3 ms·
>In the long long term, isn't it reasonable to assume that Earth may end up losing mass due to space launches? No. It is much more likely that Earth would beco
by FlyMoreRockets 6y ago
>In the long long term, isn't it reasonable to assume that Earth may end up losing mass due to space launches?
No. It is much more likely that Earth would become a long-term importer of space manufacturing for quite some time. It is much cheaper to drop stuff down into Earth's deep gravity well than to hoist it up into space. Pretty much everything in orbit (except for the Moon and mass where the Moon's gravitional influence dominates) will eventually come back down to the Earth's surface, too
- devthrowawy 6y agoIt's not 'harder' to take mass off earth than it is to bring mass back. Assuming you want to bring the mass back 'gently' and not have it collide with earth like a comet. Think like pulling a rock out of a hole vs lowering it back down in a controlled manner, controlled here meaning velocity=0 by the time it reaches the bottom. In both cases you are responsible for transitioning the same amount of energy into or out of the rock. To do this with a rocket would required the same integration of force and thus fuel. In the case where you are lowering the rock, ie returning mass back to space, you have to bring fuel to the rock to 'lower' it back down so it is actually harder to bring mass back.
- anfilt 6y agoEven for uncontrolled crashing you still need to use fuel. You need to use energy to slow the object down enough to fall into earths gravity well.