Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-23-2005, 06:39 PM
SomethingClever SomethingClever is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3
Default Re: Feasibility of Space Elevator?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, rocket scientist, but wouldn't it go flying off into space if the connection is severed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I'm said rocket scientist, but he means the part that's tethered to the ground.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I guess it depends where the connection is severed. But the most likely place for it to be severed would be closer to earth than to the top part, for obvious reasons.

Wouldn't the majority fly off into space, leaving just the small part below the sever to fall to earth?
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-23-2005, 08:36 PM
Jingleheimer Jingleheimer is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7
Default Re: Feasibility of Space Elevator?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, rocket scientist, but wouldn't it go flying off into space if the connection is severed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I'm said rocket scientist, but he means the part that's tethered to the ground.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I guess it depends where the connection is severed. But the most likely place for it to be severed would be closer to earth than to the top part, for obvious reasons.

Wouldn't the majority fly off into space, leaving just the small part below the sever to fall to earth?

[/ QUOTE ]

You could design for this. Obviously the bottom of the elevator would be much thicker than the top, and there would be a counterweight slightly beyond the geosynchronous radius.

Smart people have thought about this, and there is a lot of literature out there (some of it not even by crackpots) which indicates the feasibility if you have a material with a dream strength-to-weight ratio like diamond (enter nanotech zealots) or carbon nanotubes. The problem with nanotubes is that we can't make them in bulk right now (I think no plant can even make 1lb/day right now) and you can't make them long enough either (1cm max so far)- you certainly can't envision anything very long made from anything that short. And it's not an inevitability to make really really long nanotubes either; these are single molecules. It's not like process optimization.

I think a space elevator is a very long way off. I'd wager any amount of money that one won't be built in 30 years.

J
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-23-2005, 08:40 PM
Jingleheimer Jingleheimer is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7
Default Re: Feasibility of Space Elevator?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(don't think it could be built on US soil, needs to be closer to the equator)

[/ QUOTE ]

I seem to recall that Arthur C. Clarke said Sri Lanka would be an ideal spot. Close to the equator and something about how the earth bulges in some areas. I guess the bulge is closer to space. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It's got to be a geostationary orbit- you can't have that over anyplace other than the equator.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-23-2005, 08:44 PM
MtnDave MtnDave is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 4
Default Re: Feasibility of Space Elevator?

Get Paul Allen interested. Right up his alley.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-23-2005, 09:00 PM
jakethebake jakethebake is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9
Default Re: Feasibility of Space Elevator?

[ QUOTE ]
Get Paul Allen interested. Right up his alley.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea. He's a pipe dream expert.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.