How big would a spinning space habitat have to be in order for the residents to not notice the curvature of the habitat...

How big would a spinning space habitat have to be in order for the residents to not notice the curvature of the habitat in their day-to-day life?

your mom

19

probably about the same diameter a sphere would need, I suppose
perhaps you can find that information somewhere

15,000 miles in radius and 2000 miles in thickness. That's twice the real estate of earth if you use both sides.

One would first have to clarify what shape this spinning space habitat is?

This should Elon Musk's next project. If anyone could do it, it would be him!

ikr, literally the same size of any planet or moon, Op, you dingus

Why don't you do the calculation, brainlet? Just set up a margin, say, 1m/s2 difference in a 10 story building, or whatever you want it to be, and put it into the equations. You'll get a system of 2 equations.

Relevant equations:
[math] a = \frac{v^2}{r} [/math]
[math] v = \omega \cdot r [/math]
Which gives
[math] a = \omega ^2 \cdot r [/math]

Now, put the values you wish.

2 AU in diameter?

Depends on what you mean by "not notice". Everytime you look up, you would see other side of the cylinder, and immediately know you are in a cylinder, unlike earth, where looking up doesn't give you an immediate response to the answer "what shape does the thing im standing on have?"

If you don't like that, you could build something inbetween to block your view. Basically a giant poster with stars on it, if you prefer the illusion of that. If you are really fance, it could also be a giant LED-billboard that simulates the real night sky.

If you meant not noticing in the sense of the house at the end of the street not being noticeably higher up than yours, its probably in the range of 10-20km diameter, depending on how little you want to notice it (you are definetely going to notice it at some point).

Instead of a poster or LED billboard that simulates the sky it would be a giant ad

Okay, so I got curious and did it for you. Saying a difference of 1m/s^2 over a 30m difference, with surface gravity at the topmost equal to 10m/s^2 and 30m below that being 11m/s^2, you get the innermost radius equal to 300m with a period of [math] T = 10s[/math], frequency [math]\omega = \frac{1}{\sqrt{30}} \approx 0.18 Hz[/math] and linear velocity [math] v = \frac{300}{\sqrt{30}} \approx 54,7m/s [/math].

Halo did it

OP here, okay now different question.

Suppose the cylinder will have several stories. So instead of there only being one landscape as it is often depicted (like in the OP image), we are going to construct a ceiling that is, lets say 150 metres high, and above that there is another landscape, and on top of that another, etc. How would that change the centrifugal powers that are being felt in the lowest stories? How many stories up could you go with equal centrifugal force?

The outer floors would feel higher gravity than the inner floors, but to know exactly how much difference you would need to know the full dimensions, spin rate, etc of the ring in question, then do all the math.

Here's some equations for ya

to heckeroni with artifical gravity, all this needs is centrifugal force!

You can't go up at all, not even a millimeter, without experiencing a change in the centrifugal "gravity".
What do you consider acceptable?
If you climb 10% of the distance towards the spin-axis, you'll weigh 10% less there.

The non-autistic answer is: Larger than is structurally possible while still being able to rotate to simulate 1g.

We don't know.
Because nobody has actually tried, ever.
There was a module built for the ISS about trying it.
But it never flew and is now rusting somewhere in the wild.
Muh scientists are saying it would not be like actual gravity.
On no fucking basis for it.
I mean, they could at least send mice in a fucking rotating habitat.
You'd think that's what they would do.
But they never did it.

Well, except until you looked up.

How large of a Halo Ring would you need to not notice it's curvature immediately and not see the other portions of the ring?

> If you use both sides

Short answer: fucking huge

>live on rotating cylinder
>jump
>land on your face

thanks newton

Define noticeable. Gravity, sky, landscape curvature... all of these things can be build into the design of the interior terrain for smaller habitats, ans mirrors for lighting would be like a long thin sun running accross the sky. At night you would see the light from the homes of people on the other side. It would be interesting at christmas time woth all the christmas lights.

For something impressive though you are looking at walls at least 200km high to contain enough atmosphere to protect you from radiation.

I dont know much about definitions but would that class as a small moon?

Calculate the luminescence from the far surface. If it's similar to the moon, it would have to be much further.

But this depends on the albedo of the surface and the size of the central light force.

In theory, you could make the light source so bright that you couldn't see behind it regardless of the distance.

True, most "ring systems" would never see the other side because of the star blocking the view. As for the "up & down spin" directions curvature being unseen by naked eye.. , correct.

fpbp

Just make it foggy all the time, you could probably get it under 1000 feet in diameter.
Taken to an extreme, if you took the eyes out of the theoretical people inhabiting your ring, you could make it pretty darn small, like under 200 feet.

WHO CARES ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE INHABITING ONE "FEEL" OR "SEE"
THEY ARE NOT DYING IN THE VOID THEY SHOULD BE GRATEFUL. FUCK EM

>implying a life devoid of the natural pleasures found on our home planet is even worth living
>implying one should be grateful to be alive in such a scenario

Foolish.

Frighteningly such civilisations and cultures will emerge.

Earth is flat.

...

Basically you need a shitton of air above you so that you won’t see the other end (read 100s of km of thick atmosphere vs 20 on earth), the problem is that the normal acceleration force from the rotation (centrifuge) will cause the air to heap near the surface, so instead of a 500 km column of 1 bar air, it will be only a few dozen km tall and have a pressure of 10+ bar, which is too much for a human.

On the horizon it’s even harder, while a curved earth makes horizon easy to hide, a large halo would make it extremely easily noticeable, from only a few dozen km if is earth scale, then you have the same problem as in the previous post, you need to hide an item 10 km away.

In the end the best answer is to put dust in the atmosphere so that the sight distance will be of a few km at most at any time, kinda like a permanent mist.

Water vapour would also work, but I dont think its necessary. I believe creative internal landscaping could conceal a great deal of curvature. Even things as simple as tree canopies will make the place seem rather normal. The necessary mirrors during daylight hours would blind sight anyone looking straight up.

The most important thing is gravity, climate and ather habitat features which closely mimic those on earth.

This, the most important question for if we are to ever live anywhere other than Earth is how do our bodies react to different gravity, both higher, lower and spin. They had to send one fucking module up to settle the most important fucking matter, but nope, gotta do all this dumb shit instead. Now we have to send some roastie to Mars and get her knocked up to see what happens at 0.38.

Fucking cocksuckers.

Halo rings are fucking gay, O'neill cylinder master race reporting in, you know, something actually somewhat practical to construct.

Huge diameter ring, constant light fog, and constant upper cloud deck. Ok thanks, I'll inform the builders.

Unless those ends are capped with clear acrylics or something, that image wouldn't be possible.

Sure, build a big tube... out of donuts...

Torus beats cigar.