Elevator Going Way Up!

That crossed my mind as well.
An un-perfect orbit and it could be China's tower of power, or loss of momentum might cause it to fall behind in our orbit of the sun. The moon effects our tides so it's orbit comes into play as well.
Without central out-rigger poles and guide wires, I cannot fathom how it would stay straight. Waving like a stalk of wheat in a gentle breeze.
More stress, more cable.
Hey if it wasn't my money I'd say go for it. I need the laugh.
My tele-porter will be finished before that thing gets built. Gravitational lens/space folding/matter transfer/sub-atomic/time displacement device ...
it's technical , but I'm accepting funding now.

 

I was watching a thing on tele the other day with James May talking about personal flying machines and so on, at the end he made a very good point. He pointed out that what holds back this kind of invention isn't money or lack of ideas but scepticism. People look at them and think 'what a crazy idea, that'll never work!' Then he asked what the reaction would be today if cars had not been invented and someone said 'look, how about if almost everyone owned this metal box which you pour flammable liquid into, it then carries you at speeds of up to 100mph wherever you want to go.' Sounds pretty mental to me.

My point is that sometimes we have to try things, it's pretty crazy to strap men to millions of gallons of fuel and shoot them into the sky but we do it, what's so nuts about this idea? Of course there is a lot that can go wrong, that's the challenge. It's the attitudes above that would have left mankind sitting in a cave saying 'I'm not going out there, its bloody freezing.'

 

I'm not "skeptical" of everything (flat),
just screen doors in Submarines,
and picture windows in Army Tanks.
Being a flat "Yassa Boss" is just as dangerous.
fannie mae & Freddie Mac (and those who should've watched them), should've taken off the "Rose Colored Glasses" and seen the writing on the wall.
It's a toss-up, and we need both. One without the other does not compute.
The door always swings both ways.
Apart from the engineering/financial/worth mysteries of this project ...
there is the problem of it being a tempting "target" in an unstable world.
Rival company loosing the bid ... sabotage
Terrorists (dirty bomb) ... making it unusable
Hostile Nation/Regime ... shooting a missile at it (?nuke?)
too many variables. A risk of total failure for limited worth = "round-file".

 

Everything has risks, the worth could be massive if it works, frankly to discount the idea before it has even been seriously looked at is short sighted and daft.

 

This massive worth is ? Of course everything has risks (safe statement there)
As I said, if it's your money, go for it.
If it's mine, you will answer my concerns, before you "dictate" how I spend my money.

 

Well, luckily for you it's not me making the decision and therefore I feel no compulsion to answer your concerns. I'll leave that to your government and the intellectuals they pay to make this kind of decision, luckily for me I suspect they are a little more far sighted and less inclined to stunt human development because it might be a little risky.

As for the massive worth, the development of mankind, the acquisition of knowledge, our further development as a species. Seems pretty important to me.

 

Perhaps you can get AIG to insure it, or Lloyds of London.
Good luck on your claim.
I've found a picture of the guy who though up the idea.
He said "it just hit me" when I was playing golf (next to the archery range).

 

You know you really do talk some utter rot mate.

 

Glad to see you've an interest in Sci-Fi, big fan myself.
I remember what the Fi means though.
Build these too. There's no print, no budget, no time frame, just an artist's conception.
Proof enough though, eh ? For further advancement of ...

 

See my post above.

100 years ago rockets and satellites were the things of sci-fi, now they are a part of our lives in one form or another. Your idea that any vaguely risky scientific progress should be halted is just plain stupid.

 

No disrespect to the crews of Challenger & Columbia, the shuttle program (to be retired in 2010) will cost 174 Billion dollars for the launch of 66 satellites. Not counting the 7 Billion apiece (1.3 for the launch, 5.7 per ship). Cost over-runs abound as does the danger. The original estimates are a joke compared with the actual cost. As will it be with this. I have first hand experience with this as I (we)'ve done work for Kessler, who builds parts for these things.
In this time of financial disparity it comes down to a question of "priorities", and to spend the Earth's resources & money to build this "Tower of Babel" for the advancement of science and technology (alone, worth in is deep doubt) and forgetting about the very survival of civilization and the human race, "yours are" ...
[quote=Stefan; utter rot mate.
I'm sure in 100 years this too will be possible, and gone the way of the Battleship. Obsolete before completion.

 

Well, lets abandon the space program along with alternative fuels and any kind of research. Clearly we can't cope with what we have now and the risks are too great, lets just stop all development where it is now and accept that this is as good as things are ever going to get!

Seriously, you talk some utter rubbish mate!

 

Look at this way: It would be the ultimate game of "Crack the Whip!"

 

I believe Stephen Hawking would likely agree with Stefan's perspective regarding the space elevator!

Hawking: If we survive the next 200 years, we should be OK - CNN.com

 

Ah ha. Changing the subject again because you ran out of arguments.
Did not say abandon
"ALL" ..... You did !
Said ... abandon this "Joke", at the very least ... for now.

Now we're into prophecy for a (semi-possible) future?

I've read hundreds of Sci-Fi books, heard "most" of the prediction and almost believe in all of them as possible, and eventually necessary for us (if we're around) when our Sun explodes.

This P-O-S is an expensive Farse , and only a blind fool couldn't see it.

(or someone who likes to argue, especially if it's with me)

 

Don't flatter yourself skunk. Don't know if you've noticed but I'll argue with anyone who spouts utter bunk.

Sorry, you point out a few potential risks and suggest that they are reason enough to stop research into a project which has a lot of potential (according to minds greater than yours or mine). By your logic you could pretty much halt any research which is at risk of failure, attack or might hurt people which encompasses a massive number of projects. What I find really ridiculous is that most of your objections revolve around problems which are very obvious and will need solving before the project goes anywhere, rather like someone saying in the 19th century 'we can't build motorised vehicles because they might drive into something.' Clearly that is the case, so you will have to develop some means to steer them.

 

Don't flatter yourself. Yer nothing but "Nanny says so, so it must be good"
Your owned, and free will & thinking is history for you.
Your the "Lobbiest" for this imaginary "Stairway to Heaven".
I'm in the oversight committee (in this case foresight)
Ooh name dropper MIT. So what, no idiots at MIT? No prints, budget, time frame either. Take that proposal to the bank, tell them you want a blank check.
I'll be able to hear him laugh across the ocean. When he says no ... just show him the picture. Ha Ha Ha and say see, it's possible.
Only half the problems have been stated, and any one of those is enough for a "Bye Bye" rating. We have earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanoes too.
It's not nice to fool with Mother nature. She always wins, because she's got nothing to loose.
You clearly have no budgeting, scheduling, or architectural or engineering skills.
On top of this (like we need more), you will need to use the Shuttle program, and other rockets in order to build this joke replacement for them. I'm sure the budget Guru's will hide this expense from the estimate.
People like me find this crap, and shut people like you up.
Liberal Fascism, Socialism by proxy, telling us we "have to" do foolish, expensive things, because only you want us to, or we're being rude, and the only reason you've given so far is so that you can live some perverted, vicarious little adventure (slash) fantasy at our expense.
Run off and pout now.

NO SALE

 

SkunkWorks -- Is your opposition to the concept based purely on a concern that public funds would be used to finance it? If so, would you be opposed to it if private funds -- and only private funds -- were used?

Keep in mind that even failed experiments and explorations can lead to great strides forward. I readily admit that the concept of a space elevator seems questionable to me but I also readily admit that I am not an engineer and I would be curious to see whether such a concept could be developed into something practical. You seem to have judged the concept stupid and unworthy but you have not expressed a note of scientific curiousity. I know that I learned a long time ago that none of us should question what science can accomplish and all of us should encourage science to advance. (Note that the use of "can accomplish" should not be replaced with "should accomplish" in the last sentence.)

 

another elevator.....oops thread..... about to be closed?

 

Leave it Skipper, I'm fairly sure we can behave like grown ups Skunk clearly has a downer on the project and can only express it by being incoherant and vaguely insulting.

Some interesting stuff on here:

The Space Elevator Reference brought to you by SpaceRef