o'Neill cylinder

[Anonymous No.16082335]

I don't know much about space or engineering

is this shit realistic and will it actually happen in the medium future like 50/100 years?

[Anonymous No.16082337]

>>16082335
the only way to build space-based megastructures is to source material off planet and use construction robots.
there's been some cool research into the latter, but i think we are still a long ways off from mining in space.

[Anonymous No.16082342]

>>16082335
at that scale it's kinda claustrophobic. it's better than nothing but pretty bleak. hurtling in a balloon through space, can randomly pop from some rock smashing into it at high speeds.

[Anonymous No.16082346]

>dude muh gay soience fiction space fantasy
>>>/lit/23186539

[Anonymous No.16082356]

>>16082342
I don't think you'd experience claustrophobia in such an environment. Maybe ennui, but through a long stretch of human civilization most people didn't go any further than the boundaries of their own village. I won't say that's an ideal existence, but they were content enough.

[Anonymous No.16082357]

>>16082335
Technically possible? Yes. Will we do it in the next century? No. A century from now we might not even have jet powered aircraft.

[Anonymous No.16082359]

>>16082357
I don't see why we would have jet powered aircraft when solar power aircraft are so much better for the environment.

[Anonymous No.16082360]

>>16082335
Go to youtube and look up a playthrough of zone of the enders 1, it should only be 2 to 3 hours long. The setting takes place in a O neill cylinder orbiting the planet jupiter, great game real futuristic.

[Anonymous No.16082363]

>>16082335
Think smaller

http://www.artificial-gravity.com/sw/SpinCalc/

If a single starship could be made to rotate on its longest axis at 4rpm, you could achieve a decent 0.45g at the nose. If the center of mass was closer to the engines, you could do even better.

The sierra space 19m habitat could give you 0.16g @ 4rpm

If you launched some inflatable donut at 100 meters diameter, that's 0.5g @ 3rpm

Play with it and have fun

[Anonymous No.16082368]

>>16082356
some people did go out of their village, that's how we colonized earth. the mental freedom to go to some other place is kind of important.
in 1-2 years I'd know every nook and cranny of that vessel, inside and outside, and I'd be bored out of my mind of it. it is pretty dark. at least for me

[Anonymous No.16082375]

>>16082368
>some people did go out of their village, that's how we colonized earth.
No shit, autist, but most people were bound to their village for much of the past 5000 years. So no, you will not go insane just because you live in an O'Neill cylinder.
>the mental freedom to go to some other place is kind of important
It's on the hierarchy of needs, but not fundamental.
>in 1-2 years I'd know every nook and cranny of that vessel, inside and outside, and I'd be bored out of my mind of it. it is pretty dark. at least for me
Nice blog.

[Anonymous No.16082378]

>>16082375
yeah clearly you know there's no way such a detail can fuck the whole thing up, in time.
the concept is retarded. building Earth-like environment to cater to human form instead of like adjusting the human form for certain conditions.
it's like a child's idea about "consciousness in space", it's laughable.

[Anonymous No.16082391]

>>16082359
A century from how we might not have the technology to build solar cells.

[Anonymous No.16082417]

>>16082335
A century from now we might not even have cylinders

[Anonymous No.16082422]

you better stock up on your o'Neill cylinders people. they might be gone tomorrow

[Anonymous No.16082493]

>>16082335
They might happen, but they won't be larping as rural lifestyle blocks. Enjoy your kowloon walled city in space.

[Anonymous No.16082524]

>>16082335
Yes, they're reasonable and require no new science to build. They do require some new economics to work. Luckily, rapidly reusable, cheap, superheavy rockets are being built now.

Here's a post I wrote a year ago, it shows how much more stuff Starship can enable. And the things it can bring to space will enable turning big asteroids/small moons (Deimos & Phobos) into habitats.
>>Begin!
The scale and importance of Starship is still greatly underestimated. I made a rough calculation of Starship upmass using some basic assumptions (1 new rocket [superheavy+starship] is added to the fleet per month. [~500 raptors/year @ 6+33=39 per stack; 500/39 ~12]
Each rocket can get 150 tonnes to LEO per launch
Each rocket will fly once per day
Assuming flights start Jan 1 2024....

>For comparison to real things:

After 3 flights, you've launched 450 tonnes, which is more than the 420 tonne ISS [which took more than 40 flights to assemble!]

After 6 months, you've sent mass up equal to a US supercarrier [100,000 tonnes]

In about a year, you could launch the of the Momentum Limited Orion Nuclear Pulse ship. This ship was designed in the 1960's to use contemporary tech to get humans to Alpha Centauri quickly by periodically detonating nuclear bombs and using their energy to gradually push the ship to 3% of the speed of light. [400,000 tonnes]

Before 4 years, you've sent more than the total US Navy tonnage [4,635,628 tonnes]

>The scale and economies of Starship are so ridiculous that science fiction things can actually happen.

The Nostromo [bulk carrier from Alien] is ~ 63,000 tonnes, so that could be launched in the first 4 months of Starship operations.

The USS Enterprise NCC-1701 is 190,000 tonnes, so that could be launched in about 9 months.

The Donnager [Martian flagship in the Expanse] is ~250,000 tonnes, so that could be launched in about 11 months.

[Anonymous No.16082632]

>>16082342
>at that scale it's kinda claustrophobic
yes, that's the worst picture I've ever seen of one

[Anonymous No.16082635]

>>16082335
No, it will never happen, I'm sorry

[Anonymous No.16082661]

>Medium future 100 years
We’ll be daycare for brown retards at that point. No high tech utopia, just production for the sake of giving free food in exchange for brown votes.

[Anonymous No.16082668]

>>16082335
can this thread be saved?

[Anonymous No.16082681]

>>16082668
silly idea makes no sense. why would I ever want to go in one? apart from novelty there's nothing there.
>but you are in space
we're in space on Earth as well. it's basically the same shit, different scale. Earth is more convenient, gravity, more stuff, less risk.
>but travel to ...
in active form? that's fucking retarded. and insanely expensive anyway.
would visit for a few days at most.

[Anonymous No.16082689]

>>16082335
The physics are sound but no we won't build one any time soon. It's a massive undertaking and there is simply no benefit.

[Anonymous No.16082750]

>>16082681
Travel will cost nothing in space. You could fire pods at a modest velocity towards different nearby habitats with little to no fuel spent. If it was just one habitat I see your point, but if it kept growing it could be quite an interesting place.

[Anonymous No.16082763]

>>16082750
there are two types of people. the ones who instantly understand the insanity of it, and children.
any humans you put in such a vessel will instantly become their own species, in all senses. one because they will diverge from humans on earth, and second you have no control over what happens next in that tube. the most powerful of them can enslave everyone in a horror type scenario. becomes Dark fucking City.

[Anonymous No.16082767]

>>16082689
if you had left off the last 6 word you could have sounded smart, but no

[Anonymous No.16082839]

>>16082763
You understand there's places like that NOW, in the US? There are islands in Alaska where the poorest can't afford a plane ticket out. They aren't much better than old fashioned company towns.

[Anonymous No.16082855]

>>16082335
They're entirely possible to build even at quite large sizes. The issue is economics. It's difficult to do that much of anything so far away when you can't get resources on site. In addition to that there's also the problem of lack of use case, thus leaving little justification for building one.
With increasing access to space enabling both the construction of ever larger objects in space and opening up the possibility for zero-g manufacturing and even potentially tourism I think it is likely we will see some sizeable artificial gravity habitats this century. Probably nothing on the scale of hundreds or even tens of square kilometers, but perhaps a few.

[Anonymous No.16082863]

>>16082335
nice idea, unfortunately a big rotating cylinder in space is not stable

[Anonymous No.16082891]

>>16082863
counter rotating section

[Anonymous No.16082905]

pressure is already a mayor issue, as well as for fictional mars domes
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=60366.0

[Anonymous No.16083016]

>>16082905
>withstanding 1atm pressure differential is impossibru!!!!!!!!!
lol

[Anonymous No.16083150]

>>16082335
>medium future like 50/100 years?
Nope. Even if we ignore dysgenics, land prices would need to dramatically increase for space land to be economical.

1m^2 land in space = 10m deep earth(30t) + extra 20t for house to sit on top = ~50t per 1m^2. If we assume elon makes $100/kg orbit = $5,000,000 per square meter in space. Not even NYC apartments are that costly

[Anonymous No.16083155]

>>16082335
50/100 = 1/2
None of this will be possible in six months.

[Anonymous No.16083277]

>>16082417
There are more bikes in my back garden than there are stars in a galaxy - science nigger

[Anonymous No.16083282]

>>16083150
I was about to say: what if the perk is escaping niggers
But then I realised the niggers dont deserve Earth and they should be the ones to be sent to space (habitat optional)

[Anonymous No.16083751]

>>16082855
whats picrel

[Anonymous No.16083765]

>>16083751
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZBLAN
tl;dr extremely pure fiber optic cables with minimal imperfections thanks to zero-g.

[Anonymous No.16083806]

>>16082767
>curves in both directions
Stupid illustration

[Anonymous No.16084189]

>>16083806

[Anonymous No.16084193]

>>16084189
I don't know why these are always depicted as a having a single floor. It would be much more dense and 3D packed that that. No use wasting all that volume.

[Anonymous No.16084211]

>>16084193
because that's what people want

[Anonymous No.16084215]

>>16084189
in practice it would become a dark densely packed rat dystopia with tight walkways and shit everywhere.

[Anonymous No.16084219]

>>16084189
The world would be like a Mario 64 level. There would just be a wall, and beyond that nothing exists. A surreal and confined space.

Look at that tree on the far left. Growing at the edge of the world. Its leaves brushing against the firmament. It's over there in a corner, and beyond that there is nothing.

[Anonymous No.16084282]

>>16084193
In the early 90s tv show Babylon 5, there were many levels, with just an empty core in the center. The problem with levels is that each one ends up with different gravity. Also the differential between your head and your feet gets worse the closer you are to the center. Things start going somewhat sideways. Machinery would need to account for these difference and humans would have various health and behavioral impacts. The outermost level might end up being the most desirable because gravity would be the most stable there.

[Anonymous No.16084316]

>>16084219
yeah, seems like it would be cool af, don't it?

[Anonymous No.16084319]

Here's a favorite of mine, I wish i was this guy.

[Anonymous No.16084330]

post heating bill, just for the lake.

[Anonymous No.16084376]

[Anonymous No.16084387]

>>16082335
>is this shit realistic and will it actually happen in the medium future like 50/100 years?
Depends entirely on the degree space becomes industrialized in that time and how cheap launch costs are.
If rockets like starship and other high tonnage reusable rockets become commonplace and launch costs drop significantly we might see the beginnings of lunar industrialization in a few decades, if it becomes possible/cost effective to mine large quantities of metal from the lunar surface and launch it into orbit you can bet somebody will try to build very large space stations including an O'Neil cylinder.
It's more a problem of practicality and cost than technology.

[Anonymous No.16084414]

>>16084387
>mine large quantities of metal from the lunar surface and launch it into orbit you can bet somebody will try to build very large space stations
this or just turn a gravel pile like Deimos into a "concrete" station like this one: >>16082767
, and it's already in Mars orbit as a bonus

[Anonymous No.16084421]

>>16084387
Furthermore, we already build megastructures capable of withstanding the forces of a rotating space habitat. It's just a matter of having access to cheap resources from space.

[Anonymous No.16085437]

bumping

[Anonymous No.16085510]

>>16082363
4rpm is barf city

[Anonymous No.16085791]

>>16085437
L1 looks comfy

[Anonymous No.16085863]

>>16082839
that's unironically like Hawaii. people go there, fail, become homeless and can't get back to the mainland.

[Anonymous No.16085873]

>>16084215
This assumes we run out of material to build these colonies. The Asteroid Belt is yuuge.
There could be many colonies each one sparsely populated.
Now, where you may have a point, is if one of these colonies is full of misfits (or Mormons) and decides to cut itself off from the others. Like, by becoming a generation-ship and launching itself at Wolf 359 or Trappist-1 or some nearby dim bulb like that.

[Anonymous No.16085910]

>>16085510
You slowly spin it up until people complain. A lot of people could tolerate even 6rpm if it took a week to spin up to that rate.