TheAnvil 0 #1 June 29, 2004 ...on this. http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/06/25/space.elevator.ap/index.html Call me skeptical, but... Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoadRash 0 #2 June 29, 2004 Quote...on this. Call me skeptical, but... Ok, I can't decide whether I want to laugh or ask if there is gonna be a charge to watch folks "board" the elevator... ~R+R...15 years huh? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bertusgeert 1 #3 June 29, 2004 The difference now, Edwards said, is "we have a material that we can use to actually build it." Edwards said he probably needs about two more years of development on the carbon nanotubes to obtain the strength needed. After that, he believes work on the project can begin. "The major obstacle is probably just politics or funding and those two are the same thing," he said. "The technical, I don't think that's really an issue anymore." My dad told me about this a while ago. The strength of these tubes doesn't need two more years of research. My dad's place is already producing this and were the first ones to do so. These "microstrands" are incredibly strong. Pretty cool stuff. It'll be awesome to see pictures of the real deal. But I don't quite see the goal in the whole mission. --------------------------------------------- As jy dom is moet jy bloei! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #4 June 29, 2004 Just drop me off at about 18 grand. I'll walk home - thanks.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloud_monkey 0 #5 June 29, 2004 QuoteJust drop me off at about 18 grand. I'll walk home - thanks. I'm with you Turtle.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
larsrulz 0 #6 June 29, 2004 Carbon Nanotubes themselves can be produced perfectly fine, the problem is there is absolutely nothing that can be used to connect multiple nanotubes together, as each one is smaller in length than a mm. They can certainly be bundled together for incredible strength, but without some form of adhesive, they cannot be made into any sort of usable length. They have been put into composites (like oh so many helmets are made out of these days), but the nanotubes themselves pull out of the epoxy matrix as there is not enough friction to keep them in place and allow their full strength to be used. I do research on Carbon Nanotubes, so this is sort of my specialty. I got a strong urge to fly, but I got no where to fly to. -PF Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #7 June 29, 2004 The idea has been around at NASA for a while. clicky I just want to get on the roof and elevator surf to the top. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #8 June 29, 2004 I'd read that article before. Never heard such an announcement as that dude made recently though. Larz' post makes me even more skeptical of that dude. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #9 June 29, 2004 QuoteI'd read that article before. Never heard such an announcement as that dude made recently though. Larz' post makes me even more skeptical of that dude. Larz may be right. The writer is in the science fiction business. He makes money coming up with ideas and either writing about them or speaking about them. A little skepticism may be warranted. Quote "The major obstacle is probably just politics or funding and those two are the same thing," he said. "The technical, I don't think that's really an issue anymore." It seems that all business have the politics/funding issue. That is the way upper level stuff works. However, I don't think that it is as simple as a lack of money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #10 June 29, 2004 QuoteQuoteJust drop me off at about 18 grand. I'll walk home - thanks. I'm with you Turtle.... That wopuld make for some awesome video - Back Tracking / Carving around it passing car #2 on the way down - waving and smiling at the passengers - [droool]I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloud_monkey 0 #11 June 29, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteJust drop me off at about 18 grand. I'll walk home - thanks. I'm with you Turtle.... That wopuld make for some awesome video - Back Tracking / Carving around it passing car #2 on the way down - waving and smiling at the passengers - [droool] That does sound like fun As long as you don't HIT car#2 on the way by Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #12 June 29, 2004 Well YEAH! See there is a Safety cage from 18k down. You just kind of "Glance" off (Note that I didn't say Bounce) It would be a new discipline.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #13 June 29, 2004 QuoteBut I don't quite see the goal in the whole mission. One of the most difficult aspects of space travel is escaping Earth's gravity along with reentering the atmosphere. If a space ship could be stationed in orbit, and you could take an elevator to get or or off of it, that would enable longer space flights. It's the same idea why GWB wants to build a space station on the moon. One thing that he apparently overlooks with that plan, though, is that the moon has gravity too, and you'll still have launch and landing issues associated with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LuvToFly 0 #14 June 29, 2004 Hey, Don't know why everyone is so skeptical. They have been using a transporter on Star Trek since, like August 1968, right?? Clicky this for evidence! Somebody ought to tell the dude and save us a lot of bucks... "The helicopter approaches closer than any other to fulfillment of mankind's ancient dreams of a magic carpet" - Igor Sikorsky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #15 June 29, 2004 So, I guess my question is how the hell you would dock with that thing. I'm no physicist, so if my comments are based on ignorance, then enlighten me. But it seems to me that it'd be pretty tough to dock on it with a spacecraft in orbit unless it was 35-40,000 kilometers up. I have a hard time imagining a 25,000 mile high platform, which would be necessary for docking. Anything lower and the spacecraft hoping to dock would either re-enter or crash into the platform. And escaping gravity isn't the issue, is it? When something is in orbit, the earth's gravity has a hold of it. It's a matter of working up the velocity to be in orbit, and velocity would have to be nothing (unless the top was high enough for geosynchronous orbit) to dock, which would put you back to square one with the problem. Am I just an ignoramus? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #16 June 29, 2004 I'm just postulating, but maybe a smaller craft, from the top of the elevator to the orbiting space ship. Yes, you're still in the clutches of earth's gravity when in orbit, but not nearly to the degree that you are on the ground. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #17 June 29, 2004 when are politics and funding not the major obsticle for new technologies? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #18 June 29, 2004 QuoteYes, you're still in the clutches of earth's gravity when in orbit, but not nearly to the degree that you are on the ground. I dunno. I thought you were. I picture orbit as an object in constant freefall, but traveling fast enough that, due to curvature of the earth, it can never hit the ground. That's why the objects need to travel so fast to stay in orbit, is it not? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #19 June 29, 2004 There is an area where the pull of the moons gravitation and the Earths gravitation have equal pull. It's called L5. In the late 80's, there was a space station group that wanted a platform for the start of interplanetary travel by 1995. They called themselves "L5 in 95". That sums up everything I know about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #20 June 29, 2004 Quotewhen are politics and funding not the major obsticle for new technologies? Wartime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LuvToFly 0 #21 June 29, 2004 Quotewhen are politics and funding not the major obsticle for new technologies? Good point. "The helicopter approaches closer than any other to fulfillment of mankind's ancient dreams of a magic carpet" - Igor Sikorsky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #22 June 29, 2004 I think I see what lawrocket is trying to say... pretend you're in a craft tethered to the planet. at these altitudes there's no atmosphere to speak of so the only thing that's going to keep you there is a) the carbon structure is going to hold you up there (not likely) or b) your orbital momentum is going to be sufficient that you just stay at the same altitude. But there's another constraint, since you're attached to the surface, you have to be high enough up such that your oribtal velocity and the pull of gravity work out in your favor. this happens at about 22,241 miles. The article says this thing is going to be at almost 70000 miles, so if it's staying over the same spot on earth it should more than enough speed to stay in orbit. In fact, it should be trying to leave orbit, being whipped around by the tether like the poor kid on the end playing crack the whip at the ice rink. so if you could slowly raise something up to the top of the structure, and then let it go, it should be flung off into space. now I'll sit back and wait for kallend to give me an intellectual beat down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #23 June 29, 2004 QuoteQuotewhen are politics and funding not the major obsticle for new technologies? Wartime. Yeah, "Tactical to Practical" is a show that definately has a lot of material to work with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #24 June 29, 2004 Quotenow I'll sit back and wait for kallend to give me an intellectual beat down. K thinks that just because he's a physics professor and rocket builder, we respect his opinion. He's an ok skydiver too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #25 June 29, 2004 Your thinking of the Lagrange Points or Lagrangian Points. Here's a link. That sight is pretty good for general scientific/mathematical questions. http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/LagrangePoints.html Vinny the AnvilVinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
