/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10064846
we have no need for large scale space launch and current space launch trends do no indicate the need for one. Orbital rings are about TRL 2-3 at best, we aren't sure if they are feasible or practical. At best they are an interesting concept. Orbital rings have not been shown to be stable for the case we can actually construct. A detailed analysis to perturbations has not been carried out. Problems might arise from vibrational excitation of the ladder in the atmosphere. More practically, we haven't built ANY structure requiring continuous stabilization or energy input to stay up. NONE AT ALL. Really the closest thing we have are bouncy castles and those inflatable football pitches and those don't require too much control or stabilization. We have yet to build a magnetic levitation system capable of levitating the equivalent of a small CARGO SHIP! Neither have we made a magnetic levitation system capable of operating at KILOMETERS PER SECOND. How on earth we can even test and verify such a system is beyond me. The largest structure we have ever constructed in space is not very big.
>>the next 50 years
50 years is a long fucking time. In 50 years we could find something better than an orbital ring. Beamed propulsion, fusion rockets, or something we haven't even thought of yet could potentially do better.

>>10064846

>Why aren't the nations of the world spending a crazy fucking huge amount of money on a useless project while the ecology of the world is gonna collapse in like 30 years

>>10064846

>>10064846
>meme elevator
Lrn2meme fgt pls

>>10065143
Greenfags are actually this dumb, lmao

>>10065126
Is their a study about these obstacles?

>>10065143
If youre really a greenfag and not just a larp, You can put solar panels on orbital rings and get continuous non intermittent source of electricity

>>10064846
no material is tear-resistant enough, such a ring can not be stable in orbit, we already got enough problems to take care of

>>10064846
I have seen&read a lot of stuff about the orbital ring, and everybody is too optimistic about this
>"we already have the tech&materials"
Thats something that always comes up when they talk about this thing.
In reality space elevators and orbital rings are early tier 1 constructions on the Kardashev scale.
Thats a long way off.

>>10065126
>50 years is a long fucking time. In 50 years we could find something better than an orbital ring. Beamed propulsion, fusion rockets, or something we haven't even thought of yet could potentially do better.

No, we are stuck with what we have. This isn't a sci-fi movie. We've discovered nearly all the science can use for most of anything and it is only engineering that matters now. However, for stuff like this, we've already peaked for the most part. There won't be space elevators, orbital rings, terraforming, or any of that shit.

>fusion rockets

The best you can hope for is that of the Orion project and that's not going to happen for launches. It may happen for space travel, but conventional fuels are all anyone will be using seriously for launches from Earth.

>>10065978
>Thats something that always comes up when they talk about this thing.

Which is a lie based on complete ignorance of the facts. Like those mentioned in >>10065154

>>10065980
>we've already peaked for the most part
Are you retarded? How can you nake such a conclusion half a century after the beginning of manned spaceflight?

>>10065154
Engineering problems which can be solved within a decade or two. I dont think dampening solutions will be that difficult considering the electromagnetic wire needed to encircle the equator wont have large diameter. The advantages of an orbital loop would be too great not to invest in creative engineering solutions.

>>10065980
>We've discovered nearly all the science

You just outed yourself as a brainlet

>>10066037
Because I don't fall for sci-fi dreams like a manchild. There's a hard limit to science. The age of scientific discovery is long long over.

>>10066054
>Engineering problems which can be solved within a decade or two.

There's no solution to stuff like this.

>The advantages of ______ would be too great not to invest in creative engineering solutions.

Fill in the blank with ANY sci-fi bullshit you want. Here's a list:

teleportation
earth-based space elevators
cold fusion
strong AI
overunity
FTL
lightsabers
orbital rings
time machines
anti-gravity

>>10066111
>irony posting is still a thing in 2018

kek

>>10066113
cold fusion and faster than light are real today already. Anyone who thinks science is perfected is actually just a barely above a parrot or primate. sure you can make words but you cannot concieve the future

>>10066139
>cold fusion and faster than light are real today already

I'm sure that is what you tell your investors.

>>10066113
>>10066139

>Why we no ring...?

Has anybody thought about what happens with tides?

>>10066054
>handwaves problems by claiming the engineering fairy will fix it
>>10066113
>shouts NEVER EVER NEVER EVER in response to everything, weaving genuinely low hanging fruit impossible things to try and give himself a semblance of legitimacy
take the tide pod challenge together, you cancerous shit stains

>>10065143
>what's space based solar power

>>10065143
>WE'RE DOOMED
>THE END IS NIGH
>SEA LEVELS WILL RISE OVER THE MOUNTAINS AND WASH CITIES AWAY
>no don't pay attention to the fact we said this before and were wrong
>gib money

>>10066113
>can't into orbital mathematics and sciences

>>10065143
Why are you such a shill or brainlet, obviously the orbital ring can resolve ecological issues of the planet