Am 17.01.2016 um 07:23 schrieb Anthony D. Baye:

> I don't know that it's the acceleration that's causing the nausia in the MF
> example above, as much as it's the dissonance between the physically percieved
> motion of the ship and the motion as relayed to the brain by the eyes.

Not exactly -- it's not so much a dissonance in perceived motion as it
is a dissonance in perceived acceleration (primarily in the absence or
direction thereof) and/or perceived change in attitude. Your eyes
constitute your only sense that can perceive motion, so there cannot be
any dissonance in that, whereas acceleration and changes in attitude are
detected by both your eyes and your vestibular system (a part of the
inner ear).

> Like when you stand on a bridge, watching the water flow benieth you, and you
> get the feeling that the bridge is moving the opposite direction, except in that
> case, your standing still, while on the Falcon, you'd actually be in motion, but
> not in the way your eyes tell you.

But that just causes a weird feeling, not nausea. Your eyes may be at
dissonance with reason, but reason is presumably the highest-level
function of the brain, whereas nausea is among the most fundamental
functions, that there is no such thing as nausea from a dissonance
between perception and reason.


> For the actual physics, I'll have to trust the experts.

And who would that be?

I would have serious doubts about the "expert" status of anyone claiming
that real-world space pilots "want to turn gradually, not make a right
angle and fly off in a new direction instantly". It is certainly
well-advised to avoid excessive g forces, and there may be reasons to
avoid fast changes in attitude in preparation for a turn, but barring
that, there are in fact at least two compelling reasons to make any
actual changes in trajectory pretty sharp: (1) There is (almost) always
a single ideal point in time where the change in trajectory is least
expensive in terms of propellant use; and (2) computing the parameters
for an engine burn required to transit from one particular trajectory to
another is quite easy for sufficiently short burn times, but gets more
complicated the longer the burn takes.

Post a reply to this message