A time of new challenges–and then some

Although my children now are grown and I am no longer either teaching or enrolled as a student, this time of year has always felt like a pivot-point for me.

For most of my life, August has been the time when my family (Mom and Dad were both teachers) and I would shift from a summer of differently-structured time, to plunge back into the challenges of the new school year.

Headed back to school: What should we prepare them for?

My time at the helm of a classroom probably is over, for well or ill. But at this time of year I can’t help thinking about the challenges today’s teachers and students face. Our picture of the future is continually in motion, but the age-old job of teachers is to prepare their students for it as best they can. That’s one of the few things that hasn’t changed!

But what should teachers prepare them for?

Our immediate future contains a massive range of possibilities. Technology that seemed remote only a few years ago now is imminent. From personalized medical care based on an individual’s genome to advances in brain-computer interface technology, our picture of living, working, and learning in the 21st Century is changing rapidly.

We’re beginning to feel the effects of climate change in shifting weather patterns and greater environmental hazards, from more intense storms, more widespread flooding, and hotter, less controllable wildfires.

More intense storms are only one of the environmental hazards kids will increasingly face in the future.

The news tells us the USA has officially recovered from the Great Recession of the last decade–though some of us will never make up the lossesAutomationsome aspects of globalization, and a shifting dominance of industries in the economic sector have taken away some jobs and transformed demand for skilled labor.

Learning new skills throughout life to remain employable is a new feature of the employment scene, a trend that isn’t likely to change in the future.

Our political and social landscape has been changed by economic and demographic shiftsphilosophical polarization, and new social norms about what is and is not acceptable. The so-called “bathroom bills” that have recently targeted transgender students are only one example of the lengths laypersons with no understanding of problems sometimes try to meddle in school affairs.

As if all of that wasn’t enough of a challenge for teachers, consider that there is now literally more history to teach than there was several decades ago, and the best pedagogical standards demand the inclusion of a range of ethnic and socio-economic viewpoints, not just “old dead white guys.”

New scientific knowledge is developed every year, and a quality science education demands that teaching adjust for newly-discovered facts or risk teaching erroneous information (there’s enough of that already).

School breakfast programs provide essential nutrition for millions of kids who otherwise might come to school too distracted by hunger to learn.

Educators also are now expected to accommodate a wider array of needs than they’ve been asked to do in the past, from feeding kids breakfast and lunch so they can be alert in class, to crafting lessons for differentiated learning and individual learning styles, despite often-overcrowded classrooms due to budget shortfalls.

It all adds up to steeper challenges for teachers and school systems every year. I wish them all the best of success, and good luck.

They’re going to need it.

IMAGES: Many thanks to Apple Country Living, for the “back to school” bus-and-kids photo; to CNN, for the photo of the Plaza Towers Elementary School, after a massive tornado hit Moore, OK, in 2013; and to the Eau Claire WI Leader-Telegram for the photo of employment seekers at a local job fair. Many thanks are also due to the Kansas City Chiefs for the photo of a “Wake Up” School Breakfast spread they helped promote for National School Breakfast Week at a local middle school (this photo is from their 2016 project).

DIY Space Station: Farmers in the sky

As I’ve been designing a space-based habitat that is home to the characters in my “XK9” novels, one of the recurring questions is how will these people feed themselves?

On the eve of the US Thanksgiving holiday, it seems an especially apt question.

Space Farmer by Jay Wong: if we’re out there, we’ll have to eat.

As you may have picked up from comments I’ve made in several of my previous “DIY Space Station” posts, I have some rather pointed views about agriculture in a space-based habitat. I’ve lived in or near farm country all my life, and I’ve been an organic gardener (I was even a garden club president once!) for many years. Of course I have opinions. 🙂

One thing’s certain: space colonists will have to eat–and for their habitats to be sustainable, they’ll have to produce food where they live. From Yuri Gagarin’s first space meal on Vostok 1 in 1961 and John Glenn’s first meal during the Friendship 7 mission in 1962 to contemporary experiments on the International Space Station, finding ways to fulfill this basic human need in space has been an ongoing concern.

An agricultural area in Kalpana One, as envisioned by Bryan Versteeg

The 1970s-era NASA project designers who created the Bernal sphere and O’Neill cylinder designs assumed that intensive farming, something like the industrialized agriculture that was beginning to become widespread at the time, would be most efficient for space. They designed a separate section for agriculture, the so-called Crystal Palace” of the Bernal sphere. The same kind of structure was planned for the O’Neill cylinder.

Perhaps the “Crystal Palace” made sense in the 1970s.

I don’t know if you’ve ever been near a feedlot or hog farm and smelled the “atmospherics” produced by intensive livestock farming, or if you’ve ever studied the health riskscarbon footprint or water use of such projects, especially as regards beef, but if you have the “Crystal Palace” plan should give you pause.

As I explained in my post on Bernal spheres, we’ve learned a lot about the perils of such practices since then. There’s also growing evidence that all beef, chicken, salmon, and other meat proteins are not equal: the intensively-farmed versions are markedly inferior. Why ever would we take those methods into space?

Not actually healthy for anybody: cattle on a large feed lot.

In a relatively small, enclosed system such as a space habitat, everything must be recycled. There’d only be room for highly efficient agricultural methods. Intensive livestock farming is still livestock farminginherently inefficient, compared to many other protein sources.

Of course, there’s a question of exactly what does “efficient” mean?

During the recent drought, for instance, California almond farmers have been taking tremendous criticism over their thirsty almond groves. But in general nuts are an excellent source of protein. In a smaller, closed system with a controlled water cycle, trees’ value must be considered in terms of the nutrition and oxygen they produce, not only the water they consume.

Almonds ready for harvest.

Unfortunately, when you look at nutritional protein sources, animal-sourced protein (including eggs and some milk products) tends to be better-suited for human metabolisms than most vegetable sources. A balance of both sources is best, nutritionally–but how do you get meat, milk and eggs in a space habitat where there are no wide-open spaces for healthy animals to roam?

Aquaponics systems can sustain quite a variety of plant crops, but also can produce animal protein from fish, shrimp, prawns, etc. That might provide a partial solution. 

An aquaponics “family plot” grows a wide variety of plants.

Certainly ventures such as Sky Farms in Singapore are pushing the envelope on the potential to grow more food in a smaller “footprint,” and they’re doing it with aquaponics. But so far they’re growing mostly salad greens, not almond trees.

The rotating towers of Sky Farms are designed to make sure all plants get adequate sunlight in a vertical planting scheme.

Sky Farms brings up another important point: the space station designers of the 1970s envisioned farming as something that happened in separate, “agricultural” areas. Yet contemporary trends are opening us to more urban agriculture options. “Farms” aren’t just out in the country anymore. They’re popping up in vacant urban lots and in greenhouses on urban rooftops.

This community garden in Kansas City, KS is not far from my home.
SkyHarvest in Vancouver has located its rooftop greenhouse within biking distance of many of its regular restaurant clients. Their website has a great short video about how they operate.

Another recent trend in urban plantings are so-called “green walls,” planted with a variety of species to create visual interest, produce oxygen, and help clean the air. I can’t imagine those would be hard to adapt for edible plants.

The company that makes this vertical planting system is called–appropriately enough–Greenwalls.

And of course, space-saving espaliered fruit trees have been around for centuries.

An espaliered peach tree at historic Le Portager du Roi (Vegetable Garden of the King) at Versailles, France

Another idea gaining traction lately has been “green roofs.” One has only to look at Bryan Versteeg’s visualizations of Kalpana One to see that I’m not the first person to think of putting them on space habitats.

Bryan Versteeg beat me to the idea of green roofs on a space habitat: this is part of his visualization of Kalpana One.

In addition to providing pleasant green spaces and oxygen, they’d make ideal garden plots if the soil was deep enough. Urban rooftops all over the world support similar green roofs and rooftop gardens.

This rooftop garden in Portland, OR supplies the Noble Rot Restaurant.

If agricultural efforts are integrated throughout the entire space habitat, that changes the picture and the potential. Food could grow anywhere! Why not on pergolas hung with grapevines, squash, or tomatoes, for example?

This is a squash trellis, but lots of food plants grow as vines, which means they can grow up walls and hang from trellises or pergolas–providing yet more vertical growing options.

And while we might not see cattle wandering freely through the streets, we certainly might find “backyard chickens” or other, smaller-scale livestock growing operations (Rabbits? Goats?) tucked in here and there all over the station–another potential partial solution to the “where do we get our protein?” question.

Beyond aquaponics: could small-scale chicken farming be another source of protein on a space habitat?

None of this discussion has so far wandered into the areas of genetically-modified plants, that might be specifically adapted for high yields in small amounts of space, but they are likely to be developed, whatever we may think of GMOs (a discussion for a different post).

Another area that’s still in its infancy is cultured meat. Yes, right now one tough, relatively tasteless patty recently cost about $263,000 to produce, but the Dutch lab that produced it from beef stem cells is anticipating its products could be commercially available and viable by 2020.

The $263,000 burger, before cooking. Is cultured meat the future of protein in space?

While the question of how many resources such “cellular agriculture” might require is still open, it seems likely that the field will have evolved considerably by the time we’re building habitats in space. So maybe our descendants who venture forth to live on the Final Frontier won’t have to forego eating their favorite Kobe steaks after all.

IMAGES: Many thanks to Jay Wong’s website, for his Space Farmer image, to Bryan Versteeg’s Spacehabs Gallery for the Kalpana One farm and green roofs images; and to Wikipedia and NASA for the “Crystal Palace” image (sorry–couldn’t find the artist’s name). 

I’m indebted to “Johnny Muck” for the beef feedlot photo, to Grow Organic for the photo of the ready-to-harvest almonds, and to Friendly Aquaponics for the photo of varied crop-plants in an aquaponics system. 

Many thanks to Urban Growth for the image of the Sky Farms tower, to Kansas City Community Gardens for the photo of the urban garden in KCK, and to SkyHarvest via Pinterest for the photo of their rooftop greenhouse. 

Thanks greatly to Greenwalls Vertical Planting Systems for their photo of a contemporary “green wall.” Go to their website for more beautiful examples. 

Thanks also to Paully and Growing Fruit for the photo of the espalliered peach tree at Versailles, to Noble Rot of Portland, Oregon, for the rooftop garden photo, to Organic Authority for the squash trellis photo, and to the Denver Library’s website, for the photo of urban chickens. And finally, thanks to the Daily Mail for the photo of the cultured meat patty.

Space Station DIY: Should we go Tubular?

NASA artist Don Davis gave us a vision of how it might look inside an O'Neill cylinder with reflected sunlight.
NASA artist Don Davis gave us a vision of how it might look inside an O’Neill cylinder with reflected sunlight.

My quest to find a plausible, space-based home for the characters in my novels continued.

I needed a space-based habitat that would feel earthlike-enough for me (and my readers) to believe that humans could be comfortable there long-term. But it also must be believable, based on what we know or can reasonably extrapolate from physics, space, engineering, and technology.

So far in this DIY Space Station series we’ve considered space stations/colonies in general, Dyson structures, and Bernal spheresThe next design I considered was the O’Neill Cylinder, a design developed by one of the founders of this area of engineering and design, Dr. Gerard K. O’Neill, of Princeton University. 

the_high_frontier_coverThe idea for this design evolved out of O’Neill’s work for NASA and at PrincetonHis Island One and Island Two designs were Bernal spheres, but the larger Island Three design proposed a paired-cylinders design that sought to solve several problems with the Bernal sphere design.

His 1976 book, The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space described the “Islands,” and developed the concept of the paired cylinders. Why paired cylinders? So they can  cancel out a gyroscopic effect that would make it difficult to keep them aimed at the sun. Each cylinder was to be four or five miles in diameter and up to 20 miles long, with six sections: three “window” areas, interspersed with three “land” areas. Each cylinder could provide habitat for several million people.

spacecolony1

There would be a separate section for agriculture, designed much like the so-called Crystal Palace” of the Bernal sphere design. As I pointed out in my Bernal sphere post, today we know far more about the pitfalls of industrial-style agriculture than we did in the 1970s. I’ll go into more detail about space-based agricultural issues in a future post.

O’Neill cylinders utilize a shape identified by the creators of Kalpana One as the most efficient for a space habitat (more about Kalpana One in a different future post), but I ultimately found it difficult to imagine living in one, for many of the same reasons as the Bernal sphere.

goetzscheuermann-oneillcylinder-650

Also, I didn’t like the slight Coriolis effect that would occur if the habitat was built the size O’Neill originally proposed. There were economic reasons for that size: O’Neill was trying to get the US Government to consider funding one of his “Islands.” Their size was dictated by 1970s-based calculations. Unfortunately, the head of the Senate subcommittee that handled NASA’s funding considered a large-scale space habitat a “nutty fantasy,” and the project was killed.

Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) thought Gerard K. O'Neill's space-settlement ideas were a "nutty fantasy." Proxmire was famous for identifying government programs he thought were silly, and awarding them the Golden Fleece Award. Fear of his wrath led NASA to kill O'Neill's project.
Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) thought Gerard K. O’Neill’s space-settlement ideas were a “nutty fantasy.” Proxmire was famous for identifying government programs he thought were silly, and awarding them the Golden Fleece Award. Fear of his wrath led NASA to kill O’Neill’s project.

Of course, there’s no reason to think a larger version couldn’t be built, if the economics of the builders supported it. Rama, the space habitat described by Arthur C. Clarke in his 1973 novel Rendezvous with Rama, is about 50% larger than the classic O’Neill cylinder, but as I understand it, it’s based in part on O’Neill’s design. I found a video that offers a 3D-animated “tour” of Rama. I enjoyed it, and I hope you do too.

Side note: yes, my own Rana Station‘s name was chosen with a nod to Rama, although I ultimately chose a different design configuration for my space habitat. The name “Rana” (with an n) means “attractive, eye-catching, elegant,” which is what cinched the choice for me. I’m an artist: it had to appeal to my eyes, too!

Besides Clarke’s Rama, other famous O’Neill cylinders in science fiction include the space station Babylon 5 and the space habitats (sides) in the Gundam Universe.

Babylon 5--but where are the windows? And are those solar panels, or heat exchangers?
Babylon 5–but where are the windows? And are those solar panels, or heat exchangers?
Animators of the Mobile Gundam series paid close attention to the design of O'Neill cylinders. This is an interior view of Loum (Side 5).
Animators of the Mobile Gundam series paid close attention to the design of O’Neill cylinders. This is an interior view of Loum (Side 5).

IMAGES: Many thanks to Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons and Don Davis for the upper image of the cylinder interior; for the High Frontier first edition cover featuring art by Rick Guidice; for the 1970s rendering of an exterior view of paired cylinders, also by Guidice; and for the photo portraits of Senator William Proxmire and Gerard K. O’NeillI am indebted to the Maveric Universe Wiki for the GoetzSheuermann image of Island One. Many thanks to YouTube and Eric Bruneton for the Rama animation, to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange for the image of the Babylon 5 Space Station, and to The Universal Century, for the interior image of Loum (Side Five) a space colony from the Mobile Gundam universe.

Space Station DIY: Bernal Spheres?

I needed a plausible space station for my fictional characters to live in. My research yielded such riches, I decided to share them with you in a series of “Space Station DIY” blog posts.

John Desmond Bernal
John Desmond Bernal

Today, let’s consider the Bernal Sphere. It’s an idea originally cooked up by John Desmond Bernal in 1929. Bernal was primarily known as a pioneer in molecular biology, but his concept of a spherical habitat in space seemed plausible enough for NASA to launch a more in-depth study in 1975-76.

Gerard K. O’Neill

That study led to Dr. Gerard K. O’Neill’s proposal for Island One, a relatively small Bernal Sphere. This was followed by the larger Island Two (which, it was hoped, would provide a more practical industrial base). By the time O’Neill got to Island Three, he’d evolved to a different shape, the O’Neill Cylinder (we’ll discuss that design in a future post). Other research rooted in the Bernal Sphere eventually led to a toroidal design, often called a Stanford Torus.

The wine-tasting party doesn't seem to mind if the world is inside-out.
The wine-tasting party doesn’t seem to mind if the world is inside-out.

What would it be like, to live in a Bernal Sphere? Artwork from the mid-1970s gives us a glimpse of an inside-out world, in which you could see the other side of the colony “up in the sky.” I don’t know about you, but I think that would give me terrible vertigo.

Recreation at the poles: nets and micro-gravity sex?
Recreation at the poles: nets and micro-gravity sex?

The artificially-generated centrifugal gravity would fall to nothing at the poles, which some have thought would make those good recreational areas. The illustration above envisions “Zero gravity honeymoon suites,” but doesn’t seem to consider the problems of space-sickness caused by microgravity, or the realities of Newton’s Third Law. Perhaps people would be better advised to enjoy their marital bliss in the 1-G areas, and play Quidditch at the poles.

Perhaps people could play Quidditch at the poles of the Bernal Sphere.
Perhaps people could play Quidditch at the poles of the Bernal Sphere.

The outside view shows a series of rings on one end, stacked next to the sphere. This would be the so-called “Crystal Palace” for agriculture to feed the population of 10,000 (on Island One).

External view of Island One, with agricultural "Crystal Palace" tori at one end.
External view of Island One, with agricultural “Crystal Palace” tori at one end.

Unfortunately, scientists and engineers in the 1970s were not much concerned about the issues involved in intensive farming, so they followed contemporary ideas, and designed their Crystal Palace to be a cow-, pig-, and chicken-hell. I wonder how much concern they had about overuse of antibiotics and methane production (perhaps they could use the latter as a fuel, but what about the smell?), as well as the relative economies of growing plant crops versus livestock. Maybe they just couldn’t imagine life without steak?

Livestock Hell in space? Maybe not such a good idea after all.
Livestock Hell in space? Maybe not such a good idea after all.

Ultimately, I decided the Bernal Sphere was not the design for my fictional space station. If I didn’t want to imagine living there, why would I try to make my characters do so? Might recall O’Neill apparently moved away from the original sphere-focused idea, too, once he looked into it more. But although my fictional Rana Habitat Space Station didn’t turn out to be a Bernal Sphere, the design gave me some interesting ideas. I hope you’ve enjoyed this exploration.

Earlier posts in this series have discussed space stations in popular culture and conjecture, and the idea of Dyson spheres.

IMAGES: Many thanks to the ever-invaluable Wikipedia, for the photos of John Desmond Bernal and Gerard K. O’Neill; to the NASA Ames Research Center for the 1970s-era artwork of the Bernal Sphere interior, exterior, and “Crystal Palace” cutaway detail; to the National Space Society, for the artist’s rendering of the Bernal Sphere recreational area; and to Entertainment Weekly for the Harry Potter Quidditch image. I appreciate all of you!

 

Space Station DIY: Spheres of Influence

I needed to create a space station. 

Looks like fun, and it’s clearly DIY, but not quite what I mean.

The space station I needed to make would be the place where the characters in my novels could live out their comedies and dramas, grow, change, and face their challenges (or try not to, depending). 

But what sort of environment would it be? It would need earthlike aspects, for earth-evolved persons to be able to live there (and for their earth-evolved writer to be able to wrap her head around it). But it would have to believably function in space.

Again . . . not exactly what I needed!

When I first set out to explore ideas about space stations/habitats, I decided to consider only ideas that had been suggested and extensively considered previously, by people who could do the math (better yet–who liked doing the math, and understood it). This math-challenged artist has enough problems without courting gratuitous disasters.

I also rejected the idea of some kind of mysterious “artificial gravity” that was generated kind of like a magnet one could switch on or off. I wanted to find a design that could exist in our universe, and that was in keeping with physics as we more or less understand things today.

Dyson ring: the tiny dot in the center is the star.

I eventually rejected the idea of using Dyson rings, swarms, bubbles, or spheres, especially for a living surface. In case you haven’t encountered the concept yet, a Dyson structure is a megastructure (bigger than you can possibly imagine, even if you can imagine a lot) that would encircle a star (in some scenarios, our star), to collect energy and possibly create new living surface. There are a lot of practical difficulties with this idea. 

How big is a Dyson sphere? In this concept, big enough to encircle not only the Sun, but also Mercury and Venus, with lots of room to spare. In other words, ludicrously big.


Of course, other sf writers are free to disagree with me, and several have used the idea to good dramatic purpose. Here’s an image of the U.S.S. Enterprise with a Dyson Sphere from Star Trek-TNG’s episode Relics.  

Megastructures in space? Star Trek gave us interesting visuals.

In rejecting a Dyson sphere I’m also at odds with Robert Silverberg (Across a Billion Years) and Stephen Baxter (The Time Ships). So be it, guys. 

We cannot rule out the possibility that at some point in the future we could solve the problems, but as Frasier Cain points out in this video from Universe Today, there might not be enough matter in our solar system to build a full sphere. 



This is not to say there aren’t fascinating possibilities. The idea that you could even partially enclose a star with a structure made by sapient creatures is pretty interesting, and it’s an idea that’s endured for almost 80 years, as I write this. 


The cover of the first edition.

As far as I can tell, Freeman Dyson actually got the first germs of his idea from Olaf Stapledon’s 1937 novel Star Maker. Dyson wrote about the idea a bit later, in 1960. 

Only last winter, scientists using the Kepler Telescope actually did think that maybe they’d discovered evidence of a megasturcture similar to a Dyson sphere. However, now they’ve had second thoughts

Would’ve been pretty interesting, from a scientific point of view–although until we know how friendly they are, I’d just as soon keep extraterrestrials out there in the reaches of space for a while longer. 

I couldn’t resist Danielle Futselaar’s gorgeous rendering of the Dyson-like structure-that-wasn’t, as it might have looked disintegrating from around the star KIC 8462852

Unfortunately, the more I learned about Dyson structures, the less they fit my novels’ needs. But I had a lot of fun with the research. And just because it probably isn’t currently possible to make one, that doesn’t mean it isn’t possible to hypothesize, create images, and dream far-off dreams. 

Last time: I kicked off the “Space Station DIY” series with an overview of my introduction to space colonies, space stations, and this whole idea of living permanently on structures in space.
Next time: we stay well-rounded with Bernal Spheres.

IMAGES: The image of the “DIY Mission Control Play Station” is courtesy of MAKE: on Pinterest. The fanciful “Home in Space” image is from Universe Today (Yep. See below). 

The Dyson Ring and Dyson Sphere diagrams are both courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. God bless you! The article is excellent, too.
Lots of thanks to Paramount Pictures and Popular Mechanics for the image of the U.S.S. Enterprise and a Dyson Sphere. 
The photo of the Star Maker first edition cover is from a different article in the ever-valuable Wikimedia Commons
The gorgeous image of the disintegrating Dyson Sphere (that didn’t turn out to be one after all) by Danielle Futselaar for SETI International is from the Washington Post. Many thanks to all!

VIDEO: Many thanks to Universe Today and Frasier Cain, for the informative YouTube video “What is a Dyson Sphere?” The link takes you to extensive notes, if you’re interested.

Space Station DIY: Where to start?

That’s no moon . . . 

I needed to create a space station. 

I had a cast of characters, the makings of a plot, and a big-picture concept of how my universe had turned out as it did. 

But now it was time to get down to creating the habitat space station on which my characters would live.

Where does one start?

One goes back to the 1970s, I discovered. That was the era when I first learned the concept of a “space station,” much less that people were seriously thinking about how one might actually build one someday. 

My earliest book on the
subject, with a great
John Berkley cover!

I was a college kid when I went to a movie called Star Wars, for the scandalously high price of three dollars per ticket. My then-boyfriend Pascal (now husband of 37+ years) and I went back to see it over and over again, as often as we could afford to (pre-video tape–but then, I’ve already admitted I’m older than dirt). 

I didn’t know it when I was bankrupting myself at the movie theater, but just a couple of years earlier a bunch of rocket scientists and other geniuses had gotten together at Stanford University for the 1975 NASA Summer Study, to try and figure out how it might be possible to build a space colony. 

They came up with something the shape of a bicycle wheel, with mirrors mounted on the hub. Artificial gravity was to be created by centrifugal force inside the outer ring. Being scientists, they didn’t call it a doughnut or wheel-shape, but a torus. It is still known as the Stanford Torus.

This is Donald E. Davis’s rendition of the exterior of the torus.

According to Wikipedia’s article about the project, it was based on earlier ideas proposed by Wernher von Braun and Herman Potocnik. The concept was known to science fiction writers, but the scientists really got going on it in 1975.

The idea of using centrifugal force to create gravity in a wheel-like structure also was suggested in the 1957 Russian film, Road to the Stars, which is fascinating to watch. Indeed, we’re still speculating on some of the same things they did, and a lot of the speculation doesn’t seem to have changed all that much. The entire 49-minute opus is available for viewing on You Tube. If you have time, take a look.

In 1957, Pavel Klushantsev’s film Road to the Stars included a space station with a torus of sorts, that produced artificial gravity.

If you look at the list of contributors to the 1975 Summer Study, it really did take a village to work out the myriad of details to arrive at something that might actually work. It’s now all freely available online

Although it’s been used in many movies, from 2001: A Space Odyssey to Elysium, the “classic” Stanford Torus isn’t the only prototype space station shape from which the would-be sf author can choose, however. In upcoming posts from this “DIY Space Station” series, I’ll look at Bernal and Dyson Spheres, the O’Neill Cylinder, and Bishop Rings.

IMAGES: Many thanks to TurboSquid for the picture of the Death Star, and to Abe Books for the cover art for Colonies in Space. The wonderful Don Davis painting of the torus, NASA Ames Research Center (ID AC76-0525), is now in the public domain. I got it from Wikipedia. The image of Klushantsev’s proto-torus design is a screen-capture from Road to the Stars, as seen on You Tube.