A colossal elevator to space could be going up sooner than you ever imagined

a reply to: Groot

And yet we went to the Moon with similar mechanical and electronic devices quite some time ago.

The mechanics and electronics are already in existence, the problem up until now has been the material science, but with the likes of carbon nanotubes and Buckyballs influencing said science, the problem is one we can realistically attempt to solve.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Groot

And yet we went to the Moon with similar mechanical and electronic devices quite some time ago.

The mechanics and electronics are already in existence, the problem up until now has been the material science, but with the likes of carbon nanotubes and Buckyballs influencing said science, the problem is one we can realistically attempt to solve.

The problem is , that back in the 60's and 70's, elevators, here on earth, lasted for ever. With todays ever evolving technology, things are not as reliable as they use to be. I deal with it on a daily basis.

You have to look at it realistically. Todays tech is designed to fail of not engineered well.

Back when thing were made to last, and thoroughly tested, it was different.

I love it when engineers throw stuff out there and we, as mechanics, have to figure it out and tell them how stupid they are.

Things look good on paper, but in the real world, ha, not so much.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

You would still require a means of launching man and equipment from Earth to the Moon to colonize the place.

Rockets will never do the job cost effectively which is why it will never happen.

A space elevator is a stepping stone to the stars and actually viable with the technology and materials we already have at our disposal.

Seems to me we would be rather silly not to attempt to build one although the whole notion of such does somewhat reek of The Tower of Babylon described in the Bible.

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

originally posted by: notsure1


I am very envious of the people who are around 1000 years from now.

As long as we dont destroy ourselves or get destroyed it would be a great time to be alive.

There is a very serious, very determined group of people who say if you can survive the next 30 years you can live the next 1000...hang in there!

Who wants to live to be 1000?

999 year olds.

a reply to: Groot

Problem is today's technology is designed with a life cycle in mind and constructed with materials to specific tolerances, essentially designed to fail.

That does not mean we do not know how to build things to last.

Like i said the technology to do so is already there, just not the production process where mass production of carbon nano fibre is concerned.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Groot

Problem is today's technology is designed with a life cycle in mind and constructed with materials to specific tolerances, essentially designed to fail.

That does not mean we do not know how to build things to last.

Like i said the technology to do so is already there, just not the production process where mass production of carbon nano fibre is concerned.

Why even argue with me with that response. That doesn't make any sense . You just admitted to it. LOL !

No cheers for you, I drink your beer !

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: LookingAtMars

You would still require a means of launching man and equipment from Earth to the Moon to colonize the place.

Rockets will never do the job cost effectively which is why it will never happen.

A space elevator is a stepping stone to the stars and actually viable with the technology and materials we already have at our disposal.

Seems to me we would be rather silly not to attempt to build one although the whole notion of such does somewhat reek of The Tower of Babylon described in the Bible.

Bungee cords are cheap.

A ride on the space elevator is not in my bucket list.

It would take days.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

It would take a few hours dependant on propulsion but keep in mind you could have a semi-infinite amount of electrical power provided via solar at the top and nuclear at the bottom.

Could even generate power on return trips which could be stored then used to propel the elevator carriage back up the tether i suppose.

a reply to: Groot

Admitted what?

That we may have a means to actually depart this rock and tangibly address the prospect of colonizing other planets within our own star system or that we simply do not have the will nor monies made available to actually attempt to build the thing?

Think of what we could build up there in near vacuum and low gravity.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: burgerbuddy

It would take a few hours dependant on propulsion but keep in mind you could have a semi-infinite amount of electrical power provided via solar at the top and nuclear at the bottom.

Could even generate power on return trips which could be stored then used to propel the elevator carriage back up the tether i suppose.

Hey, guess what kind of tech we have now? Elevators with regen drives. We generate power back to the grid. Ask me how !

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

I'm pretty sure they will be built out of graphene.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

Just think of the terrorism possibilities!

20,000 miles of unobtainium. Falling ... really fast. Around the equator!


One...TRILLION...dollars.

Or else.

a reply to: Phage

Hahaha, please tell me James Cameron is making the film adaptation of this future event.

a reply to: Lysergic

I think it's from a Niven story. But for the life of me I can't remember which one.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Just think of the terrorism possibilities!

20,000 miles of unobtainium. Falling ... really fast. Around the equator!


One...TRILLION...dollars.

Or else.

Good thing it wont be unobtainium.

There are claims that it wouldn't be that bad with a realistic material. Upper parts of the cable would break off, burn up on reentry. Lower parts would reach the surface, but won't cause much mayhem due to aerodynamic drag and low density of the cable.

Someone even wrote a simulation (it does not account for atmospheric friction): gassend.net...

Still it might be a good idea to place the anchor as far away from land as possible. One suggested location is 2500 km west of Ecuador for example.

a reply to: moebius

Those sims are awesome! Somewhat intuitive, I guess. I figured the most effective ploy would be separation at the counterweight.

That's some deep sea out there, in the middle of the Pacific though.

We'll build more than one. We expand, we build more. You want one, I want one, China wants one too. Better spread them out.

The part on the OP diagram that stood out is where is describes the minute effects on Earth's rotation.

Minute. Until there's 400 elevators all operating at different rates and weights just like normal air traffic down on Earth.

Minute. Until this has been going on for several centuries. Or millenia.


Might not be an issue we can't overcome but playing around with the speed of our rotation has 'side effects'

What about space debris orbiting the earth ?

I like the idea but I really don't see how it's feasible

a reply to: Breakthestreak

You want one, I want one, China wants one too. Better spread them out.

Can't. Much.
The ground station has to be quite close the equator and the counterweight has to be in a geosynchronous orbit.

Space is big, but...

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Sounds great but what will stop debris, asteroids from smashing it to pieces?