[Liberal Classic]

Simulated gravity is a good idea, but we would need to start with a blank sheet, not try to adapt the ISS to it.

No argument there. I'm not suggesting spinning ISS around on a line. Rather I think the Spacelab/Mir/ISS concept is already outdated. Perhaps there are some longer term studies that can be done on ISS that can't be done on the shuttle, because the shuttle doesn't have the duration needed. Most of these studies involve the effects of weighlessness on living organisms, which in my opinion is the wrong thing to now be studying. We know that zero gee in the long term is terribly detrimental to human life, and while the effects of zero gee on plants and lower creatures are interesting, of what worth are they when we already know how harmful zero gee is? Perhaps some good will come from plant weightlessness studies, but I think now is the time to start approaching the problem from the other direction: how do we start making artificial gravity to avoid the harmfull effects of weightlessness.

This is not a question that the shuttle or ISS can easily answer. IMO, I think we need to start thinking about those rotating ring stations, heavy lift capacity, and smaller safer manned vehicles.

[supercat]

One thing I was wondering about: if a space station isn't rotating to produce artificial gravity (many experiments require zero-G, and it may be most practical to not have the whole station rotating) would it be practical to set up a running track around the inside of a cylinder and run on that? Would the cylinder have to be rotating, or could one get accustomed to "running" using nothing but ones own momentum to press one's feed against the "ground"?

I guess spinning the cylinder a bit might not hurt, and would increase the "apparent gravitation" to better approximate 1g. Still, my impression is that zero-G is not in and of itself harmful provided that crews get sufficient exercise in a simulated gravitational environment.