Artificial Gravity: Fact and Fiction

I find it difficult to agree with this analysis of motion. It is necessary for the shuttle to be firing it's thrusters since it's is trying to dock with an arm of a rotating object. The path that it follows is a curve, not a straight line, thus a force needs to be applied to keep it in a curve.

Secondly, notice that most of the modules on that space station is mounted on arms some distance from the center of the rotation. As long as you're not at the center of the space station, it is not that difficult to generate 1 G of centripetal acceleration. Some calculations based on the formula given, and using a space shuttle as an example. The space shuttle is 56 meters long, which would give it a 28 meter radius at tip at tail. To generate 1 G, you would need a tangential velocity of 16.565 m/s. One full arc of a circle with a 28 meter radius is 175.84 meters. Which means it has to rotate about once every 10.6 seconds. Also, notice that most of the modules on that space station is mounted on arms some distance from the center of the rotation. Most of those modules seem to be mounted more than half a space shuttle length from the center. Granted, you would have gravitational variances, but it's better than no gravity at all.

PS If you were on board whatever vessel was firing those thrusters, you would still hear the noise as it is transmitted along the fuselage of the craft. (ever ridden the Concorde?)

Freekin,
You have overlooked several details in your comment. If you look again at the clip you will see that the living area in the space station is in a central tunnel which has a diameter of only a few meters.

At the beginning of the scene we can see that the rotation is around that central tunnel and the Cosmonaut stands on the "floor" rotating around the center. His head and feet are on opposite sides of the rotation axis. The modules you are talking about are, as you say, at a much further distance from the central axis and would be a more appropriate place to experience artificial gravity but that is not where the scene takes place.

It does not look to me like they approach the station on a curved trajectory. At least not during the first shot where the thrusters are clearly firing. It is true that to fly on a curved path you'd need a centripetal force to pull you into that path but what we see is thrust being applied from rockets at the rear of the shuttle. Unless the rockets are swiveled sideways such that they are able to produce a centripetal force they will simply cause the shuttle to speed up. Applying a constant forward thrust during docking is a bad idea.

Notice also that the sound of the thrusters always accompanies an external shot of the shuttle - presumably this is meant to be the scene as experienced from space. This happens many times during the movie. Sound as viewed from space is one of the most common and simple sci-fi physics goofs. While film makers I'm sure feel it would be a lot less dramatic without sound, it bears pointing out.

For artificial gravity you would need a huge spaceship, like the one in 2001 A Space Odyssey. You can check it out in YouTube.

As for the thrusters, you need to use them as breaks, too. So the shuttle depends on the thrusters to accelerate and stop.

nvitija you don't need a huge spaceship. I can give any capsule or what ever shape you want gravity. All you have to do is attach a tether with some mass at the other end and make the whole thing spin. Simple cheep and easy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|@@@@|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_____~~~
|@@@@|___________________|####|~~~
|@@@@|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|####|~~~
|@@@@|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|____|~~~
|________|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

animemaster is right you dont need a huge spacship as long as were sending migits into space, for ex: beetlejuice, nice pic by the way ;)