Assuming a spacecraft is traveling in a constant rate and our Astronaut will exit it to a space walk, will he be “left behind” by the spacecraft?









up vote
23
down vote

favorite
2












Lets say our Spacecraft is traveling to a remote Galaxy at a constant speed of 1/X of the speed of light.



A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



Will the astronaut



  1. hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or

  2. be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?

Is there any difference between such a situation when orbiting the Earth and when being in the deep space?










share|improve this question









New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 12




    Is there a reason you think this would be different than a typical space-walk in Earth orbit?
    – JPhi1618
    Nov 8 at 17:01










  • @JPhi1618 - is there a reason to phrase it as a rhetorical question? :) The difference is the speed.
    – Fattie
    Nov 9 at 3:26






  • 6




    Even at 0.1c, hitting a 1mg grain of dust is equivalent to detonating 250kg of TNT...
    – Oscar Bravo
    Nov 9 at 11:39










  • What do you mean by "1/X of the speed of light"? Why an inverse?
    – d-b
    2 days ago










  • @d-b , "1/X of speed of light" = "Y percent of speed of light"
    – riorio
    yesterday














up vote
23
down vote

favorite
2












Lets say our Spacecraft is traveling to a remote Galaxy at a constant speed of 1/X of the speed of light.



A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



Will the astronaut



  1. hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or

  2. be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?

Is there any difference between such a situation when orbiting the Earth and when being in the deep space?










share|improve this question









New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 12




    Is there a reason you think this would be different than a typical space-walk in Earth orbit?
    – JPhi1618
    Nov 8 at 17:01










  • @JPhi1618 - is there a reason to phrase it as a rhetorical question? :) The difference is the speed.
    – Fattie
    Nov 9 at 3:26






  • 6




    Even at 0.1c, hitting a 1mg grain of dust is equivalent to detonating 250kg of TNT...
    – Oscar Bravo
    Nov 9 at 11:39










  • What do you mean by "1/X of the speed of light"? Why an inverse?
    – d-b
    2 days ago










  • @d-b , "1/X of speed of light" = "Y percent of speed of light"
    – riorio
    yesterday












up vote
23
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
23
down vote

favorite
2






2





Lets say our Spacecraft is traveling to a remote Galaxy at a constant speed of 1/X of the speed of light.



A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



Will the astronaut



  1. hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or

  2. be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?

Is there any difference between such a situation when orbiting the Earth and when being in the deep space?










share|improve this question









New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











Lets say our Spacecraft is traveling to a remote Galaxy at a constant speed of 1/X of the speed of light.



A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



Will the astronaut



  1. hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or

  2. be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?

Is there any difference between such a situation when orbiting the Earth and when being in the deep space?







spacecraft interplanetary spacewalk






share|improve this question









New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 8 at 23:31









RonJohn

239110




239110






New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked Nov 8 at 13:15









riorio

222115




222115




New contributor




riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






riorio is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 12




    Is there a reason you think this would be different than a typical space-walk in Earth orbit?
    – JPhi1618
    Nov 8 at 17:01










  • @JPhi1618 - is there a reason to phrase it as a rhetorical question? :) The difference is the speed.
    – Fattie
    Nov 9 at 3:26






  • 6




    Even at 0.1c, hitting a 1mg grain of dust is equivalent to detonating 250kg of TNT...
    – Oscar Bravo
    Nov 9 at 11:39










  • What do you mean by "1/X of the speed of light"? Why an inverse?
    – d-b
    2 days ago










  • @d-b , "1/X of speed of light" = "Y percent of speed of light"
    – riorio
    yesterday












  • 12




    Is there a reason you think this would be different than a typical space-walk in Earth orbit?
    – JPhi1618
    Nov 8 at 17:01










  • @JPhi1618 - is there a reason to phrase it as a rhetorical question? :) The difference is the speed.
    – Fattie
    Nov 9 at 3:26






  • 6




    Even at 0.1c, hitting a 1mg grain of dust is equivalent to detonating 250kg of TNT...
    – Oscar Bravo
    Nov 9 at 11:39










  • What do you mean by "1/X of the speed of light"? Why an inverse?
    – d-b
    2 days ago










  • @d-b , "1/X of speed of light" = "Y percent of speed of light"
    – riorio
    yesterday







12




12




Is there a reason you think this would be different than a typical space-walk in Earth orbit?
– JPhi1618
Nov 8 at 17:01




Is there a reason you think this would be different than a typical space-walk in Earth orbit?
– JPhi1618
Nov 8 at 17:01












@JPhi1618 - is there a reason to phrase it as a rhetorical question? :) The difference is the speed.
– Fattie
Nov 9 at 3:26




@JPhi1618 - is there a reason to phrase it as a rhetorical question? :) The difference is the speed.
– Fattie
Nov 9 at 3:26




6




6




Even at 0.1c, hitting a 1mg grain of dust is equivalent to detonating 250kg of TNT...
– Oscar Bravo
Nov 9 at 11:39




Even at 0.1c, hitting a 1mg grain of dust is equivalent to detonating 250kg of TNT...
– Oscar Bravo
Nov 9 at 11:39












What do you mean by "1/X of the speed of light"? Why an inverse?
– d-b
2 days ago




What do you mean by "1/X of the speed of light"? Why an inverse?
– d-b
2 days ago












@d-b , "1/X of speed of light" = "Y percent of speed of light"
– riorio
yesterday




@d-b , "1/X of speed of light" = "Y percent of speed of light"
– riorio
yesterday










9 Answers
9






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
54
down vote













As long as neither spacecraft nor the astronaut are accelerating or decelerating, the relative speed of the spacecraft and the astronaut remains the same. So the astronaut will hover near the spacecraft.



The actual velocity is irrelevant here, it's the same principle with every spacewalk: the ISS is moving at about 27,600 km/h, yet the astronauts do not "get left behind" when they exit for a space walk. They, too, move at about 27,600 km/h. They do move at a very slight relative velocity when they move along the spacecraft, though.



Things change if your spacecraft is accelerating or decelerating, though: in this case the astronaut needs to remain attached to the spacecraft to not get lost. As soon as they would let go, their current velocity would remain the same but the spacecraft would continue to change its velocity and the two would get further and further apart.






share|improve this answer


















  • 14




    @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
    – Saiboogu
    Nov 8 at 14:28






  • 11




    I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
    – NikoNyrh
    Nov 8 at 16:32






  • 2




    @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
    – Blade Wraith
    Nov 8 at 16:43







  • 7




    I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
    – Peter A. Schneider
    Nov 8 at 17:00







  • 1




    @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
    – Ghedipunk
    Nov 8 at 20:56

















up vote
35
down vote













It turns out that outer space is not a perfect vacuum: there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. (reference)



For large X, non-relativistic physics, the astronaut and spacecraft will stay close enough to each other.



Once X gets small, and you approach the speed of light, these hydrogen atoms could slow down your spacecraft. Therefore, to maintain constant speed against this "apparent headwind" you'd have to apply force to the spacecraft, and the space-walker would not be subjected to that same force.



My hypothesis is that the astronaut will slowly be left behind.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.













  • 1




    "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
    – uhoh
    Nov 9 at 2:14







  • 2




    Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
    – jpmc26
    Nov 9 at 4:44







  • 2




    In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
    – gerrit
    Nov 9 at 10:00






  • 4




    And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    Nov 9 at 12:11






  • 4




    What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
    – JBentley
    yesterday

















up vote
20
down vote













I feel this sort of question benefits from a series of thought experiments.



Imagine instead that you've got two astronauts, side by side, zipping through space at some constant speed.



They're kind of sweet on each other so they're holding hands. Awwwww.



But then they suffer a cruel change of heart and stop holding hands!



What do you imagine would happen?



Does anything change if one of the astronauts is much fatter than the other?



If we replace the very fat astronaut with a spacecraft, does that change anything?



(I'm asking these questions quasi-rhetorically, for the benefit of the original question-asker. No need to answer me in comments.)






share|improve this answer
















  • 8




    What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
    – frarugi87
    Nov 8 at 16:06






  • 4




    @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
    – BlueCoder
    Nov 8 at 16:10






  • 3




    If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
    – Peter A. Schneider
    Nov 8 at 17:04






  • 3




    Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
    – imallett
    Nov 8 at 22:31






  • 2




    @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
    – Jon P
    Nov 9 at 5:44

















up vote
9
down vote













Another way to think is to consider two space walking astronauts; one inside the ship and one outside. Neither is touching the ship, both are moving at essentially the same speed in the same direction. All three pretty much stay together.



However, there could be a teeny tiny amount of acceleration experienced by each. For example, at an extremely high velocity, even the tiny impulse caused by each interstellar proton hitting a body can cause a bit of drag. The "indoor" space walker won't experience it, and so won't be slowed at all, but the ship will, and so will the "outdoor" space walker. It's not clear which one would be affected more, it depends on their cross-sectional areas and masses.



Then there are tidal effects. If there is a distant gravitational source, and there always is, that will accelerate all three the same. But if you are fairly close to a source of gravity, then it is possible that it affects them slightly differently because they will each have a very slightly different distance from the source.



For more on that see answers to Lowest ISS microgravity and for fun see How to get sunburned through the window of a General Products hull?



And before your ship does another neutron-star flyby to accelerate so fast, remember that what humans call UV is not the only thing that gets through a General Products Hull!






share|improve this answer






















  • This is always the coolest way to explain this!
    – Fattie
    Nov 9 at 3:22






  • 1




    The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
    – jpmc26
    Nov 9 at 4:48










  • @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
    – uhoh
    Nov 9 at 4:55

















up vote
5
down vote













no, conservation of momentum is retained (an object in motion will remain in motion unless something acts upon it)...similar to being in an airplane and throwing a ball up in the air...seems like it should fly to the back of the airplane, but it won't...it'll act just like you were on the ground.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
























    up vote
    4
    down vote














    A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



    Will the astronaut



    hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or



    be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?




    Newton's First Law of Motion ("an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force") means that the astronaut -- who is traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship while inside the ship -- will continue traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship when he steps out of it.






    share|improve this answer




















    • Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
      – AnoE
      Nov 9 at 14:21

















    up vote
    4
    down vote













    The correct and complete answer is distributed among many previous posts. I try to condense them here, without attempting to reference all of you guys. All of the below information was provided in the previous answers.



    The main point is that




    • neither the ship nor the astronaut tend to brake in empty space because of Newton's law.

    Additionally, there are three very weak effects:




    1. Space is not completely empty. This depends on where you are, but there will be some countable amount of atoms (mostly hydrogen) per cubic meter. These take away your velocity, very very slowly. Whether the astronaut's or the ship's velocity decreases faster depends on the ratio of their mass to their cross-sectional area, respectively.


    2. Tidal effects also pull them apart. This is because they are located at slightly different distances to the surrounding sources of gravity. The closer you are to such a source, the stronger is the respective force, hence the astronaut and the ship experience different gravitational pulls.


    3. Mutual gravity pulls them together. Both the spacecraft and the astronaut have mass and hence attract each other.

    Whether the astronaut will be able to measure a change of the distance between her or him and the spaceship (during her or his lifetime) depends on the exact initial conditions.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      Let's tackle this with a slightly different question:




      Which falls faster? A bowling ball or a feather?




      Now, everyone knows the feather will fall slowly, but that's because the feather has a massive surface area to catch the air around it. Without air resistance they fall at the same rate (see the video below for a most impressive display of that principle)








      If an astronaut exits a spacecraft moving at 17,000 mph, they're still moving at a relative 17,000 mph because there's nothing to slow the astronaut down.






      share|improve this answer
















      • 2




        Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:06










      • @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
        – Machavity
        Nov 8 at 17:18











      • That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
        – Fattie
        Nov 9 at 3:27










      • @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
        – Ister
        Nov 9 at 8:39

















      up vote
      1
      down vote













      As others have explained, cosmic dust and orbital mechanics aside, the astronaut will cruise along with the ship. However, to make sure we cover all the aces, he'd better check the ship is not rotating before he leaves.



      If it is, then while he is inside, he will find himself held to the outer walls by "centrifugal" force (really, it's the walls pushing him round in a circle). Once he exits, that pushing will send him drifting off at a tangent to the rotation. Since the craft will turn under him as he floats away, it will look like he is moving straight out from the door. At this point, a Wilhelm Scream might be appropriate.






      share|improve this answer




















      • My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
        – rehctawrats
        Nov 9 at 14:25










      • @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
        – Oscar Bravo
        Nov 9 at 15:21










      • What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
        – Fattie
        yesterday










      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      );
      );
      , "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "508"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );






      riorio is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31898%2fassuming-a-spacecraft-is-traveling-in-a-constant-rate-and-our-astronaut-will-exi%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest






























      9 Answers
      9






      active

      oldest

      votes








      9 Answers
      9






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      54
      down vote













      As long as neither spacecraft nor the astronaut are accelerating or decelerating, the relative speed of the spacecraft and the astronaut remains the same. So the astronaut will hover near the spacecraft.



      The actual velocity is irrelevant here, it's the same principle with every spacewalk: the ISS is moving at about 27,600 km/h, yet the astronauts do not "get left behind" when they exit for a space walk. They, too, move at about 27,600 km/h. They do move at a very slight relative velocity when they move along the spacecraft, though.



      Things change if your spacecraft is accelerating or decelerating, though: in this case the astronaut needs to remain attached to the spacecraft to not get lost. As soon as they would let go, their current velocity would remain the same but the spacecraft would continue to change its velocity and the two would get further and further apart.






      share|improve this answer


















      • 14




        @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
        – Saiboogu
        Nov 8 at 14:28






      • 11




        I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
        – NikoNyrh
        Nov 8 at 16:32






      • 2




        @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
        – Blade Wraith
        Nov 8 at 16:43







      • 7




        I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:00







      • 1




        @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
        – Ghedipunk
        Nov 8 at 20:56














      up vote
      54
      down vote













      As long as neither spacecraft nor the astronaut are accelerating or decelerating, the relative speed of the spacecraft and the astronaut remains the same. So the astronaut will hover near the spacecraft.



      The actual velocity is irrelevant here, it's the same principle with every spacewalk: the ISS is moving at about 27,600 km/h, yet the astronauts do not "get left behind" when they exit for a space walk. They, too, move at about 27,600 km/h. They do move at a very slight relative velocity when they move along the spacecraft, though.



      Things change if your spacecraft is accelerating or decelerating, though: in this case the astronaut needs to remain attached to the spacecraft to not get lost. As soon as they would let go, their current velocity would remain the same but the spacecraft would continue to change its velocity and the two would get further and further apart.






      share|improve this answer


















      • 14




        @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
        – Saiboogu
        Nov 8 at 14:28






      • 11




        I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
        – NikoNyrh
        Nov 8 at 16:32






      • 2




        @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
        – Blade Wraith
        Nov 8 at 16:43







      • 7




        I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:00







      • 1




        @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
        – Ghedipunk
        Nov 8 at 20:56












      up vote
      54
      down vote










      up vote
      54
      down vote









      As long as neither spacecraft nor the astronaut are accelerating or decelerating, the relative speed of the spacecraft and the astronaut remains the same. So the astronaut will hover near the spacecraft.



      The actual velocity is irrelevant here, it's the same principle with every spacewalk: the ISS is moving at about 27,600 km/h, yet the astronauts do not "get left behind" when they exit for a space walk. They, too, move at about 27,600 km/h. They do move at a very slight relative velocity when they move along the spacecraft, though.



      Things change if your spacecraft is accelerating or decelerating, though: in this case the astronaut needs to remain attached to the spacecraft to not get lost. As soon as they would let go, their current velocity would remain the same but the spacecraft would continue to change its velocity and the two would get further and further apart.






      share|improve this answer














      As long as neither spacecraft nor the astronaut are accelerating or decelerating, the relative speed of the spacecraft and the astronaut remains the same. So the astronaut will hover near the spacecraft.



      The actual velocity is irrelevant here, it's the same principle with every spacewalk: the ISS is moving at about 27,600 km/h, yet the astronauts do not "get left behind" when they exit for a space walk. They, too, move at about 27,600 km/h. They do move at a very slight relative velocity when they move along the spacecraft, though.



      Things change if your spacecraft is accelerating or decelerating, though: in this case the astronaut needs to remain attached to the spacecraft to not get lost. As soon as they would let go, their current velocity would remain the same but the spacecraft would continue to change its velocity and the two would get further and further apart.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited Nov 8 at 13:29

























      answered Nov 8 at 13:24









      DarkDust

      5,14412044




      5,14412044







      • 14




        @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
        – Saiboogu
        Nov 8 at 14:28






      • 11




        I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
        – NikoNyrh
        Nov 8 at 16:32






      • 2




        @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
        – Blade Wraith
        Nov 8 at 16:43







      • 7




        I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:00







      • 1




        @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
        – Ghedipunk
        Nov 8 at 20:56












      • 14




        @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
        – Saiboogu
        Nov 8 at 14:28






      • 11




        I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
        – NikoNyrh
        Nov 8 at 16:32






      • 2




        @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
        – Blade Wraith
        Nov 8 at 16:43







      • 7




        I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:00







      • 1




        @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
        – Ghedipunk
        Nov 8 at 20:56







      14




      14




      @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
      – Saiboogu
      Nov 8 at 14:28




      @papakias No, because gravity will pull on both the ISS and the astronaut the same. Drag will slow the ISS more rapidly due to surface area, but that effect will take hours or days to make itself obvious.
      – Saiboogu
      Nov 8 at 14:28




      11




      11




      I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
      – NikoNyrh
      Nov 8 at 16:32




      I would elaborate that the gravitational force on ISS is greater than on an astronaut as it has more mass, but also this mass makes it accelerate slower that if the same amount of force was applied to the astronaut. Things basically cancel out, and the gravitational acceleration is the same for everyone.
      – NikoNyrh
      Nov 8 at 16:32




      2




      2




      @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
      – Blade Wraith
      Nov 8 at 16:43





      @Saiboogu, agreed, although if the astronaut was not tethered and even just 1 metre away from the ISS and completed a full orbit, the astronauts orbit would be fractionally different and therefore the ISS would move away very slightly, and each orbit that distance would increase, and now that i think about it the lighter astronaut would be more susceptable to atmospheric drag, even with how thin the atmosphere is at that altitude
      – Blade Wraith
      Nov 8 at 16:43





      7




      7




      I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
      – Peter A. Schneider
      Nov 8 at 17:00





      I would emphasize that there is no unaccelerated flight -- there's always some mass somewhere (stars, galaxies etc.). The key issue is that the masses are usually so far away that the resulting gravitational field can be considered homogeneous with very little error and thus affects bodies that are "close" to each other (close relative to the closest significant gravitational sources) equally. That would not be the case in low orbit, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/….
      – Peter A. Schneider
      Nov 8 at 17:00





      1




      1




      @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
      – Ghedipunk
      Nov 8 at 20:56




      @BladeWraith, not quite. If the astronaut were 1 meter away, in a homogeneous gravity field, they would co-orbit each other, or, more likely, oscillate in distance to each other. Better visualization: youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM -- And, atmospheric drag depends entirely on the relationship to surface area hitting the atmosphere relative to weight... which usually correlates to an object's density. Spacecraft being intentionally light, and usually quite hollow, a spacewalking human is more dense than the ISS, so will experience less atmospheric drag.
      – Ghedipunk
      Nov 8 at 20:56










      up vote
      35
      down vote













      It turns out that outer space is not a perfect vacuum: there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. (reference)



      For large X, non-relativistic physics, the astronaut and spacecraft will stay close enough to each other.



      Once X gets small, and you approach the speed of light, these hydrogen atoms could slow down your spacecraft. Therefore, to maintain constant speed against this "apparent headwind" you'd have to apply force to the spacecraft, and the space-walker would not be subjected to that same force.



      My hypothesis is that the astronaut will slowly be left behind.






      share|improve this answer










      New contributor




      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.













      • 1




        "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 2:14







      • 2




        Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:44







      • 2




        In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
        – gerrit
        Nov 9 at 10:00






      • 4




        And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
        – Lightness Races in Orbit
        Nov 9 at 12:11






      • 4




        What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
        – JBentley
        yesterday














      up vote
      35
      down vote













      It turns out that outer space is not a perfect vacuum: there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. (reference)



      For large X, non-relativistic physics, the astronaut and spacecraft will stay close enough to each other.



      Once X gets small, and you approach the speed of light, these hydrogen atoms could slow down your spacecraft. Therefore, to maintain constant speed against this "apparent headwind" you'd have to apply force to the spacecraft, and the space-walker would not be subjected to that same force.



      My hypothesis is that the astronaut will slowly be left behind.






      share|improve this answer










      New contributor




      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.













      • 1




        "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 2:14







      • 2




        Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:44







      • 2




        In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
        – gerrit
        Nov 9 at 10:00






      • 4




        And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
        – Lightness Races in Orbit
        Nov 9 at 12:11






      • 4




        What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
        – JBentley
        yesterday












      up vote
      35
      down vote










      up vote
      35
      down vote









      It turns out that outer space is not a perfect vacuum: there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. (reference)



      For large X, non-relativistic physics, the astronaut and spacecraft will stay close enough to each other.



      Once X gets small, and you approach the speed of light, these hydrogen atoms could slow down your spacecraft. Therefore, to maintain constant speed against this "apparent headwind" you'd have to apply force to the spacecraft, and the space-walker would not be subjected to that same force.



      My hypothesis is that the astronaut will slowly be left behind.






      share|improve this answer










      New contributor




      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      It turns out that outer space is not a perfect vacuum: there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. (reference)



      For large X, non-relativistic physics, the astronaut and spacecraft will stay close enough to each other.



      Once X gets small, and you approach the speed of light, these hydrogen atoms could slow down your spacecraft. Therefore, to maintain constant speed against this "apparent headwind" you'd have to apply force to the spacecraft, and the space-walker would not be subjected to that same force.



      My hypothesis is that the astronaut will slowly be left behind.







      share|improve this answer










      New contributor




      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 2 days ago





















      New contributor




      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      answered Nov 9 at 0:03









      TomEberhard

      42114




      42114




      New contributor




      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      TomEberhard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      • 1




        "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 2:14







      • 2




        Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:44







      • 2




        In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
        – gerrit
        Nov 9 at 10:00






      • 4




        And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
        – Lightness Races in Orbit
        Nov 9 at 12:11






      • 4




        What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
        – JBentley
        yesterday












      • 1




        "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 2:14







      • 2




        Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:44







      • 2




        In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
        – gerrit
        Nov 9 at 10:00






      • 4




        And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
        – Lightness Races in Orbit
        Nov 9 at 12:11






      • 4




        What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
        – JBentley
        yesterday







      1




      1




      "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
      – uhoh
      Nov 9 at 2:14





      "Disclaimers: not a physicist" but your physics is absolutely spot-on! See this comment and also this answer
      – uhoh
      Nov 9 at 2:14





      2




      2




      Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
      – jpmc26
      Nov 9 at 4:44





      Why would you post an answer in a comment anyway? Please remove that rather bizarre note from the beginning of the post. Also, your reference says, "You have followed a link to a page that is not yet available for public viewing on the New World Encyclopedia." Question: galaxies and the space between them likely have different densities of matter; which one does your stat refer to?
      – jpmc26
      Nov 9 at 4:44





      2




      2




      In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
      – gerrit
      Nov 9 at 10:00




      In practice, a lot hinges on putting numbers on "slowly" here.
      – gerrit
      Nov 9 at 10:00




      4




      4




      And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
      – Lightness Races in Orbit
      Nov 9 at 12:11




      And by "slow down your spacecraft" you surely mean "rip it to shreds"
      – Lightness Races in Orbit
      Nov 9 at 12:11




      4




      4




      What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
      – JBentley
      yesterday




      What if the astronaut is behind the ship's direction of travel, so he is shielded from the "headwind"?
      – JBentley
      yesterday










      up vote
      20
      down vote













      I feel this sort of question benefits from a series of thought experiments.



      Imagine instead that you've got two astronauts, side by side, zipping through space at some constant speed.



      They're kind of sweet on each other so they're holding hands. Awwwww.



      But then they suffer a cruel change of heart and stop holding hands!



      What do you imagine would happen?



      Does anything change if one of the astronauts is much fatter than the other?



      If we replace the very fat astronaut with a spacecraft, does that change anything?



      (I'm asking these questions quasi-rhetorically, for the benefit of the original question-asker. No need to answer me in comments.)






      share|improve this answer
















      • 8




        What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
        – frarugi87
        Nov 8 at 16:06






      • 4




        @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
        – BlueCoder
        Nov 8 at 16:10






      • 3




        If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:04






      • 3




        Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
        – imallett
        Nov 8 at 22:31






      • 2




        @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
        – Jon P
        Nov 9 at 5:44














      up vote
      20
      down vote













      I feel this sort of question benefits from a series of thought experiments.



      Imagine instead that you've got two astronauts, side by side, zipping through space at some constant speed.



      They're kind of sweet on each other so they're holding hands. Awwwww.



      But then they suffer a cruel change of heart and stop holding hands!



      What do you imagine would happen?



      Does anything change if one of the astronauts is much fatter than the other?



      If we replace the very fat astronaut with a spacecraft, does that change anything?



      (I'm asking these questions quasi-rhetorically, for the benefit of the original question-asker. No need to answer me in comments.)






      share|improve this answer
















      • 8




        What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
        – frarugi87
        Nov 8 at 16:06






      • 4




        @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
        – BlueCoder
        Nov 8 at 16:10






      • 3




        If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:04






      • 3




        Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
        – imallett
        Nov 8 at 22:31






      • 2




        @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
        – Jon P
        Nov 9 at 5:44












      up vote
      20
      down vote










      up vote
      20
      down vote









      I feel this sort of question benefits from a series of thought experiments.



      Imagine instead that you've got two astronauts, side by side, zipping through space at some constant speed.



      They're kind of sweet on each other so they're holding hands. Awwwww.



      But then they suffer a cruel change of heart and stop holding hands!



      What do you imagine would happen?



      Does anything change if one of the astronauts is much fatter than the other?



      If we replace the very fat astronaut with a spacecraft, does that change anything?



      (I'm asking these questions quasi-rhetorically, for the benefit of the original question-asker. No need to answer me in comments.)






      share|improve this answer












      I feel this sort of question benefits from a series of thought experiments.



      Imagine instead that you've got two astronauts, side by side, zipping through space at some constant speed.



      They're kind of sweet on each other so they're holding hands. Awwwww.



      But then they suffer a cruel change of heart and stop holding hands!



      What do you imagine would happen?



      Does anything change if one of the astronauts is much fatter than the other?



      If we replace the very fat astronaut with a spacecraft, does that change anything?



      (I'm asking these questions quasi-rhetorically, for the benefit of the original question-asker. No need to answer me in comments.)







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Nov 8 at 15:13









      Roger

      75916




      75916







      • 8




        What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
        – frarugi87
        Nov 8 at 16:06






      • 4




        @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
        – BlueCoder
        Nov 8 at 16:10






      • 3




        If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:04






      • 3




        Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
        – imallett
        Nov 8 at 22:31






      • 2




        @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
        – Jon P
        Nov 9 at 5:44












      • 8




        What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
        – frarugi87
        Nov 8 at 16:06






      • 4




        @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
        – BlueCoder
        Nov 8 at 16:10






      • 3




        If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
        – Peter A. Schneider
        Nov 8 at 17:04






      • 3




        Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
        – imallett
        Nov 8 at 22:31






      • 2




        @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
        – Jon P
        Nov 9 at 5:44







      8




      8




      What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
      – frarugi87
      Nov 8 at 16:06




      What about the mutual gravity force? Until they hold their hands, they can remain at a fixed distance, but when they let go they slowly start approaching ;)
      – frarugi87
      Nov 8 at 16:06




      4




      4




      @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
      – BlueCoder
      Nov 8 at 16:10




      @frarugi87 how sweet! They can't avoid being nearer and nearer to each other...Awww :D
      – BlueCoder
      Nov 8 at 16:10




      3




      3




      If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
      – Peter A. Schneider
      Nov 8 at 17:04




      If the partner of the very fat astronaut is replaced by a black hole the black hole gets to have vay fatty spaghetti for lunch.
      – Peter A. Schneider
      Nov 8 at 17:04




      3




      3




      Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
      – imallett
      Nov 8 at 22:31




      Re: gravity, note that the escape velocity of a 150kg astronaut+suit is only 56.06 nanometers / second. Good luck getting your velocity below that.
      – imallett
      Nov 8 at 22:31




      2




      2




      @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
      – Jon P
      Nov 9 at 5:44




      @imallett, I seem to recall escape velocity is related to radius, so I take it we are assuming a spherical fat astronaut, in, for all practical purposes, a vacuum?
      – Jon P
      Nov 9 at 5:44










      up vote
      9
      down vote













      Another way to think is to consider two space walking astronauts; one inside the ship and one outside. Neither is touching the ship, both are moving at essentially the same speed in the same direction. All three pretty much stay together.



      However, there could be a teeny tiny amount of acceleration experienced by each. For example, at an extremely high velocity, even the tiny impulse caused by each interstellar proton hitting a body can cause a bit of drag. The "indoor" space walker won't experience it, and so won't be slowed at all, but the ship will, and so will the "outdoor" space walker. It's not clear which one would be affected more, it depends on their cross-sectional areas and masses.



      Then there are tidal effects. If there is a distant gravitational source, and there always is, that will accelerate all three the same. But if you are fairly close to a source of gravity, then it is possible that it affects them slightly differently because they will each have a very slightly different distance from the source.



      For more on that see answers to Lowest ISS microgravity and for fun see How to get sunburned through the window of a General Products hull?



      And before your ship does another neutron-star flyby to accelerate so fast, remember that what humans call UV is not the only thing that gets through a General Products Hull!






      share|improve this answer






















      • This is always the coolest way to explain this!
        – Fattie
        Nov 9 at 3:22






      • 1




        The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:48










      • @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 4:55














      up vote
      9
      down vote













      Another way to think is to consider two space walking astronauts; one inside the ship and one outside. Neither is touching the ship, both are moving at essentially the same speed in the same direction. All three pretty much stay together.



      However, there could be a teeny tiny amount of acceleration experienced by each. For example, at an extremely high velocity, even the tiny impulse caused by each interstellar proton hitting a body can cause a bit of drag. The "indoor" space walker won't experience it, and so won't be slowed at all, but the ship will, and so will the "outdoor" space walker. It's not clear which one would be affected more, it depends on their cross-sectional areas and masses.



      Then there are tidal effects. If there is a distant gravitational source, and there always is, that will accelerate all three the same. But if you are fairly close to a source of gravity, then it is possible that it affects them slightly differently because they will each have a very slightly different distance from the source.



      For more on that see answers to Lowest ISS microgravity and for fun see How to get sunburned through the window of a General Products hull?



      And before your ship does another neutron-star flyby to accelerate so fast, remember that what humans call UV is not the only thing that gets through a General Products Hull!






      share|improve this answer






















      • This is always the coolest way to explain this!
        – Fattie
        Nov 9 at 3:22






      • 1




        The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:48










      • @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 4:55












      up vote
      9
      down vote










      up vote
      9
      down vote









      Another way to think is to consider two space walking astronauts; one inside the ship and one outside. Neither is touching the ship, both are moving at essentially the same speed in the same direction. All three pretty much stay together.



      However, there could be a teeny tiny amount of acceleration experienced by each. For example, at an extremely high velocity, even the tiny impulse caused by each interstellar proton hitting a body can cause a bit of drag. The "indoor" space walker won't experience it, and so won't be slowed at all, but the ship will, and so will the "outdoor" space walker. It's not clear which one would be affected more, it depends on their cross-sectional areas and masses.



      Then there are tidal effects. If there is a distant gravitational source, and there always is, that will accelerate all three the same. But if you are fairly close to a source of gravity, then it is possible that it affects them slightly differently because they will each have a very slightly different distance from the source.



      For more on that see answers to Lowest ISS microgravity and for fun see How to get sunburned through the window of a General Products hull?



      And before your ship does another neutron-star flyby to accelerate so fast, remember that what humans call UV is not the only thing that gets through a General Products Hull!






      share|improve this answer














      Another way to think is to consider two space walking astronauts; one inside the ship and one outside. Neither is touching the ship, both are moving at essentially the same speed in the same direction. All three pretty much stay together.



      However, there could be a teeny tiny amount of acceleration experienced by each. For example, at an extremely high velocity, even the tiny impulse caused by each interstellar proton hitting a body can cause a bit of drag. The "indoor" space walker won't experience it, and so won't be slowed at all, but the ship will, and so will the "outdoor" space walker. It's not clear which one would be affected more, it depends on their cross-sectional areas and masses.



      Then there are tidal effects. If there is a distant gravitational source, and there always is, that will accelerate all three the same. But if you are fairly close to a source of gravity, then it is possible that it affects them slightly differently because they will each have a very slightly different distance from the source.



      For more on that see answers to Lowest ISS microgravity and for fun see How to get sunburned through the window of a General Products hull?



      And before your ship does another neutron-star flyby to accelerate so fast, remember that what humans call UV is not the only thing that gets through a General Products Hull!







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited Nov 8 at 15:54

























      answered Nov 8 at 15:43









      uhoh

      32k15109394




      32k15109394











      • This is always the coolest way to explain this!
        – Fattie
        Nov 9 at 3:22






      • 1




        The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:48










      • @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 4:55
















      • This is always the coolest way to explain this!
        – Fattie
        Nov 9 at 3:22






      • 1




        The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
        – jpmc26
        Nov 9 at 4:48










      • @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
        – uhoh
        Nov 9 at 4:55















      This is always the coolest way to explain this!
      – Fattie
      Nov 9 at 3:22




      This is always the coolest way to explain this!
      – Fattie
      Nov 9 at 3:22




      1




      1




      The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
      – jpmc26
      Nov 9 at 4:48




      The one inside would need to be in a vacuum for the situation to be equivalent. Otherwise, you have to account for air pressure.
      – jpmc26
      Nov 9 at 4:48












      @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
      – uhoh
      Nov 9 at 4:55




      @jpmc26 Sounds good. In my mind's eye I pictured them both wearing suits for some reason, you've figured out why! There would be a small (order of part-per-thousand) buoyancy effect if there was air in there.
      – uhoh
      Nov 9 at 4:55










      up vote
      5
      down vote













      no, conservation of momentum is retained (an object in motion will remain in motion unless something acts upon it)...similar to being in an airplane and throwing a ball up in the air...seems like it should fly to the back of the airplane, but it won't...it'll act just like you were on the ground.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















        up vote
        5
        down vote













        no, conservation of momentum is retained (an object in motion will remain in motion unless something acts upon it)...similar to being in an airplane and throwing a ball up in the air...seems like it should fly to the back of the airplane, but it won't...it'll act just like you were on the ground.






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.



















          up vote
          5
          down vote










          up vote
          5
          down vote









          no, conservation of momentum is retained (an object in motion will remain in motion unless something acts upon it)...similar to being in an airplane and throwing a ball up in the air...seems like it should fly to the back of the airplane, but it won't...it'll act just like you were on the ground.






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          no, conservation of momentum is retained (an object in motion will remain in motion unless something acts upon it)...similar to being in an airplane and throwing a ball up in the air...seems like it should fly to the back of the airplane, but it won't...it'll act just like you were on the ground.







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered Nov 8 at 20:18









          Joseph

          511




          511




          New contributor




          Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          Joseph is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.




















              up vote
              4
              down vote














              A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



              Will the astronaut



              hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or



              be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?




              Newton's First Law of Motion ("an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force") means that the astronaut -- who is traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship while inside the ship -- will continue traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship when he steps out of it.






              share|improve this answer




















              • Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
                – AnoE
                Nov 9 at 14:21














              up vote
              4
              down vote














              A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



              Will the astronaut



              hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or



              be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?




              Newton's First Law of Motion ("an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force") means that the astronaut -- who is traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship while inside the ship -- will continue traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship when he steps out of it.






              share|improve this answer




















              • Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
                – AnoE
                Nov 9 at 14:21












              up vote
              4
              down vote










              up vote
              4
              down vote










              A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



              Will the astronaut



              hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or



              be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?




              Newton's First Law of Motion ("an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force") means that the astronaut -- who is traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship while inside the ship -- will continue traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship when he steps out of it.






              share|improve this answer













              A brave Astronaut is leaving the spacecraft to a space walk, while not being attached to the spacecraft.



              Will the astronaut



              hover near the spacecraft at the same speed as it (1/X of speed of light), or



              be quickly behind the spacecraft and will watch it disappear in the black horizon?




              Newton's First Law of Motion ("an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force") means that the astronaut -- who is traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship while inside the ship -- will continue traveling at the same speed and direction as the ship when he steps out of it.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Nov 8 at 22:54









              RonJohn

              239110




              239110











              • Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
                – AnoE
                Nov 9 at 14:21
















              • Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
                – AnoE
                Nov 9 at 14:21















              Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
              – AnoE
              Nov 9 at 14:21




              Thanks for being the first one to mention Newton. OP's second case (does anything change if in Earth orbit) could be worth a further paragraph...
              – AnoE
              Nov 9 at 14:21










              up vote
              4
              down vote













              The correct and complete answer is distributed among many previous posts. I try to condense them here, without attempting to reference all of you guys. All of the below information was provided in the previous answers.



              The main point is that




              • neither the ship nor the astronaut tend to brake in empty space because of Newton's law.

              Additionally, there are three very weak effects:




              1. Space is not completely empty. This depends on where you are, but there will be some countable amount of atoms (mostly hydrogen) per cubic meter. These take away your velocity, very very slowly. Whether the astronaut's or the ship's velocity decreases faster depends on the ratio of their mass to their cross-sectional area, respectively.


              2. Tidal effects also pull them apart. This is because they are located at slightly different distances to the surrounding sources of gravity. The closer you are to such a source, the stronger is the respective force, hence the astronaut and the ship experience different gravitational pulls.


              3. Mutual gravity pulls them together. Both the spacecraft and the astronaut have mass and hence attract each other.

              Whether the astronaut will be able to measure a change of the distance between her or him and the spaceship (during her or his lifetime) depends on the exact initial conditions.






              share|improve this answer
























                up vote
                4
                down vote













                The correct and complete answer is distributed among many previous posts. I try to condense them here, without attempting to reference all of you guys. All of the below information was provided in the previous answers.



                The main point is that




                • neither the ship nor the astronaut tend to brake in empty space because of Newton's law.

                Additionally, there are three very weak effects:




                1. Space is not completely empty. This depends on where you are, but there will be some countable amount of atoms (mostly hydrogen) per cubic meter. These take away your velocity, very very slowly. Whether the astronaut's or the ship's velocity decreases faster depends on the ratio of their mass to their cross-sectional area, respectively.


                2. Tidal effects also pull them apart. This is because they are located at slightly different distances to the surrounding sources of gravity. The closer you are to such a source, the stronger is the respective force, hence the astronaut and the ship experience different gravitational pulls.


                3. Mutual gravity pulls them together. Both the spacecraft and the astronaut have mass and hence attract each other.

                Whether the astronaut will be able to measure a change of the distance between her or him and the spaceship (during her or his lifetime) depends on the exact initial conditions.






                share|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote









                  The correct and complete answer is distributed among many previous posts. I try to condense them here, without attempting to reference all of you guys. All of the below information was provided in the previous answers.



                  The main point is that




                  • neither the ship nor the astronaut tend to brake in empty space because of Newton's law.

                  Additionally, there are three very weak effects:




                  1. Space is not completely empty. This depends on where you are, but there will be some countable amount of atoms (mostly hydrogen) per cubic meter. These take away your velocity, very very slowly. Whether the astronaut's or the ship's velocity decreases faster depends on the ratio of their mass to their cross-sectional area, respectively.


                  2. Tidal effects also pull them apart. This is because they are located at slightly different distances to the surrounding sources of gravity. The closer you are to such a source, the stronger is the respective force, hence the astronaut and the ship experience different gravitational pulls.


                  3. Mutual gravity pulls them together. Both the spacecraft and the astronaut have mass and hence attract each other.

                  Whether the astronaut will be able to measure a change of the distance between her or him and the spaceship (during her or his lifetime) depends on the exact initial conditions.






                  share|improve this answer












                  The correct and complete answer is distributed among many previous posts. I try to condense them here, without attempting to reference all of you guys. All of the below information was provided in the previous answers.



                  The main point is that




                  • neither the ship nor the astronaut tend to brake in empty space because of Newton's law.

                  Additionally, there are three very weak effects:




                  1. Space is not completely empty. This depends on where you are, but there will be some countable amount of atoms (mostly hydrogen) per cubic meter. These take away your velocity, very very slowly. Whether the astronaut's or the ship's velocity decreases faster depends on the ratio of their mass to their cross-sectional area, respectively.


                  2. Tidal effects also pull them apart. This is because they are located at slightly different distances to the surrounding sources of gravity. The closer you are to such a source, the stronger is the respective force, hence the astronaut and the ship experience different gravitational pulls.


                  3. Mutual gravity pulls them together. Both the spacecraft and the astronaut have mass and hence attract each other.

                  Whether the astronaut will be able to measure a change of the distance between her or him and the spaceship (during her or his lifetime) depends on the exact initial conditions.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 9 at 14:24









                  rehctawrats

                  1,181522




                  1,181522




















                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote













                      Let's tackle this with a slightly different question:




                      Which falls faster? A bowling ball or a feather?




                      Now, everyone knows the feather will fall slowly, but that's because the feather has a massive surface area to catch the air around it. Without air resistance they fall at the same rate (see the video below for a most impressive display of that principle)








                      If an astronaut exits a spacecraft moving at 17,000 mph, they're still moving at a relative 17,000 mph because there's nothing to slow the astronaut down.






                      share|improve this answer
















                      • 2




                        Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
                        – Peter A. Schneider
                        Nov 8 at 17:06










                      • @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
                        – Machavity
                        Nov 8 at 17:18











                      • That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
                        – Fattie
                        Nov 9 at 3:27










                      • @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
                        – Ister
                        Nov 9 at 8:39














                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote













                      Let's tackle this with a slightly different question:




                      Which falls faster? A bowling ball or a feather?




                      Now, everyone knows the feather will fall slowly, but that's because the feather has a massive surface area to catch the air around it. Without air resistance they fall at the same rate (see the video below for a most impressive display of that principle)








                      If an astronaut exits a spacecraft moving at 17,000 mph, they're still moving at a relative 17,000 mph because there's nothing to slow the astronaut down.






                      share|improve this answer
















                      • 2




                        Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
                        – Peter A. Schneider
                        Nov 8 at 17:06










                      • @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
                        – Machavity
                        Nov 8 at 17:18











                      • That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
                        – Fattie
                        Nov 9 at 3:27










                      • @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
                        – Ister
                        Nov 9 at 8:39












                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      3
                      down vote









                      Let's tackle this with a slightly different question:




                      Which falls faster? A bowling ball or a feather?




                      Now, everyone knows the feather will fall slowly, but that's because the feather has a massive surface area to catch the air around it. Without air resistance they fall at the same rate (see the video below for a most impressive display of that principle)








                      If an astronaut exits a spacecraft moving at 17,000 mph, they're still moving at a relative 17,000 mph because there's nothing to slow the astronaut down.






                      share|improve this answer












                      Let's tackle this with a slightly different question:




                      Which falls faster? A bowling ball or a feather?




                      Now, everyone knows the feather will fall slowly, but that's because the feather has a massive surface area to catch the air around it. Without air resistance they fall at the same rate (see the video below for a most impressive display of that principle)








                      If an astronaut exits a spacecraft moving at 17,000 mph, they're still moving at a relative 17,000 mph because there's nothing to slow the astronaut down.















                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Nov 8 at 16:50









                      Machavity

                      2,0911734




                      2,0911734







                      • 2




                        Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
                        – Peter A. Schneider
                        Nov 8 at 17:06










                      • @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
                        – Machavity
                        Nov 8 at 17:18











                      • That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
                        – Fattie
                        Nov 9 at 3:27










                      • @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
                        – Ister
                        Nov 9 at 8:39












                      • 2




                        Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
                        – Peter A. Schneider
                        Nov 8 at 17:06










                      • @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
                        – Machavity
                        Nov 8 at 17:18











                      • That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
                        – Fattie
                        Nov 9 at 3:27










                      • @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
                        – Ister
                        Nov 9 at 8:39







                      2




                      2




                      Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
                      – Peter A. Schneider
                      Nov 8 at 17:06




                      Actually the hammer falls somewhat faster (if the objects fall not together but one after the other) because it pulls the earth towards itself just a tad stronger, so that the two collide a bit earlier. (My 10 year old remarked that when I suggested the feather/hammer experiment. Ouch.)
                      – Peter A. Schneider
                      Nov 8 at 17:06












                      @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
                      – Machavity
                      Nov 8 at 17:18





                      @PeterA.Schneider The difference is negligible. The formula for gravitational attraction (when you account for the mass of the Earth) bears this out (I had a physics teacher make us do that math). Either way, the experiment shows how a vacuum changes things
                      – Machavity
                      Nov 8 at 17:18













                      That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
                      – Fattie
                      Nov 9 at 3:27




                      That's a great link, @Machavity, thanks.
                      – Fattie
                      Nov 9 at 3:27












                      @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
                      – Ister
                      Nov 9 at 8:39




                      @PeterA.Schneider wow, your 10 year old kid just did a bit of extra hard science that is usually omitted but should be pointed out (of course with the remark that the difference is negligible as mentioned by Machavity). I really hope you've mentioned to them how great job they did?
                      – Ister
                      Nov 9 at 8:39










                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      As others have explained, cosmic dust and orbital mechanics aside, the astronaut will cruise along with the ship. However, to make sure we cover all the aces, he'd better check the ship is not rotating before he leaves.



                      If it is, then while he is inside, he will find himself held to the outer walls by "centrifugal" force (really, it's the walls pushing him round in a circle). Once he exits, that pushing will send him drifting off at a tangent to the rotation. Since the craft will turn under him as he floats away, it will look like he is moving straight out from the door. At this point, a Wilhelm Scream might be appropriate.






                      share|improve this answer




















                      • My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
                        – rehctawrats
                        Nov 9 at 14:25










                      • @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
                        – Oscar Bravo
                        Nov 9 at 15:21










                      • What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
                        – Fattie
                        yesterday














                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      As others have explained, cosmic dust and orbital mechanics aside, the astronaut will cruise along with the ship. However, to make sure we cover all the aces, he'd better check the ship is not rotating before he leaves.



                      If it is, then while he is inside, he will find himself held to the outer walls by "centrifugal" force (really, it's the walls pushing him round in a circle). Once he exits, that pushing will send him drifting off at a tangent to the rotation. Since the craft will turn under him as he floats away, it will look like he is moving straight out from the door. At this point, a Wilhelm Scream might be appropriate.






                      share|improve this answer




















                      • My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
                        – rehctawrats
                        Nov 9 at 14:25










                      • @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
                        – Oscar Bravo
                        Nov 9 at 15:21










                      • What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
                        – Fattie
                        yesterday












                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote









                      As others have explained, cosmic dust and orbital mechanics aside, the astronaut will cruise along with the ship. However, to make sure we cover all the aces, he'd better check the ship is not rotating before he leaves.



                      If it is, then while he is inside, he will find himself held to the outer walls by "centrifugal" force (really, it's the walls pushing him round in a circle). Once he exits, that pushing will send him drifting off at a tangent to the rotation. Since the craft will turn under him as he floats away, it will look like he is moving straight out from the door. At this point, a Wilhelm Scream might be appropriate.






                      share|improve this answer












                      As others have explained, cosmic dust and orbital mechanics aside, the astronaut will cruise along with the ship. However, to make sure we cover all the aces, he'd better check the ship is not rotating before he leaves.



                      If it is, then while he is inside, he will find himself held to the outer walls by "centrifugal" force (really, it's the walls pushing him round in a circle). Once he exits, that pushing will send him drifting off at a tangent to the rotation. Since the craft will turn under him as he floats away, it will look like he is moving straight out from the door. At this point, a Wilhelm Scream might be appropriate.







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Nov 9 at 9:45









                      Oscar Bravo

                      20124




                      20124











                      • My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
                        – rehctawrats
                        Nov 9 at 14:25










                      • @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
                        – Oscar Bravo
                        Nov 9 at 15:21










                      • What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
                        – Fattie
                        yesterday
















                      • My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
                        – rehctawrats
                        Nov 9 at 14:25










                      • @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
                        – Oscar Bravo
                        Nov 9 at 15:21










                      • What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
                        – Fattie
                        yesterday















                      My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
                      – rehctawrats
                      Nov 9 at 14:25




                      My understanding is that zero initial relative velocity is assumed.
                      – rehctawrats
                      Nov 9 at 14:25












                      @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
                      – Oscar Bravo
                      Nov 9 at 15:21




                      @rehctawrats Even in a rotating ship, you could argue that the relative velocity between spaceman and spaceship is zero - angular velocity, that is! As for is assumed - on SE, nothing can be assumed...
                      – Oscar Bravo
                      Nov 9 at 15:21












                      What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
                      – Fattie
                      yesterday




                      What a great point, OB !!! Good one !!
                      – Fattie
                      yesterday










                      riorio is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded


















                      riorio is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      riorio is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                      riorio is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31898%2fassuming-a-spacecraft-is-traveling-in-a-constant-rate-and-our-astronaut-will-exi%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest














































































                      這個網誌中的熱門文章

                      How to read a connectionString WITH PROVIDER in .NET Core?

                      In R, how to develop a multiplot heatmap.2 figure showing key labels successfully

                      Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art of Trento and Rovereto