maybe at least we'll hit Mars.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    2. Re:Future != now by Teresita · · Score: 1

      Provided that humans still exist 500 years from now, there will still be poor illiterate people, regardless of what planet or plane of existence we live in then.

      Except that in 2507 "illiterate" will be defined as a person who does not have a biochip brain implant to give them access to the Matrix. Or a person who has the implant but changed their mind so many times that Windows Genuine Advantage detected a crossed threshold, yanked their licence, and dumped them off the net until they call Redmond over a land line and explain.

    3. Re:Future != now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll put most of the credit into Drexler's style nanotechnology research, once we 'master' nanotechnology, then tackling space exploration makes sense [..]
      Nanotechnology is a worthwile effort, no doubt, but does one have to exclude the other? I'm sure we have enough scientists to work on both. If we were forced to prioritize which fields to invest in I'd have to go with energy, though, because our ability to harness energy in various forms is the cornerstone of all other technologies and the state of our society. In fact, better power sources would not only enhance our ability to travel in space, but it would very likely advance technology in ways favorable for nanotechnology research. It may not sound exciting but it all comes down to the simple fact that energy is everything, and our inability to use it efficiently is our greatest limitation.

      Fortunately we aren't forced to prioritize, so we can invest resources in energy, nanotechnology and space travel.
    4. Re:Future != now by alphamugwump · · Score: 1

      Nah. What we want to do is develop strong AI. That way, we can send transhuman robots to colonize the galaxy, while we stay home and read slashdot for the rest of eternity. Why worry about "the destiny of the human race" if you can get someone else to do it for you?

    5. Re:Future != now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a well-fed, well-educated, literate, rich citizen of a western society could be so arrogant as to say that we should "set our sights on the stars" instead of trying to focus on the actual problems we're having.

    6. Re:Future != now by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      Different researchers have different interests. Just because nanotechnology is important and interesting doesn't mean that everyone interested in space exploration and, heck, computer science and biology should drop what their doing, and the public should lose interest.

      There's enough room in the world for both astrophysicists and materials technologists.

    7. Re:Future != now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Only a well-fed, well-educated, literate, rich citizen of a western society could be so arrogant as to say that we should "set our sights on the stars" instead of trying to focus on the actual problems we're having.

      That statement is ignorant on multiple levels. I'm glad you are an obvious troll.

  18. Encouraging interest in spaceflight by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

    I thought the rich guy who wanted to pay NASA $20 million to fly with them was bringing in interest, but I guess he's not good enough.

    1. Re:Encouraging interest in spaceflight by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      some rich guy who you don't even know the name of or give a toss about at all, yea, he's going to really raise the profile eh?

  19. Science ragdoll hilarity by Micklewhite · · Score: 0

    My only hope is that they video tape the whole thing. He must know what he's in for. I can only imagine what he'll say after the whole ordeal is over...

    'Despite my intelligence I must say it was a rather bad choice to bring my wheelchair into the plane. Intially everything went well unill I fell out and kicked myself in the back of the head, then my chair followed suit. I've been forced to change most of my theories on gravity because of this. I strongly discourage anyone wishing to experience zero g. It is more trouble than it's worth'

    --
    I don't own a snook, and if I did I wouldn't leave it cocked.
  20. Einstein's Equivalence Principle by alphabetsoup · · Score: 2, Informative

    No. There is absolutely no difference between free fall in a gravitational field and absence of a gravitational field. This is the famous Equivalence Principle of General Relativitiy. This link gives more detail: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/gener al_relativity.html

    So there exists no difference at all between free fall and zero gravity. As for your second point, no experiment can distinguish between the two cases. So no observation can differentiate between the two.

    1. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by at_18 · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. There is absolutely no difference between free fall in a gravitational field and absence of a gravitational field. This is the famous Equivalence Principle of General Relativitiy. This link gives more detail: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/gener al_relativity.html [virginia.edu]

      So there exists no difference at all between free fall and zero gravity. As for your second point, no experiment can distinguish between the two cases. So no observation can differentiate between the two.


      This is incorrect. For a point-like object, it's true that you can't distinguish between the two. But for an extended body, if the intensity of the gravitational field varies with the position, different parts of the body will try to follow different "free falls" trajectories and this will result in very real forces inside the body - so called
      tidal forces. BTW, to have any kind of measurable difference you need either a gravitational field with a very steep gradient, for example very near to a black hole center, or a very big object like the Earth.

    2. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by Annoying · · Score: 1

      There is a different between freefall in an atmosphere in a gravitational field and the absence of gravity. Most orbitting objects will eventually have orbital decay from the minimal amount of atmosphere they are in so the most correct term for the gravity situation in orbit is 'microgravity', given enough time any loose object will settle in accordance with the gravitational field. So I've heard anyway.

    3. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by Compass · · Score: 0

      Free Fall and Zero Gravity are different things.
      The Moon is in a Free Fall situation compared to Earth. Earth keeps the Moon orbiting thanks to its gravity field.
      Zero Gravity would mean no gravity at all. Another way to say it would mean that the nearest object is infinitely away. If Hawking is in a Zero Gravity situation, then the vessel he's inside will have to burn a lot of fuel so it can orbit Earth, or else he would slingshot into infinity.
      To prove my point read these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtons_law and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_fall
      1. An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by another force.
      Well, the Moon is in orbit around Earth, right? So there is a force acting, else it would not be around us.
      2. Free fall in its strictest sense is the condition of acceleration which is due only to gravity. In other words, the objects undergoing free fall experience only one force: their own weight.
      Examples include: a spacecraft with its rockets off; the Moon's trajectory around the Earth, the Earth's orbit around the Sun, or an asteroid's orbit around the Sun; on Earth, falling through a vacuum tube or shaft.

      Compass.

    4. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by Original+Replica · · Score: 1

      There is a different between freefall in an atmosphere in a gravitational field and the absence of gravity.

      Yeah, The rushing wind is a dead give-away too.

      --
      We are all just people.
    5. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      But is Hawking a point-like object?

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    6. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by TheDreadSlashdotterD · · Score: 1

      It depends on the shape of the human mind.

      --
      I have nothing to say.
    7. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does it feel to be so wrong, making such a bold statement.

      The earth is not a singularity, thus it has gradients to its gravitational field. These can be measured. Hence, you are incorrect. You are over simplifying a facet of general relativity and then applying that to a real environment.

      Sensitive measurements can certainly tell the difference between the vomit comet and "zero-g" since "zero-g" is only a theoretical construct and doesn't exist in our universe. There are no objects in the universe (nor points of reference in which an object could be) which do not experience a gravitational field, however weak it may be. Even a measuring device has its own gravity. The only true zero-g environment that could exist is a uniform field, such as the singularity that existed prior to the big bang (again, only in theiry).

      Next time don't take such hard stances on something you do not understand.

    8. Re:Einstein's Equivalence Principle by Petersson · · Score: 1
      But is Hawking a point-like object?

      Good point.

      --
      I'm not insane. My mother had me tested.
  21. Smacked into the floor hard by viking80 · · Score: 1

    The average g-load is 1g, so you typically get 0g for 25 seconds, and 2g for 25 seconds and some time in between.

    I am sure Hawkins will handle 0g, but I wonder how he will feel during the 25 seconds of 2g. That is stressful even for a healthy person.

    Slamming on the brakes in a Porsche on a good track going from 250km/h down to 0 is a change from 1g to 1.28g (sqrt(1^2+0.8^2), so the vomit comet is 7 times that! You are certainly smacked into the floor hard, even with assistants.

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
    1. Re:Smacked into the floor hard by ACDChook · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Come on, you have to be kidding me. 2g for 25 seconds? That's hardly stressful at all. +2g in an aircraft is a LOT different to doing essentially -1.28g decelerating in a car. For starters, +ve g-forces are a lot easier for the body to tolerate than negative. Fighter pilots do up to about +10g for short periods, but only about -4g. I've done +5g for 30 seconds in an aerobatic spin, and ok, it does feel a bit heavy, but it's no problem. Even with Hawking's condition, 2g certainly shouldn't pose any threat.

      And it's not as if the vomit comet suddenly goes from 0g to +2g - the climb-out from the parabolic arc is somewhat gradual, so the occupants settle to the floor fairly gently. Plus I guarantee he will be under someone's close scrutiny, and they'll be sure that he's close to the floor before the end of the ride.

    2. Re:Smacked into the floor hard by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 1

      Miscalculation on your part. The 1g typical is going straight down, while the 1.28g is pointing somewhat forward (I'm not even going to touch whether you've calculating it correctly. Is the 1.28 the resulting vector, or just the braking vector?). It's the change in direction, and the fact that your 'weight' is suddenly held in place by two straps that makes it uncomfortable.

  22. It's a fun ride by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been on that flight (courtesy of Jimmy Kimmel Live!, which got to show video of me losing my lunch in return). It's a lot of fun. I hope Professor Hawking enjoys his ride.

    Anyone who wants to can go on Zero G's flights, as long as they don't have a medical problem that gets in the way - and they have a doctor on staff who goes over your medical history before you go. All it takes is $3750.

    --
    Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
    1. Re:It's a fun ride by alienmole · · Score: 1

      Anyone who wants to can go on Zero G's flights, as long as they don't have a medical problem that gets in the way - and they have a doctor on staff who goes over your medical history before you go.
      Oh yeah, Prof. Hawking's medical history shouldn't be a problem...
    2. Re:It's a fun ride by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, Prof. Hawking's medical history shouldn't be a problem... Depends on what effect ALS has had on his body. If he's not susceptible to motion sickness, it may not be a big deal after all. Regardless, he's not getting on that 727 unless the doc clears him, and given his prominence, I'd be greatly surprised if Zero G's doc and Professor Hawking's doc weren't in close contact well before all this was announced in the first place.
      --
      Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
    3. Re:It's a fun ride by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Depends on what effect ALS has had on his body.

      Because of ALS he has the ultimate sedentary lifestyle. If we were talking about somebody else who had not moved at all in decades (for whatever reason) I would be suggesting that they not go out and do aerobatics in an aircraft.

    4. Re:It's a fun ride by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, perhaps not. If all you're doing is sitting, 0G/+2G isn't that strenuous - no more than a moderately sedate rollercoaster. I wouldn't expect him to go swimming about the cabin, but (assuming he has no problems with motion sickness, something he may well not have had the opportunity to find out about before now) he may not have any problems at all.

      --
      Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
  23. If he doesn't enjoy the ride... by gemada · · Score: 2, Funny

    In space, he will be able to throw his chair

    1. Re:If he doesn't enjoy the ride... by Teresita · · Score: 1

      In space, he will be able to throw his chair

      The article is about Steve Hawking, not Steve Ballmer.

  24. hopefully he doesn't... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...plan on bringing any wasabi

  25. Err Hmm by KKlaus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, to be fair, with an incredible amount of brilliance, so he can find a job where physical work is almost entirely unneccassary. It's not like he's an average guy just making it in the world. Sort of like ol Chris Reeves. All his story really means is that if you're extremely rich, you can expect to get treatments that far exceed what others would get. And since all the effort he puts into that directly helps him, I guess the most you can say is that he's not a wimp.

    Anyhow, I didn't mean to be downer, and Hawking is obviously a very impressive person, but he's hardly a role model for the disabled... because he's a man of near singular abilities. If Kobe Bryant had been born in the ghetto, he can hardly be a role model to your average poor kid, because none of them could ever become wealthy by being great basketball players because they don't have his abilities. You see?

    --
    Relax I just want some peanuts.
    1. Re:Err Hmm by Mal-2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Many children see basketball players as role models. It's quite questionable if they should, but no question that they do.

      Stephen Hawking was exceptionally lucky that his disability proved to be manageable, at least professionally. Others may be able to use this as inspiration to change to better-suited careers. One thing that absolutely cannot be disputed is his ability to roll with the punches, and fire back with a few of his own. Live life aggressively. If your only career path is to be a theoretical physicist, then be the best damn theoretical physicist you can.

      A basketball player, on the other hand, sends the message that "if you're good enough, you could become rich and respected yourself." While this is true, the number of players that reach this elite status are few. Even the numbers that even make it to the NBA are relatively few, and just making it is no guarantee of celebrity. (Of course this is true of any profession where the money is mostly paid out to a few people at the top.) The ideal lesson would be "always have a backup plan" but usually it ends up being "you really can do anything!"

      Mal-2

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    2. Re:Err Hmm by TerovThePyro · · Score: 1

      he's a man of near singular abilities. And if he were a man of singular abilities we could never know it, for he would be on the other side of the event horizon.
    3. Re:Err Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, to be fair, with an incredible amount of brilliance, so he can find a job where physical work is almost entirely unneccassary. [sic]

      Do you think that Hawking is the only physicist who doesn't need to exhaust himself physically in his day to day activities? Hawking may very well have made larger discoveries in physics that most, but that doesn't mean that the mundane aspects of his work is somehow different from that of other physicists. The gp could become an "ordinary" physicist and have the same requirement on himself as Hawking has.

      Anyhow, I didn't mean to be downer

      Are you sure? Then what was the purpose of your post? The gp obviously found Hawkings inspirational, and whether or not you think that he is warranted in this is really irrelevant.

      If Kobe Bryant had been born in the ghetto, he can hardly be a role model to your average poor kid, because none of them could ever become wealthy by being great basketball players because they don't have his abilities.

      The point is that what Hawking has done is a testament to his strength of will. He wouldn't have become a world famous physicist without his intellect, but neither would intellect have been enough on his own either.

      I don't know what the life goal of the gp is (if he has one), but if Hawkings, who in all likelihood has a much more severe disability, could write several books, hold a normal academic position, go on lecture tours, and even go into space, then surely whatever the gp is aiming for (assuming it's not becoming a world class sprinter or something equally ridiculous) might very well be within reach as well. The aspect of Hawking's intellect doesn't enter into the equation here.

      You seem to have the wrong idea about what an inspirational role model is supposed to accomplish. Hawking has probably inspired thousands of kids to do well in school so that they could study physics. Will all of these kids end up as famous as Hawking? Of course not. Do they all really expect to? Not really. However, they will most likely lead happier lives than they would have without that inspiration nonetheless. In that case, what more is there to ask for?

  26. Spirit. by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1
    What a bigot, disparaging those of us who are disabled in spirit. Just because I have scoliosis of the soul doesn't mean that I don't deserve to fly on spacecraft that are named after the act of emesis.

    I bet the jerk Hawking hates crackpots and anthropocidal maniacs too.

  27. April Zero by ViciousAndCruel · · Score: 1

    My Calendar doesn't have an April zero.

  28. Simple by RiskyChris · · Score: 0

    Sitting in a chair, the seat exerts a normal force g upwards against you while the field of gravity exerts a gravitational force g downwards. You feel your presence in the seat. When free-falling gravity is the only force acting on you, so you don't feel a normal force. Zero g. Same reason why you feel "gees" when turning in a car.

  29. Article is grossly inaccurate by Raynor · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTFA:

    "On April 26, Hawking, surrounded by a medical entourage, is to take a zero-gravity ride out of Cape Canaveral on a so-called vomit comet, a padded aircraft that flies a roller-coaster trajectory to produce periods of weightlessness. He is getting his lift gratis, from Zero Gravity, a company that has been flying thrill seekers on a special Boeing 727-200 since 2004 at $3,500 a trip."

    Zero Gravity is taking him up... NOT NASA. It's NOT the Vomit Comet (NASA's plane).

    From a better article:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17156385/page/2/

    "Parabolic flights can pose a risk of motion sickness or more serious health effects, but Zero Gravity's flights have been structured to minimize the risk. During a typical flight, Zero Gravity's "G-Force One" jet makes a gradual transition to weightless parabolas, and provides significantly fewer bouts of weightlessness than NASA's "Vomit Comet" jet. "

    --
    "Dictator Flakes. They WILL be delicious."
  30. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ""I also want to show," he said in an e-mail interview, "that people need not be limited by physical handicaps as long as they are not disabled in spirit."'"

  31. but i thought by jaimz22 · · Score: 0

    but, I thought tony hawking already practiced zero gravity on a skateboard... oh, n/m

  32. That doesn't matter... by Nick+Driver · · Score: 1

    only problem is the vomit comit doesn't have a handicapped accessable bathroom

    I'm sure NASA will issue him an adequate supply of their now-famous adult diapers.

    1. Re:That doesn't matter... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Provided he doesn't bring his own.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  33. Not the Vomit Comet by dekkerdreyer · · Score: 1

    He's not riding on the Vomet Comet, he's riding on an imitation by some tourist startup out of Ft. Lauderdale. Check the wikipedia article on Vomit Comet.

    --
    Dekker Dreyer
  34. Re:you don't understand: by Da_Weasel · · Score: 1

    Am I wrong in assuming that he can't feel anything across most of his body? Isn't that going to impact his ability to experience zero gravity? We all become aware of weight and what it means by supporting our body weight or other objects. Since he can not support his own weight, or lift other objects can he really understand what what weight is?

    At first it was kind of silly, but now that I'm thinking about it it pretty deep...

    --
    If you must!
  35. Hawking is the science messiah. by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    He is to science of the next generation, what jesus was to everyone else.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
    1. Re:Hawking is the science messiah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a myth ?

    2. Re:Hawking is the science messiah. by bh_doc · · Score: 1

      He is to science of the next generation, what jesus was to everyone else.

      What ridiculous hyperbole. The man is inspirational, sure, and clever. He is good at the field of physics in which he works. But to paint him as some sort of scientific messiah is just silly.

  36. hawking's ride by mweep · · Score: 1

    Way to go, Doc! If Branson won't pony up the fare gratis, I'd be willing to chip in for the ticket. (Not that Hawking needs the gelt.) As for his physical condition, if he's not concerned, why should anyone else be?

    --
    mweep:the sound made by the system bell on a SPARC workstation.
  37. Hawking's first words in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't feel my legs!

  38. I'm sure he'll enjoy it, too... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    Because really, even without this trip, his whole life has been a demonstration of that sentence.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  39. Re:you don't understand: by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

    No, his sensation of touch and pain are pretty well normal. It is his coordination that is shot.

  40. In space.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope he takes a metal rod with him.

    It helped Homer...

  41. Prof. Hawkings by stfukthx · · Score: 1

    He's a living legend. Gwaaan my son ! Big up the Cambridge crew !