…in what proximity would you have to be to the sun and how fast would you have to be spinning (like a rotisserie chicken) so that your light side didn’t burn and your dark side didn’t freeze; rotating just enough to keep a relatively stable temperature?
Absolutely absurd, I know but this question somehow popped into my head and won’t leave. 😆🐔🔥🧊
Outside of all the assumptions to make this work, the real issue is that the “dark side” doesn’t cool you like you’re thinking. Getting rid of heat in space is actually a hard problem to solve as a vacuum is a great insulator. Heat has to be radiated away, and that takes time and lots of surface area.
Interesting and does make sense. Where does this image of stuff freezing instantly as it “enters” space vacuum come from?
As an earthling, you have evolved over the course of billions of years to deal with sunlight at a distance of one astronomical unit. That’s the distance of the earth’s orbit. That’s probably the most comfortable distance.
The Apollo moon missions used a so-called “barbecue” mode that rotated the capsules at three revolutions per hour. They did this during the 3-4 day coast phases to and from the moon. As far as I know this was able to mostly hold the interior temperatures in the “survivable” range.
That’s a good starting point, but caveats:
-
My bet is that most of our thermal circulation is via the movement of our blood. That’s probably not directly analogous to spacecraft.
-
If one isn’t just talking thermal, we do burn at 1AU. Go lie in the sun without cover long enough – especially if you’re pale-skinned – long enough, and you’ll get burned. Without the atmosphere, we’d be hit by more UV light, too.
Without the atmosphere, UV is going to be among the least dangerous wavelengths for you to have to worry about.
looks puzzled
I don’t think that it mostly stops more-energetic stuff.
Hmm.
Are you thinking of the magnetosphere rather than the atmosphere? I didn’t mention that, but I guess that’d also be a factor.
-
