PDA

View Full Version : couples in space...



g99
2002-Nov-04, 04:46 AM
Have they had couples in space? Have they done experiments with mating animals and animals giving birth in space? Does the birthing process happen normally, or is it interrupted or different in some way? Does the fetus come out normal, or affected diffeently by the gravity reduction?

P.S. this was posted on another thread that will most likely be banned, that is why some of you might see it twice. But it will probobly be banned before anyone answers. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

gbaikie
2002-Nov-04, 05:41 AM
NASA is unsexy.
Sex is too messy for the clean rooms:)

JS Princeton
2002-Nov-04, 05:41 AM
at the risk of being unscrupulous in a family friendly website, I shall post a link to another site that I and Phil are members of, The Straight Dope:

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_214.html

That pretty much covers the human end of the subject in better detail than I think we deserve to know.

g99
2002-Nov-04, 06:24 AM
hmmm. Very entertaining and interesting article. So, so far that we know, America has never done it (pun intended /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif), but has europe? or russia? Or how about animals? The article only mentioned pre-fertalizxed eggs of fish. I imagine that it has happened at least once in the 60 year history of the space program.

Smaug
2002-Nov-04, 06:39 AM
I was watching this show about space exploration on "The Science Channel"(Division of Discovery Channel). They talked about this subject. In one Russian mission(might have even been American) they incubated chicken eggs up there and when they hatched... they had no heads! After trying again they chickens had heads though. Also they said that one couple volunteered to "do the hippity dippity" on the vomit comet(you know the airplane).

g99
2002-Nov-04, 11:15 AM
No heads!!! Well I think KFC would want to hear that. Makes their hot wings easier to make. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif (sorry, but it came into my head, i apologize to all of you veggies out there.)

g99
2002-Nov-04, 12:39 PM
but the vomet comet only acieves the feeling of weightlessness for a couple of seconds at a time (corret me if i am wrong here) I think around 60-90 sec right? I don't know about you but i think it takes significantly longer to perform the act, even for a practiced married couple. (altought i know some people who will disagree, but they are usually joking /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif ) So how does it work that way?

But seriously, i think that NASA, the Russian space agency, and the European Space Agency are really kidding themselves if they think that a mixed sex (or sometimes a same sex) crew will not get intimate with eachother on long term space missions or on long stays on ISS. I am sue it has already happened. DO they stock protection onboard ISS? I would think that they do, alotught the modifications to deal with the (relative) wieghtlessness would be interesting to see.

Chuck
2002-Nov-04, 03:39 PM
Maybe it would be a good investment for a woman to pay the $20,000,000 tourist fee to visit the space station to give birth. Her child would be the first true alien from outer space. The fame of being the first child born in space would surely bring in enough money to make the trip profitable in the long run.

Valiant Dancer
2002-Nov-04, 04:02 PM
On 2002-11-03 23:46, g99 wrote:
Have they had couples in space? Have they done experiments with mating animals and animals giving birth in space? Does the birthing process happen normally, or is it interrupted or different in some way? Does the fetus come out normal, or affected diffeently by the gravity reduction?

P.S. this was posted on another thread that will most likely be banned, that is why some of you might see it twice. But it will probobly be banned before anyone answers. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif



That would depend on who you ask.

NASA and the Russian Space Agency both have said that there is no time in their schedules for such a frivolous study.

The Star and Weekly World News (bastions of Truth(tm)) have reported differently.

Valiant Dancer
2002-Nov-04, 04:14 PM
On 2002-11-04 10:39, Chuck wrote:
Maybe it would be a good investment for a woman to pay the $20,000,000 tourist fee to visit the space station to give birth. Her child would be the first true alien from outer space. The fame of being the first child born in space would surely bring in enough money to make the trip profitable in the long run.




Oh. Bad idea. Really, really bad idea.

Major problems.

Giving birth is a messy business. How are you gonna contain it?

Babies need gravity to help them clear the liquid in their lungs. Constant freefall = zero G. Or do we let her do this on the shuttle and accellerate when it's time?

Once born, the baby will have to deal with equalizing pressure in its ears. How ya gonna get the baby down without hurting it?

Sometimes, problems happen during delivery. Governmental agencies tend to want to bring everyone back alive. This would constitute an unacceptable risk.

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-04, 09:00 PM
Babies need gravity to help them clear the liquid in their lungs.Sorry, this is not correct. Doctors no longer hold newborns upside down to "clear their lungs"--newborns begin to breathe because of biochemistry, and it's not dependent on gravity. You suction out the glop that happens to be in the infant's mouth, so she doesn't aspirate it when she starts to breathe, but she doesn't have to be upside down, and she doesn't need gravity to breathe.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/304054.asp

What causes newborns
to breathe?

< snip >

Upon delivery, the umbilical cord is clamped and the placental gas exchange is disrupted, leading to increased carbon dioxide and decreased oxygen in the body.

This imbalance is quickly discovered by sensory nerve cells, called chemoreceptors, which signal the respiratory center in the brain stem to start breathing.

A message is then sent to the lungs and respiratory muscles to initiate that first breath. Gas exchange is thus initiated in the lungs.

Fluid in the fetal lungs also plays a role in the initiation of breathing. Prior to birth, the fetal lungs are inflated with liquid to about half of total lung capacity. During birth, some of the fluid is squeezed out as the baby moves through the birth canal. The remainder helps the lungs to inflate.

Once born, the baby will have to deal with equalizing pressure in its ears. This is dependent on the air pressure inside the shuttle or space station or whatever being Earth-normal, which it probably would be, as Mom can't give birth in a spacesuit, in vacuum. It's not dependent on gravity, just on air pressure, and again, it wouldn't be a problem.

The only problems I see with giving birth in space would be the fact that as you said, things do go wrong.

And, she'd be a citizen of what country? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jigsaw on 2002-11-04 16:14 ]</font>

Smaug
2002-Nov-04, 11:41 PM
On 2002-11-04 11:14, Valiant Dancer wrote:


On 2002-11-04 10:39, Chuck wrote:
Maybe it would be a good investment for a woman to pay the $20,000,000 tourist fee to visit the space station to give birth. Her child would be the first true alien from outer space. The fame of being the first child born in space would surely bring in enough money to make the trip profitable in the long run.




Oh. Bad idea. Really, really bad idea.

Major problems.

Giving birth is a messy business. How are you gonna contain it?

Babies need gravity to help them clear the liquid in their lungs. Constant freefall = zero G. Or do we let her do this on the shuttle and accellerate when it's time?

Once born, the baby will have to deal with equalizing pressure in its ears. How ya gonna get the baby down without hurting it?

Sometimes, problems happen during delivery. Governmental agencies tend to want to bring everyone back alive. This would constitute an unacceptable risk.




There would be problems in giving birth in space, however the show I watched was focused on the problems with fetus development in microgravity. Going back the the chicken part... I don't think we want spacecraft pilots without heads.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Smaug on 2002-11-04 18:42 ]</font>

Chuck
2002-Nov-05, 12:00 AM
The mother should certainly stay on earth until the kid has a head. This would be a publicity stunt, not a scientific experiment.

The risk might be unacceptable to the U.S. government, but it's an international space station. Other countries might do it for the money.

nebularain
2002-Nov-05, 12:09 AM
And just what are the chances that a pregnant woman would even be allowed to be launched from Earth into orbit in the first place?

Superstring
2002-Nov-05, 12:50 AM
On 2002-11-04 19:09, nebularain wrote:
And just what are the chances that a pregnant woman would even be allowed to be launched from Earth into orbit in the first place?




Good question. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif But even if a pregnant woman is allowed to, I'm not sure if she would even WANT to have a child born in space. Plus, I doubt she would be too happy if the baby was born lacking a head. And what would be the point anyway? For all I know being born in space MAY lead to some health problems later on in the baby's life (how do we know it won't? No one has ever tried it).

Just my 2 cents worth.

g99
2002-Nov-05, 01:51 AM
I'm sorry, but what does gravity have to do with having a head or not. I personally think that the chickens (chicks?) were a mutation. If they did it again and the same thing happened with a different chickens eggs than you might have something. But the head is programed by genetics, not weather you have gravity or not.

ljbrs
2002-Nov-05, 02:16 AM
JS Princeton:

See what you started with that marvelous link?

I wager two percent interest on a dollar for a year that this thread will last longer than any of the others on BA (unless Phil Plait deletes it before it overloads his system).

Of course, before NASA ever dreams of human space travel, the powers that be will need to find out about the possibilities involved. I do not think that NASA will have any problems in finding volunteers.

ljbrs /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-05, 04:18 AM
Well, the Chinese did hatch some "space chickens" just recently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sci/tech/1948317.stm

Wednesday, 24 April, 2002, 11:10 GMT 12:10 UK
China hatches space chickens

Three chickens have hatched in China from eggs that spent almost a week in orbit in March aboard the unmanned Shenzhou III spacecraft, Chinese state media says.
The animals, one female and two male, hatched from nine eggs, which travelled 108 times around the Earth on a seven-day flight that ended on 1 April. So they were already fertilized when they went up, but apparently they have heads.

Espritch
2002-Nov-05, 05:29 AM
Of course they only got three chickens from 9 eggs. Maybe the other six didn't have heads and they just decided to omit that little detail.

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-05, 05:29 AM
I'm looking around on Google for the "Russian space chickens" (Hint: do not put "space chicks" into search engine), and so far all I've got is the quail eggs they sent up in the BION satellite in 1979.

http://lifesci.arc.nasa.gov/LIS/Programs/Cosmos/overview/Cosmos_Biosat.html

And hey, I found the actual experiment.

http://lifesci.arc.nasa.gov/lis/Experiment_App/C1129_1.html

Although all of the quail eggs were adversely impacted by an inflight failure of the incubator humidifier, several embryos were able to progress to a developmental stage equivalent to that of a control ten- to twelve-day embryo.

< snip >

Based upon examination of the external features and analyses of the one quail flight embryo received, development under conditions of space flight appeared to be normal. The drop in relative humidity to a level of 23-25% for a period over six days must have led to a dehydration of the eggs and an increase in the fragility of the shell.
And BTW, this was the same trip where they sent up male and female rats, but...

Both flight and synchronous rat groups were provided a dual chambered mating cage. Fertility in test animals was assured by successful preflight breeding. The divider separating male and female rats was removed on the second day of flight.

< snip >

None of the flight or synchronous rat females gave birth as a result of breeding that may have occurred during the flight phase of the experiment...The basic questions concerning mammalian copulation, insemination, fertilization, implantation, placentation, and embryo- genesis still remain unanswered. So, would being up in a biosatellite have counted as "zero G" mating?

There are diagrams of the "rodent mating chamber" and quail egg incubator here.
http://lifesci.arc.nasa.gov/lis/Programs/Cosmos/Cosmos_1129/Cosmos_1129.html#quailegg1

I love the Internet. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Smaug
2002-Nov-05, 05:38 AM
On 2002-11-04 20:51, g99 wrote:
I'm sorry, but what does gravity have to do with having a head or not. I personally think that the chickens (chicks?) were a mutation. If they did it again and the same thing happened with a different chickens eggs than you might have something. But the head is programed by genetics, not weather you have gravity or not.



I'm not sure why, but they just simply developed without heads! However I did mention that they succeeded in a later mission.

As to the reason on why to see if a baby can be born(not to mention develop) in zero-g. If we don't have problems breeding in space, then it would ensure that the mission, say to a distant star(or even galaxy /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif ) would have people to man the spacecraft if it takes longer than the average human lifespan. Also in space colonies, if they are small, you can have the hospital section more in the center for easy access? I think the possibilities are endless as to where we could go with the right ship and some babies /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

Also, here is a neat link for a great space colony design http://www.dyarstraights.com/msgundam/frontier.html#top just for fun(in this design, there is enough space where you wouldn't need a centrally located hospital. However these colonies were designed to stay in LaGrange Points and not wander the cosmos)

Espritch
2002-Nov-05, 05:57 AM
I put 'space babies' in Yahoo and found the following relevant link.

http://www.floridatoday.com/space/explore/stories/1996b/070596c.htm


For several years, NASA has been researching the possibility of human reproduction in space through a series of shuttle experiments, the latest of which are aboard Columbia during its current mission.

Only a bunch of NASA science geeks would study human reproduction by sending fish eggs into space. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Espritch on 2002-11-05 01:01 ]</font>

Glutomoto
2002-Nov-05, 06:53 AM
On 2002-11-04 01:39, Smaug wrote:
I was watching this show about space exploration on "The Science Channel"(Division of Discovery Channel). They talked about this subject. In one Russian mission(might have even been American) they incubated chicken eggs up there and when they hatched... they had no heads! After trying again they chickens had heads though. Also they said that one couple volunteered to "do the hippity dippity" on the vomit comet(you know the airplane).


This has got to be some bad science to the first degree. Don't birds peck their way out of the shell ?? I guess they meant, when it was time for the eggs to hatch they were opened by the experimenters to find that the chickens had no heads. Sorry Smaug, i am not trying to get down on you. It seems like a small point, but it also doesn't mesh with normal avian birth process to say, they hatched with no heads.

this subject can make you lose your lunch http://bbs.artistdirect.com/images/smilies/sick.gif

Smaug
2002-Nov-05, 02:46 PM
On 2002-11-05 01:53, Glutomoto wrote:


On 2002-11-04 01:39, Smaug wrote:
I was watching this show about space exploration on "The Science Channel"(Division of Discovery Channel). They talked about this subject. In one Russian mission(might have even been American) they incubated chicken eggs up there and when they hatched... they had no heads! After trying again they chickens had heads though. Also they said that one couple volunteered to "do the hippity dippity" on the vomit comet(you know the airplane).


This has got to be some bad science to the first degree. Don't birds peck their way out of the shell ?? I guess they meant, when it was time for the eggs to hatch they were opened by the experimenters to find that the chickens had no heads. Sorry Smaug, i am not trying to get down on you. It seems like a small point, but it also doesn't mesh with normal avian birth process to say, they hatched with no heads.

this subject can make you lose your lunch http://bbs.artistdirect.com/images/smilies/sick.gif


I can certainly understand what your saying. I never even thought of that myself. As I have said before though, I don't remember the specifics of the experiment. They only mentioned that they had no heads. Perhaps they did remove the shell for them? I simply just don't know. A weird topic though huh? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif
Good point, thanks for bringing it up

TinFoilHat
2002-Nov-05, 03:13 PM
I heard a man speaking at a convention once insisting that it had been proven that conception was impossible in space. He said that it had been demonstrated that couplings in space could never lead to pregnancies - for some reason the fertilized egg either never implanted or never developed properly. Anything too this, or was he talking nonsense, or just not enough evidence to decide yet?

The fellow saying this was very authorative-sounding, yet (I found out later) very wrong on a lot of his math and figures for other things he was saying.

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-05, 08:59 PM
He might have been talking about the rats, but there's never been any experimentation on humans. So he's just talking through his hat.

Unless, of course, he got his information direct from the Nibiru aliens...

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-05, 09:02 PM
sorry, double post, my bad

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jigsaw on 2002-11-05 16:06 ]</font>

g99
2002-Nov-06, 12:09 AM
so NASA has done reproduction reaserch. Hmm...Why cover it up?

But i can't see why it wont work. The egg descends by mucle and fluid action. If a woman hanghs upside wown, the egg will not fall back into the fallopian tube! Also asperm can swim very well so there is no reason there. What i would like to know is what the bone density of newborns will be when born in zero G. If not right after birt, then several months after during the growth phase.

David Hall
2002-Nov-06, 04:39 PM
On 2002-11-04 07:39, g99 wrote:

I am sue it has already happened. DO they stock protection onboard ISS? I would think that they do, alotught the modifications to deal with the (relative) wieghtlessness would be interesting to see.


Some people think that it would be difficult for such activities to take place in 0G, and others think it would be like heaven. I lean towards the latter myself. Humans can be quite creative in their pursuit of this particular brand of entertainment, and I think that any problems encountered would be easily solved with a little experimentation.

But I really doubt it's happened yet, at least on the American side. In the first place, just where are these people going to get any privacy? they're in a very small enclosed space with several other astronauts, a tight schedule, and have cameras and biosensors running 24/7. Not to mention very tight schedules giving these people little free time for 'cavorting'.

The shuttle would be impossible. The ISS only slightly less so, due to it's larger size and continuous habitation, but it still seems unlikely to me. The only place I could really see it as possible would have been on MIR. But that assumes the cosmonauts would have had more privacy, which in itself is a bit of a stretch.

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-06, 05:02 PM
NASA has not done reproduction research on mammals, unless I missed something. The Russians sent up some rats in a satellite, but just because they didn't come back pregnant doesn't really constitute "research".

Also, the fallopian tubes move the egg by muscle and fluids, like you said, so this is not dependent on gravity, either. The egg doesn't "fall" into the uterus--it's "conveyed" by the muscular waves in the fallopian tubes. Your food doesn't "fall" down into your stomach when you swallow--it's "conveyed" by your esophagus. This is how people can eat in zero G. And I would expect that a mammal wouldn't have any trouble getting pregnant in zero G, either.




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jigsaw on 2002-11-06 12:03 ]</font>

Wisconsin_Mike
2002-Nov-06, 06:09 PM
This thread got me wondering if Bill and Monica made it into the Mile High Club on Air Force One?

Now, back on topic... I have no doubt that any two people in as good physical condition as our astronauts are in would have no problem completing copulation in space. Where there's a will, there's a way.

Now as to the question of whether they HAVE, I wonder if they wear heart monitors 24/7? Would the sudden acceleration of the heartbeat of two astronauts during lights out would indicate something, uh, unprofessional was taking place? Just checking...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wisconsin_Mike on 2002-11-06 13:35 ]</font>

GrapesOfWrath
2002-Nov-06, 06:12 PM
Didn't Tom Hanks take his off? Or was that Kevin Bacon?

David Hall
2002-Nov-06, 06:17 PM
On 2002-11-06 13:12, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
Didn't Tom Hanks take his off? Or was that Kevin Bacon?


It was all three, though I forget who started it.

Wisconsin_Mike
2002-Nov-06, 06:37 PM
It's not just the mess of birth you have to worry about containing in zero-G, but based on my wife's experience morning sickness presents containment problems as well...

Jim
2002-Nov-06, 06:44 PM
I wonder if they wear heart monitors 24/7? Would the sudden acceleration of the heartbeat of two astronauts during lights out would indicate something, uh, unprofessional was taking place? Just checking...



Didn't Tom Hanks take his off? Or was that Kevin Bacon?



It was all three, though I forget who started it.


What are you folks suggesting?

Or do I want to know?

Doodler
2002-Nov-06, 06:52 PM
Withdrawn after reading second page, my question got answered.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Doodler on 2002-11-06 13:54 ]</font>

2002-Nov-07, 11:31 PM
As a matter of fact, I read an article a long while ago about the Soviet experiments on this count, and how used smuggled condoms were found on several Soyuz capsules after the flight. However, what piqued my curiosity was that a woman was indeed fertilized while in orbit and gave birth to a normal boy(on Earth) who was named Nikolai(Kolya). The father's identity however remains unknown. Should I try and dig up the article?

g99
2002-Nov-08, 12:49 AM
Gambit, if you could that would be amazing!! Is the source reliable or is it some news based website? It the boy came out perfectly that would be a big plus for space colonization and the colonization of asteroids. Next would be to give birth in space. I bet they can find a voluteer if they promise a free trip into space and the best doctor available on earth.

2002-Nov-09, 01:31 AM
I don't know, the credibility Occam's Razor is not tilting towards the newspaper, because they mentioned experiments with the elastic belt on the STS-75, which has an all male crew. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif
Most likely only a rumour, but worth pursuing.

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-09, 04:55 AM
The Russian cosmonaut who had a baby.

http://www.nauts.com/bios/cosmonaut/savitskaya.html

Savitskaya continued putting her name in the record books, becoming the second woman in space on August 19, 1982.

Savitskaya and fellow crew members Leonid Popov and Alexander Serebrov flew Soyuz T-7 to dock with the Salyut 7 space station. They conducted experiments and returned the Soyuz T-5 crew to Earth.

However, it was her second flight aboard Soyuz T-12 for which she is best known. On July 25, 1984, Savitskaya and cosmonaut Vladimir Dzhanibekov performed an EVA to conduct welding experiments with the Salyut 7 space station. The space walk lasted 3.58 hours. It was the first time a woman walked in space.

The Soyuz T-12 mission was her last trip to space. She was appointed Commander of an all-female crew to Salyut 7 for International Women's Day, but the mission was canceled because of problems with the space station and the limited availability of Soyuz T spacecraft.

< snip >

Savitskaya is married to Viktor Khatkovsky, an engineer and pilot at Ilyushin aircraft design bureau.
http://www.iwasm.org/airspace/bios/savitsk.htm

Planned September 1986. To have docked with Mir. Cancelled all-female flight to be launched on International Woman's Day. Breakdown of Salyut 7, exhaustion of stock of Soyuz T spacecraft led to cancellation of mission. Officially cancelled after birth of Savtskaya's baby. So if she did get pregnant in orbit, it would have been during the 1984 Soyuz T-12 mission, and she would have had about 10 days on the new-and-improved Salyut 7 space station to do it.

The All-female mission was evidently officially canceled in April 1986.
http://www.friends-partners.ru/partners/mwade/chrono/19862.htm

So if she got pregnant in July of 1984, she would have had the baby in April of 1985, so I don't understand why it took the Russians a year to decide to cancel the trip, although the fact that the Challenger explosion was in January 1986 might have made them extra-jittery, so it might have been just a combination of factors.

I can't find any information on the baby, what its name was, or anything.

Link describing the space station. Not as crowded as the shuttle, and I don't think they were under constant video surveillance from the ground, were they?

http://www.nauts.com/vehicles/80s/salyut7/index.html

That's the one that "deorbited" in 1991, setting off Chicken Little Alarms all over the U.S. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jigsaw on 2002-11-09 00:01 ]</font>

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-09, 05:09 AM
Although I realized after I posted, that we may be doing her a disservice, and the line "after the birth of her baby" might just mean that she and Viktor had a baby and the Russians were reluctant to allow a Mom into orbit, and they didn't have any other female cosmonauts qualified to lead the mission, so they scrapped it. It's only that one mention and I can't find it anywhere else in any other contexts. It's such old news.

g99
2002-Nov-09, 05:49 AM
Good, so it is definitely possible to get pregnant in space. Now it would be good to go throught the whole life cycle with something like a fly or spider, then onto mammals. See if it is the same.

I understand the reluctance to send up the mission with the new mother. They probobly did it for safety reasons and for the fact that she was a new mother. I know it is commonly percieved that russians are heartless, but they are not that evil. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

beskeptical
2002-Nov-09, 06:01 AM
Timing the human delivery would be tricky unless 20 mil got you a couple weeks on the ISS.

The head wouldn't disolve so unless the whole 9 month gestation was on the ISS from start to finish the headless chickens example wouldn't be relevant.

If it even happened. How do we know Smaug isn't trying to start an internet rumor? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

David Hall
2002-Nov-09, 07:07 PM
Thanks for the link Jigsaw. Savitskaya at least, doesn't seem to fit the bill for concieving in orbit. The timing is off, and there's no evidence of anything happening. And there's one more point that was overlooked. If she did conceive in space, then it wasn't with her husband. (Not that that necessarily means much however, but it does make it less likely.)

I tried putting her name in Google, but nearly all the hits were copies of the one above. I did find this interesting one about the Russian attitude towards it's female cosmonauts though, including an interesting comment by Savitskaya.
http://www.chron.com/content/interactive/space/missions/mir/news/1988/19880112.html

So there's still no evidence of anything happening in space. The link above says there have been only 8 female cosmonauts in space. It seems unlikely anything has happened considering it's such a small number, and they were mostly sent up for publicity purposes. I have a feeling Gambit's memory is based on nothing more than hearsay and rumor.

David Hall
2002-Nov-09, 07:19 PM
Here's another story on sex in space, but you should consider the source when you read it.

http://english.pravda.ru/fun/2001/09/03/14042.html

David Hall
2002-Nov-09, 07:34 PM
One more. Here's a possible source for Gambit's claim. It's about Valentina Tereshkova, the first woman in space:



Nevertheless, space did manifestly change her life in other ways. Not long after her flight, Valentina married Andrian G. Nikolayev, another cosmonaut and the pilot of the Vostok 3 mission in August 1962.

The celeb marriage did not last very long, but it did produce another first, the world's first "space baby" born to parents who had both experienced life in orbit. The couple's daughter Yelena is now a 38-year-old doctor, and is herself the mother of a school-age son.


Note her husband's name is Nikolayev, similar to the name Gambit thought the child's name was.

http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp?id=20020917IE11

David Hall
2002-Nov-09, 07:52 PM
Ok, last one for today (I promise). Here's a good, even-handed article on all aspects of sexual relations in space.

http://www.space.edu/LibraryResearch/sex.html

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-09, 10:39 PM
No, no, that's okay, this is fun. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif The Pravda links are always the most fun...

2002-Nov-09, 10:51 PM
I remember distinctly that the woman was not a career cosmonaut, but someone specifically for that experiment.

Smaug
2002-Nov-09, 11:51 PM
hehe evil internet rumor. I know I do sound a little cooky. I just wish I remembered what the show was called. It was on the Science Channel (division of Discovery Channel). They usually play the same shows over and over for a while. Hmmm might have been entitled "Space Exploration". I don't think the channel is offered on basic cable packages. My dad finally got us digital cable. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

oskorei
2002-Nov-11, 09:35 AM
However, there have been only three Russian women-cosmonauts: Tereshkova, Savitskaya, and Kondakova. ( http://www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/woman_cosmonaut_010126.html ). And, AFAIK, there never were any Russian space "tourists". Maybe the crew of one of the Soyuzes smuggled someone aboard? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Jigsaw
2002-Nov-11, 03:26 PM
Well, Gambit, if the Russians really did send up a female cosmonaut for the express purposes of seeing whether she could get pregnant, it sure isn't mentioned on any websites that I can find. I think we're talking "evil Internet rumor" here.

Gambit
2002-Nov-11, 08:49 PM
The source isn't from the 'net, so you never really know. Considering that we're talking about the times when not everything about the Soyuz missions was released, I would not be surprised if such information is still hidden. For whatever purposes.