Cubing in Outer Space

[Evan Wright]

there is no zero g place in the universe. of course, because gravity decreases exponentially, there are places where gravity is so small that it can pretty much be considered zero g.

 

[Tempus]

there is no zero g place in the universe. of course, because gravity decreases exponentially, there are places where gravity is so small that it can pretty much be considered zero g.

...such as on the ISS, or anywhere else that you're traveling in a straight line in 4-dimensional space-time.

 

[cubernya]

there is no zero g place in the universe. of course, because gravity decreases exponentially, there are places where gravity is so small that it can pretty much be considered zero g.

Not quite. Especially on the ISS. Here says that it is 89% gravity on ISS, which can be calculated. It is because the station is literally in freefall is why it has NET zero-G

 

[goodatthis]

By that definition of gravity, there isn't a zero-G place in the universe. I find definitions that render words useless to themselves be useless.

There isn't a zero-G place in the universe. Every place in the universe has gravity. Unless that's what you meant, and in that case, you didn't word things very well. (Hmm I wonder if you rendered a uselessness to themselves word useless?) <--- this was a joke

 

[Evan Wright]

I encourage you all to enlighten yourselves with a little internet research. The answer to this debate is only a few keystrokes away, and I would hope we can all stop our useless bickering and just imagine an astronaut solving a rubik's cube while floating in space. Like, with the gloves and everything. That would be cool.

Not quite. Especially on the ISS. Here says that it is 89% gravity on ISS, which can be calculated. It is because the station is literally in freefall is why it has NET zero-G

thats what i was trying to say. I didnt mean between earth and the iss, a meant like somewhere really really far away from anything.

 

[10461394944000]

gravity decreases exponentially

doesnt it decrease like distance^-2?

 

[Bindedsa]

http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/space-environment/1-is-there-gravity-in-space.html

That was his point, technically gravity exists everywhere, but the feeling of weightlessness is what would affect cubing and the actual gravitation force becomes irrelevant . Technicalities quickly become semantics.

 

[Tempus]

If you want to get beyond Newtonian physics, you need to stop thinking of Gravity as a force. Gravity is mass-induced curvature of 4-dimensional space-time. No part of space-time is entirely flat, and so no part of space is without gravity. Therefore, for the term zero-G to ever have any meaning at all, it must be defined sanely as what happens when a body is moving along a straight line in 4-dimensional space-time. As I understand it, a planet in orbit around a star is actually moving in a straight line in a curved space, and so Earth as a whole is experiencing zero-G. A person standing on Earth is constantly being pushed by the ground, however, so he is not moving in a straight line. It's counterintuitive, but it's apparently how the universe works.

 

[Dane man]

I suddenly have the urge to take one of those zero-G (in reality just free-fall) flights, and see if I can keep my cool enough to solve the cube in the free-fall time allotted. It'd make for a fun video.

And think of it, having 3 cubes in the air, floating next to you as you try to solve them all before time runs out.

 

[xlmmaarten]

I suddenly have the urge to take one of those zero-G (in reality just free-fall) flights, and see if I can keep my cool enough to solve the cube in the free-fall time allotted. It'd make for a fun video.

And think of it, having 3 cubes in the air, floating next to you as you try to solve them all before time runs out.

That sounds pretty freaking awesome!
Someone should do this xD

 

[ryanj92]

doesnt it decrease like distance^-2?

Yes, I was about to point that out

and zero-G is to do with acceleration and not gravity. every mass attracts every other mass so there is no such thing as 'zero gravity', but you can cancel out gravitational force with other forces in order to counteract gravity, so there is no net force on you therefore weightless feeling therefore zero-g etc. etc.

 

[CubeSurfer]

I suddenly have the urge to take one of those zero-G (in reality just free-fall) flights, and see if I can keep my cool enough to solve the cube in the free-fall time allotted.

I think it may be hard enough to keep your breakfast down let alone keep your cool enough to solve a cube in one of those zero-G flights (At least for me!) But that would definitely be interesting to try/see.

 

[mns112]

I suddenly have the urge to take one of those zero-G (in reality just free-fall) flights, and see if I can keep my cool enough to solve the cube in the free-fall time allotted. It'd make for a fun video.

And think of it, having 3 cubes in the air, floating next to you as you try to solve them all before time runs out.

+1 I'D come too. Then we can have a factory solve or a relay

 

[guysensei1]

+1 I'D come too. Then we can have a factory solve or a relay

Why not just get into one of those wind tunnel like things where skydivers practice?

 

[Cm_Hu]

An Chinese astronaut did that two years ago.
[video]http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDE3NjAyOTM2.html[/video]
At 34 second. But i don't think she actually know how to solve it.

 

[Tempus]

Why not just get into one of those wind tunnel like things where skydivers practice?

Because that would no more be zero-G than would lying on a waterbed. In either case, your support base is uneven, but you're still being pushed upward by the air/water just like you're pushed upward by the ground now.

Still, it would be interesting. Perhaps the cheapest analog to zero-G cubing would be underwater cubing. It's not zero-G, but buoyancy might make it feel a bit like it, and for a lot less money than other options thus far discussed. Not sure what the water might do to the cube, though.... :confused:

 

[Dane man]

An Chinese astronaut did that two years ago.
[video]http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDE3NjAyOTM2.html[/video]
At 34 second. But i don't think she actually know how to solve it.

Nice find bro!

Because that would no more be zero-G than would lying on a waterbed. In either case, your support base is uneven, but you're still being pushed upward by the air/water just like you're pushed upward by the ground now.

Still, it would be interesting. Perhaps the cheapest analog to zero-G cubing would be underwater cubing. It's not zero-G, but buoyancy might make it feel a bit like it, and for a lot less money than other options thus far discussed. Not sure what the water might do to the cube, though.... :confused:

Yeah but even then, you've still got gravity pushing down on your insides. You don't get the awesome butterflies in your stomach effect that comes with 0-G or Freefall.

 

[Michael Womack]

Here is a video that might hep you all under stand what i'm trying to say.

 

[sneaklyfox]

Except the floating cubes would reach terminal velocity before you would so they would probably not stay next to you.

 

[ruwix]

Your question has been answered — an astronaut just solved the Rubik’s Cube on the ISS, floating in zero gravity!
Details here: https://ruwix.com/blog/hungarian-astronaut-solves-rubiks-cube-in-space/