Does your spacecraft produce it's own gravity?

[joppiesaus]

Hello, I have a question:

Does your spacecraft produce it's own gravity? I mean, everything that has mass, has gravity. Big mass - more gravity, tiny mass - less gravity.

For example, I have 10000 orange tanks strapped togehter, would ksp detect it has gravity?(it will be super low, but you understand my point.)

Or is it only for satelites, such as a moon, a planet, not a object like a spacecraft in ksp.

Thanks everyone!

[acealeam]

It probably doesn't, that would be pretty hard to program! But I'm interested to see if anyone actually knows.

[CalculusWarrior]

KSP uses a simplified gravity model (hence, no Lagrangian points), which means only the planets and moons (and sun) produce a gravitational effect on your spacecraft. As such, even if you built a really big spacecraft, (like the size of a planet) then you still wouldn't have any gravity because the game doesn't take it into account.

[Richy teh space man]

No they don't.

[michaelphoenix22]

Gravity - It's not just a good idea, it's the law!

[bgraves]

There was a "Part Gravity" mod that let ships within around 2 km of each other be attracted together. I don't think it's updated anymore.

[joppiesaus]

KSP uses a simplified gravity model (hence, no Lagrangian points), which means only the planets and moons (and sun) produce a gravitational effect on your spacecraft. As such, even if you built a really big spacecraft, (like the size of a planet) then you still wouldn't have any gravity because the game doesn't take it into account.

Thanks! that's clear to me.

[LeonG17]

Perhaps it could be introduced at some point if we can ever build really MASSIVE ships without the MASSIVE lag that comes with them. You could build a artificial moon!

[ZedNova]

You would have to have a massive or extremely dense ship for it to have any gravity.

[rodion_herrera]

If you think about it, a ship so massive that it can produce gravity, has to be more or less spherical in shape (i.e. death star), simply because the property known as hydrostatic equilibrium will effect it at some point, so parts of the structure that "jut out" or higher than the others will get stressed and be pulled towards the center of the ship.

[Rocketscience101]

Saw a guy build a ship that made artificial gravity using centrifugal force, and drove a rover around in it.

[Atanar]

You would have to have a massive or extremely dense ship for it to have any gravity.

Back to school with you. Unless you forgot to write the word "noticeable".

[Tom K.]

You would have to build a HUGE spacecraft to see some decent gravity. (Bigger than Gilly!)

[A Fat Pokemon]

It probably doesn't, that would be pretty hard to program! But I'm interested to see if anyone actually knows.

Actually it would be quite easy. The problem lies with how KSP's physics actually work out, the planets are on 'rails,' and you can only simulate one bodies gravity at once. I've threw something together of the likes myself, and I found it pretty easy

[flightmaster]

everything that has mass, has gravity

not quite true, light has no mass yet it still has gravity (sure, not much, but it's still there). In order for an object to have gravity, it must have energy and momentum. This is why light can be bent by black holes etc. Not related to the question at hand, I know, but just thought it was an educational point.

[Brabbit1987]

not quite true, light has no mass yet it still has gravity (sure, not much, but it's still there). In order for an object to have gravity, it must have energy and momentum. This is why light can be bent by black holes etc. Not related to the question at hand, I know, but just thought it was an educational point.

You are right and wrong. Light has no mass. Photons themselves have no mass. However they have relativistic mass. This might mean light has gravity caused by momentum but this does not mean light itself has gravity. I am actually unsure where you learned this from, but I don't think it's even known if light has gravity or not. I think you are confusing it with being affected by gravity. According to old theory, things with out mass could not be affected by gravity. This was eventually proven wrong with the discovery of black holes. Light had no mass yet it was being affected by gravity. I don't remember the exact reason why this occurs, could probably just look it up.

Now for an object to have gravity, it needs mass. Momentum is not a requirement as far as I am aware, and again .. where did you learn this?

If you could please link me to some sources that prove this. I very well could be wrong, but it's the first I have heard this.

[Dunbaratu]

I think the hit of having to run the math on all the parts would kill performance. To do what you propose would basically BE the N-body problem that has to be solved to do lagrange points, whcih is what Squad was trying to avoid. In this case the N bodies would be the parts of the spacecraft rather than, say, the Mun and Kerbal. Once you decide to calculate the pull of parts on parts then you have to calculate the pull of parts on all the OTHER parts, turning it into an N factorial problem.

[tek_604]

Light had no mass yet it was being affected by gravity. I don't remember the exact reason why this occurs, could probably just look it up.

If I remember rightly, photons are not affected by gravity, and therefore, light, cannot be. Space is bent by gravity, and that means the photons have to travel through the bent space. If I am right, this was the essence of Eddington's experiment during the eclipse in 1919, proving Einstein was right.

[Brotoro]

But that's how everything is affected by gravity in General Relativity: mass and energy (and momentum and pressure) cause curvature of spacetime, and all objects (be they particles with mass or massless photons) move according to that curvature. So the way photons move is affected by gravity.

[SRV Ron]

No natural gravity from the objects making your ship. You could, however, design a ship using rotation of a habitat modules on a pole or the spinning ring containing a rover example to create an artificial gravity for your Kerbals. Just be mindful of the stresses on those parts that could cause your ship to fly apart.

[Dunbaratu]

No natural gravity from the objects making your ship. You could, however, design a ship using rotation of a habitat modules on a pole or the spinning ring containing a rover example to create an artificial gravity for your Kerbals. Just be mindful of the stresses on those parts that could cause your ship to fly apart.

And that since rotational velocity is forgotten when you shift focus away from the area, the rotating ship will stop rotating when you go off to do something else and when you come back it will be stationary.

[Sir Nahme]

You are right and wrong. Light has no mass. Photons themselves have no mass. However they have relativistic mass. This might mean light has gravity caused by momentum but this does not mean light itself has gravity. I am actually unsure where you learned this from, but I don't think it's even known if light has gravity or not. I think you are confusing it with being affected by gravity. According to old theory, things with out mass could not be affected by gravity. This was eventually proven wrong with the discovery of black holes. Light had no mass yet it was being affected by gravity. I don't remember the exact reason why this occurs, could probably just look it up.

Now for an object to have gravity, it needs mass. Momentum is not a requirement as far as I am aware, and again .. where did you learn this?

If you could please link me to some sources that prove this. I very well could be wrong, but it's the first I have heard this.

You are partially correct. It has relativistic mass but no rest mass, so it does not have gravity. Relativistic mass is energy that CAN be converted to mass. For an object to have gravity it needs to have rest mass. As someone already pointed out light is not affected by gravity it merely follows the straight path through space, and if that straight path happens to be curved by gravity an outside observer will see the light "turn".