How does the GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector work, really?

[Instresu]

Gravity in a game can be calculated as it is a known value, it does not need to be inferred nor does it rely on reference frames.

Also, the gravioli detector will give different results when exposed to tomatosauceons.

What do you mean? The experienced acceleration does indeed depend on the frame of reference. An object in rest in an initial frame of reference will per definition never experience any acceleration or force.

Something like LISA Pathfinder, maybe?

Or like the GRACE satelite pair. [Link]

I think this may actually be better in the science labs.

Oh, so using the the fact that tidal forces exists can make it possible to detect gravitational wells?

The answer is simple. In the kerbal universe, gravity is a force applied by gravioli particles. These are material manifestations of quantum energy that are attracted to matter. Planets exert a strong pull on them. The pull of gravioli particles towards a planet pushes on spacecraft in orbit of that planet, forcing them towards the surface. Negative gravioli particles have the opposite interaction with matter and harnessing them would lead to anti-gravity technology. This is why the kerbals have a sensor for it. The problem is taht it is repelled from matter, thus always being pushed away by the presence of the detector, making the search pointless.

This is complete and utter BS made up on the spot. I take no responsibility for any actions made by persons assuming my false theory to be fact.

So it's analogical to the hypothetical graviton, the in real life force carrier of gravity?

I don't know how the Gravioli detector works, but the NASA uses two satellites one following the other through space.

http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/k-4/features/F_Measuring_Gravity_With_Grace.html

This works because surface perturbations that result in decreases in surface mass (a satellites is only a few hundreds of miles above earths surface).

Theoretically if a machine was sensitive enough you could have two floating balls in a device and measure the distance between the floating balls as the travel.

You can estimate the average gravity of an object by knowing how fast a craft is traveling at its perigee (radial) and the major axis, and in fact if one can simulataneously measure radial component of velocity and the orbital component of velocity one can measure gravity at any point in an orbit.

I'm reading from the site:

GRACE, short for Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, is a NASA mission consisting of twin satellites that were launched in 2002. The satellites are in the same orbit around Earth, one about 220 kilometers (137 miles) in front of the other at an altitude of 460 kilometers (286 miles) above the Earth's surface. Together, they measure Earth's gravity field with a precision greater than any previous instrument.

As the lead satellite passes over an area on Earth of slightly stronger gravity, it detects an increased gravitational pull and speeds up ever so slightly, thus increasing its distance from the trailing satellite. Conversely, the lead satellite slows down when it passes over an area of slightly weaker gravity, decreasing the distance between the two satellites.

The changes in distance between the satellites are so minute -- about one-tenth the width of a human hair -- that they are undetectable by the human eye. GRACE measures these changes using an instrument that generates pulses of microwave energy -- a highly energetic form of electromagnetic radiation -- that bounce back and forth between the two satellites. The distance between the satellites is determined by the time a microwave pulse takes to travel from one satellite to the other and back.

So, if I understand this correctly, they can put two satellites with a such precision that changes of a few micrometers (µm) is detectable? Wouldn't the gravitation of the Moon, along with solar wind and other factors just totally mess with this?

KSP physics are Newtonian, not Einsteinian; skip the tensors. Well, actually it's a bit odder than that... gravitational forces in are a vector field, and at least some coordinate systems are absolute. (There's also some weird juggling with relative coordinate systems based around a craft's current location, but still...)

I know that KSP does not deal with relativistic effects. However, I was discussing the GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector, and how a such device would work in the reality.

[Perry Apsis]

Einstein taught us, through his equivalence principle, that free fall is equal to initial motion and any accelerometer "on-board" a spaceship in a such state will not register any acceleration; because there isn't any – to freely fall is to be in an initial frame of reference. This makes me wonder how the Gravioli Detector works. Is there any plausible explanation behind it or is it just magic breaking general relativity?

Obviously, Einstein didn't teach that fact to the Kerbals. Please note also that if the negative graviolis are responsible for gravity, positive graviolis must therefore be irresponsible for gravity.

[basic.syntax]

This article on Ars Technica, which is based on a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal, digs into recent studies attempting to discover evidence of the effects of gravity at the quantum physics scale.

Our current theory of gravity is general relativity, which is a "classical" (meaning "non-quantum") theory. Under relativity, the structure of spacetime remains smooth on all length scales, from the whole cosmos down to subatomic distances. However, quantum mechanics suggests that, on the scale of the Planck length (1.6×10^-35 meters), quantum effects should kick in. Theories disagree on exactly what those effects might be though. The "quantum foam" hypothesis, for instance, predicts that spacetime becomes a chaotic froth at the Planck length. [...more...]

[stelarfox]

Well the string theory, predicts the existence of the graviton, now not saying that is true but if that is, you can think of the graviton as balls that attract each other all the time but a more intuitive way of thinking them will be like balls falling, how many of them fall (and how fast) will determine the G force (taking that mol of material of hidrogen weights 1 gram) that will be 6x10^23 atoms, and each of them has mass so each of them has a graviton, so you can easily think that 6x10^23 gravitons = 1 gram. if you define a graviton like that.

now if you had some way to count how many pass certain area in certain time. you will be able to know how much gravity is there in that moment.

Now supose you change the name graviton to "Negative Gravioli particle", and you call the detector "Negative Gravioli Detector" and, you just have that (all theoretical of course).

[Draconiator]

I'm pretty sure the suite of instruments on board the Gravioli Detector are collectively named PASTA (Pretty Asymptomatic Series of Tertiary Algorithms)

[Jeb1969]

Regardless of how this instrument works, I swear i thought negative gravioli was something you enjoy with genovese pesto or ragù  and garlic bread (Yeah I thought the Negative gravioli detector was a filled pasta detector.)  Thankfully I now know it has something to do with gravitons, that's a relief I came pretty close to convincing the Kerbals that it was Italian Food.

[LeKerbal]

SCIENCE!

[Potaters]

It probably uses a loose automatic Reseting core system which would measure the gravitational field which is caused by the generation of the Negitive Gravioli particle which is generated by all masses.

[aalekh]

Actually real world physics can be used.

Assuming the detector is oriented towards the planet, there will be a slightly different force attracting each end due to the gradient of the gravitational field . This will be very small but can be  measurable. This force will be -2*GMml/ R^3 where M and m are the masses of the body and the negative gravioli detector and l is the length of the detector.

This can be used to calculate the distance R and hence the gravitational field.

 

Einsteins equivalence principle holds for a single frame of reference - which technically exists at a single point. However, if we treat the detector as an extended object it is indeed possible to calculate the field.