"Even low earth orbit is deleterious to a human's health. Bone mass loss and other things that go to hell when they are out of the gravity well they were constructed in. By just a tiny amount. The gravity is still about 90% where they hang out. Free fall is not real lack of gravity."<quoted text>
Funded by ARPA, so you paid for it. Oh, and it does work, but I can fully understand it might be beyond you.
I kind of figured you didn't really understand it when you made the erroneous comment about LEO (low Earth orbit) being 90% less gravity effect than sea level.
At sea level the pull of gravity is 9.81 m/s^2.
At leo it's 9 m/s^2.
Freefall is just that - falling.
No different that skydiving EXCEPT
1. there is no atmospheric drag (okay, some on the orbiter, but not on the people inside); AND
2. the forward momentum of the vehicle is great enough to miss hitting the Earth as it constantly *falls* around the Earth (about 7.8 km/s).
That is what I said. Where did you come up with the 90% "less"?
Big difference with skydiving. You are following the line of acceleration, lessening "weight". Standing on the ground arrests that acceleration, resulting in the "weight" the body mechanism adjusts to and was developed in. You still have that "weight" in free fall. That is a relative weightlessness. The fact is they suffer from deleterious physical effects even within that 90% of the surface pull. On a trip to Mars you would have to equal the pull of gravity on the Earth's surface in a small craft to duplicate. You can't do it.
Not only do you have that straight vertical effect of gravity on Earth, you also have the tangential pulls from the rest of the Earth. Horizon to horizon is mass pulling on you. Why Newton's theory about mountains affecting gravity is correct.