Help
FORUMS › General Discussions › Open Forum › Doing the math
TOPIC: Doing_the_math
« Prev  1  2  3  4  Next »
11 to 20 of 40
User Details are only visible to members.
On an episode of Underdog, the Earth flopped over on its side. It was snowing in the tropics. The reason was that Simon bar Sinister (with his loyal assistant, Cad), had marched all the elephants in the world up to the North Pole -- making the planet top-heavy.

This Space Tower project might have the same effect. Beware: if you ignore history (or 1960's cartoons) you may repeat it!

Username hidden
(2984 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
VA:

lol... critiques are nice...

I think that I wasn't clear on a few issues. 1) I abandoned the notion that there would be a single elevator shaft. (I always intended there to be multiple lifts to exist within it.)

2) The five mile wide area was for the single shaft Idea, I have now shifted this to a five mile radius of individual elevators running along a cable to the space station above/counterweight. I have yet to do the math on how large each lift will be, but there will be three different lift types. Blue for those requiring atmosphere and temperatures. Orange for cargo which requires above freezing temperatures and some atmosphere. Then Gray for ores and other things not requiring atmosphere.

3) Powering each lift is still something I have yet to decide. It is 800 years into the future… I think we would have power generation capacity for each individual lift… but if not I could always say that the counter weight beams lasers to satellites which transfers it to the lifts.

4) Gravity, speed and reentry, it’s the future! They have a limited ability to alter the gravity of an object. This is why they have artificial gravity. I could go on for a page as to why there are two kinds of ships. (Atmosphere ships and space ships.) But it gets quite boring when you must talk about structural integrity and how it works differently for space ships which aren't allowed within the Geostationary orbits of planets. (Only exception being medium size military frigates all ships larger are unable to survive reentry.)

Please, poke holes into these ideas before they become concrete.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(8416 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Not to be overly crude in this question, but where the hell are all these people and shit going? When the get to the top, what's waiting for them? You're going to cram 1.2 million people in a 25 sq mi space for a 22,300 mile ride? That's less than a 5x5 square per person, and even if the ride were at Mach 1 (quite unrealistic) it would still take about 32 hours. Better have a lot of portapotties.

I guess one could make some allowances for awesome technology to somehow apply the energy needed to accelerate this thing - if the platform weighed 300 pounds per sq ft (being that it's 5 miles wide, it would need to be pretty strong), plus the weight of all that crap - so probably 400 pounds per square foot - a little over 5 million metric tons. Minimum. To accelerate this with a force of 2 G would require (neglecting wind resistance, which I assure you a 5x5 mile square has a good amount of) would require around 35 TWh of power - roughly 140,000 times the power output of the Hiroshima bomb. The energy required for this would be enormous. My numbers of course have a great amount of estimates thrown in and the real number is probably off by at least a factor of 10, and likely even more, but you get my drift. It would probably be much more cost effective to do just about anything else with these people on Earth than hoist them by the millions into the sky.

I happen to really like math.

Windermere FL
Username hidden
(29004 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
holly:

"Believe it or not, I actually researched, wrote, and performed a speech about Nanotubes back in 97. I'll see if I can find it and I'll send you my source material. Even then scientists were talking about nanotubes allowing us to build an elevator into space."

Yep, I read that we are looking to the nanotubes, sadly we are still unable to produce anywhere near enough to make an elevator. Sadly we will not have a space elevator until we have a space mining program. We will not have a mining program for another 100 to 200 years... when we use up too much in the way of resources here on Earth.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(8416 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
No tim foil will act like an antannae, you need to make the hat's out of lead to keep others from reading your mind.... or so I was told

Middletown NY
Username hidden
(9784 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Use tinfoil. It works great for making hats.

Redford MI
Username hidden
(302 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Believe it or not, I actually researched, wrote, and performed a speech about Nanotubes back in 97. I'll see if I can find it and I'll send you my source material. Even then scientists were talking about nanotubes allowing us to build an elevator into space.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(4450 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
VA/Milf

This is why I stated that I had abandoned the tower Idea of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky in 1895 for the current... more realistic idea of a space elevator.

The most realistic ideas of having a cable made of carbon nanotube or boron nitride nanotube based materials. Anchor points (likely a ship, but for my book land) the opposing side would be the counter weight (space station for my book).

I am still working on coming up with a capacity ratio, but I am settling on 1.2 million people up and 1.2m down. Tonnage of materials moved is likely just going to be kept as a given.

Now I won't be going into the material it is actually made of... If asked I'll reply Unobtainium.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(8416 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
What if, instead of the tube being free-standing, how about it is suspended? Hang it from a satellite!

Redford MI
Username hidden
(302 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I know.. I was just having fun with you.

Actually, I think you'd find the biggest problem of all is that your proposed structure would be 4,460 times as high as it is wide, or to put it into more perspective, it would be like having a 1-inch wide bar 372 feet high. It simply would not remain upright and would flex and bend over/fracture under its own weight, even if it were solid steel or hell, even if it were solid diamond.

I know.... it's sci-fi...

Windermere FL
Username hidden
(29004 posts)
« Prev  1  2  3  4  Next »
11 to 20 of 40
TOPIC: Doing the math
This site does not contain sexually explicit images as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
Accordingly, neither this site nor the contents contained herein are covered by the record-keeping provisions of 18 USC 2257(a)-(c).
Disclaimer: This website contains adult material. You must be over 18 to enter or 21 where applicable by law.
All Members are over 18 years of age.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
 
Copyright © 1998-2016 DashBoardHosting, LLC. All Rights Reserved.