Do you think Space Elevators will ever become a reality? Is

>>8557815
The economic reward will be so huge that they will certainly be a thing. Brazil and Nigeria will be superpowers once they get one up and running. The difficulty is a material science one, in that no known material would be strong enough to actually build one. But a new technology could be just around the corner that will solve this, it's really just a matter of time.

It is a brute-force approach to a problem which has much simpler solutions. The engineering and materials science acuity required to create something of this kind would much sooner produce safe, reliable, multi-use rockets in quantities so great it would make such a thing as a space elevator superfluous.

It's a very interesting notion, but we'll find a better way much sooner than that. Space elevators are merely a thought experiment meant to answer that age old question: "How do we escape the gravity well economically."

>>8557833

>Much simpler solutions

Such as? And yes, I know you said rockets, but let's not try to pretend that rocketry will ever be the less complicated science.

>>8557833
I could see space elevators being used on lower mass planets, planetoids, and moons...

But as far as using one on a planet with 7 billion people, religions of peace who have access to 747's, and a planetary atmosphere and magnetosphere, I just don't see it as wise.

File: tbc-shear strength.jpg (1014KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1014KB, 2048x1536px

>>8557815

>>8557931
We'll just have to put laser defenses on it, that fry anything bigger than a sparrow that gets within a mile of the elevator.

>>8557955
Then you get into the potential for a maccross missile massacre.

Can you imagine trying to defend your tensile cable from 100 inbound missiles?

>>8557815
>tempting a target for terrorism
>target for terrorism
>terrorism

If you stupid humans would stop fighting over trivial problems, maybe you would finally advance and finally meet up with the other intelligent species in your solar system.

What would haplen if we built a space elevator a lightyear long? Would the end be traveling FTL?

>>8557961
>If you stupid humans would stop fighting over trivial problems

Some of us don't have a problem with that, you see...

>>8557815
I been thinking about how this may works... But try to imagine about how the translational and rotation are going to help to stabilisation of the main tower, to the land and external port or gates maybe to the 'International Space Station'... May be whit huge supports covering the edge using electromagnetism to make everything straight... What you think about this, isn't possible ?

Do you guys remember that 2 mile long space tether thing that NASA did a few years ago?

Where it snapped in half because of too much current?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tether_missions#TSS-1R_mission

>>8557815

yeah, totally workable.

In the future, terrorists are going to use 'suicide bombers' to hack your mind/thing interphase, and literally blow your mind :D

>>8557957
>100 inbound missiles
This is a dream scenario. Even religions of peace don't have dozens, much less hundreds of actual missiles worth a damn.

Countries will not target this thing. It would be fucking stupid and result in instant sanctions and a UN-``American'' joint ``peacekeeping'' operation to turn the entire country into smoldering plains.

>>8558016
>Countries will not target this thing. It would be fucking stupid and result in instant sanctions and a UN-``American'' joint ``peacekeeping'' operation to turn the entire country into smoldering plains.

That still won't replace your spas escalator.

>>8558027
>That still won't replace your spas escalator.

Actually, funny story....

Due to the way the space elevator is tethered with a counterweight to keep tension, if the cable is ever cut, the whole upper section will just fly off into space.

>>8557815

>tfw we would be a solar-system wide species if not for Muslims

Why are we so cursed?

>>8558027
>>8558028
It'll replace an entire demographic of people with glass. And then we'll build another one.

>>8557815
yes on the moon, but not on earth. we'll rather have more sophisticated soyuz rockets.

having a space elevator on the moon would however drastically reduce necessary cargo since one could dock on the orbital platform and send everything to the moon from there, without having to go down and up again.

File: Saturn.jpg (518KB, 2369x1999px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 2369x1999px

>>8558121
>soyuz rockets.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

no

>>8558028
And the rest of it?

>>8557815
>Do you think Space Elevators will ever become a reality?
Nah
>Is the science just not there?
The science is there, but the economics are not. Rockets are actually far more efficient than most common projections of a space elevator predict.

I think the engineering challenges would make it more feasible that we skip right ahead to a orbital ring (easier to build, bigger capacity and more utility).

>>8558227

You do realize Orbital Rings require their own set of Space Elevators to be cost effective, yes?

>>8558136
>And the rest of it?

falls, obviously.

>>8558209
the science is NOT there
Thats the reason they make fantasy projections of costs, because there is no materials today that could do a Space Elevator

>>8559174

>What are carbon nanotubes
>What are boron nitride nanotubes
>What are diamond nanothreads

>>8559281
>what is all this shit no one manufactures

>>8559286

Yes, the ECONOMICS aren't there.

But don't you ever again say the SCIENCE isn't there, you knuckle dragging fuckhead

File: IMG_3281.jpg (2MB, 3648x2736px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3648x2736px

>>8559293
None of those materials have ever been manufactured in more than a meter's length and that's not due to cost, it's due to technical challenge

Three years ago a university team was like "holy fuck bros we did it we made a carbon nanotube strand 55cm long"

>>8557931
A modern jetplane wouldn't affect a tether all that much. If it could, it'd mean the tether would have ripped apart under it's own weight long long ago.

>>8559299
That 5-minute energy tycoon has people working on this stuff for bringing up heat from the interior of the Earth.

>>8557818
"But a new technology could be just around the corner that will solve this, it's really just a matter of time."

This is /sci/, not the discovery channel.

Why don't they just use a really long rope and have astronauts climb their way to space?

>>8559383
The entire problem is that after a certain length the rope will snap due to tensile strain

The engineering issue is trying to make a thread that can stay in one 57,000km long strand

>>8557815
They're pretty dumb but might eventually be built to avoid the effects of a high volume of rocket traffic on the upper atmosphere.

File: mxtether.jpg (42KB, 662x350px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 662x350px

>>8557815

Space Elevators are simply too big and too complex.

Skyhooks are the future: instead of touching the ground, the end of a rotating 500km long tether occasionally enters the upper atmosphere (~50km) at designed times and locations, where a high flying spaceplane then matches velocity with the tether and hooks onto it. The skyhook then "flings" this spaceplane into a higher orbit (perhaps even escape velocity if long enough), and recovers from the orbital velocity loss of the "fling" by using high efficiency low thrust engines (ie. Ion drives) to correct itself back into its previous orbit.

All of this is possible with current materials science, and a few billion dollars of funding.

>>8559281
All likely to fracture and break from the repeated environmental stressors that a tower like that would sustain.

Diamond nanothreads, while strong, aren't exceptionally stable over long periods of time, especially when oxidation is a probable threat.

Carbon nanotubes have much of the same issues, and good luck maintaining an electrically conductive tether through the earths' magnetic field. Shit would snap after a day.

Boron nitride would be your best bet out of those, however with most ceramics you're going to be seeing issues when dealing with repeated stress from swaying and environmental factors.

Your best bet would be a composite material of things with good long-term tensile strength, assuming that you're working with the counterweight development.

>>8559174
>there is no materials today that could do a Space Elevator
Not PRACTICALLY, but it is possible with existing materials. Much of the stress on a space elevator tether is associated with holding it's own weight, not just the weight of the payload, but in theory you COULD make the tether out of ANY material by aggressively tapering it to make it thick and strong up high where it's under the most tension, and slender and light down near the surface of the Earth where gravity is strongest.

For example, the classical case of a carbon-nanotube-based elevator would have a very high amount of strength for its weight, and could be constructed with a very modest taper ratio of 1.6:1 (that is, the tether would only need to be 1.6 times stronger and 1.26 times thicker in diameter at geostationary height as at sea level). A kevlar tether, by comparison, would require a much more dramatic taper ratio of 260,000,000:1 (260 million times stronger and 16 thousand times thicker at GSO as at sea level), therefore requiring a FAR thicker and heavier tether that is FAR more costly not only to manufacture but also to put into geostationary orbit.
http://www.mill-creek-systems.com/HighLift/chapter2.html

Even for existing materials, the science is there, but the economics are not.

>>8559725
>Diamond nanothreads, while strong, aren't exceptionally stable over long periods of time

Holy shit, what?

This is the most fucking WRONG thing I've ever read on /sci/ and that's saying something

>>8557931
Only if you rigged the elevator with thermite.

>>8559415
So basically a suborbital refueling station that uses rotational kinetic energy instead of chemical potential energy.

>>8557815
>target for terrorism
You realize if something like this were built it would be the strongest, most stable structure on Earth, right? Compared to the natural forces that would be actively trying to tear it to the ground constantly, anything a terrorist could throw at it would seem like a gentle breeze on a summer day.

>>8557815
No. I don't think space elevators will ever be a thing on Earth because when you can build one, you could build a nice enough rocket you wouldn't want to build a space elevator.

A lot of moons are gravitationally locked or have such tiny gravity a space elevator wouldn't be worth it.

>>8559844
?????
thats not how it fucking works for the same reason you can't build sky scrapers out of brick

>>8557961
Just you wait

>>8558852
Not that far away too, the "big whip" scenario is crap unless the cable is cut halfway to orbit (not feasible with common planes or missiles, maybe with a big rogue satellite deorbited precisely)

It would be easier to build automatic plants on the moon and build all the stuff you need in addition to asteroid farming.

There is nothing on earth you need what you couldn't get in space.

>>8560475
except you know.. people..
and cheap fuel
and other industries

>>8560572
You can make everything you need for space also in space.

You only need a transport vehicle for people. And a ramjet propulsion based solution would be easier and cheaper than anything else.

>>8560578
for the foreseeable future it'll always be cheaper to build shit on earth than on the moon or elsewhere

File: skyhook.jpg (24KB, 640x893px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 640x893px

>>8559924

Yes.

Basically it allows you to boost a payload into orbit using the efficiency of an Ion drive instead of a chemical rocket. It could get down the cost of space travel to <$100 a pound.

You could also build a static, non-rotating tether in the same vein, but it would need to be longer and would have the added complexity of operating and station-keeping a 4000km long elevator system, and it could not periodically "dip" into the upper atmosphere like a rotating tether could.

>>8560735
>>8559924
Every time you send mass up you pull it back towards Earth and will need to push it back up somehow. This is why there's a counter elevator that moves down as cargo is moved up in many designs. Only for as much mass as you move up you have to move and equal mass down and that mass needs to come from somewhere. Otherwise, you are again just fighting the gravity well using chemical means.

File: Burj Khalifa vs El Capitan.jpg (42KB, 704x396px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 704x396px

>>8560226
It's EXACTLY how it works, and you CAN build skyscrapers out of marginal materials using the same technique - taper the structure so it's strong where it needs to be and light where it doesn't need the strength.

The Great Pyramid is made of brick and it's 450 feet high, no sweat. Mount Shasta is made of fucking dirt and rocks and it's FAR taller than any steel skyscraper.

>>8560239
Wait for what?

if tension in a single thread is the issue, why not just tie the ends of lots of smaller threads together?

>>8560597
>thread about a space elevator
>foreseeable future

And going full automation and antroid farming is way closer and realistic than anything else.

>>8560754
Or an ion drive...

>>8560884
>ion drive for that application

>>>/x/

File: drone_with_clock.jpg (142KB, 1300x1246px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1300x1246px

>>8557955

>>8559299
If you dedicated the entire world's industry, aside from that which is used to feed and house, to creating carbon nano tubing, you could create a hundred space elevators a year.

Yeah, obviously that's not gonna happen, but it still makes it a willpower/economic/logistics issue, rather than a technical one.

Not that we won't find ways and reasons to mass produce the stuff someday, along with a lot of these other marginal materials.

>>8557818
>be brazilian engineer
>making tons of money off new space elevator
>coming down from orbit in elevator
>elevator stops half way
>what is this? another elevator above us?
>angry brazilian man in a motorcycle helmet comes in and pushes us out at gunpoint
>tfw elevator jacked

File: Ray-Kurzweil.jpg (207KB, 1068x1600px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 1068x1600px

>>8557815

No, man.

By the time such a thing is feasible, we'll have nano-scale universal assemblers...you launch these infinitesimal payloads at your target world, and they build themselves up to whatever you need when they get there.

This is space opera garbage think.

File: launch loop.png (70KB, 800x492px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x492px

There are better megastructures to get into space.

>>8560821
>comparing manmade structures to rock formations and mountains

File: Space Mountain.png (344KB, 1113x461px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1113x461px

>>8560821
Funny how a space mountain is more feasible than a space elevator.

>>8561295
a space mountain is not feasible
You can't go higher than existing mountains or you will sink the ground into the mantle

>>8557871
Tesla would probably be jizzing himself at the opportunity to directly interact with the ionosphere that an elevator would provide.

Like anything else that's important, you can make it terrorist proof.

it's ez to get into space

you just need lots of cheap energy on tap.

think 15-30 nuclear power plants in one general area; when they are not powering cities and industry, they can be tapped into to power large lasers. then you stick some ablative material under your capsule and away you go

>>8557815
>Are they too tempting a target for terrorism?
as long as jews are around, yes.

>>8560821
wrong, there is a simple limit on length of the tether under earth gravity. Just like the limit on reciprocating machinery. The steel flies apart at a certain acceleration regardless of the balancing or any other consideration.

It's simple. Space elevators will be a reality when it is reasonably economically practical to build one.
Lets say a disaster befalls us RIGHT NOW. All buildings are crushed, and everyone except like 100 people are left alive. Lets say by some miracle the interbutts is still mostly running and lots of books are still around

Do you think those 100 people are going to be able to build a small jet airliner? Hell no.
Kinda the situation we're in right now.
Or that you could get primitives to build a steel ship, even if you gave them the knowledge?
Analogous situation right now for us.

A space elevator is so such a massive, advanced undertaking that we can't economically do it EVEN IF WE HAD THE TECHNOLOGY
Yes that gap is closing but still

>>8557815
>meme elevators

>>8557815
I have a better idea, make fucking rockets that can casually go into space and back on earth instead.

>>8561797
>Space elevators will be a reality

Not on Earth, ever, not even to move kg pound of mass up to space.

This thread is full >>>/x/

>>8562030

Boy, will you look like a fucking retard in 2031

>>8560848
Wait until I make my own nation

>>8562085
space elevators are stupid and garbage
how would they work? insanity
how do you repair them? who knows
How do you climb them in a way thats better than rocketry? s m h

>>8561969
t. billionaire with a glorified bottle rocket hobby

>>8562085
There's no material in existence that can be used for a space elevator for Earth. You can make them for other planets/moons, but never for Earth. They will also not be "better" than rocketry or other space flinging device simply because of Newton's Third Law.

File: SpaceX-Cringe Pokemon GO.webm (3MB, 722x542px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 722x542px

>>8562266
Musk has done more for the future of the space industry simply due to the media coverage than anything since the space race to the Moon.

>>8562283
>There's no material in existence that can be used for a space elevator for Earth

see >>8559281

And before you say we don't produce enough see >>8559293

>>8562543
Even if you had enough, you can not build a structure with them can could work for this application. Sure they are super strong, but they are just too small. Make them larger and they become ultra brittle.

>>8562578
>Even if you had enough, you can not build a structure with them can could work for this application.

Says fucking who, fucboi?

>>8562589
Simple physics.

File: 300px-LaunchLoop.svg.png (23KB, 300x185px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x185px

>>8557851

Launch loops, for one.

I know it's counterintuitive to hear that space elevators are the opposite of a simple solution; space elevators are a concept that's easy to grasp, and it's easy to get the impression that a space elevator isn't much more complicated in design than a rope ladder.

But the problems that prevent the construction of a space elevator are not easily overcome. The problems which make space elevators a worse alternative to rockets may not even have solutions Rockets put payloads into orbit in a matter of hours. A space elevator would take weeks to lift payloads to orbit, which means payloads would spend days in the Van Allen radiation belt instead of minutes.

Thus a Launch Loop, the idea of which, on the surface, seems to be much more complicated than the idea of a space elevator, is actually a much more simple solution, as they could be built using existing materials and fabrication techniques, and payloads would still be put into orbit on a rocket-equivalent timescale, and thus existing solutions for human and cargo radiation shielding would be sufficient.

>>8562248
You're a dumb nigger

>>8557931
We seriously need to outlaw religion.

Wouldn't a space elevator fuck up earth's protection from the sun by interacting with the earth's magnetic field?

>>8562861
I fail to see the point of that thing. Why not just point the rockets straight up, instead of running them along the surface for a while? Wouldn't tectonic shift make such a long and rigid structure nonviable?

>>8563387
No, if one were to be made it wouldn't be made of a material that would even affect it. That aside, it isn't large enough to affect it in the first place. A modern city has more of a chance of effecting it due to what a city is made of, however even cities don't affect it.

File: main-qimg-68a27dbad5061727a39cc8d7cd2cbe14.png (35KB, 455x215px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 455x215px

>>8563394
Rockets don't go straight up, they go sideways.

>>8562861
I highly doubt a launch loop would actually work

>>8561316
>can't go higher than existing mountains
>world's tallest mountain is literally still growing

Uhhhhh /sci/tards?

Yes! Let's waste more time and tax dollars for even more useless shit!

At least wars create jobs and money and stimulate the economy for a while. But this stuff is literally a pit to throw money into with no return.

>>8557931
>Next scene:
>Plane flies by, one wing falls off, having been perfectly sliced.
Should've gone perpendicular to the ribbon.

It might work on the moon.

File: space elevator break75.gif (856KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

856KB, 600x600px

>>8557962
The length is dependent upon GEO altitude, it needs to be as long as GEO altitude, plus have a counterweight (which could be the same length again of elevator cable).

So a space elevator a light year long (if it suddenly popped into existence with angular momentum equal to the planet surface) would instantly go flying out into space even if the bottom end was in a neutron star or black hole. Inertia would stop the end from moving at the same angular speed as the base.

>>8565294
Once you have a self-sustaining colony on another rock you've got an entire new planet of resources to exploit

>>8565294
All dis broken window fallacy.

>>8563394
afaik its not really rigid. It's only held up by the inertia of the loop.

Guys guys guys, I GOT IT.
Build a launch loop that is literally a loop, like a helix downwards spiral with a nearly frictionless "payload cart" attatched to a rail system like a rollercoaster. Instead of traveling 2000km on earth in a straight line, it uses gravity combined with fuel powered acceleration while traveling in a tight downwards spiral. Meanwhile we can attatch magnets to it and use electromagnetic potential to gather energy off it to power it's own ekectrical systems

>>8567329
WAIT WAIT EVEN BETTER. So instead of building a single space elevator, we build an eliptical ring around the earth at the height of the space elevator, supported both by vertical space elevators and continued space counterweights, sort of like spokes on a wheel. If inertia would cause the high end of the elevator to lose momentum and create tension, then if it was part of an orbital, it would simply disperse the mechanical stress


Fuck I'm high

>>8567334
not plausible until humans can utilize the resources of multiple star systems

>>8557815
For what it is I think its the stupidest concept of transpiration ever imagined.
If we get to the point where we have rugged materials that can withstand those forces believe you me we wont use shit like elevators.

>>8559315
>A modern jetplane wouldn't affect a building all that much. If it could, it'd mean the building would have crumbled under it's own weight long long ago.

>>8567784
A carbon nanotube ribbon 70,000km long would be tougher than a steel girder 410m long

>>8568003
And kevlar fibre is tougher than steel, too. Doesn't mean it survives metal flying at it with Mach 0.8 unharmed.