EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

Space Elevator Not Gonna Happen

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - Space Elevator Not Gonna Happen

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



Jasen Betts <jasen_at_xnet.co.nz> wrote in
news:q363fo$62p$6_at_gonzo.alcatraz:

Quote:
illogic?

yeah, those were your exact words when you dismissed a permanent
tether.


Lying fuck. I never used the NON-word "illogic" in my life. That
was YOUR stupid move.


Are you fucktards down there really that fucking dumb? You cannot
see that your fucktarded choice of made up terms was an insult? Oh,
that's right... that is what you meant by the post to start with.

Again... Fuck you, Betts.

And as to the tehter, dipshit. Note that I agreed with him, and
said it was a good idea. Are you really so stupid as to not notice
a point at which someone accepts a concept. Again... fuck off and
die, you insulting POS. You do not deserve to discuss things with
men.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



Jasen Betts <jasen_at_xnet.co.nz> wrote in
news:q362h3$62p$5_at_gonzo.alcatraz:

Quote:
On 2019-02-02, gnuarm.deletethisbit_at_gmail.com
gnuarm.deletethisbit_at_gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 10:01:25 PM UTC-5, Jasen Betts
wrote:
On 2019-02-01, gnuarm.deletethisbit_at_gmail.com
gnuarm.deletethisbit_at_gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 6:31:34 PM UTC-5, Jasen Betts
wrote:
On 2019-02-01, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno_at_decadence.org> wrote:
Jasen Betts <jasen_at_xnet.co.nz> wrote in
news:q32bk4$s2o$4_at_gonzo.alcatraz:

Most designs seem to have a stationary "beanstalk" this
does away with the need to expend fuel at the top.

Have you run the numbers? can your design lift enough fuel
to maintain itself?


We can barely build free standing radio towers down here
at the
sub kilometer level. And those have guy wires on them.

So no stalk. It would weigh far too much anyway.

It needs to be temporal.

so far no confvincing argument

It is like fishing a wall.

uh, you mean for installing cables inside an finished wall?
I've never seen that done using skyhooks.

In this case, however, two lines get
dropped. The hoist tether for the payload attachment and
the guide strand it will ride on during the hoist event.
The guide strand gets anchored to Earth. During the hoist,
once the hoist escapes atmospheric influence, the Earth
guide strand attachment can be released and retrieved back
to the platform.

What the fuck? by the illogic above the guide strand "would
weigh far too much anyway."

At some point, the rising payload and tether will
continue rising
even after the winch has stopped pulling. So there will
have to be a capture device at the platform.

Tidal forces will continue to stretch the system, it's also
going to gain lots of angular velocity by conservation of
momentum. it's going to be a serious hazard to other
satellites.

Ask yourself... your weight on Mt. Everest and your
weight
standing on a chunk of ice in the Arctic Sea?

this argument is given as evidence of what?

Ask yourself how does this thing stay in orbit, (and in what
orbit)

I think it is funny that you think no one has worked out the
orbital
mechanics yet. I would have expected this to be the very first
thing done.

Your design is like nothing I've hard of before. maybe there's a
reason for that. I can think of several.

"My" design??? Care to actually say something rather than just
being vague?

Sorry, DLU#1's design: moving/extensible tether

If you are so convinced the orbital mechanics won't work, why
not
prove it or find someone who has already proven it. Do you
think no one has looked at it?

yes, I think noone who has looked has found it useful.

More vague nothing.

I recall watching a show about a company (or two) that worked
on the idea. Yeah, the material science isn't there yet, but
they did all the preliminary work and seemed to show that it
was feasible if the carbon nanotube thing could be made to
work. By "feasible" they mean there are no glaring defects in
the science. Sure, there is a lot more work to be done, but
nothing that would be a clear road block.

That whip sweeping through the clarke belt seems like a deal
breaker to me

More nothing. Care to elucidate?

I explained that a few posts back, caused by conservation of
angular momentum as you reel the tether in the system starts to
spin faster - (it's already spinning once per sidereal day) when
it gets much shorter it spins much faster.


Wake the fuck up. Nobody said anything about traversing across
space or the Earth during use.


You explained. You explained nothing. You READ and interpretted
what you read wrong to start with and your first reply way back then
was fucking wrong, and your entire mind set about it since is bent.

Your fucking brain is spinning from self shortened nerves.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:46317cf3-9e92-4f1e-a7b8-93fa4f870202_at_googlegroups.com:

Quote:
And magical forces might come into it if the entire platform was
built around a giant unicorn.

-


Like I said. A punk fuck like you onviously knows nothing about
gyroscopes.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:d7471099-2e49-4887-8e94-acacf213bd18_at_googlegroups.com:

Quote:
On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 3:08:47 AM UTC+11,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:eec6f368-2346-46ae-8746-bf8354e19ea6 @googlegroups.com:

Not a feature of any space elevator I've heard about.


Ever work with or study a gyroscope and its mechanical effects
in
physics class?

Of course I did. What has that go to do with space elevators?


Well I can see that you got your lithium script updated. No need
talking with you.

Take off the horse blinders or consider yourself to be thought of
as too fucking lame for the discussion.

IOW, if you do not know where gyros would come into play in this
scenario, you are too fucking stupid to be in the group.

But we already knew that.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



gnuarm.deletethisbit_at_gmail.com wrote in
news:f2af0fef-a322-4127-8fbb-66379827e460_at_googlegroups.com:

Quote:
On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 6:00:22 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
On 1/31/2019 2:39 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:
Another ripoff in the making.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAXGUQ_ewcg


What about the hundreds or even thousands of lower orbit
satellites (including the GPS ones)? One hit and either one or
both is destroyed.

You don't think that can be avoided? How do they keep sats from
running into each other any other time?


Rick C.

--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209


What he is saying is that the platform sits at geosynchronous
space orbit with a whole bunch of moving LEO orbit device flying
past in the space between your platform and the Earth.

This is why my "deploy at time of use" idea would be one of the
only feasible methods.

To get right down to it, we would be better off suspending a
platform in high altitude air with balloons and launching with
reduced requisite boosters since there is less of a jump to get into
space.

Or have an acceleration ramp up a mountain slope leading to a
'soft' railgun finish push to space.

Idea C could be used to send water to the moon too. Maybe keep us
from drowning in our stupidity about the water on this globe too.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



John S <Sophi.2_at_invalid.org> wrote in news:q357e2$ouv$5_at_dont-email.me:

Quote:
One hit and either one or both is destroyed.


Wow, Johnny... none of us here would possibly know that a collision
causes damage.

Go get a replacement for your sunken rubber duck, so you can go back
to sitting in the tub. You are too childish to attempt playing with
the big boys. If you were once mature, that went out the window when
you hard wired yourself as an asshole.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:45 pm   



Jasen Betts <jasen_at_xnet.co.nz> wrote in news:q363fo$62p$6
@gonzo.alcatraz:

Quote:
No, Clarke belt. when this thing spins up. There's a lot of angular
momentum there


Spins up? It is not a satellite, ya dope.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:45 pm   



On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 11:11:48 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:d7471099-2e49-4887-8e94-acacf213bd18_at_googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 3:08:47 AM UTC+11,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:eec6f368-2346-46ae-8746-bf8354e19ea6 @googlegroups.com:

Not a feature of any space elevator I've heard about.


Ever work with or study a gyroscope and its mechanical effects
in
physics class?

Of course I did. What has that go to do with space elevators?


Well I can see that you got your lithium script updated. No need
talking with you.


Who takes lithium? I certainly don't need it. One of my cousins did his Ph.D. on the theraputic effects of lithium, but that's as close as anybody on the family has got to taking it. Manic-depression isn't one of our lunacies.

Quote:
Take off the horse blinders or consider yourself to be thought of
as too fucking lame for the discussion.


Funny you should mention that. You are the half-wit that think that gyroscopes have a part to play in bean-stalk style space elevators.

Quote:
IOW, if you do not know where gyros would come into play in this
scenario, you are too fucking stupid to be in the group.


Actually, if you think that they have any part to play in the kind of space elevators we are talking about, you may not be stupid, but you do have a rather poor grasp of this particular subject.

> But we already knew that.

What you "know" is better related to reality that what krw "knows", but you don't do any better in correcting the items that you've got wrong.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:45 pm   



On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 11:12:39 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:46317cf3-9e92-4f1e-a7b8-93fa4f870202_at_googlegroups.com:

And magical forces might come into it if the entire platform was
built around a giant unicorn.

Like I said. A punk fuck like you obviously knows nothing about
gyroscopes.


I actually know quite a bit, but the obvious thing I know - and that you don't - is that gyroscopes don't have anything to do with bean-stalk style space elevators.

Do try to learn the elementary details of the stuff you pontificate about. You'd look less like like a twit if you did.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:45 pm   



bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:e0e9a82b-a6ac-4cbd-9678-c67ae026c161_at_googlegroups.com:

Quote:
Actually, if you think that they have any part to play in the kind
of space elevators we are talking about,


You are no part of any 'we'.

And in this thread, "WE" are talking about a tether hoist.

You are an abject idiot.


Guest

Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:45 pm   



bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:e0e9a82b-a6ac-4cbd-9678-c67ae026c161_at_googlegroups.com:

Quote:
You are the half-wit that think that gyroscopes have a part to
play in bean-stalk style space elevators.


Except that I specififcally stated that it would NOT be a 'beanstalk
style space elevator'.

I guess your vocabulary is severely limited. Try looking up the word
'hoist'. Need more help? Try rope hoist.


Guest

Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:45 am   



On Monday, February 4, 2019 at 1:57:17 AM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:e0e9a82b-a6ac-4cbd-9678-c67ae026c161_at_googlegroups.com:

You are the half-wit that think that gyroscopes have a part to
play in bean-stalk style space elevators.

Except that I specifically stated that it would NOT be a 'beanstalk
style space elevator'.

I guess your vocabulary is severely limited. Try looking up the word
'hoist'. Need more help? Try rope hoist.


Your guess-work is as inadequate as ever.

I posted a link to what strikes me as the only competition to the beanstalk space elevator. The demands on the tether are less extreme.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19980048417.pdf

That doesn't seem to involve gyroscopes either. I'm afraid you seem to have invented your own Heath robinson scheme, and want the rest of us to take you seriously (which isn't going to happen).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


Guest

Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:45 am   



On Monday, February 4, 2019 at 1:58:21 AM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote in
news:e0e9a82b-a6ac-4cbd-9678-c67ae026c161_at_googlegroups.com:

Actually, if you think that they have any part to play in the kind
of space elevators we are talking about,

You are no part of any 'we'.


Not the "we" that might include you.

> And in this thread, "WE" are talking about a tether hoist.

You (singular) are talking about a tether hoist, which is a remarkably silly idea.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19980048417.pdf

uses tethers in a way that is technically feasible. It can shift stuff up into higher orbits, once it's outside the atmosphere.

> You are an abject idiot.

Neither of us is, but you have gone down the wrong rabbit-hole and haven't noticed, which isn't clever.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Peabody
Guest

Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:45 am   



I apologize for not reading the entire thread, but a few interesting things
if not already mentioned:

1. Space elevator science fiction reading should start with Arthur C.
Clarke's "The Fountains of Paradise". He covers it pretty well (carbon
fiber, space junk, etc.), but doesn't really deal with all of the major
issues.

2. Since the upper "lobby" is in synchronous orbit, you can just push off
from that and still be in synchronous orbit. But you can't just get off at a
lower floor. You could be going far too slow, and would fall to earth.

3. It has always seemed to me that the cable would also be resposible for
increasing the horizontal velocity of the elevator car as it goes from the
surface of the earth to synchronous orbit. And vice versa coming back down.
So the cable would bow out to the West on the way up, and to the East on the
way down. It's not clear how this would be compensated for.

4. Another place where an elevator would be useful would be on Mars. And
that has the advantage of not having material atmosphere to get in the way,
or very much space junk already in lower orbit. And of course it wouldn't be
nearly as long. However, there is one big piece of junk that would have to
be dealt with, and that is Phobos, which is in a sub-synchronous orbit. (On
your next trip to Mars, please note that Phobos rises in the West and sets in
the East.) One thought for dealing with Phobos is to induce a wave
oscillation in the cable, carefully timed so that the cable is out of the way
when Phobos passes underneath. Another idea is to move Phobos to a higher
orbit.

Clarke makes the point that if we are to escape the red giant phase of our
sun, we will need the elevator to permit mass movemnent of people to our new
home.


Guest

Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:45 am   



On Monday, February 4, 2019 at 10:17:18 AM UTC+11, Peabody wrote:
Quote:
I apologize for not reading the entire thread, but a few interesting things
if not already mentioned:

1. Space elevator science fiction reading should start with Arthur C.
Clarke's "The Fountains of Paradise". He covers it pretty well (carbon
fiber, space junk, etc.), but doesn't really deal with all of the major
issues.

2. Since the upper "lobby" is in synchronous orbit, you can just push off
from that and still be in synchronous orbit. But you can't just get off at a
lower floor. You could be going far too slow, and would fall to earth.

3. It has always seemed to me that the cable would also be resposible for
increasing the horizontal velocity of the elevator car as it goes from the
surface of the earth to synchronous orbit. And vice versa coming back down.
So the cable would bow out to the West on the way up, and to the East on the
way down. It's not clear how this would be compensated for.


Probably by a crawling counter-weight on the section of the cable above synchronous orbit - it would crawl out a bit further to increase the tension on the lower end of the cable, counter-acting any tendency to bow.

It would probably also be used to cancel out tidal forces as the moon passed overhead, and damp any stretching vibrational resonances in the cable - it does seem to be an essnetial part of any practicable system.
Quote:

4. Another place where an elevator would be useful would be on Mars. And
that has the advantage of not having material atmosphere to get in the way,
or very much space junk already in lower orbit. And of course it wouldn't be
nearly as long. However, there is one big piece of junk that would have to
be dealt with, and that is Phobos, which is in a sub-synchronous orbit. (On
your next trip to Mars, please note that Phobos rises in the West and sets in
the East.) One thought for dealing with Phobos is to induce a wave
oscillation in the cable, carefully timed so that the cable is out of the way
when Phobos passes underneath. Another idea is to move Phobos to a higher
orbit.


Both would work.

Quote:
Clarke makes the point that if we are to escape the red giant phase of our
sun, we will need the elevator to permit mass movement of people to our new
home.


Probably more sensible to move the whole planet into a higher orbit - we've got a couple of billions years to do it, and launching most of the asteroid belt at the earth to pass close enough to lift it into a higher orbit, while directing the successive asteroids into the sun, should do the job.

Getting it wrong - as by putting an asteroid on a collision course rather into a grazing orbit - would be awkward, but it would be a survivable accident.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - Space Elevator Not Gonna Happen

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map