>Orbital rings >Space elevators What are some other bullshit

B-but /pol/ told me it'd work!!

File: 1468712092887.jpg (1MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1600px

I know some "progressive" New York Architects are thinking of creating a sky scraper that attaches its top to a satellite in our orbit, and touches down on the ground. At least they made the windows be made of different materials and shapes to accommodate atmospheric pressure at different levels

>neural links
>superhuman AI
>manned interstellar space flight
>cryonic thawing
>brain emulations
>clinical immortality

Pretty much anything that you see in sc-fi movies.

File: autisquirrel girl rage.png (257KB, 851x460px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 851x460px

>>9004603
don't bring /pol/ into this. /pol/acks always bring politics into everything and desu, you're as bad.

have any of you guys read the book FEED?
If you have, That's what the future would definitely be like imo.

>>9004607
Manned interstellar space flight and cryonic thawing will likely exist someday. Albeit it won't be for hundreds, if not thousands, of years

>>9004607
>no "EPIC THREE DEE HOLOGRAPHIC SOFTWARE LIKE IN TONY STARKS LAB"
[spoiler]this might actually exist about a 100 or more years from now desu[/spoiler]

File: 1495067449195.png (78KB, 416x163px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 416x163px

>>9004603
how would /pol/ tell you it'd work
why would /pol/ tell you it'd work
why is /pol/ talking about space science

File: Please, go on.png (228KB, 318x302px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 318x302px

>>9004600
why wont it work frind
surely you, with your godlike knowledge, could tell us specifically, with details

>>9004600
They probably won't have orbital rings (maybe idfk) but they'll definitely take advantage of the space in our orbit as time goes on.

>>9004600
Perpetual motion machines.
Faster than light travel.
>>9004607
>>neural links
We have demonstrated them in people, they just aren't very good and tend to kill neurons. Thing is, neural interfaces that don't appear to kill neurons have been demonstrated in mice. It's not that far off.
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/graphene-shown-to-safely-interact-with-neurons-in-the-brain


What might be far off is making the surgery safe enough that it's worth the risk to install in people who aren't horrible crippled.

>>brain emulations
that depends on how good we can make computers and how hard it is to simulate neurons. If all that's required is just connection information and simple states, we can probably do it. If we have to go in and simulate conformations of DNA to figure out gene expression and shit, or some shit that makes it so that we can't run the simulated brain as fast as realtime it's fucked.

>>9004600

Trump presidency.

File: BPM_Mech.jpg64f47cf6-7faa-43a3-b30a-3a97f2c42ffcOriginal.jpg (162KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1200x900px

Mechas when?

>>9004600
Basically Half of /sci/ threads
Warp Drives >>9003561
type 2 & 3 civilization >>9003037
solving environmental problems on Earth before get to Mars >>8994560
Build Large Humanoid Robots >>9000677
travel through the galaxy >>8992570
Become taller as adult >>8997241
Superpowers >>9002896

>>9004681
type 2 civ is entirely possible, with modern tech, as it quite literally is just a foggy cloud of solar collectors and habitats around a star, and those are mostly mundane in their materials
Type 3 is not, due to pure distance between stars, and thus no empire cohesion

Travel through the galaxy is possible, since you are more than able to move star to star, it just takes a long fucking time

Taller as an adult, a maybe if we figure out how to fuck with growth genes in the body, or genes at all
Superpowers needs to be defined, but superhero style is a no, making someone stronger and faster? Probably yes

Large humanoid robots, possibly, but there's absolutely no fucking reason to

the solve ecological problems on earth was just some dumbass arts "professor" wanting to be progressive to their friends

stop being dumb, Hard =/= Impossible

>>9004657
Literally never. No advantage over a tank, significantly less easy to armour, taller profile makes them easier to spot and hit at range.

Exoskeletal powered armour though, that could be a thing, provided it was small enough to fit through your average doorway.

>>9004769
>average doorway
if it's a powersuit, you could just smash through said doorway
if you were in a position where you needed to use a powersuit, you probably do not give a fuck about the doorway

File: 19149073_1901547476752407_7200352322290786069_n.png (431KB, 498x384px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 498x384px

>>9004681
kek, the reality of that post is sad!
However, some things on that list are possible - just absurdly difficult.

File: 1444081969121.gif (1021KB, 500x241px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 500x241px

>>9004607
>superhuman AI

Brainlet, a pocket calculator can already out-perform you at arithmetic...

File: X on SCI.png (31KB, 694x968px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 694x968px

>>9004600
Computer Science Jobs.

File: 1495019825656.png (235KB, 720x759px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 720x759px

>>9004629
All of /sci/ told you why your shit idea for orbital rings won't work. If you can't remember that far back, use one of the fucking online archives to read past threads.

File: 1496350436321.jpg (20KB, 362x259px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 362x259px

>>9004789
>IT WONT WORK
>no I wont tell why
disregarded

>>9004600
Floating cloud cities on Venus/Jupiter/Whatever.

>>9004796
what's hard to believe about buoyancy anon?

>>9004681
we already are type 2 civ

File: 213.png (127KB, 1000x537px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1000x537px

>>9004791

>>9004814
>we already are type 2 civ

No we are not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale
> Type 2 civilization can harness the total energy of its planet's parent star

We are not even a type 1 yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale
>Type 1 civilization can use and store all of the energy which reaches its planet from its parent star.

>>9004814
We aren't even a Type 1 civilization yet and never will be.

>>9004629
If there is a claim of something working with no current exhibit, it's your responsibility to defend it.

>>9004825
http://www.orionsarm.com/fm_store/OrbitalRings-I.pdf
http://www.orionsarm.com/fm_store/OrbitalRings-II.pdf
http://www.orionsarm.com/fm_store/OrbitalRings-III.pdf

good enough for research papers to branch off it, surely it's good enough for speculation

You run a cable around the earth, you run a current through it to make it electromagnetic, and you magnetically stabilize a platform above the cable
it's not a supermaterial, it's ordinary fucking iron or nickel, long as shit, but if it's moving at orbital speed, there aren't actually any forces acting on it, and thus will not break.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMbI6sk-62E
first 8 or so minutes explains and summarizes it effectively enough, good listen if you can decipher sentences of someone who cannot pronounce the letter R

>inb4 entire thing gets ignored and not even read because memes

>>9004839
and it's cost?

>>9004849
Fucking expensive.
Duh.

File: smiley face.jpg (18KB, 542x540px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 542x540px

>>9004839
>You run a cable around the earth

>>9004789
>All of /sci/ told you why your shit idea for orbital rings won't work. If you can't remember that far back, use one of the fucking online archives to read past threads.
All of /sci/ ???
[citation needed]
interesting claim there bucko, care to back it up?
I've been away for a while, would you be so kind as to provide a synopsis of the critical faults in the orbital ring idea? From what I've seen it looks quite feasible. The forces on the various components are well within spec for modern materials unlike the space elevator's incredibly long tether.
The maglev portions of the orbital ring are nearly off the shelf due to current use of maglev trains.
So do tell just exactly what is the show stopper in this idea.

>>9004856
>Lets go up the cloud layer, travel above the earth which is much longer, drop down on the equator and still have to take another transport to go where we wanna go from the equator line rather than fly it with a plane in 8 hours.

Great idea genius...

>>9004859
>Lets go up the cloud layer, travel above the earth which is much longer, drop down on the equator and still have to take another transport to go where we wanna go from the equator line rather than fly it with a plane in 8 hours.
Going up and down adds 180km, which isn't all that far compared to international travel, and travelling above the earth isn't much further - the Earth is kinda big. Being outside the atmosphere allows for safe travel at batshit speeds.

Really though, international travel is probably the least interesting possible use for an orbital ring - Why did you pick that one?

>>9004864
So since we have all these avaliable options for international travel, why would we pick a longer more expensive way to travel anywhere? And you do know that this design only allows people to travel on the equator, so anywhere not on equator needs to be traveled with yet another vehicle.

No wonder why this retarded idea never came into life.

>>9004823
I thought type 1 civs could use every type of energy from their planet

>>9004859
>Great idea genius...
actually it is a great idea
>mfw $1 per Kg to LEO sounds like a damn fine idea

>>9004867
>So since we have all these avaliable options for international travel, why would we pick a longer more expensive way to travel anywhere?
Being longer doesn't mean much if it's still faster, and I doubt travelling on a ring would be all that expensive per trip.

Again though, why is international travel the thing you're focusing on?

>>9004864
>Why did you pick that one?
if you cannot understand why that anon keeps shifting the goalposts and using pilpul tatics...

Let us just agree that orbital ring concept is worth looking into further and has great potential for getting humanity launched into true space faring civilization.
>mfw (((some))) might oppose it for just those reasons

>>9004883
And what should I be focused on? The ones that don't clearly show why it's an inefficient idea with terrible feasibility?

File: 0ff3b6501a37677fc1916dd92b8f1250--riding-lawn-mowers-workout-ideas.jpg (46KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 320x320px

>>9004839
>>9004856
Hey, here's the orbital ring faggot, posting his links again. All the shit that was disproved as fucking sci-fi like 10 fucking threads ago.

Do you even know what this is: >>9004822 it is just 1, just ONE reason why that shit of yours can't possibly work. There's a shit load, SHIT LOAD of other reasons.

>there aren't actually any forces acting on it

WEW
E
W

>>9004600
The concept that you can transfer your consciousness into a computer/robot brain.

It might be possible for you to make a copy of yourself that way -- but YOU would still be back in the old brain, or whatever was left of it after the process of copying it.

>>9004604
That's essentially a space elevator, if it touches the ground. The one I liked terminated a mile or so up, with the center of mass at a geosynchronous orbit -- and so moved over the ground at high speed in a lemniscate pattern with it's northernmost point passing over New York.

>Sounds legit.

>>9004607
>neural links
Already in lab animal testing
>Superhuman AI
Didn't Google's cofounders come out and say that was their endgame along?
>Manned interstellar flight
Agreed. Whenever we travel the stars we wouldn't have been men for a long time.
>Cryonic thawing
Had a breakthrough this year that allowed full organ retrieval with a 100% viability rate. Give it around 100 years to be frozen properly and probably 50 more to be unfrozen. That doesn't mean you'll be less dead, but you'd still look fresh.
>brain emulations
Only because you need to understand something almost fully to emulate it and we don't understand the brain entirely.
>clinical immortality
Not for a good while considering cancer and immortality being a drastically underfunded pursuit (because nobody wants to pay and miss out so they just don't pay.) That is for our electronic descendants.

/sci/ was the guy telling Leonardo he was retarded and flying machines would never exist because the one he drew was trash

>>9004943
/sci/ was also the guy who told perpetual machines won't work and ghosts don't exist and ftl travel is not possible and many other physical limitations proven by science.
So no your chances don't look good at all.

>>9004946
it's always surprising when scientifically minded people are also jaded curmudgeons who hate imagining interesting possibilities

>>9004946
>Anyone on /sci/ discovered those limits and didn't just parrot them.

I hope ZPE and discovered negative mass happens just to fuck with you guys

>>9004950
there are no "interesting possibilities" we all know the cost and use of this thing and it's an inefficient, pointless idea. only people who support this are sci-fi fans who have no knowledge of physics, economy or logistic and only want real-life to look like their videogames.

>>9004950
>imagining interesting possibilities
Fuck off cunt. Science isn't creative writing.

>>9004839
Those materials don't have the structural integrity to make that mega structure. Wave propagation will be too much. The forces at play on it are too great.

>>9004980
good job, make everyone hate science like you do. This will surely boost the field and provide more funding

>>9004996
>make everyone hate science like you do.
I don't hate science. I just think this "all I need is imagination" pop-sci nonsense is overall damaging to the publics understanding.

>>9004922
>Do you even know what this is: >>9004822 it is just 1, just ONE reason why that shit of yours can't possibly work.
it would appear to be a representation of a standing wave or oscillation. Are you implying such motions cannot be accounted for and dampened?
>there aren't actually any forces acting on it
is mistaken, there are forces but they are minimal. the ring is in orbit at orbital speed there will be minimal tensile stress along it's length.
And again you don't offer any reasons the orbital ring idea isn't feasible you just point to a diagram with no further explanation and assume that is sufficient to prove your point. Your debate skills are weak and your engineering knowledge even weaker.
>There's a shit load, SHIT LOAD of other reasons.
give me 5
5 isn't a shitload but it's more than a few
>mfw the faggot cannot come up with any

>>9004600
You can't find an idea dumber than space elevators

>>9005038
>give me 5
Not that guy but I'll give you a couple. Those papers assume a spherical earth, which leads to a uniform gravitational pull. This isn't true, so it'll be pulling more on one side than the other, setting up large stresses in the ring. The "skyhooks" look to me to be space elevators, so they have all the standard problems of having to support it's own weight.

>>9005057
>Those papers assume a spherical earth, which leads to a uniform gravitational pull. This isn't true, so it'll be pulling more on one side than the other, setting up large stresses in the ring.
seriously?
The non-uniformity of the Earth's gravitational field has been studied and is well known. The effects are far below the effects from atmospheric drag at those altitudes. Just look to the ISS orbital data and the reasons behind the corrections they periodically do.
> The "skyhooks" look to me to be space elevators, so they have all the standard problems of having to support it's own weight.
The ''skyhooks'' as you call them are supported by the orbital ring. This results in tensile stress along the length of the ring.
Most of the objections I've seen are from basic ignorance or from omissions in the description of the orbital ring.
The ring will be comprised of segments, since it would be extremely difficult to manufacture, transport and orbit a one piece ring. Each segment will have control thrusters for station keeping, to dampen oscillations, to offset perterbations from atmospheric drag, precessional forces and the loading placed upon the ring from the ''skyhooks''

>>9005076
This post is why I don't argue with sci-fi fags. You ask for an argument, and when given on just dismiss it. The non-uniform field is a problem since parts of it will be falling towards earth a different rates. It's stated that in those papers that it needs to be in free fall in order to avoid setting up stresses, but non-uniformity is going to lead to the stresses he wants to avoid.
>The ''skyhooks'' as you call them are supported by the orbital ring
They can be supported by whatever you like, they still have the same problems as space elevators. They're functionally identical.
>Most of the objections I've seen are from basic ignorance
Which is funny because you're the ignorant one here.

Sci-fags are literally the most obnoxious posters on /sci/.

>>9004925
what's the difference? you'd just eliminate the irritating flaws of natural brains and if you could transfer it then you could make an exact copy - though you wouldn't want to as you'd be inferior.

>>9005082
>but non-uniformity is going to lead to the stresses he wants to avoid.
you seriously think those gravitational anomalies make that big a difference? you're the one who's a fool here anon. If these gravitational variances were so great don't you think it'd show up in computations for things like the ISS or the GPS satellite constellation?

>>9005095
>you seriously think those gravitational anomalies make that big a difference?
>Small perturbations can't lead to large effects
Oh boy I really am arguing with a retard.
>for things like the ISS or the GPS satellite constellation?
Completely different, none of those are continuous structures. Have you even read the papers you cite?

>>9005104
>Oh boy I really am arguing with a retard.
do you think nothing was learned from Tacoma narrows bridge anon?

>they still have the same problems as space elevators. They're functionally identical.
>Have you even read the papers you cite?
Have you?

>>9005109
>Tacoma narrows bridge
What the hell has that got to do with anything? Gravitational perturbations can have large effects, the tides on earth are cause by quadrupole moments. Very tiny corrections to a perfect sphere, very large effects. Moreover secular perturbation theory studies exactly these things, small perturbations that lead to large effects. What I'm trying to say is: just because it's a small deviation, doesn't mean that has a small effect.
>Have you?
Yep:
>[the ring] does not need to bear large structural loads because it is in free fall.
I've explained why this isn't going to be the case in reality, it's going to have large structural loads because of the non-uniformity. You've singularly failed to address this, instead deciding to continue shitposting. Fuck off, go to >>>/lit/ if you want to post about science fiction.

>>9004600
LMAO only scifi fanboys with no actual background in science think this is a possibility. Such a pipe dream lol.(pun)

File: 1496319867347.png (748KB, 528x693px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 528x693px

>>9005038
>Are you implying such motions cannot be accounted for and dampened?

Correct. The amount of material needed for dampening requires an exponential increase in mass. The more mass it has the worse the situation gets in this scenario. This is directly related to the fact it is a ring and in orbit around a planet.

>is mistaken, there are forces but they are minimal. the ring is in orbit at orbital speed there will be minimal tensile stress along it's length.

That's incorrect. Tidal forces are the worst part of an orbital ring. Those are caused from the planet, the moon, the sun, and all the other planets in the system.

>And again you don't offer any reasons the orbital ring idea isn't feasible you just point to a diagram with no further explanation and assume that is sufficient to prove your point

You are the same person as last time. You chose to ignore the information given. You choose to ignore it now and instead use hand-waving to make it okay.

>give me 5

Wave propagation
Tidal forces (Roche limit)
Tidal forces (extra planetary)
Tidal forces (planetary gravitational map inconsistencies)
Solar phase declination particle flux cumulative charging
Linear mass acceleration shear force
Metal fatigue due to temperature fluctuations (ductile & tensile swings)
Basal shear stress
Secular & periodic gravitational perturbation
Constant orbital degradation & related forces

File: large-humanoid-robot.jpg (177KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1280x720px

>>9004681
>>Large Humanoid Robots
possible today for varying definitions of large. No moving the goal posts.

File: venus_a_landis_balloon_hab_in_the_atmosphere_of_venus_by_eburacum45-d72tvs0.jpg (130KB, 1024x709px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1024x709px

>>9004802
>>9004796
Making a cloud city on a gas giant is fucking ridiculous. The only way to stay up is with a hot air balloon because the atmosphere is hydrogen and helium. Making a cloud city on venus isn't too crazy. On venus, breathable air is a lifting gas.

>>9005208
thank you for answering anon.

>The amount of material needed for dampening requires an exponential increase in mass.
again, you think nothing was learned from Tacoma narrows bridge? If we were restricted to passive dampening methods only you would have a point.

>Tidal forces are the worst part of an orbital ring. Those are caused from the planet, the moon, the sun, and all the other planets in the system.
Tidal forces act upon a body in orbit arises because the gravitational force exerted by one body on another is not constant across it: the nearest side is attracted more strongly than the farthest side. In the case of an orbital ring tidal forces would be exerted across the thickness of the ring not the total diameter.
As for the effects of other celestial bodies upon the ring, they'd have an effect just as the moon has an effect upon you, it exists and causes the tides but is extremely small.

>Wave propagation
active oscillation dampening
>Tidal forces (Roche limit)
minimal
>Tidal forces (extra planetary)
are you freakin serious?
>Tidal forces (planetary gravitational map inconsistencies)
if these were large enough to be relevant they'd show up in GPS station keeping data
>Solar phase declination particle flux cumulative charging
cumulative charging is the most real problem you've posed so far
>Linear mass acceleration shear force
what acceleration? once in orbit the only accelerations needed will be for oscillation dampening and station keeping.
>Metal fatigue due to temperature fluctuations (ductile & tensile swings)
a problem tis true, but you think the ISS doesn't have the same thermal swings? why hasn't the canadian arm snapped off if the problem is as great as you imply.

>Secular & periodic gravitational perturbation
>Constant orbital degradation & related forces
It's not a perpetual motion device anon, of course it will require active station keeping
>mfw you forgot precessional forces

>>9004939
>>9004607
>Clinical Immortality
>Being drastically underfunded pursuit.
I could've sworn the US government just thrown 100 million for studies in rejuvenate medicine which could lead to biological immortality last year.

Chinese also started some testing on animals to mes with cell. I wouldn't say its aggressively being poured into, but I wouldn't say underfunded.

>>9005854
>have waving
>it'll be okay
>it ain't dat bad
>magic properties of everyday materials stop this

If it were a bunch of separate shit it'd be fine (ISS/Satellites), but the instant you link it all together you fuck yourself really hard, kid.

>precessional forces

Axial precession in this case.

File: 132.jpg (54KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 800x800px

>>9005854
>thermal expansion ain't no thing, ISS can do it

An orbital ring is a lot longer than ISS. 1 degree of temperature change for an orbital ring can change its length literally by miles.

Mars colonization. Space travel.

>>9004780
Brainlet, computers don't understand shit about anything, they're literally light-bulbs arranged in a way that's meaningful and useful to us.

IF launch costs fall as much as Musk wants them to, an orbital ring is doable, but still wildly expensive and ambitious. Not going to happen for a long long time if ever.

>>9006018
an orbital ring wouldn't be the thing you build first anyway, you'd build it after you have either another launch assist method to send materials, or have an industrial base in space to supply it

>>9006001
a few kilometers, on a cable 40000 kilometers long, wouldn't there be things that could be done to counteract that?
how do we solve temperature fluctuation on other shit?

>>9006022
>how do we solve temperature fluctuation on other shit?

It is a lot different when something just sits on Earth. We don't have anything that long where structural integrity is that massively important.

The problem is that different materials expand at different rates. If you try to put them together they warp each other all to hell if they are super long.

File: bridge expansion.jpg (41KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x450px

>>9006022
>how do we solve temperature fluctuation on other shit?

Imagine these, but them being miles long. Then imagine that they also have expansion problems themselves.

File: wat.gif (324KB, 400x378px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 400x378px

>>9006001
>>9006022
>>9006025
>>9006030
>then it gets cold and contracts for miles and miles

And this shit is supposed to allow docking for space ships and have space elevators attached to it?

>>9006025
>>9006030
looks perfectly doable to me
just really fucking expensive, piling on the need to source the materials from space

after all, the expansion would not be all on a single spot, it'd be spread out, enough for regular shit be function

>>9006036
>miles and miles
>on a 40000 kilometer structure
how much is that contraction or expansion on any given spot?

why does it need to be one solid ring anyway, what exactly are you putting there that needs that

File: 1497982063062.jpg (13KB, 360x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 360x300px

>>9004925
>>9004925

That's not necessarily true.

Obviously we're dealing with totally fictional technology, so its impossible to say what is or is not possible when it comes to brain uploading.

But with that in mind all you really need to do is make the process not instant.

For example. Our transhumanist, lets call him Theseus, invents a nanomachine that slowly converts your brain into a synthetic brain.

If the process worked in seconds, people would probably call the 'its not really you' argument. But if it took months, or years?

Would people really argue it isnt *really* the original Theseus? Human cells get replaced all the time, whats the difference?

Theseus would be fine whatever they said. He'd know he was still him, because he'd have what's called 'Continuity'. His mind functioning the entire time through the transfer, over many months, with no point where they 'stopped'.

The reason the nanomachine idea works well is because there's none of the ambiguity usual to this sort of thing. Really, you could do it with the more standard scifi brain scan type machine. The problem is ensuring that the continuity isnt just an illusion (since the new version would be starting with all the memories up to the scan, they would come into being with no knowledge that they arent the original).

The answer again, is to make it gradual. If the scan takes a nanosecond, theres no way of knowing if your continuity is real or not.

If the scan takes hours, during which time your mind is slowly being moved off your organic brain and more into an artificial one, the continuity problem is lessened.

The final option i can think of is for the copy to be synced up to the original. By which i mean they're thinking with their organic and machine brain at the same time, experiencing both sets of stimuli at the same time. Basically a hive mind of two which could remain in that state for as long as they want until they decided to pull the plug on their organic version.

File: 1498164886486.jpg (54KB, 421x415px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 421x415px

>>9006053
it's a solid ring because it needs to be a giant electromagnet to stabilize the static platform you'd be putting shit on

>>9006036
after looking up the expansion joints that are used in construction right now, I fail to see why minor expansion would fuck the structure, if you upscaled it, and added one every set distance, say a mile, you'd have more than enough room to account for forces and keep everything stable

the larger single gap bridge expansion joints can account for 1000mm of movement, if we were to say "fuck it" and use that type for every single one, and put one every mile, we'd have 1000x40000 millimeters of expansion room, or 40 kilometers
and that's the single joints, there are modular joints that can handle over 3000mm, which gives us 120 kilometers to work with

while the true details of the problem are probably more in depth, we've been dealing with this sort of problem for ages, and have a mountain of solutions to throw at it and could devise a solution for shit that comes our way

>>9006073
I mixed up miles with kilometers like a mong, so where it says mile, put kilometer instead
math was done on kilometers

>>9006073
Every single thing would need that. Then you no longer have a ridged structure. It'll act like a wet space noodle.

>>9006082
and what is the issue with that one, lets figure out a solution
Less expansion joints?
smaller joints?

lets be productive friendo

>>9006089
I really don't see a way around it. Everything I can come up with still makes it chance orbital distances by so much that nothing could land on it and nothing could attach to the ground. The forces involved in all this are tiny, but when added together and propagated along a mass the size of an orbital ring, everything just comes apart.

It is like trying to use a hammer for a job that needs a squirt gun. An orbital ring is just the wrong way to go about this.

>>9006111
>makes it change orbital

>>9004607
>>clinical immortality.
Define what you mean by this, because in addition to continuing cancer research, they just recently figured out how to stop cellular aging in rats and the drug in question is going into human testing within the next few months.

>>9006128
Probably be 65 but look 25 type of thing without plastic surgery.

>>9006143
While this is strictly speculation on my part, I think halting the aging of cells in the body will have something more then just a cosmetic effect.

>>9006111
though I gotta ask, Why would these effects be so significant
sure it compounds, but would that compounding result in it being fucked all over, or would it just be localized and small scale?

>>9006151
Actually, lemme be a bit more specific here, the article in question mentions reversing cellular aging in rats.

http://wallstreetpit.com/113170-anti-aging-pill-on-the-horizon-human-trials-this-fall/
I mean sure, maybe it's a bit more complicated in humans, but this at least looks promising to me.

>>9006168
Large scale movement cause wave propagation for of all. Secondly, if you want to dock with it, a temperature swing is going to fuck that up.

>>9004600
30 years ago, portable internet was practically impossible and would never come into life. Now look at where we are.

I'm not saying there will be space elevators in 2047. But one can dream.

>>9006211
A space elevator is just (theoretically) a method of getting people/stuff into orbit cheaply though isn't it? Why would you research and then build something like that when you could achieve the same result through further developments in say rockets, spaceplanes, or other methods of getting into orbit?

File: 1495624556725.jpg (249KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 1920x1080px

A space elevator on earth is not feasible because we have yet to invent a material that could handle the strain
even the ones in the lab or theoretical ones don't appear to be capable
there are different launch assist methods on the table, and a few of them look like they could be pulled off by individual nations, the Launch loop in particular

a list of possible ones is:
The skyhook
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlpFzn_Y-F0&index=3&list=PLIIOUpOge0LsGJI_vni4xvfBQTuryTwlU
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/library/meetings/annual/jun01/391Grant.pdf

Mass Drivers, though I have very little faith in it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KerG4ILWEa4&index=4&list=PLIIOUpOge0LsGJI_vni4xvfBQTuryTwlU

Launch Loops:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1MAg0UAAHg&list=PLIIOUpOge0LsGJI_vni4xvfBQTuryTwlU&index=7

Space towers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1MAg0UAAHg&list=PLIIOUpOge0LsGJI_vni4xvfBQTuryTwlU&index=7

and lastly, Orbital rings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMbI6sk-62E&list=PLIIOUpOge0LsGJI_vni4xvfBQTuryTwlU&index=9

whether or not any of these can be pulled off is up for debate and investigation, the fact that they're being looked at by so many people in the field shows that they do have a kernel of truth to them, and just need polish and edits to become full viable

I'd say, instead of declaring everything is impossible, why not have a bit of faith and see if they can be altered and engineered to become possible
The math checks out on all of them, they're just fuckmassive things with problems we have dealt with before on smaller scales

It's wonderously convienent that the upper US Government and Military is filled with lots of pro space people who all have boners for the idea of building the biggest ships with the biggest guns

>>9004600
>spaceships that don't look ugly as balls

The reason space travel isn't getting funded is because it's ugly. The space shuttle worked because it had to be aerodynamic which made it look decent. A real starship would look like the one from the Avatar movie. U G L Y! Nobody wants to fund that

>>9004617
>Manned interstellar space flight and cryonic thawing will likely exist someday
what is the Fermi paradox

>>9004604
how would you even get people it and out? thousands and thousands of helicopters?
>>9006484
overly optimistic

>>9006226
Because it would allow access to space directly using low-power energy sources.

>>9004617
>Albeit it
come on, that's like saying "although though..."

>>9005979
Now you see the folly in engaging these people. They're like singularity fags, they refuse to accept that there are physical limits to things, they seem to assume that you can always engineer your way around a problem. When you point out a problem they either ignore it or refuse to acknowledge that it's a problem at all.

>>9006254
This entire post is full >>>/x/

File: sls.jpg (11KB, 270x468px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 270x468px

SLS
2 Billions dollars per flight.
Hopefully it blows up on the first test flight.

>>9004604
Wasn't that an April Fool's joke?

>>9004603
Fuck off. Im a /pol/ack and I would never tell you such nonsense.

Project Orion on the other hand. Now thats something which is actually doable.

>>9004604
Thats so retarded, You would have to move New York to the equator...

>>9005979
>but the instant you link it all together you fuck yourself really hard, kid.
you need to pull the dildo out yo ass anon.
you've provided fuck-all for show stopping problems, just minor kvetches about how this or that minor engineering problem.
>>9006001
>An orbital ring is a lot longer than ISS. 1 degree of temperature change for an orbital ring can change its length literally by miles.
ever see what happens to a solid railroad rail that is 1Km long? you think engineers haven't had to deal with thermal expansion before?
>>9005979
>Axial precession in this case.
I'm glad you understand the concepts involved

There is no doubt that an orbital ring is an interesting idea.
There is no doubt that construction and operation of an orbital ring will encounter massive engineering obstacles.
I seriously doubt there are any engineering problems that are insurmountable.

I believe one of the biggest problems will be dealing with induced currents and regions of accumulated charge.

>>9004603
Don't remind me of that retard that's been spamming /pol/ with his launch loop.

>>9006826
you need to fuck off back to your anti-science SJWtard nigger nazi cesspool >>>/pol/

>>9006860
>a solid railroad rail that is 1Km long
You literally are retarded.

>>9006922
He's right. Orbital rings can't happen. It is >>>/x/ where you need to return to. Take your unicorn farts with you.

>>9006860
>minor problems
>easy fixes
>1km solid railroad rail

lol Christ kid, kill yourself.

Even "massive engineering obstacles" is an understatement. I think you need to bone up on materials science and engineering. Don't return.

File: 1495828916955.png (34KB, 598x615px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 598x615px

>only 2 to 3 people actually sat down and debated the mechanics of an orbital ring, and what could be done to fix the significant issues with them
>a dozen just shitposted furiously about /x/ and /pol/
/sci/ in a nutshell

>>9007103
I could sit here all day and refer to the stuff in >>9005208 but pro-orbital ring fag would just hand wave them away. He has no education in the matter except via wikipedia and what has been thrown at him. Too bad it doesn't seem to stick. There's literally more than enough info given in just that post to allow anyone to do research and see why something like that wouldn't work.

It is the tip of the ice burg. Station keeping would be another extremely serious problem with his big wet noodle.

File: 1487986421931.gif (2MB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x320px

>>9007100
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that by "easy fixes", he meant "fixes that we have done before for smaller scale projects"
he is likely of the belief that the orbital ring would be mostly similar to a railroad, and could thus utilize the same fixes that a railroad does

File: Skyscrapers in Tokyo swaying in Earthquake.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>orbital ring 40,000km long(is that right? 24,854+ miles)
>to allow space ships to dock
>to allow space elevators to transport things up to space
>all manner of forces acting upon it at any given point on the ring

Can you imagine the amount of wobble something like that would have? Imagine being the pilot who needs to dock to it.

>>9007120
Most designs have multiple space elevators attached around the entire Earth. I'm sure the diameter of the Earth does change all the time. Not by very much, but a tiny change can mean huge problems for something like this.

File: 1492473841984.png (37KB, 206x188px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 206x188px

>>9007125
>multiple 80 kilometer long towers all holding on to a fuckmassive wobbly noodle
This is something I doubt even the fucking Orks would make

>>9007131
It sounds exactly like something Mechanicus would come up with.

>>9007131
It doesn't have to be a space tower, video said elevator cable could work, since we have materials that have a tensile strength limit over 80 kilometers

Maybe those guy wires could act as stabilization for the ring

>>9007144
> we have materials that have a tensile strength limit over 80 kilometers
like what?

And if you want it to act as an elevator or an anchor it needs to hold more than it's own weight.

File: ss (2017-07-01 at 12.49.53).png (53KB, 746x881px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 746x881px

>>9007150
Kevlar looks to be our best bet, goes way over the limit, and we can and do mass produce it

>>9007170
>goes way over the limit
I don't know man. You'd need significant tension to keep that 80km cable from flapping about (even without thermal expansion taken into the account) plus i doubt any engineer giving such a construction safety factor below 5.

>>9007144
Let's say the tensile strength happens to check out.

What happens when it wobbles or shrinks suddenly due to temp swings? That's a shit load of "g-force" 100kg can suddenly have the force of 10,000kg. *snap*

>>9004600
A screen that fits into the palm of your hands that can show you what's happening thousands of miles away in real time.

>>9004880

No, it's that they use ALL of the energy of their planet, including everything that comes from the sun, everything that they can mine out of the ground in terms of nuclear and chemical fuels, all of the geothermal heat sources, etc. If we were a type 1 civilization we'd be influencing the climate of the entire planet just by the waste heat of our activity, right now with our entire civilization releasing about as much CO2 as possible we're barely increasing the temperature. It'll still have an effect mind you, but we won't have to worry about accidentally boiling any oceans during major sporting events.

>>9007933
Wow, someone else who knows about civilization waste heat. I need to interact with more smart people irl.

>>9004802

I don't doubt that things can float in Venus' atmosphere.

What I don't accept is the idea that an entire self sustaining colony can exist in Venus' atmosphere, for several reasons, the biggest being lack of resources.

At 50km altitude on Venus the pressure is a familiar 1 bar, the temperature is a comfortable 70 degrees C, and the air is full of a delightful mist of concentrated sulfuric acid. If you go outside without a suit on, you will be simultaneously scalded by the hot air and chemically burned by acid across your entire body, but your ears won't pop and your blood won't boil, so that's nice. There's not much to do outside anyway though because you're suspended 50km in the air above a surface under crushing pressure and intense heat. You can't access it to gather metals for tools or machinery, you can't grab any rock to crush and use as mineral nutrient feed for hydroponic farms. You have no access to any elements except hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, sulfur, and a few other trace atmospheric components that aren't very useful. There's no way your colony will ever be able to expand itself or even supply all its own needs, you will depend forever on Earth for shipments of hardware, materials, and vital elements. Meanwhile people on Mars are building parks by doming over craters.

>>9007952
>Meanwhile people on Mars are building parks by doming over craters.

And, having nightmare abominations for children.

>>9006793

honestly I'd kek pretty hard
fuck SLS

>>9007941
>implying I'm smart

i'm actually just severely autistic, anon.

>>9007956

>implying we know anything about reduced gravity and its effect on fetal development

3/8th's Earth gravity is not 0 gravity you silly man.

NASA needs to do an experiment with a few dozen embryos of different species in a pod attached to a counterweight by a cable in space. Spin up the pod and cable to whatever RPM generates whatever gravity you're looking to study, then thaw the embryos and see what they do.

>>9007973
It'll be a curve, on a chart, I'm sure. Finding out where the tipping point is, will be the hard part. Especially, since the type to testing needed to be done will have to be done with real people and infants. It isn't going to be pretty.

>>9007977

>Put frozen egg and sperm cells in spacecraft
>Allow to comingle
>Observe embryo development
>Refreeze embryos at certain points to have a series of specimens to study back on Earth, looking for any significant abnormalities
>Start at 90% Earth gravity and go down in 10% steps with ten embryos used on each step, frozen 4 days apart in series.
>Once experiment has gone down to 10% Earth gravity and all embryos refrozen, detach counterweight and despin spacecraft, reenter and land on Earth, scientists later publish findings that jellobabies occur at 0.X times Earth gravity and under

Doesn't seem to messy to me. No reason to go full term with humans, although full term with some other mammal may be useful (rats, pigs, etc).

>>9008058
It isn't that simple. You need every developmental stage. Bone development comes from gravity. VIIP may mean infants are blind from birth for all we know.

>>9008069

Eventually you do, but for preliminary tests being able to rule out 20% gravity and under for example would help prevent wasting time with later, more long-term experiments.