What is Digg?195 Comments
- inactive, on 05/04/2008, -3/+166now all they need is space elevator muzak
- keatonkeaton998, on 05/04/2008, -9/+99This is the most disorienting, upside down, unclear, and confusing video I've ever seen. I have no idea what's going on and it's incredibly frustrating that there is no sound or narration.
- hstege, on 05/04/2008, -7/+57yeah, they really mucked up those trips to the moon and that atom bomb...
the government has money and ambitions, and isn't necessarily interested in strict profit -- a good combination for some scientific pursuits. - rnelsonee, on 05/04/2008, -4/+54Well, I'm glad you're not running things. "Pie in the sky" ideas from the past such as heavier-than-air flight, nuclear power, and landing on the moon were all thought to be impossible by most people, but we still did it. The science will come about - we've only been civilized for about 5,000 years and we've done quite a bit in the last 1,000.
And cost? The space elevator has been estimated to cost at $6B. That's less than 1/150th of the estimated cost of the Iraq war. And lets talk about savings - the whole reason behind the space elevator is to save money for transporting items into space. Building the elevator would mean material could get into space at $100/lb rather than $10,000/lb (using rockets, which use fuel, which isn't going to be around forever). The thing would pay for itself after you put up 700 tons, which is less than one space station.
(can't post long links here for some reason, but my figures are easily Googled) - carpespasm, on 05/04/2008, -6/+46"ALLAH ACKBAR!" *Scissor snip*
- WRXFiles, on 05/04/2008, -3/+40You kids who are questioning how good an idea this is need to get out more.
Try reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fountains_of_Para ...
This book was written by Arthur C Clarke. Remember him? He is the same guy who in 1945 committed to paper the idea of communications satellites. Think about how we use satellites... Had he patented that idea, he would have been the wealthiest man the world has ever known.
What's Clarke's first law? Well, if an elderly scientist says that something is possible, he is usually right. When an elderly scientist says something is impossible - he is usually wrong.'
This is now just a technological challenge, and if we don't destroy ourselves first, it will be built. - CabesMojo, on 05/04/2008, -5/+39No, its mass would be insignificant.
- nomadxx7, on 05/04/2008, -1/+34That is awesome. I remember reading about this idea back in '04 from Popular Science
Here is the PopSci link:
http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2004-04/spac ... - kevinmotel, on 05/04/2008, -1/+32"It collapsed when the city got glassed."
"But the tower was thousands of kilometers high."
"Yeah. Well now it's scattered all over the Savannah." - Apocolypse007, on 05/04/2008, -1/+26I cant wait to see the time lapse video of the guy who gets stuck in the space elevator for 48 hours and keeps opening the doors just to see planes and birds passing by.
- inactive, on 05/04/2008, -1/+21the earth is a lot lot lot bigger than you are thinking of.
- catachip, on 05/04/2008, -0/+20First of all, I've worked at NASA and have been to seminar talks given by the space elevator group. Second of all, to quote LiftPort themselves: "LiftPort hopes to eventually use carbon nanotubes in the construction of a 100,000 km (62,000 mile) space elevator..." (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator)
As for satellites, a simple google search would tell you that geosynchronous orbit is over 40,000 km up.
Please don't presume to lecture other people on their ignorance when you have not confirmed the facts yourself. - RogerStrong, on 05/04/2008, -1/+19No, the reporting is just better.
Lyndon Johnson was little better than Bush II - complete with the same incompetence trying to command a war from the White House rather than let the professionals handle it.
It was Johnson who began America's direct involvement in the ground war in Vietnam. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which gave the President the exclusive right to use military force without consulting the Senate, was based on a false pretext.
He used the same fear tactics. "If we allow Vietnam to fall, tomorrow we’ll be fighting in Hawaii, and next week in San Francisco."
But that was before Nixon, when reporters wouldn't take on a President. - powatom, on 05/04/2008, -3/+20Oh come on - meteors and planes? The odds of the ribbon ever being hit by ANYTHING are so astronomically small it's not even worth thinking about. Why bother going outside? You might get a meteor slamming into your face! And god forbid - never go parachuting, don't you know that a plane might fly into you?
An actual targeted attack on the ribbon IS something to worry about, but if we just focused on what 'might happen', we'd never get anywhere, would we?
And besides, investing in a way to get stuff into space without consuming massive amounts of fuel is very worthwhile - we can't send rockets up indefinately. The initial cost may very well be in the trillions (although I doubt it - billions, possibly), but at least it's only a one time cost, and not something you keep needing to pay for over and over again.
Think of it as a pioneering project. Even if it is never accomplished so we can send stuff up to space using an elevator, the technology could be used for other purposes (construction, in particular - even construction in space). - mentaldingo, on 05/04/2008, -0/+15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_Momentum
- EliColburn, on 05/04/2008, -1/+14Futurama: not just for television any more.
- kebwi, on 05/04/2008, -0/+12Yet another comment suggesting that no one involved in space elevator research has actually given it more than two minutes of thought or a napkin's worth of calculation. If you are genuinely curious about how they think it can be done why don't you just look it up and learn about it instead of making ridiculous accusations? Welcome to the internet age where you never have any excuse for asking dumb questions about topics which are easily researched on the web (and this is definitely one of those topics. Have you even *looked* for an answer to your question?).
I find space elevator nay-sayers to be much like creationists. They criticize a particular idea or concept with a bunch of arguments which they think sound clever and insightful, but to anyone who has actually researched the topic in a little depth, their arguments are unfailingly hollow and naive, and serve only to illustrate how uneducated they themselves are for asking such absurd questions in the first place.
Do you really want to know "how they plan on extending the thing past Earth's atmosphere [without balloons]", your quote? You want to know? Then for goodness sakes, look it up. - Orsenfelt, on 05/04/2008, -2/+14Brilliant idea. Getting closer to everyone being able to get witness earth from space. Bring it on!
- Shots, on 05/04/2008, -0/+12Actually... YES.
The earth's rotation would be slowed... but unless you have a very accurate atomic clock, you probably wouldn't notice it.
And unless we were to use the elevator to "slingshot" payloads... which would also reduce our rotational speed.
It's like asking... if i can get everybody near me to jump up and down at the same time, will we shift the world from it's orbit?
It would have to be a very very BIG space elevator... - inactive, on 05/04/2008, -0/+12Finally, a solution to the problem of screaming children who let go of their McDonalds branded balloons!
- mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -5/+17It sure would make for an easy target for terrorism.
- inactive, on 05/04/2008, -0/+11No thanks. Wake me up when the have the space escaltor running.
- Quicksilver4648, on 05/04/2008, -0/+10I swear, I have learned more from video games then anything else sometimes.
- earthforce1, on 05/04/2008, -0/+10The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) published an article on the space elevator proposal in 2005. http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/aug05/1690
The IEEE is a technical body representing engineers worldwide, and they are not prone to fits of fancy. They actually detail how it could be put up, and it isn't as pie in the sky as you think. There are some technical hurdles to solve, but it isn't a wild fantasy. - Furkle, on 05/04/2008, -5/+15If that was an original thought I might have dugg you up but as it's asked every time one of these links go up that's not the case. Also the answer is no.
- mentaldingo, on 05/04/2008, -0/+9I could do with a few more hours in the day.
- OisinT, on 05/04/2008, -1/+10it needs to be that muzak from that Jurassic Park video game for snes in the 90s
- strangewill, on 05/04/2008, -1/+10Wouldn't it be technically yes, but so small you'd never realize it?
- DarkSideofMoon, on 05/04/2008, -2/+10Tripod. Ever heard of it?
- bratterscain, on 05/04/2008, -1/+9I see a Spaceballs episode involving giant scissors.
- nynexla, on 05/04/2008, -0/+8with diarrhea
- objectnull, on 05/04/2008, -1/+9This is fantastic, but I see it much more of a tip of the iceberg thing concerning what new innovations will be fostered by this technology.
Also, another short video on the space elevator, it's a little more informative.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2UZDHHDhog - RandaII, on 05/04/2008, -1/+9God your parents must of been ***** high when they made you.
- CSharpSauce, on 05/04/2008, -1/+8... you're completely right... why would the FAA require safety measures for the air when the only thing up there are planes /*eye roll*/
- brad3378, on 05/04/2008, -0/+7How'd you like to get stuck on this thing for 42 hours?
- santiago1, on 05/04/2008, -1/+8 I vote they use the elevator muzak from System Shock! I STILL always hear that to this day!!
- yetAnotherCroc, on 05/04/2008, -1/+8you obviously didnt pay attention. They had a robot climb the ribbon. That was the real test
- kebwi, on 05/04/2008, -1/+8First, they weren't testing the ribbon, they were testing the climber, so they can use any ribbon-hoisting method they want and remain legitimate. Your point is completely irrelevant because the ribbon wasn't the subject of the test.
Second, your proposal is a radically different scale of this experiment. The shuttle flies just a little bit higher than the 1000' (or even target 5000') height of this experiment...just a little bit mind you. Why won't you allow them to scale up, starting from low heights and advancing to higher heights over time? Why do you chide them for not jumping straight to space shuttle altitudes? Do you think that's really the right approach to this sort of experiment, no smaller preliminary experiments, just got for full tilt or else be criticized for starting with smaller degrees of the experiment? - Vet4Peace, on 05/04/2008, -0/+7Yes. But by an absolutely miniscule amount.
- catachip, on 05/04/2008, -0/+7Also, the 600-1000 km distance you mention is low-Earth orbit, which is not geosynchronous. That is where most satellites are, the shuttle orbits and where the ISS is located. However, these things don't need to be in a constant location above the Earth. For that, you need to be much farther out. The weight of the counterbalance and other concerns require the orbiting portion of the "space elevator" to be 100,000 km out.
- thechr0nic, on 05/04/2008, -0/+7blah blah blah... all I want to know, is when I can jump from this.. and if it would qualify as a skydive or a base jump.
- Aerandir, on 05/04/2008, -1/+7Wow, that comment was really boring as well.
- LeggoMyEgo, on 05/04/2008, -0/+6I am thinking you don't understand geosynchronous orbit, nor what a space elevator is.
- mydingaling, on 05/04/2008, -3/+9In space elevators, no-one can hear you fart.
- Darph.Bobo, on 05/04/2008, -0/+6At least you have your priorities straight.
- inactive, on 05/04/2008, -1/+8You've gotta crawl, before you can walk. They're in preliminary stages of tests that have been going on for years. They will continue to make ribbons a little longer, and make crawlers that go a little further, and weigh a little more. This is a process.. The end goal of which is to be able to launch cargo into space at a fraction of a percent of what we do today, and with very little danger. Fortunately, they were able to complete these tests despite the needless obstacles the government added, and they're one step closer to reaching their revolutionary goal in 2031.
- RandaII, on 05/04/2008, -5/+11Wow that comment was really boring
- alittleroy101, on 05/04/2008, -0/+6I want to copy-paste your comment whenever people ask these ridiculous questions.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 194 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is