[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 531 KB, 4000x1260, space-elevator-schematics-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8971664 No.8971664 [Reply] [Original]

Are Space Elevators a plausible idea or will future generations look back on our ideas of them as something they can't understand why we would ever think was possible?

>> No.8971707

>>8971664
Why not just build rockets that reduce air friction instead?

>> No.8971711
File: 44 KB, 540x300, I hope my eyes deceive me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8971711

>>8971707
>rockets that reduce air friction

>> No.8971924

>>8971711
haha bro all you need to do is put a phat ass compressor on the front

>> No.8971935

>>8971664
Yes it's plausible. We could build one on the moon with materials we have today.

>> No.8971940

The problem with threads like this one (and that other one about space colonization) is that it's impossible to tell if posts like >>8971935 are just plain old shitposts or if the fags writing them are honestly this retarded.

>> No.8971958

A space elevator on Earth is less plausible than an orbital ring, and orbital rings are currently being dismissed as completely implausible on this board already. I've never understood the world's fascination with space elevators.

>> No.8971995

>>8971664
at the moment, they are not possible on earth, due to us lacking a material strong enough
They are however possible on lower gravity bodies, A lunar elevator could be made with Kevlar, for example

>> No.8972215

we don't currently know how to fabricate a space elevator. we have the materials strong and light enough. the problem is making them into something huge and with insanely tight tolerance.

>> No.8972228

>>8972215
>we have the materials strong and light enough

This is nonsense.

>we don't currently know how to fabricate a space elevator

This has been solved for decades. I'll give you a clue: You start at the top.

>> No.8972233

>>8972228
carbon meme materials like graphene, carbon nano tubes, etc.

if an atom is out of place on these meme materials. then the strength drops significantly.

>> No.8972348

>>8972233
It's not confirmed that they would be strong enough to build one of these, more testing needs to be done on their tensile strength to start designing this shit

>> No.8972360

>>8971958
Come on, IF they could be built, it would be a lovely cheap way to get mass into orbit cheaply (cheaply after the initial high investment, anyway.) It's not that hard to understand.

I just don't think we're going to be able to build one here. Future breakthroughs may prove me wrong, ut I just don't see the materials technology ever getting to where we'd need it to be.

But if we can get to where we have folks living on the moon or Mars, that will be a huge potential trade advantage for them over Earth, in the long run.

>> No.8972517

>>8972360
>it would be a lovely cheap way to get mass into orbit cheaply
Except it wouldn't
If you just have reusable rockets thats already cheap as hell

Even if you need to burn 20 times the weight of the payload in fuel, thats still very little

>> No.8972546

>>8972233
>building a long-ass elevator with memetubes
Do you have turbo autism?

>> No.8972569

>>8972517
>Rockets
>need fucktons of fuel per rocket
>don't get much payload per launch

>elevator
>can send fucktons of mass up into space without dealing with fuel at all
>requires only energy to function

>> No.8974114

>>8971664
they are pure science fiction.

Tell me how a space elevator will survive a 1000mph spinning earth

>> No.8974118

>>8974114
The same way you do

>> No.8974123

>>8974118
By being close to the ground?

>> No.8974137

>>8971664
Meteorites kinda breaks the bubble for space elevators.

>> No.8974142

>>8972517
Fuel isn't expensive. Manning mission control and preparing the mission (work hours) is.

>> No.8974150
File: 53 KB, 1280x623, 1280px-Lunar_space_elevator.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8974150

>>8971940
Fucking faggot, we have materials strong enough to build a space elevator on the moon:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_space_elevator

Here have a NASA study on lunar space elevators:
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_report/1032Pearson.pdf

It is you who is the retard.

>> No.8974165

>>8974150
>the moon
I can also fly (under my own power) on the moon. But the problem is we I'm not on the moon, I'm on earth.

>> No.8974174

>>8974142
mission control has no mandatory minimum cost
You could do it all with 1 person if you wanted

>> No.8974180
File: 16 KB, 480x378, 1496251186335.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8974180

yes, why not, dreaming is gratis after all

>> No.8974183

>>8974165
And your argument is what now?

The question was are space elevators plausible? It turns out they are plausible today on the Moon.

>> No.8974201

>>8974183
My argument? Nigga who the fuck are you talking to? Also again just because something works on the moon doesn't mean it works on earth.

>> No.8974247

>>8974201
The question wasn't are space elevators plausible on Earth, the question was are space elevators plausible. I'm not arguing that space elevators are plausible on Earth, just that they are plausible on the Moon. Space elevators are plausible on the Moon is a valid answer to the original question.

>> No.8974248

>>8971664
We should build a prototype off world first before we try to deal with the financial political and technological issues that would face a space elevator built on Earth.

>> No.8974272

>>8974183
There is nothing that could be plausibly built on Mars today. Major engineering projects even less so.

>> No.8974331

>>8974272
Did I say Mars? No I did not, I said the Moon. Not plausible today does not mean not plausible at all.

We could build one today using materials we have today with a single SLS launch:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marshall_Eubanks/publication/260989829_A_Space_Elevator_for_the_Far_Side_of_the_Moon/links/02e7e532f0f4f0c83e000000.pdf

...if the SLS actually worked today. The only construction activity that would need to be carried out on the moon would be drilling into the lunar regolith to hold the anchor in

>> No.8974483

>>8971924
Define jet engine?

>> No.8974631

>>8972517
>20 times
Wow. You must know so much about rockets.

Or not. That's a crazy number and is not going to happen with a reusable orbital chemical rocket. Ever. Even with an expendable second stage.

Unless maybe, just maybe, it floats up to high altitude before it lights. Because it's made of a composite structure built atom by atom and actually mostly voids of hard vacuum made and maintained by nanotechnology so advanced that it would be indistinguishable from magic even by relatively intelligent people.

Which, coincidentally, is what we would need to ever have a prayer of making a space elevator that would work for Earth. Luna and Mars? Possible. Unlikely on Mars. Logistically a nightmare even on the moon, but I'm not sure that easy landing on the moon is worth having to land only where the tether mounts are.