I am curious about Newton’s Third Law (For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.)
I know that when fired, the bullet would behave just as Cecil described. Even when taking mass into consideration wouldn’t the “gun-slinger” be on fast trip in the opposite direction? Or… Do I need a refresher course in physics?
CaberCatcher
The gun-slinger has recoil to worry about, but he and the gun put together have a much larger mass than the bullet. The “equal and opposite reaction” is that he and the gun between them have a momentum exactly equal and opposite to the bullet. Since momentum equals velocity times mass, if the firer has (say) ten thousand times the mass of the bullet, he’ll acquire a velocity one ten-thousandth that of the bullet. A seriously quick bullet departing the scene at 1km per second sees the firer heading the other way at 10cm per second. So delete “fast”, insert “slow”, and you’re dead right.
The mass ratio stated above would be a 100kg firer and a 10g bullet - that’s about 220 pounds versus a third of an ounce, roughly. Not necessarily spot on but in the ballpark.
Hey there, Cabercatcher. The gun-in-space item is a staff report written by Bricker, one of Cecil’s assistant, not by Cecil himself. So I’ll move this thread to the Comments on Staff Reports forum.
Also, a link to the item you’re commenting on is appreciated. This is the one: Would a gun work in space?
bibliophage? I think you have the wrong link there - at least I’m kinda surprised to imagine Bricker involved in something called “The Monkey Chow Diaries.” And I wonder where the SDSTAFF report might be on that page. 
(And if I can be so bold - what on earth brought you to that page?)
Who knew Bricker was a goofy 20 something trying to subsist on a diet of Monkey Chow…
I’ve corrected the links. They now go to Bricker’s article instead of The Monkey Chow Diaries.
Gfactor
And by the way, great report, Bricker.
Yeah. What he said.
I’ve crunched numbers and shooting single bullet from 9mm pistol would propel me with extreme speed of 0.15 mph, rounded. Even emptying whole magazine from a Glock wouldn’t propel me with speed that I would call fast.
I’ve read that the Soviets stashed some small arms aboard their spacecraft during the Cold War, but more to defend themselves against critters upon landing (they always parachuted down over land, sometimes in pretty remote areas of the USSR or its dependencies) than to fight American astronauts. As far as I know, no one’s ever fired a gun in space.
A bigger consideration would be that unless the firearm is held close to the center of mass (just slightly south of the navel, on most men, almost in between the hips on women) you’ll start to tumble. Granted, the energy we’re talking about is, as earlier posters noted, not that high, but it will have a much bigger effect on your attitude in space than you’d expect if you were only considering how much it would move your entire mass. After a couple of shots, you’d probably have to reorient yourself.
Only against aliens who speak English.
Cosmonauts were expected to land in the wilderness and be prepared to defend themselves against the worst that Russian wildlife could throw at them. They have a triple barrelled gun for this purpose;
But the USSR did have at least one armed station in orbit, Salyut 3. The gun was allegedly tested after the crew returned to Earth and the station was due to be deorbited.
Bricker’s article claims that space has no temperature. I must confess I can’t get my head around that concept. So what happens to thermometer if you take it into deep space. Does it lose its mind?
Chefguy, I have been to space, symbolically, so maybe that answers your question, as I do feel like a thermometer on this forum.
Chefguy, the place to begin is with a definition of what temperature really is: It’s a measure of the average kinetic energy (brownian motion) of the molecules in a given substance. Since a vacuum, which is what space is, lacks molecules, it can’t have any temperature, itself.
(I’m simplifying, here - at the edges of things this definition breaks down - but it’ll work for the basics.)
What your thermometer will be measuring then, isn’t a temperature of a surrounding environment, so much as it’s own response to the radiation impinging upon it, or the radiation it’s giving off. In direct sunlight, for example, the thermometer will probably read a very high temperature, because it would be receiving so much more radiative energy than it would be broadcasting.
How much force did the compressed air gun used for Gemini spacewalks produce?
That reminds me of the quiz Dad had on a team building exercise, you were given a list of things found in a life boat, on the moon etc and uses for them were asked for. A pair of handguns were useful in space to help you move about the moon, point them in the opposite direction of travel and pull the trigger. How a pair of hand guns got to the moon in the first place was never raised.
Well, if you were actually on the Moon, the handguns wouldn’t be very useful for transportation, a lot easier to just walk. (Or rather, proceed in short hops, as all the Apollo astronauts adapted to; why did that sliding backwards dance step ever get called the “moonwalk”? No resemblance.)
Did Dick Tracy wear his piece when he was playing golf on the Moon?
I’m sure he did. You never know when, and where, Flattop might try to put a hit on you.
So if the thermometer was in a box of some sort (lead?), where there were no external radiation impinging upon it?