Naked Science Forum
General Science => Question of the Week => Topic started by: katieHaylor on 10/02/2021 17:10:23
-
David asks:
Would a foetus develop differently in zero gravity conditions?
What do you think?
-
It is already suspended in liquid, which is effectively a zero-G environment, so I suspect little difference except for side effects of a likely altered diet necessary for a low gravity pregnancy. There are certainly going to be physiological differences in how the mother develops without the weight of the belly growing slowly. That will effect her ability to eventually give birth: Less muscles and no gravity helping her to do the job.
-
Mouse embryos have been successfully grown in space.
Very few humans use gravity assistance in childbirth nowadays. There is no reason why the uterine muscle should atrophy in zero-g. If anything the possibility of placental rupture would be lower, so fetal development should be at least equal to and possibly better than in 1 g
-
It is already suspended in liquid, which is effectively a zero-G environment
Once born, bone and muscle growth is strongly affected by gravitational forces, so I suspect that, once out of the zero-g environment of the pregnancy, major developmental differences would appear in the first year of life.
- It is possible that babies born on the Moon or in space would never be able to return to Earth without significant weight training, medication and/or being confined to a traveling bed
Mouse embryos have been successfully grown in space.
That is true - but some things do not scale linearly with size (or gravity).
- Compare the "matchstick" legs of a mouse
- With the legs of a human
- And the "tree trunk" legs of an elephant
- In the end, human gestation in zero gravity is something that will need to be tried (multiple times) to know for sure
I suggest that radiation in space is likely to be more of a risk to the foetus (and the parents' egg & sperm)
- So a more sensible way of working up to it may be to first try a human pregnancy in reduced gravity (eg on a future Moon or Mars settlement)
- Where the pregnancy can be somewhat shielded underground
- In an environment which can remain stable for multiple years (most ISS missions last only 6 months)
-
While it's true that the embryo grows floating in liquid, it's not in zero gravity.
If it was then "breech" births would be a 50:50 shot.
I think there's a significant likelihood that gravity has other effects too. And I think it might be prudent to check that idea with something bigger than a mouse before we risk a human.
-
That is a really interesting question!
Firstly, the fetus would not only develop differently because of the zero gravity but also because of the radiation. The radiation is much stronger and potentially more damaging. It is already a risky factor for space travellers. I think the impact on a fetus would be even more damaging and serious. Maybe the development would stop or there would be abnormal developments.
-
This question has now been answered, and you can find it here: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/podcasts/question-week/how-would-foetus-develop-zero-gravity
-
Interesting question...
Wondering what would happen if the general earth gravity was moved up a notch...?
Say 10.807m/s²
-
Wondering what would happen if the general earth gravity was moved up a notch...? Say 10.807m/s²
All the pendulum clocks would be fast by about 5%.
An increase in broken bones as people land harder after falling.
I was interested to see that I have visited cities with both the lowest and highest values of gravity:
In large cities, (Earth's gravity) ranges from 9.7806 in Kuala Lumpur, Mexico City, and Singapore to 9.825 in Oslo and Helsinki.
I didn't notice any differences that could be attributed to changes in gravity.
-
Interesting question...
Wondering what would happen if the general earth gravity was moved up a notch...?
Say 10.807m/s²
All the physics text books which say "9.81 m/s/s" (or 33 feet/sec/ sec) would be wrong.
The mercury barometers would disagree with the aneroid ones, at least, I think they would. That's a more interesting question. The Earths atmosphere would shrink, but become denser.
The gas companies who set the pressure regulators in peoples houses to deliver gas at "8 inches (or 200 mm) of water" pressure would need to recalibrate.
All the spring balances calibrated in G or Kg would give the wrong answers but the ones calibrated in Newtons would be OK. The same would be true for the ones which rely on balancing the force of gravity against the force from an electromagnet.
Which means that a laboratory balance from 200 years ago would work better than a modern one.
Satellites would fall out of their orbits- I don't think they would hit the ground, but it would certainly mess them up.
Geosynchronous ones would suddenly fine they were in the wrong place.
Roller coasters would go a bit faster.
Hydroelectric power stations would become slightly more energetic.
The UK newspapers would blame the EU for the disruption.
The Tories would blame the previous government for it. The Republicans would blame the
Democrats and vice versa.
Trump would blame China, but nobody with any sense would listen.
Lots of structures that are only marginally stable would fall down. Some pictures would fall of walls
A lot of animals would need to recalibrate their leaps (this includes humans).
It would be a good idea to bet that no weightlifting records would be broken this year. (and, indeed, most other forms of athletics)
Air travel would become more expensive.
The increase in pressure would compress the swim bladders of fish, causing them to sink.
-
@evan_au lol
@Bored chemist rofl
Ooh gosh!
It's been awhile since i was in here..
I so so forgot that One needs to be crystal clear Specific about thee questions They ask..
🙏
My Bad, i apologize on my own behalf.
What i meant to ask was, what difference would an increased value of gravity would have, in relation with the development process of a foetus.(human)?
Like would it grow faster, would bones be stronger, the individual born(infant) would be short & stout like a teapot...etc etc.
P.S. - Anyways, I'm kinda Glad i made that Mistake!
🥳
(Nice to observe the old guns are still firing out splendidly with huge Bangs!)
👍
Feels gr8 2 b back.
😇
-
Like would (a foetus) grow faster, would bones be stronger, the individual born(infant) would be short & stout like a teapot...etc etc.
It comes back to the old debate about nature vs nurture (with epigenetics now thrown in the mix)...
I don't think that a 10% change in gravity would affect the foetus much during development, as it is still constrained by the womb.
- It might lead to more premature deliveries, due to increased stress on the mother
I think changes would be apparent during early development, as milestones like "the baby is able to lift it's head", "baby crawls" and "baby walks" would be delayed - it requires stronger muscles and stronger bones to achieve these milestones.
- There would be differences in lungs, as a denser atmosphere would provide a higher partial pressure of oxygen. This would affect the blood vessels in the retina - a setting that is calibrated in the first week or so after birth.
- Characteristics that are determined entirely by genes would take many generations to change - assuming there is a high death rate amongst those with less-suitable genes
- Many characteristics are determined by the environment, sometimes with epigenetic factors. We know, for example, that a long period of bed rest or even a short period in zero-G leads to weaker bones and weaker muscles. So an infant fighting against increased gravity could presumably have stronger bones and stronger muscles.
- There may be long-term disadvantages too, for example higher levels of calcium might produce stronger bones, but may lead to increased calcification of arteries and heart valves, leading to increased heart disease and more kidney stones...
-
So...whatever changes happen to Earth's Gravity value need to be gradually constant & very very slow.
Only then species would atleast have a chance to evolve and biologically be able to adapt to those changes.
I was just randomly surfing the net...
Had an Assumption that Earth's gaining weight, inform of dust & debris from outer space..
But Polar Winds turned that into a Misassumption!
👎
P.S. - Obviously, it ain't happening on a rapid rate...but still, it's happening.
(Perhapz a questn 4 anothr OP)
👍
-
Quote from: Wikipedia
In large cities, (Earth's gravity) ranges from 9.7806 in Kuala Lumpur, Mexico City, and Singapore to 9.825 in Oslo and Helsinki.
I didn't notice any differences that could be attributed to changes in gravity.
There was concern that any records set at the Mexico Olympics (1968) for anerobic events would be difficult to break elsewhere, but performance in endurance events would be poorer.
The heaviest rain I have ever known was in Kuala Lumpur but I don't think it had anything to do with g.
-
Should future Olympic Games, take into account factors such as the position of the Moon, during the athletic events.
The Moon has the gravitational power, supposedly, to create tides by raising enormous volumes of sea-water upwards.
Could this power raise the bodies of athletes upwards during athletic events such as the high-jump?
-
Should future Olympic Games, take into account factors such as the position of the Moon
No, the gravitational impact of the Moon is much less than the differences between different cities.
- A tide of perhaps 1m in an ocean basin with a depth of several kilometers is a very small change
- And the height of the tide has to do with large volumes of water "sloshing" backwards and forwards by the periodic attraction of Sun and Moon, not being raised up vertically.
I did hear of an accelerometer that was sensitive enough to detect the attraction of the Moon during its orbit - but that was an exceptionally sensitive device (for its time, which must have been at least 5 years ago).
- The gravitational attraction of the Moon would be undetectable by humans.
- On the other hand, the emotional attraction of the Moon has been affecting people for millennia...
-
Should future Olympic Games, take into account factors such as the position of the Moon
- The gravitational attraction of the Moon would be undetectable by humans.
- On the other hand, the emotional attraction of the Moon has been affecting people for millennia...
Yes, but could the gravitational attraction of the Moon, be manifested in more subtle effects, within our brains.
We've already established that lunar attraction can cause disturbances in large outside bodies of fluid. Such as seas and oceans.
And our brains contain inner fluids. In the form of circulating blood, and fluids inside individual brain-cells.
Isn't it at least conceivable that these fluids could be similarly disturbed, by the extraneous gravitational force emanating from the Moon.
Which might cause the emotional affects that you refer to?