Need opinions and guidance building a space elevator.

[Tituscrow]

Come on guys, you're swimming in dangerous politically flavoured waters here....and I don't want to see this thread closed

To the OP and his minions, as a Physics graduate, member of both the ASE and IOP and secondary school teacher of 20 years, I find it quite objectionable that I am labelled anti-forward thinking because I find the idea of donating money to a crackpot scheme utterly ridiculous. And that's what it is...a crackpot scheme. There is nothing in any of the links provided that can answer some of the basic technical/mechanical/physical problems that such a project provides, just lots of nonsensical babble and lame attempts at clever wordsmithery.

I can assure you that in my position of trust and responsibility with the next generation of young scientists, the last thing I am is 'anti-forward thinking'. Ridiculous.

Elevator to the moon....fact or fiction? Fiction. The End.

Oh, by the way, it's called a LIFT

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

If the power were cleaner and lower impedance from the SOURCE, it WOULD make a difference. Problem isn't the power cables, it's the context in which they're used...plugged into a $0.20 outlet wired with 100 feet of Romex at $0.05/ft, hooked to crappy power lines. I KNOW that the quality of the power has EVERYTHING to do with how good an amp sounds, and to say otherwise is naive. The lies there are not for lack of technology, they are making true statements but they are only true in a context that doesn't exist. It's really marketing genius, as much as I hate to admit it.

It is really marketing snake oil. With a short length of cabling between the wall and the amp, unless you are running right at the edge of the capacity for the cable, you'll be fine. As you say, from the hundreds of miles of power lines, box connections, wiring within your house, that last few metres isn't going to have an impact unless it's so thin or made of such poor materials that it's practically going to burn up.

Don't get me wrong, I do agree with you, that the quality of the power does matter. Just a few months ago had to deal with the fallout from a few university beurocrats who disagreed with that idea and left us with a massive diesel generator to power the department while they changed over the boxes in the building. Unsurprisingly there was a sudden spike in electronic devices failing. The university admin saved a few thousand pounds while being the likely cause of over a million pounds in damages (one of the biggest photonics departments in Europe, lost a lot of laser diodes, a good number of power supplies and a rather expensive Ti:Sapph).

Switching about cables and telling people that they hear a difference (persuasion is a wonderful thing), is pretty poor form. It's also interesting that these companies never provide quantitative (or repeatable) results in terms of physical comparison between their product and a suitable off-the-shelf equivilant. Which again, is why I'd call it snake oil, brilliant marketing or otherwise.

I'm pretty shocked (or unpleasantly not surprised) at how negative the skeptics in this thread are. Most of you don't have a real world clue what you're talking about in anything other than a vague sense, and most of you have probably never tried to engineer anything from scratch. And the first thing on everyone's mind is, "oh, this guy is trying to soak us with some scheme he knows won't work." Whatever. I don't think it will work either. But you don't move forward without trying stuff. And even trying something you KNOW won't work teaches you lessons you can't learn any other way. And it takes money to do that, whether it works or not. How many rockets exploded on the launch pad at what cost per rocket? Hell, Challenger (which SUPPOSEDLY DID WORK) exploded in mid air. How much did Rockwell charge the taxpayers for those O rings again? Complaints, anyone?

If you don't like it, don't give any money. But just leave the guy alone, otherwise. No question, the status quo in America is NOT WORKING, so don't sit in your easy chair and criticize people who are getting off their a$$es and at least TRYING something to move use forward.

The guy ASKED for opinions on it, those opinions were given. Anyone that disagreed with him was branded an ill informed skeptic, as nicely as it may have been put, it was still a stab from the OP.

It's the internet, people are allowed to disagree with an idea that is put forward. I put forward my opinion on the overall project, I also put in my real world understanding of CNTs. While I may not be an engineer, I have a fair number of years working in STEM environments, I'm currently writing up my doctoral thesis (Physics) and hold a masters degree in Nanotechnology and Microsystems, I feel that I'm informed enough to produce a rational opinion on the matter.

There is a difference between being realistic and being naive.

I'd also say that we aren't alone in this, otherwise he would have had some pretty decent industrial and governmental support for a project of that caliber.

If you're an engineer, and you really know it own't work, why say anything at all? Why not go engineer something that will? Or offer some constructive advice based on your experience? You know it won't work, and you're not an adviser or project manager, or corporate bean counter approving a budget for it, so what reason could there be to say anything negative other than to put it down, just to put it down? There are a lot of technologies that simply can't be realized in any usable form at this point in history that have a lot of money raised and/or spent on them in the name of experimentation.

Because most will have their own projects to work on, projects that pay the rent and put food on the table. Many have given reasons as to why it won't work, that doesn't somehow make it obligatory that they should figure out how to do it.

BTW, I said I KNOW that the power supply of an amplifier has everything to do with it's performance. If you're arguing that basic truth, we should probably not waste everyone's time with a public discussion. But if you want to insist that the source of power for a power source doesn't affect it's performance, I guess we can....

Not so much that it doesn't matter, as previously mentioned. More that it doesn't make a difference. You can say it's a context thing, but considering that it doesn't make a difference in the context for which it is sold, that makes it snake oil in my books.

My point from the beginning is a philosophical one. Why do so many people have to be so generally "anti forward movement"? Everyone's an expert, but I don't see too many people putting their money where their mouth is.

On another note, I was careful to word my first post so that those of you who DO know first hand what is involved in such a project wouldn't feel generalized. But apparently, in some cases "most of you" was read as "YOU" and "probably" as "DO". I picked the words I picked for a reason as I always do.

Not anti-forward, just working forward on different things. I work on next-gen Biophotonics and Biophysics applications for medicine, lots of characterisation work and some Lab-on-a-chip work too. I also do some side work with a group that is trying to create a viable method for the mass production of blood, particularly for regions where blood donation is practically impossible (or introduces other issues, such as AIDs).

The thing is, a lot of the people who didn't agree with the project are from STEM backgrounds.

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

I took your wording into consideration, and my reply wasn't because I, personally, felt marginalised. The point I was making was that you don't need to know first hand what is involved in such a project to have an educated opinion on it. To use my example before, I'm totally ignorant of most of the engineering challenges that will have to be overcome. However, my knowledge of other factors (namely the material chemistry of CNTs) is enough for me to realise how far beyond realistic the targets the OP is suggesting are.

I'd say MOST people involved in any sort of STEM field have enough understanding of at least one critical factor that has left them thinking that the project is unfeasable. Just like you've expressed your opinion that you don't think it will work (I'm presuming this is an educated opinion) because of your engineering experience...I'm guessing you don't have first-hand experience in space elevators either?

The nature of discussion is that people will share their opinions, positive or negative. I think the nature of how the OP approached the thread has led to some of the replies being a bit sharper than they would have been.

The biggest problem I has with your comment, however, is the insinuation that anyone who isn't in favour of pursuing this project is somehow against technological progress. There are thousands of positions across the spectrum between supporting this business and not supporting any forward movement. What about the countless people who would rather spend the billions of dollars that will be required to get this even into the realms of possibility, in sorting out the problems we have closer to home? Is someone who would rather invest that money into food technology "against progress"? What about someone who would rather invest it in LESS "directly" practical research that answers fundamental answers about our universe, like theoretical physics?

Even with your attempts to avoid generalisation, your post is full of them.

+1 on all accounts.

It isn't about not moving forward, it's a question of how and which direction we move forward.

What I saw, when I read through this thread, was lots of people who wanted to jump on the "let's make fun of the crazy guy" bandwagon, on the coattails of a few reasonable and educated people, both in favor of the project, and not. I'm not suggesting that these people are, at their human core, against technological advancement. That is NOT what I insinuated. However their comments, in both tone and sometimes content, were in no way part of a solution, but simply inflammatory. I think you may be putting a generalization where there isn't one.

It may not have been what you insinuated, but it is what you said. Tone often being hard to determine through a typed medium.

For me, it boils down to the way we talk to each other. I don't know the situation in Ireland, but in this country, you have jerks like Joe Wilson heckling the president during a state-of-the-union speech, or people like Rush Limbaugh calling respectable law students sluts and prostitutes because they have trouble affording birth control on a grad student's budget....men don't have to pay for those prescriptions...what do we know anyway? And how much sex did HE have in college? Please! And these guys are still kickin'! They get away with it! But I digress....

Yeah, Ireland probably isn't the best place to have questioned about disagreements (troubles still boil over even to this day).

For me, it's a matter of people seeming to have less and less of a sense of responsibility for anyone's comfort but their own. It pisses me off, and sometimes I feel the need to say something about it. I think when you have something constructive to offer, you should offer it.

And when you don't, you should keep your mouth shut....

I'll leave some space before and after that one for those who want to quote it....although my mouth has technically been shut the whole time.

Discussion isn't about keeping everyone happy, nor necessarily comfortable. I'm more than happy to put my hands up when I'm wrong, I'm also a persistent pain in the arse for following the truth in matters.

I don't think you should keep your mouth shut if you don't have something constructive to offer. The OP wanted opinions on a project, not everyone is going to be positive about it, nor should everybody have to be constructive about the matter.

I can dig the sentiment behind that, but it doesn't lead to much discussion. If only people who agree chime in, the discussion doesn't really go anywhere. In these days of political correctness (some of which is totally merited, some of which is blatant reactionism with no benefit to society), sometimes people focus too much on the way a message is passed on, compared with the actual message. I think the core message is the more important part. I'd rather a slightly uncomfortable discussion which highlighted the shortcomings of my proposals (even if no solutions are forthcoming), than a lovely, friendly one that left me totally unaware of any flaws. At least after the brief discomfort, I'd know what I needed to change.

Not that I'm arguing for being intentionally rude, politically incorrect or insensitive of course.

+1

Better than I put it.

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Come on guys, you're swimming in dangerous politically flavoured waters here....and I don't want to see this thread closed

To the OP and his minions, as a Physics graduate, member of both the ASE and IOP and secondary school teacher of 20 years, I find it quite objectionable that I am labelled anti-forward thinking because I find the idea of donating money to a crackpot scheme utterly ridiculous. And that's what it is...a crackpot scheme. There is nothing in any of the links provided that can answer some of the basic technical/mechanical/physical problems that such a project provides, just lots of nonsensical babble and lame attempts at clever wordsmithery.

I can assure you that in my position of trust and responsibility with the next generation of young scientists, the last thing I am is 'anti-forward thinking'. Ridiculous.

Elevator to the moon....fact or fiction? Fiction. The End.

Oh, by the way, it's called a LIFT

Though the company is called Liftport?

 

[skychief]

Another problem with the elevator is, where does the Lifter go once it reaches the top? Is it ejected? Or does it need to crawl back down to the base? If the latter, then only one Lifter can be utilised on the elevator. The turnaround time for the runs would be 2 days (or more).

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

If it was to be made, surely the carry capacity of a lifter would mean that one could carry a few?

Just unload the lifter at the top, then once a week have a return journey with one lifter carrying a bunch of other lifters down?

 

[DwaynieAD]

Another problem with the elevator is, where does the Lifter go once it reaches the top? Is it ejected? Or does it need to crawl back down to the base? If the latter, then only one Lifter can be utilised on the elevator. The turnaround time for the runs would be 2 days (or more).

30 hour trip one way i believe i read. so 2.5 days not to mention procedures in place at the top and bottom and maintenance. I feel it would be a stretch to see this thing making a trip once per week.

 

[thepontif]

+1 on all accounts.

It isn't about not moving forward, it's a question of how and which direction we move forward.




It may not have been what you insinuated, but it is what you said. Tone often being hard to determine through a typed medium.




Yeah, Ireland probably isn't the best place to have questioned about disagreements (troubles still boil over even to this day).




Discussion isn't about keeping everyone happy, nor necessarily comfortable. I'm more than happy to put my hands up when I'm wrong, I'm also a persistent pain in the arse for following the truth in matters.

I don't think you should keep your mouth shut if you don't have something constructive to offer. The OP wanted opinions on a project, not everyone is going to be positive about it, nor should everybody have to be constructive about the matter.




+1

Better than I put it.

I already clarified a bunch of this in my response to him. Just suffice it to say, in spite of the number of reasonable posts, there seemed to be a large number that were intentionally inflammatory and that's just a hot-button for me. I'm human, what can I say? And I'm a musician...even worse.

As for the Ireland thing, the fact that things are worse there doesn't mitigate the current state of things here.

 

[dj150888]

I suppose I didn't word that well. Maybe I should have said, "Why do so many people have to use such apparently anti-forward movement language...."

I still disagree here. I don't think that there was any anti-forward movement language or sentiments expressed whatsoever. Perhaps anti-going down the LiftPort avenue language, but that's a whole other fish to fry. That's why I thought you were generalising. A negative opinion on this project has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether a person is totally supportive of forward-movement in other avenues

I'm not sure I follow you here. Just being clear, are you suggesting I'm piling on, pandering, not sharing a relevant opinion, or none of the above? As for differences of opinion in Northern Ireland, I hear you. My point is, though, things here are deteriorating in that way.

I'm suggesting that "if you've nothing good to say, say nothing at all" type statements aren't conducive to the sharing of relevant opinions, be they positive or negative. And heckling a politician during a speech isn't even CLOSE to deteriorating that way. We've made tremendous progress here, suggesting that a couple of people saying a few nasty things is comparable to deteriorating towards a guerilla civil war over several generations, with absolute atrocities from both sides, and the effects likely to be felt for many generations to come....it somewhat plays down that progress.

I agree with this, and I am often NOT a fan of political correctness, though it has it's place. I don't think that anyone can do anything they set their mind to. I think some people are not smart enough or talented enough to do anything they want to do, and tough luck. They should focus on their strengths, of which there are probably MANY. They should be told this by someone who cares about them. My kids are super talented in many ways, but don't give them a basketball! Again, I digress.

I also don't mind uncomfortable discussions. Or I wouldn't continue to post. And I am certainly not suggesting that people with valid arguments don't speak up just because they're negative. Notice that before, I said, "constructive", not "negative". But I think if you go back and read some of the posts, you'll see what I mean that a lot of it is just smart-a$$ed filler, and that's what I think could be left out.

I'm ok with the filler being left out, except when its actually funny. Then I'm entirely in favour of it. Humour trumps all.

 

[thepontif]

You've extended my comment about the state of affairs here to a place it was never meant to go. I'm not saying we're on the cusp of guerrilla warfare, I'm saying that people's sense that they should show others respect is waning, and their behaviors are becoming more and more self-centered in general. Nobody is saying the progress made there isn't huge and that the effects of what has happened won't be felt for generations. None of that mitigates the abhorrent behavior that takes place here, though, and that abhorrent behavior represents a deterioration of American social standards, in my opinion.

I guess on most points, we have to agree to disagree. Thankfully, I have a gig to get to.

 

[dj150888]

Hello. Uh, nope didn't say anything about night in shining armor. Nothing, not in six pages of thread.

I feel very strongly about the project and as of now there isn't any money to be made for YEARS. As for your assertion, well one thing is certain if you are set to do some grand thing, some amazingly difficult, challenging thing, and you are going to need a metric butt tonne of assistance, be it financial, orgainizational, etc, you probably would want to at least have a goal. A goal far enough out, to still be shall we say tangible. In the case of this project perhaps you might pick ten years. And of course if you died before the thing was accomplished then you could hope that this thing you are trying to do, might have been spurred just a bit by whatever type of help you and your compatriots could give. The other option might be to say we don't think it's ever going to happen, for 50 years, at which point it'll be so easy, so we will just wait patiently.

As previously stated by me, and a few others we all agree the from earth elevator is really far in the future, comparatively.

Sorry, but you haven't really answered anything here, you've just deflected my question.

I'll ask again, do you or anyone directly connected to you stand to POTENTIALLY profit from LiftPort, now or any time in the near or distant future? An honest, clear and direct yes or no to this would clarify your motives and true desires, be they selfish or selfless. I reserve judgement on which until I have enough information to hold an educated opinion.

Next, you're missing a third option, somewhere between saying, "this can be done in *insert completely unfeasable timescale here*" and "we don't think its going to ever happen".

That is, provide an intellectually, economically and politically reasonable estimate on the timescales involved, that stands up to scrutiny. Admit to the unknowns, the possibile delays and other caveats. Be intellectually honest with those being asked for their hard earned cash.

Congratulations on being an INFORMED skeptic/cynic. I'm happy you are. Really happy, as getting people motivated to do anything is
rather difficult, even when it might benefit them. So, now you have checked out some financials, and clearly because there are some financial questions, you don't want to deal with Liftport. Ok.

Here's the thing about open discussions. It's my thread. I want the discussion to pertain to talking about the space elevator, it's uses, new ideas, other relevant topics. If you are bashing the idea outright, being a, "internet opinion machine", then I'm going to do my best to get you to at least look into the thing you so easily dismiss. Simple. In the instances where someone has come in with a questioning or inquisitive manner, I have treated them as such. As far as discussion there have been I believe three different posters who have had discussion type input. One of which who was talking about an arch. I believed he was serious, and responded in kind.

I believe everything I said was relevant. I did not bash the idea outright, I did a little personal research and highlighted my concerns. This IS discussion type input. Discussion isn't patting you, or those involved on the back and telling everyone what a great job they're doing. My statement was in no way disingenuine, and was entirely based on facts easily checked by all. Its also something I think anyone who is going to give their hard earned money to this project has a right to know. So what's the problem that made all of this half of your reply a necessity?

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Hello. Uh, nope didn't say anything about night in shining armor. Nothing, not in six pages of thread.

I feel very strongly about the project and as of now there isn't any money to be made for YEARS. As for your assertion, well one thing is certain if you are set to do some grand thing, some amazingly difficult, challenging thing, and you are going to need a metric butt tonne of assistance, be it financial, orgainizational, etc, you probably would want to at least have a goal. A goal far enough out, to still be shall we say tangible. In the case of this project perhaps you might pick ten years. And of course if you died before the thing was accomplished then you could hope that this thing you are trying to do, might have been spurred just a bit by whatever type of help you and your compatriots could give. The other option might be to say we don't think it's ever going to happen, for 50 years, at which point it'll be so easy, so we will just wait patiently.

As previously stated by me, and a few others we all agree the from earth elevator is really far in the future, comparatively.

Congratulations on being an INFORMED skeptic/cynic. I'm happy you are. Really happy, as getting people motivated to do anything is
rather difficult, even when it might benefit them. So, now you have checked out some financials, and clearly because there are some financial questions, you don't want to deal with Liftport. Ok.

Here's the thing about open discussions. It's my thread. I want the discussion to pertain to talking about the space elevator, it's uses, new ideas, other relevant topics. If you are bashing the idea outright, being a, "internet opinion machine", then I'm going to do my best to get you to at least look into the thing you so easily dismiss. Simple. In the instances where someone has come in with a questioning or inquisitive manner, I have treated them as such. As far as discussion there have been I believe three different posters who have had discussion type input. One of which who was talking about an arch. I believed he was serious, and responded in kind.

Out of interest, why this approach? Why this one group?

The financial point you raise is one that I have to question too, well, not so much the point, I agree that finances are important for any project. I'm just interested in why they choose not, or why they have not, attained funding through any other means.

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

I already clarified a bunch of this in my response to him. Just suffice it to say, in spite of the number of reasonable posts, there seemed to be a large number that were intentionally inflammatory and that's just a hot-button for me. I'm human, what can I say? And I'm a musician...even worse.

I missed the replies while posting/cooking, but the points still stand.

Nothing wrong with it being a hot-button, threads like this that try to throw known science and scientific practices out the window are one of mine.

 

[Funky Ghost]

And he's buying a [DEL]stairway[/DEL] elevator to [DEL]heaven[/DEL] space.

Invalid Link Removed

Will the muzak still suck or is that breakthrough also included?

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

It could be the start of the zombie apocolypse, having to listen to evelator/lift music for that long is bound to drive people off the edge.

 

[thepontif]

I missed the replies while posting/cooking, but the points still stand.

Nothing wrong with it being a hot-button, threads like this that try to throw know science and scientific practices out the window are one of mine.

Well I hear that!

 

[aborgman]

If the power were cleaner and lower impedance from the SOURCE, it WOULD make a difference. Problem isn't the power cables, it's the context in which they're used...plugged into a $0.20 outlet wired with 100 feet of Romex at $0.05/ft, hooked to crappy power lines. I KNOW that the quality of the power has EVERYTHING to do with how good an amp sounds, and to say otherwise is naive.

Yes... and all that might be true...

IF the power amp had no power supply filtering AT ALL.

 

[thepontif]

Sorry, but one point that's been bugging. This notion of comfort level. While in these kinds of discussions, comfort level is not the priority, I've never heard of a situation where when discussing or negotiating, it is a good idea to make people uncomfortable. I always thought, except as a calculated strategy, it was best to keep everyone feeling comfortable enough to not just leave the discussion. When people are uncomfortable, they generally stop listening, no? It's not a PRIORITY at all, I agree. So that means we should pay it no heed at all?

 

[DwaynieAD]

can we do an escalator to space?

 

[aborgman]

I find it hard to believe that a LARGE percentage of the people doling out the dismissive comments are, in fact, high level engineers.

I don't know if I qualify as a "high level" engineer or not...

BSCE University of Michigan

6 years Senior Design Engineer @ Intel working on the Pentium 4 and variants.

6 years head Electrical Engineer @ Precision Devices, Inc. (Ultra high precision metrology equipment)

Currently Electronics Engineer doing repair/design for research at a major research university Aerospace Engineering department.