755
Lmao (mander.xyz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] expr@piefed.social 9 points 2 months ago

I assume it's not just about the gravity, but also the much larger radius of the planet would mean much larger distance from the surface, and thus much more fuel needed.

[-] potatopotato@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's not how.......what???

F = G * (m1 * m2) / r^2

Note that radius is both squared and the dividing term. More distance = less gravity

[-] lemmyman@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Escape velocity does scale with (square root of) radius so its not a dumb thought.

And I'm not a rocket surgeon but I could imagine earth rockets might be operating near some physical limits that make a 50% increase (or whatever) infeasible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity

[-] Lojcs@piefed.social 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Wikipedia says energy = GMm/r.

if g=GM/r² then energy = mgr, proportional to r given g is constant.

apologiesMy previous comment was wrong, I derivated while integrating.

[-] expr@piefed.social 2 points 2 months ago

I stated an assumption and was contributing to the conversation. Even if that assumption is incorrect, there's no need to be a dick about it.

It seems like a larger atmosphere would result in a longer duration exposed to atmospheric drag, thus requiring more fuel to overcome it.

[-] turdas@suppo.fi 7 points 2 months ago

That's, uh, not really how that works. A taller atmosphere would mean you have to go through more of it, but unless it's not a terrestrial then the atmosphere won't be that much taller.

If it is a non-terrestrial planet, it's unlikely anyone would be building rockets on there to begin with.

[-] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

If it has a higher gravity would the atmosphere technically be lower since it will squish up closer to the planet?

[-] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

And your username would also be relevant.

this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
755 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

20648 readers
1323 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Meta Post Tags



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


If you are here asking: "Is this a science meme?"

Probably, yes. We use the Dawkins definition of meme: a replicating idea, not just an image macro with a fact on it. A good post here doesn't need to teach you something. It needs to make you ask something: who, what, where, when, and especially why or how.

Science isn't a filing cabinet of facts, it's a conversation. For example, a photo of an eel or other localized wildlife counts because most people never see one, and wonder is the first step of inquiry. A car meme counts if it makes you curious about what's under the bonnet. If you want to talk about something you noticed in the world, chances are someone else wants to talk about it too.

We moderate for vibe, not category. Pruning is light, especially where a post creates interesting discussion. Experimenting is encouraged.

See the pinned paper on Shitposting as Public Pedagogy if you want the academic case for why this works.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS