/sci/ - Science & Math

sci-fi tv show writer here, what are the three best and most logical places on Earth for a space elevator to be built?

If a space elevator was built, and then broke at a height of 100km, would the lower section fall to the east, west or straight down?

how HEAVY would be a full sized space elevator made of graphene?
is there enough graphite in the world to make one?

This thread is now about space elevators and other launch systems. How are we going to get the cost of launch down so we can settle the solar system?

>space tube thread?

http://news.rice.edu/2013/01/10/new-nanotech-fiber-robust-handling-shocking-performance-2/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XDJC64tDR0

>“The new CNT fibers have a thermal conductivity approaching that of the best graphite fibers but with 10 times greater electrical conductivity,” said study co-author Marcin Otto, business development manager at Teijin Aramid. “Graphite fibers are also brittle, while the new CNT fibers are as flexible and tough as a textile thread. We expect this combination of properties will lead to new products with unique capabilities for the aerospace, automotive, medical and smart-clothing markets.”

>The phenomenal properties of carbon nanotubes have enthralled scientists from the moment of their discovery in 1991. The hollow tubes of pure carbon, which are nearly as wide as a strand of DNA, are about 100 times stronger than steel at one-sixth the weight. Nanotubes’ conductive properties — for both electricity and heat — rival the best metal conductors. They also can serve as light-activated semiconductors, drug-delivery devices and even sponges to soak up oil.

A fully reusable Spacex rocket could have better economics than a space elevator. A Falcon Heavy should have a one time launch cost of $1000/kg. A reusable Falcon Heavy could have costs 60 times less at a little less than $50/kg.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/08/space-elevator-economics-not-that.html

Suck it elevatards.

Be at the forefront at the biggest technological jump since electronics were invented. If you guys have a masters program there, I'm thinking about jumping on board after I finish my undergrad in Physics.

What is your general take on CNTs and constructing the orbital elevator? I'm really on the fence at this point. Even if we manage the materials science to do it, I'm not sure if politics will give the go-ahead. Then again, with a 10 billion dollarish construction cost, it is a manageable project for an international engineering company to take up.

Would a space elevator really be possible to construct? Seems like if the thing broke, it would come crashing to the earth possibly killing billions.

I accidentally took 4 10gs of ambian and am now I am shacking and throwing up.....wat do? oh and I had a mixed drink with whiskey eiearlyer

Could we construct a space elevator by 2050? What's holding us back? imo it's just the political will. Right now we can't make very long strands of graphene but do you honestly think we won't be able to mass produce the stuff in two or three decades?

So how close are we to making a space elevator or other system which can reliably and cheaply deliver cargo to orbit? Humans optional.

Manned space flight at the moment is pointless.

The thing we should be concentrating on instead of manned space flight is space elevators. Here are some facts:

1. Space elevators would render traditional space transit means completely pointless. Mathmatically, chemical-propulsion systems couldn't dream of approaching the efficiency of a space elevator system. The day the first space elevator is operational marks the end of space launches on earth. Doing another earthside launch would be pointless.
2. Much of the current R&D for space travel would be rendered useless by a space elevator. Traditional limits on payload weight and size are mostly rendered moot. Space ships of arbitrary size and carrying arbitrary amounts of food, water, and fuel can be constructed on an orbital platform with the aid of a space elevator.
3. Any talk of mining the moon/asteroids for minerals is never going to happen at an economically efficient scale without a space elevator.
4. Any hope of colonizing the moon/mars/etc would be difficult to the point of impossibility without an elevator, but actually quite manageable with an elevator. Food, water, oxygen and fuel could be dispatched very cheaply to any colonies.

So lets ditch these pointless manned programs/ISS/etc and build a goddamn elevator!

space elevator topic???
space elevator topic....

Where is the best place in the world to build a space elevator from?

look, sailing to the new world was difficult and costly but a more inspiring yet more accurate metaphor would be the 1st colonisation of australia. ie, huge deal just finding the place let alone sailing to the other side of the world. while it was hard it was also doable.

space travel to mars is like colonising australia but instead of building and loading the ships in ports they do it all on land.

rolling the half built ships out into the sea
finishing the ships while at sea
taking out the cargo by row boats
crashing the finished ships into the land on arrival.

that kinda thinking would certainly have made colonisation of australia infeasible. soooo, how about we build the 'port' first.
see pic for what i mean.

what does /sci/ predict for the next 50 years?

> one big war, evtl WW3, however not involving the parties you think about
> exponential technical progress will reach peak point
> stop aging
> mars colonization
> OP's penis will grow some hair

I've been thinking about space colonization, and I've made a plan:
Build space elevator (pic related, artistic recreation) and, from there, send materials and people to Moon, so you build a base.

It would be protected against radiation by a thick layer of oxygen, electromagnets and concrete, and simulate gravity by rotating rooms to prevent bone and muscle loss.

Everything would be powered by fission at first, while a thermonuclear central is built, and then fusion (³He). Next, you could transport helium-3 to the Earth. Since it comes from Solar wind, it's renewable.

What do you think, /sci/? Mistakes, enhancements...?

>>1860523
>Error elimination: Market unfeasibility
Y'know this is a really big fucking problem for science/research?

when?

Fucking space elevators how do they work? Seriously. How?

>>1395245
Not if we build a space elevator.

So /sci/, how much closer are we to a Space Elevator?

So, what are your thoughts on a Space Elevator? Good idea, or just some more hurp durp?