Will the space elevator rise?

Brian Hinson, Albuquerque New Mexico — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 00:31:32 GMT

"as long as you had $7 billion to $10 billion to spend." That's all? We've already spent $7B on the new rockets to take astronauts to the moon (again), so it would make perfect sense to seriously invest in exploring the feasibility of a space elevator.

Will the space elevator rise?

tom — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 00:44:00 GMT

Space elevator book: www.cityofheaven.com.

Will the space elevator rise?

Beau, Marquette, Michigan — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:02:17 GMT

This is the first step to realy getting out there and exploring our tiny corner of the universe. I believe we will eventually have no choice but to some day leave this planet anyways with what we've done to it, and this is the beginning. Yes, I do believe it is worth whatever the price tag!

Will the space elevator rise?

Daniel, Toronto, Ontario — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 02:23:47 GMT

The U.S. spends more than that $7-$10billion every month in the Iraq war. Over a trillion dollars spent or going to be spent. Could you imagine what amazing things could be possible with that kind of $$ ??

Will the space elevator rise?

Steven Harris — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 02:24:14 GMT

I do wonder how a steady elevator in that fashion will handle the earth's rotation to keep delivery's steady, but like the others, I agree with pushing forward. I am thrilled to hear so much from NASA lately!

Will the space elevator rise?

David R, Halifax, NS — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 02:58:04 GMT

It makes no sense to me for us to be spending billions to contain nuclear waste for hundreds of thousands of years, when we could easily design storage to last the few hundred years it would take for a space elevator or other launch technology to be built. Even if the space elevator concept does not work out, does anyone really think that we will not have a reliable means to get into space a few hundred years from now?

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 03:23:13 GMT

All - hate to break it to you, but science and technology probably won't make it to the point where we colonize other worlds before other issues overtake scientific development. The two issues I speak of are over-population and environmental devastation. The world's population has increased by a factor of 5 or so in the last 150 years. Given the lack of water, need for more living space, already high fuel and food prices, can you imagine how it will be when the world' population grows by another factor of 5 by next century? It will be a complete disaster. The same goes for the environment. Everyone acknowledges, though some grudgingly, that the greenhouse effect and global warming are already having a profound impact. This will only become worse in the last part of this century as more people burn cheap fossil fuels for energy.
There is no way technology is advancing fast enough to have us colonize anything but the moon in the next 30 years. Technology was advancing fast enough in the late 60's and early 70's to have us colonize the moon by the late 70's and perhpas Mars by now. But the decision was made to go with the two worthless pieces of complete junk called the International Space Station and the Space shuttle. Let me rephrase that. These two projects were worthless to everyone except the Defense contractors who lined their pockets by them. Going to a LEO strategy, although that had already been done by Mir and Skylab, set America's space program back by 40 years. Perhaps this was done to keep us from moving too far ahead of the rest of the world. Or perhaps it was done for "international cooperation". In either event, the amount of time and resources we have lost with over 100 boring, repetitive, unimaginative trips by the space Shuttle can't be replaced. And with other needs more pressing, I doubt there will be a big apollo like push to do anything exciting in space for awhile. The only hope is that the CERN collider or other colliders, can find a new energy source or discover a way to bend spacetime. That is if they don't have other problems. So, you sci-fi buffs who expect more space travel advancement might as well forget it. America had our chance 40 years ago and we blew it by going with the defense contractor cash-cow shuttle and not a continuation of the Apollo program. Only a significant breakthrough in the world of physics can restore the lost dream.

Will the space elevator rise?

get real — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 03:26:52 GMT

Earth to nanotube space elevator people: come in please!

Will the space elevator rise?

Bill S., Somewhere in Virginia. — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:20:24 GMT

"62,000 miles (100,000 kilometers)" in length? So...if the hing falls down for any number of reasons, how many times would it wrap the planet? And how many people would it take out in the process? And...what kind of effort to do the environmental clean up?

Just wondering...

Will the space elevator rise?

Still Bill S., and still somewhere in Virginia — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:22:51 GMT

Oh, and one other thing. If this thing's length is 1/4 the distance to the Moon, what about tidal effects (or do we just blow the Moon up to get it out of the way?)

Will the space elevator rise?

You guessed it, Bill S. — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:24:15 GMT

Finally, how about a carbon nanotube sling shot instead?

Will the space elevator rise?

Spock — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:27:54 GMT

Getting down to the very basics, I don't see the need for "tethers", provided the light system lift is appropiate, and the platform for the lift is built in such a way that it can be guided by the lasers alone. If that can be accomplished, it would eliminate probably half the cost right off the bat.

Will the space elevator rise?

Jeff, San Diego, ca — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:29:25 GMT

Didnt they just approve like 74 billion for the Iraq war? 7 billion is nothing, problem is its not a priority for the govenment.

Will the space elevator rise?

Peter Karig, Los Angeles CA — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:34:20 GMT

This is the best idea for the solution for humankind's access to infinite space resources. It's literally a bridge to the universe.

Will the space elevator rise?

Gphillip, Houston, TX — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:41:21 GMT

Sorry folks, the science just isn't there. Even if the tether isn't severed by space junk, which almost assuredly would happen given enough time, it would still take a nuclear reactor and ion drive at the top just to keep the thing from falling back to Earth due to the constant tugging of wind resistance. It's amazing how few people know the difference between science and science fiction. This idea belongs to science fiction, and always will.

Will the space elevator rise?

Travis Costello, Canada — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:42:45 GMT

A great book to read is the Red Mars Trilogy , by Kim Stanley Robinson. The space elevator is a key to advancing our way of life. The one part I always get Amazed about is when terrorist blow off the anchor in space (ie. The space weight that holds the entire cable up using centrifugal forces) With no anchor, the cable is then wrapped around Mars 1 ½ times with such force and heat that the carbon annotates turn to diamonds.

I’m all for the elevator, but there will be so many groups that will try until the end of time to take it down. One terrorist act could devastate many countries, many races and many governments of the world. As the elevator will be a gift for human advancement, all governments should be, would HAVE to be responsible for it’s protection. I, for one, will be more than happy to have my own taxes increase $1000 a year for the protection of something that will move humanity up to the next level.

Will the space elevator rise?

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:42:54 GMT

We can't even get a high speed rail system built in North America that is horizontal...Go figure.

Will the space elevator rise?

sheldon gofberg — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:55:07 GMT

We are too busy spending billions on the wars to spend ten billion on the elevaor.

Will the space elevator rise?

Mitch, Florida - "The hurricane state" — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:58:33 GMT

I have doubts about this... As in questions like, they talk about going into space and letting a teather down to earth to anchor it... whats going to hold the weight of the teather in space as they anchor it? What about the track in the upper atmosphere, wont ice accumulate on it constantly? And then the threat of terror attacks, honest mistakes by pilots, ect ect... I just think that there are way too many variables like this to trial by fire while shooting in the dark at 7-10 billion. There has to be an easier way...

Will the space elevator rise?

Mitch, Florida - The Hurricane State — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 05:03:07 GMT

"Counterbalancing tethers would spool out spaceward." Thats ALOT of weight to counter-balance nonetheless its ALOT of extra material to be used.

Will the space elevator rise?

Jeff Reynolds, Kirkland, WA — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 05:28:17 GMT

Absolutely worth the cost, even if it never rises. Just the funding of the technologies involved would result in a wide variety of applications.

Will the space elevator rise?

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 06:03:48 GMT

It's essentially a big kite using centrifugal force instead of uplift to stay up. I know what wind does to a kite string. As the wind picks up the string bows and would pull the kite down except the kite sees more uplift from the stronger wind. This would have to have sufficient outward tether to the counterbalance to keep from hitting a tipping point as it gets pulled down. Orbital speed decreases so centrifugal force decreases, it gets closer so gravity increases, tensile stress pulling down increases because of more material hanging below and the wind. All of those work against staying in orbit. If you compensate by adding enough orbital height statically then under normal conditions it might take the whole thing into space. It might work if the counterbalance were on a retractable tether that could pay out during higher than normal winds. It would probably still take conventional fuel to stabilize it, but that could be sent up every so often.

If we were really ambitious we could tether the moon and reel it in.

Will the space elevator rise?

Michael, Folsom, California — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 06:38:29 GMT

As Team Leader of a former and top competitor (Team Astroaraneae) for the tether prize (NASA Tether Challenge), I would like to point at that the rules have changed and the House Tether now has a 200% weight advantage, as decreed by Spaceward. A competitor has to develop a tether/material FOUR TIMES stronger than the best commercial aerospace materials in the world, just to win the $2M prize.

These requirement are not sized appropriately to the prize purse...not to mention being unrealistic; and have had a negative effect on the competition. We do not expect to compete and currently no teams are registered...smaller, achievable prizes are necessary to propel COMPETITIVE space elevator tether development, e.g. $50-200k for 2-10% improvement (plenty challenging). The large gains will come naturally through competitive forces.

Spaceward and the NASA Centennial Challenge can change these rules at any time...possibly by this year's competition - please e-mail them and reflect the true will of the public. We will take care of the rest!

Will the space elevator rise?

Mike Symond, St. George, Utah — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:01:29 GMT

Wow, 10B, would that be 2, or 3 months in Iraq?? And something productive to show for it!! What a concept!

Will the space elevator rise?

Joshua Howard, Tacoma, Washington — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:07:41 GMT

It worked in "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," but I realistically doubt that such an idea will ever find a tangible place in future technology.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but in consideration of the fact that planets rotate and celetial bodies move, how exactly would one incorporate a stationary elevator shaft into the scenario? When we have the technology necessary to conveniently build railroads through space, I think we probably will also have the means by which to construct economic (and more versitile) spaceships.

Will the space elevator rise?

Mark Narens, Columbus, Ohio — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:48:43 GMT

1. Read Arthur C. Clarke's "The Fountains of Paradise," a fiction novel where he put forth the concept.

2. It really just takes the national will. When Kennedy set the moon as a goal, it too required massive investment and the development of technologies and materials that did not yet exist. Not only CAN we do this, we MUST.

Will the space elevator rise?

Doug, Anchorage, AK — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:58:58 GMT

I could see this being applied elsewhere in the Solar System. Say with asteroids, the moon, or perhaps Mars. Fewer issues with the environment. Could also see an application for station keeping much as was tested back in the Gemini program where the spacecraft was connected by a tether to the Agena after docking. Didn't a Shuttle flight or two try using the too? Seems like they had a problem with currents being generated allong the cable as it moved through the magnetic field (which would be much less for a geostationary location).

Will the space elevator rise?

Eric Christensen — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:04:08 GMT

Almost forty years after the first moon landing and after many space shuttle flights,I have some serious doubts about the efficacy of all this rather superfluous nonsense involving space exploration.It would appear that mankind,s appetite for thrill seeking and adventure is bigger than its stomach.Perhaps little media minions should categorize all the so-called benefits that have accrued,regarding the shuttle flights and the moon landings,before any more pie in the sky pipedreams are considered.

Will the space elevator rise?

John Pafford, Boulder, Colorado — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:40:18 GMT

This is just one more new and better way for a bunch of crackpots to waste huge amounts of money on a silly program that will go nowhere. Remember the flying car? Space travel for the masses? Star wars? Cold fusion? Fusion-produced electricity that would be so cheap it would essentially be free? Fission-produced electricity that would be so cheap it would essentially be free? Is there no limit to human gullibility? Absolutely not!

Will the space elevator rise?

Mark, Lake Charles, Louisiana. — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:40:37 GMT

Well, if anything, we can use it to get rid of our trash like they said. Nuclear waste is going to be a big problem in the future if we plan to build more power plants for electricity. I'm surprized we have not already started beaming down condensed solar energy from outter space. Just think how wonderful it would be to drive down a HiWay in a tankless electric vehicle charged via a laser. Or have your whole city powered by an orbiting solar relay station. Right now I would settle for my own windmill and a couple of electric golf carts. I just hope I will not have to go to the North or South pole just to catch a ride on one of these teathers.

Will the space elevator rise?

that guy next to you that you might not like — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:51:36 GMT

wtf?
stupidest crap I've ever read. a f'n space elevator???

why not concentrate all of this wasted money (trip to the moon again, iraq worthless war, etc...) on saving the FREAKIN' PLANET WE LIVE ON!!!

Will the space elevator rise?

Susan, Aberdeen NC — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:12:55 GMT

I don't know about actually using a space elevator, but I do know that asking the right questions will lead to better answers and new technology. It sounds to me that they are asking some of the right questions to help our energy problems now.

Will the space elevator rise?

Keith, Irving, Texas — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:17:37 GMT

Consider that the ANNUAL budget of NASA is about $17 BILLION.

This equates to 6/10’s of ONE CENT of every federal tax dollar we send to Washington, DC.

Obeservation:WHERE IS THE OTHER 99.4 cents OF EVERY FEDERAL TAX DOLLAR GOING?

How about reducing foreign aid expenditures by $1 BILLION a year, and with that money, fund an independent group of entrepreneurs, annually, with the money to get this project “off the ground?”

Will the space elevator rise?

Greg,Taneytown,Md. — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:29:41 GMT

Science fiction authors have often made uncanny predictions concerning future technology.A hard look at Arthur C. Clarke's dream is certainly warranted,even if the final result is only used to lift materials to build a space station,large enough to be self-sustaining for a permanent population.The benefits of that foothold would be worth any risk or cost.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ed Ciccarone, Davenport, Iowa — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:28:13 GMT

The space elevator is our next big step to colonizing and utilizing space. The returns and benefits greatly outweigh the initial investment.

Will the space elevator rise?

Brian Turner, Kansas City, MO — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:28:51 GMT

It all hangs on a thread. A thread of carbon nanotubes that is. If carbon nanotubes can reach the strength requirements then I believe that all the rest will fall in line. Including the money. The rest of the technical problems are just fodder that humans are good at solving.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ryan, Rochester, NY — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:42:19 GMT

An achievement that will most definitely change the lives of every living being on this Earth, and we are worried about a mere $10 billion price tag. I guess there must be a serious design flaw somewhere, otherwise this would already be under construction.

Will the space elevator rise?

Barbara Lemons, Okc, OK — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:44:31 GMT

Do it. We've wasted a lot more money on less worthy things. Constructing spaceports and cargo launch pads will then be financially possible ( so we can actually make that leap into space instead of the baby steps we've taken so far.)

Will the space elevator rise?

John J. corbin, Fort Worth, Texas — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:00:51 GMT

Now I'm no engineer or scientist but for a start: Couldn't you send up a large satellite containing 62,000 miles of carbon nanotube fiber ribbon (with an elevator mechanism attached, I guess) onto a reel into geostationary orbit; then with one end of the ribbon mechanism tied onto a rocket for re-entry by parachute back to the earth for tie down? Now how long a time and how much money would that require?

Will the space elevator rise?

steve smyth aka fadda eart — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:11:06 GMT

Eco question?...
what happens the first time a flock of migrating birds gets tangled in the space threads?
oops...bye, bye space elevator...
this idea is as foolish as salting the ocean with iron filings to trap algae produced CO2...compliments of a company called Planktos, which got big coverage on a History Channel 'Go Green' segment...now, with some exposure, Planktos is gone, and soon forgotten...serious GeoEngineering Bogosity being promoted by the supposedly objective reportage from History Channel...they're good at History...report the facts of things that already happened...what do they know about promoting the future?
Good on ya, Al...keep this stuff out there...no matter how foolish...if not, some of it will actually happen while nobody's looking...that's what got us into this friggin' mess in the first place, eh?

Will the space elevator rise?

take2la — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:27:48 GMT

There isn't any reason this is not possible.
The only thing stopping us is ourselves.
We should just do it.
Now.
Get out of our own way.

Just as if we had started sustainable energy production on a wide scale 30 years ago, we wouldn't be paying the price now.
If you get my drift.

Start now, finish sooner. Cheaper.

Will the space elevator rise?

Stan Newton, Huntington Beach, CA — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:51:22 GMT

Sounds like a poorly thought out, wishful thinking publicity stunt to me. Maintaining the stability of the satellite/elevator as payload is added hasn't been mentioned, nor has the necessary addition of momentum to the payload as it rises been discussed. There are probably many more hitches in the go for this pie-in-the-sky idea.

Will the space elevator rise?

Adem Er ,Ankara, Turkey — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:52:26 GMT

Even if a 5 meters/second robot climber speed achieved
it will take 231 days to reach an orbital outpost at the proposed distance of 100.000Km.That will make it impossible to elevate humans at least....

Will the space elevator rise?

Ron S., Gold Canyon, AZ — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:34:29 GMT

I've been following this concept for a very long time, but this is the first time that the space debris issue has ever crossed my mind. It seems much more serious than 'avoiding an occasional piece of space junk'. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the physics here, but it seems to me that the orbital planes of nearly every satellite out there would cross paths with a space tether extending to, say, geosynchronous orbit. It would be inevitable that during one of those plane crossings a flying bus would be at the wrong place at the wrong time. We're talking hundreds of possibilities for collision, daily. I know that space is big, but those are not the best of odds! I must be seeing things incorrectly; otherwise this plan would be dead in the water. I hope that someone will point out my error!

Will the space elevator rise?

Michael Bozeman, Flower Mound, Texas — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:39:21 GMT

No need to "Beam" power with laser beams to power a space elevator. We can power the space elevator from our own atmosphere:
Getting power from our atmosphere was proven in a 1996 space shuttle mission, using an Electrodynamic tether connected to a satellite extended into the ionosphere.

When the tether cuts the planet's magnetic field, it generates a current, and thereby converts some of the orbiting body's kinetic energy to electrical energy. This extream amount of power can be interruped on the way down the space elevators ribbon to pass through the space elevator (to power it), and back to the ribbon, to earths ground. Excess power can be used as power here on earth.

Details:

With a long conducting wire of length L, an electric field E is generated in the wire. It produces a voltage V between the opposite ends of the wire. This can be expressed as:
V = E * L = EL * Cos (t)= vBl*Cos(t)
;where the angle τ is between the length vector (L) of the tether and the electric field vector (E), assumed to be in the vertical direction at right angles to the velocity vector (v) in plane and the magnetic field vector (B) is out of the plane.

References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether_propulsion
http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/earthmag/wtether.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether

Will the space elevator rise?

Kevin, New York, NY — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:57:44 GMT

There is no question that it’s going to be built. The only question is when, who, and how much. It’s critical that the United States maintain its technological lead in space. Otherwise, we are going to decline much sooner than expected, consequences of which, will affect every American. Dependency is not acceptable, when the resource is knowledge.

Will the space elevator rise?

steven — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:15:43 GMT

The road to space is an expensive one but one we cannot ill afford not to pursue. This is yet one more attempt to make it affordable and we may not get there any time soon but getting there is most of the benefit. Advances in science and technology are surely to come with this program as it did from the manned quest for the moon. We must not cower away from things because they are hard but because they are hard as John Kennedy stated in one of his addresses to the nation. The more difficult the journey usually means greater the reward. This is only one avenue to pursue but one with less hurdles than ones like futuristic systems that the physics are not even known such as antigravity. But, this too we must pursue because it is in human nature to explore and to question.

Will the space elevator rise?

Bob, Meridian, Mississippi — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:30:09 GMT

I believe that the we need to get right with GOD before we start another space program. Can you imagine the good that can be done if that 7-10 billion was spent to expand Faith-based programs? Don't you think there's a reason we were Created here on Earth and not in space? If GOD wanted us in space, he would have Created us there.

Will the space elevator rise?

Michael, Folsom, California — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:18:46 GMT

'Space Elevator' technology immature? True
'Space Elevator' technology impossible? False!

Most experts agree, this is physically possible. The fundamental bottleneck is the incorporation of Carbon Nanotubes into a high strength tether. Just as we had Silicon before we had microchips, so can we have a Super Tether with Carbon Nanotubes. There is no natural road block; everything else are engineering challenges.

Who do it? It has the potential to reduce launch costs by a factor of 10-100X. This is the equivalent difference in cost of using the railroad vs. the Concord! It is the best potential option.

"The Earth is the cradle of humanity, but mankind cannot stay in the cradle forever." - Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

Will the space elevator rise?

Mike, Tacoma WA — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:48:13 GMT

Really the only thing worth dragging out of Earth's gravity well is people. All the hardware, ships, space stations, orbital hotels and factories will be built either in space from asteriod materials or in the lower gravity wells of the moon and Mars. The point is that if we are only lifting people the capacity of the elevators can be much smaller and therefore easier to produce. Also there is no reason to go above low Earth orbit (100/200 miles) transfer ships can pick up pasengers and cargo at that altitude.
The great place to use elevators would be on the moon, no atmospheric problems, much less gravity to overcome, and a lot of empty land for the thing to fall on if it fails.
In response to John Doe, Seattle, hate to say it but population is self limiting, disease and starvation will not allow the population increases that you are talking about.

Will the space elevator rise?

Allen McCready — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:55:52 GMT

It would help resolving this issue if official updates to feasibility, environmental, and cost/benefit quantitative and qualitative analyses were prepared and released by qualified, responsible, and objective parties periodically. The cost/benefit ratio, tempered by the feasibility and environmental impact factors, would help rationally determine the amount of prudent investment and help generate appropriate public and investor interest at any given point in time.

Interestingly, if the concept makes sense for earth, then it may make sense for the moon and mars as well. However, extending that concept by dropping an elevator cable from the moon clear back to the earth seems impossible, as that concept seems to also currently require a fixed destination point relative to the earth's surface.

Industrial competitions and an international effort make a lot of sense. National competition gave the world the achievements in space to date and may give us more. However, the U.S. is presently bogging down just trying to maintain its role as the world's largest, but most hated super power. Consequently, the U.S. now probably lacks the necessary resources, interest and attention span that, for example, were mustered during the Sputnik days of John F. Kennedy's presidency.

Will the space elevator rise?

Eddie,Fort Smith, Ark — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:05:11 GMT

How do you overcome wind drag and vibration or resonance? What about problems with lightning?

Will the space elevator rise?

Dan — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:41:04 GMT

Lets solve the oil crisis first!

Will the space elevator rise?

david b — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:47:47 GMT

ya humans never spent a year in a vessel to get to any new lands.. /sarcasm

Will the space elevator rise?

Mr Pien D. Sky — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 21:36:44 GMT

Only $7-10 billion? Yeah sure, that's what they say now. Just wait till we're stuck paying for it, then it'll be "we didn't expect this" and "we just have to figure out how to make that first". It'll become another bloated go-nowhere money-sucking project that will not die.

You can tell that I'm right from Micahel Folsom's post upstream (he's one of the competitors in the NASA Tether Challenge). He complains that NASA has made the current contest too hard. Isn't that the point? If it's doable, you should be able to demonstrate on a small scale. Do you think simply throwing money at the idea will solve the technological problems? Show proof of concept first, then throw money at it.

Will the space elevator rise?

Enlightned Elite — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 21:57:37 GMT

As far as the space elevator, we do not need to do that. We need to save mother earther. Saving the planet is very easy and shoring the US economy is very easy to achieve as well.

Step 1)
Exterminate all the hungry people (this will help the planet in two ways. First off, the pressure on the planet's resources will immediately be reduced. Second, the population growth trajectory will be eliminated because poor hungry people tend to have children. Rich people like Americans and Europeans do not have enough children to even keep their current levels static.)

Step 2)
Exterminate all the old people -- 55 or above unless they are working. If they are working, kill them when they retire. (this will "automagically" fix the social security problem, medicare problem, medicaid problem, and energy problems)

Step 3)
Exterminate all the people who either cannot produce/work (disabled, mentally ill, children, etc). People like this (and all old people) are very invconvenient to the rest of us (much like an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy).

If you did the steps above, the planet would be saved and the remaining peoples would be committed to preserving the planet at all costs. The population quotas would be more equitable (ie right now 70% of the world is Asian but most of these are hungry people).

This plan is foolproof in its effectiveness and would be easily implemented. Give it some thought.

Thank you,

Enlightened.

Will the space elevator rise?

Barry U. Headinsand — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:33:07 GMT

To all you silly people who post questions before doing any research:

1. Atmospheric winds, the tug of the Earth's gravity, bird/tether collisions would have no effect on the tether. You see, the concept is that you have a string reaching 62k miles into space with a counterweight on the end. The rotation of the planet keeps the counterweight in centrifugal motion strongly enough to keep the tether pulled tight. That's why they need such a freakin' strong tether. Because it's got to hold a several-ton counterweight against the huge amount of tension created. Any cable pulled that tight isn't going to be bothered by a wind or flock of birds, Otherwise the guy wires that hold up radio antennas would snap every time we had a gust of wind or a pigeon hit them. Wear & tear from radiation & space debris is a serious concern, though.

2. You can't load the whole tether into a rocket, shoot it up, & drop it back down to the ground because 62,000 miles of ANYTHING, even sewing thread is going to weigh TONS.

3. No, you can't do away with the tether & just "shoot an elevator up into space on a laser beam". A laser with that much power would be ridiculously expensive to build & operate - far more than the projected cost of the space elevator & far FAR more than a conventional rocket.

4. Yes this is worth doing. If we have a safe, cheap, reliable way to send payloads into space it opens many doors. For example, we could send our nuclear waste up the elevator, give it a gentle nudge towards the sun, & our nuclear waste disposal/storage problems are at an end. Granted, there are a lot of issues to be dealt with here, but the desireability of a simple, reliable disposal method makes it worth investigating.

My only concern is: What kind of music will they play? I really don't think I could stand to travel 62,000 miles listening to Kenny G.

Will the space elevator rise?

Peter, Los angeles, CA — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:38:45 GMT

Space elevator is a great concept. It certainly will work. Now that we have cold fusion under control, flying cars a reality and perpetual motion a common thing, we should start earnestly working on this novel idea of space elevator. If we are taxed based on our stupidity we will have plenty of money not only for space elevator but also for other worthwhile projects like philosopher's stone for turning base metals into gold.

Will the space elevator rise?

James, Arlington, VA — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:20:54 GMT

Even if the technical aspects of this are met, there comes an issue on chance of economic sabotage by rival nations or a terrorist attack. A structure of such value and strategic importance given its relative ease to bring down has to be taken into account.

Will the space elevator rise?

Josh Levin, Cherry Hill, NJ — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:36:36 GMT

In reply to Bob of Meridian, Mississippi:

Let me give you a bit of a quiz: You are closest to which of these:
a) the Sun;
b) the Moon;
c) the Milky Way Galaxy.

You are over 90 million miles from the Sun, nearly a quarter million miles from the moon, but you are on the earth, which is part of the Milky Way Galaxy, so (c) is the right answer. You, and the rest of humankind, are in space -- except that we prefer to regard our little bit of space as not being in space.

OK, if you don't like that one, here's another:

You have to go back to the Bible, way back, to one of the first verses, Genesis 1:28, where mankind is told to "fill the Earth". Except, if you look at the original Hebrew, the word for "the Earth" is "haAretz" -- which means, literally, "the Land".

If you grant the the Bible was written by God in the language of men, so that the people of the time of its revelation would understand it, then "haAretz" could very well refer only to the Earth. However, if you grant that God has infinite wisdom, and take the word literally, then it also can refer to land on other planets. People back then did not know that land could exist on other planets -- they regarded planets as wandering stars, and did not realize that the Earth is a planet, too. However, God knew this all along.

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:41:44 GMT

Mike - most population growth is in either the sprawl of existing cities or the creation of new cities. People have ready access to both food and healthcare in cities. So, the population will keep growing.
It will be 40 years since America landed someone on the moon next year. Can we do that right now? No. Instead, we are using basically the same rocket technology the Germans used in WWII, albeit scaled up significantly, to go to LEO. Why are there no ION propulsion systems to go to Mars quickly to reduce the radiation exposure issues? Why are there no nuclear powered propulsion systems that could cut the time to Mars or any planet in the solar system significantly since nuclear power has many orders of magnitude more energy density than fossil fuel power? The answer to those questions is that real technological advancement in space stopped with the advent of the Shuttle/ISS fiascos. Did we really need to waste all of that money on the Shuttle when other nations can send the same payload weight up over time at a small fraction of the cost? The answer is no. The resources would have been better spent on developing and continuing to develop new technologies instead of relying on the crtuch of decades old technologies to take the easy LEO approach.
In terms of nuclear propulsion, I'm sure many people are wary of that. But with 20 years or so of investment in this, and not the useless space shuttle, someone would have found an acceptable and creative way to allow that technology without the fear of health hazards.

Will the space elevator rise?

CM, Modesto, CA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:48:58 GMT

Up til now, manned space flight has not made economic sense, it has been a huge financial drain with little to show for it other than entertainment. Yes, I know all about those "NASA spinoffs", but all of those came from basic research, not the space flights themselves - we could have received the same spinoffs for a fraction of the price if we had financed basic research and dropped the manned space flights.

We are not going to have colonies on the moon, manned missions to other planets, space hotels, or asteroid mining unless we can bring the cost of going up to orbit down by a factor of 100 or more. Current rockets, including the space shuttle, cost far too much to make economic sense for anything but lightweight satellite launches.

The space elevator is one of very few strategies that might possibly be able to make space affordable.

Will the space elevator rise?

Brian, Muskegon MI — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:01:51 GMT

I think it's a crazy idea. I love space and everything in it. The odd's are just too great to over-come. Please prove me wrong.

Will the space elevator rise?

Josh Levin, Cherry Hill, NJ — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:08:30 GMT

In response to Mike from Tacoma WA:

There is a competing technology, and that is MagLev launch. This works similarly to Magnetic-Levitation rail, except that, at the end of the run, the vehicle is launched.

On earth, such a system has the limits that you can't really go over a certain speed, probably about Mach 6, because air resistance above that speed would tear the whole thing apart. (I believe you need about Mach 30 to reach stable orbit -- would someone correct me if I'm wrong). Still, you can save a lot of rocket fuel by not needing the heavy boosters that burn most of fuel just in the first part of the vehicle's rise to orbit.

A MagLev launch facility may take the form of a long, straight, ascending rail, running West-to-East, with a "ski-jump" at the end. There is a natural formation in the State of New Mexico that has this shape, and an even longer one extending across three States in central Mexico, that also being closer to the equator.

MagLev Launch would be even better on the Moon. Solar panels can provide all the power it needs, there is no air resistance, and a launch "ramp" encircling the moon can accelerate space vehicles over and over until they reach terrifically high speeds -- probably higher than what a Space Elevator could impart. It is likely that the vehicles launched from the moon would not need any propulsion rockets at all! (This idea is mentioned in passing in the sci-fi story at http://www.LeviCar.com.)

Perhaps we'll end up with a space elevator from earth sending vehicles to the moon. These vehicles will contain the people and machines needed to manufacture the MagLev Launch system, and its deep-space probes, on the moon.

Remember that a Space Elevator on the moon would still be subject to bombardment by space junk and to tidal forces, although both would be less of a problem than an earth-based Space Elevator would have.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dozier, Salem, Or. — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:12:37 GMT

Is this thing to be anchored in place? Then it will rotate at about 1000mph. And the outer end at something
like 15000mph. Anyone care to calculate the stresses
thus induced? Will we ever be able to find the upper
end? Could you catch it if you found it? Just a thought!

Will the space elevator rise?

Eric, Chattanooga TN — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:20:35 GMT

I agree with Spoc. If we can get technology good enough to "beam" something to outerspace via laser on a tether then what is the need of the tether? Also. Why would you have to tether the thing to earth anyway. Coulnd't you just let the line down(propelled) and reel it back in with the payload using a giant solar array (free, clean, constant energy) to supply the energy to a large winch in space? A little fancy maneuvering and you could use centripetal force to do some (or most) of the initial lifting. Like a giant space crane. The crane could lift objects from multiple places on earth and not just one fixed spot. This way the tether would not be constantly battered by debries, wind, dust, ice, etc. and could be inspected/cleaned while reeling in and out. Also there would be very little terrorist threat to something like this compared the the proposed fixed tether. Either way we definitely need to stop being stagnant and move forward to advance our space technologies beyond our current methods. Even if there is much greater risk involved. There are plenty of people who would be willing to risk their lives in the exciting pursuit of rapidly advancing space technology and exploration. We've lost a lot more people to sporting events and entertainment than we have to the space program. A strong evolving space program could work wonders to resurrect new interest in space, strengthen and unite the economy, give hope to future exploration, and inspire creativity in the young upcoming minds. It would be money very very well spent.

Will the space elevator rise?

richol,Montreal,Quebec — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 02:21:03 GMT

It's better to have imagination than knowledge, said Einstein. Are we living a conscious dream or what?

Jules Verne would have been proud.Good luck

Will the space elevator rise?

Rex Brewer — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 03:17:43 GMT

There is a better way, a magnetic gun. Picture a high-speed railway [without rails...levitating in a magnetic field] about 150 miles long…ending in a gentle incline at a stable mountain site. We can accelerate a payload that will reach orbit quickly and easily. The 150 mile system would be for humans. We would only need a 75 mile one for cargo. This is old stuff…what we need is will and a few bucks.

Will the space elevator rise?

Bill Morrow, Birmingham, AL — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 03:36:29 GMT

Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether :

"As mentioned earlier, conductive tethers have failed from unexpected current surges. Unexpected electrostatic discharges have cut tethers (eg. see Tethered Satellite System Reflight (TSS-1R) on STS-75), damaged electronics, and welded tether handling machinery. It may be that the Earth's magnetic field is not as homogeneous as some engineers have believed."
Considering that a space elevator would act as the world's greatest lightning rod, how can the massive and unpredictable surges of electric current be handled?

Will the space elevator rise?

Bill Smith, Kalama, Washington — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 04:29:17 GMT

The elevator would have to have its earth anchor at the equator and the counterweight in geosynchronous orbit 65,000 miles directly above it. All of the satellites and debris below cross the equator twice each orbit. This probably amounts to tens of thousands of equator crossings each day by objects that would hit the tether at speeds of around 17,000 miles per hour.
I don't think this is a trivial problem or that collisions would be a rare event.

Will the space elevator rise?

Alan Boyle — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:03:58 GMT

On the orbital debris threat: The Spaceward Foundation's Ben Shelef presented calculations indicating that an elevator in a particular equatorial location would have to move to avoid orbital debris larger than 1 meter across about every 280 days or so (if I'm remembering that right). Another consideration is that an elevator might have multiple tethers, as well as a ribbon design that could survive a small impact and be repairable. But I'm hoping that someone who actually knows what he or she is talking about will weigh in here. I think one of the things I got from the conference is that people are aware more analysis has to be done.

Will the space elevator rise?

Sean Boshard, Jacksonville, FL — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:27:01 GMT

A great idea but like 99.99 percent of all the other possible space inventions not going to happen. Sad really when we can spend trillions on a modern worthless crusade, but will not spend a couple billion on a worthy idea like this.

Will the space elevator rise?

Greg Rebholz, Arlington, VA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:28:47 GMT

I'm attending this conference, and I've read every comment on this article so far. I'm pleased to say that having read "The Space Elevator: A Revolutionary Earth-to-Space Transportation System" by Dr. Edwards there is not a single question or doubt posed here that isn't addressed to some degree in this book. There are certainly many engineering challenges -- that's what they want to spend the funding studying. The beauty of science is that spending money on these problems will progress our knowledge, and possibly our technology, no matter what the results of the research concludes. Don't slam the door on a worthy goal simply because you're afraid that it might fail.

To address a few concerns -- 1) the climber is expected to use a traction drive that grips the ribbon, and the laser provides only electricity to the climber. Purely laser-lift systems probably can't get a craft to GEO, but big laser systems (which a company presenting at this conference said they could begin manufacture on today, if someone cuts a check big enough) can provide a traction climber with enough energy to rise at ~200mph. That means the CNT tether is required. 2) The tether is held taught by the weight past the geosynchronous orbit (GEO) altitude (26,000 miles) which may be a bunch of extra ribbon (the other 36,000+ miles), or some cable + a counterweight. The point is that past GEO, all the mass is trying to escape Earth's gravity due to centrifugal force. That force is holding up all the mass below GEO. The mass below GEO is trying to fall back down because of gravity, which in turn is keeping the upper part from flying away. The whole system stands erect from the equator and rotates with the Earth. 3) Because of that tension between gravity and counterweight, cutting the cable below GEO causes much of it to immediately fly off into space (in a matter of seconds). Parts that do fall down build up speed as they fall and large parts either skip out of the atmosphere or burn up from the heat. The small percentage of ribbon parts that don't burn up do fall down, but the CNT material it'll be made of is **less dense than toilet paper**. The Red Mars scenario is the science fiction novel, remember? Carbon doesn't become diamond from heat alone, it needs pressure and controlled cooling. Tissue paper material doesn't "smash" into anything, nor does it crush anything faster than a snail that can just step out of the way. Edward's book and his colleagues actually use "math" and discuss all the various "cut" scenarios. In the 7 years since it was written, volunteer scientist have validated and modeled/visualized the physics involved. 4) Tidal forces, winds effects, lightning strikes, reaction to atomic oxygen, longitudinal and transverse waves and their dampening, and even economic analysis all await you in the book. The wiki referenced in this article will also be filling up with research results. From what I've observed this weekend, critics are absolutely welcome as long as they show up with math/science of their own that tends to refute the work that's been done so far. Bald assertions like "it'll never work" add nothing to any discussion.

I encourage anyone that thinks this won't happen to just put in some time reading this book. At the very least you're likely to stop calling these folks crackpots and scam artists. They're astrophysicists, PhDs from MIT, and that ilk. Just ask yourself how many people in 1960 would have thought we could walk on the moon? Nothing about the 9 years of science and technology by our top thinkers was a "sure bet" and there were plenty of opportunities for show stoppers. What if we discovered the radiation belts around the Earth were instantly fatal to humans? What if we couldn't get a lander stable on the moon surface (which we knew almost nothing about)? What if...? We did it anyway.

Will the space elevator rise?

M. Simon, Rockford, Illinois — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:39:54 GMT

Given the lack of water, need for more living space, already high fuel and food prices, can you imagine how it will be when the world' population grows by another factor of 5 by next century?

Earth population is expected to peak at 9 to 10 bn around 2050 and then start declining. The decline has already begun in Europe. Where does your factor of 5X come from.

Of course if living in fear is your thing anything that will make you afraid (real or imagined) is helpful.

Will the space elevator rise?

M. Simon, Rockford, Illinois — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:43:39 GMT

I believe that the we need to get right with GOD before we start another space program.

Which one? There seems to be a great difference of opinion on the matter.

For instance my GOD says we must go into space. Which GOD is that? Why the Space GOD of course.

Will the space elevator rise?

M. Simon, Rockford, Illinois — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:56:35 GMT

Do I remember Star wars? Sure. In fact we have a mini-version of that - the Patriot Missile - which seams to work moderately well.

Will the space elevator rise?

Timothy Rommes, Washington, UT — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 06:15:20 GMT

Stan Newton,
It’s tethered to the ground. The earth would impart the necessary momentum as it rises. It will just lag a little to the west.

Michael Bozeman,
It’s tethered to the ground, not in a regular orbit. The lines of magnetic flux are moving along with it, no cutting, no power. It could pick up some static from the wind.

Bob,
Getting right with God is a personal issue, and one for the church. You seem to be thinking of Israel which was a people, a kind of congregation. If you’re part of Israel then you’re Jewish. If you part of America you are not necessarily a child of God.

Mike,
Catching asteroids is kind of a problem. Most of them are farther than the tether by about 1 au. The material has to come from someplace we can actually get it.

Enlightened Elite,
Fourth Reich?

To all you silly Barry U. Headinsand’s who post comments without giving any thought,
In high winds guy wires snap, buildings fall over. Adding more to the counterweight does make the tether more resistant to wind effects, however, you run into the problem of doubling the girder size to strengthen a bridge. The bridge gets 50% stronger but it weighs twice as much. Just keep making it bigger and it gets so strong it collapses. Add more weight in orbit and you eventually just pull the whole thing out of the ground, provided the tether is strong enough. If not it breaks. So if the choices are broken or lost in orbit I’d pick come up with another option. You have to limit the counterweight so wind and gravity are issues.

Eric,
No, you can’t. While the satellite is pulling the load up, the load is pulling the satellite down. The tether would work because the counterweight provides centrifugal force greater than lifting force.

Bill Morrow,
See Michael Bozeman above. Lightning is a good question.

Bill Smith,
It could be tethered at the equator to a lower altitude than at Kalama, WA. If tethered in Kalama it would orbit in a plane parallel to the equatorial. (It wouldn’t go straight up, but rather at the angle of your latitude.) It would become increasingly more unstable as you approach the poles. Collisions, lightning strike, etc. would still be issues.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dan, Chehalis, Washington — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 07:36:20 GMT

According to Princeton University professor J. Richard Gott mankind may have about 10 thru 7,000 years to get off the planet. The possibility of some event which strips mankind of the technology infrustructure needed to escape the Earth increases every year -not decreases. J. Gott explains in his book, 'Time Travel in Einstiens Universe'reports from the future chapter, explain risk associated with accident and calamity which could befall humankind. He predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1969 using the Copernican principle, and on public record stated the Berlin Wall would fall sometime between 3- 24 years from that time.The Wall fell in 1989. So his prediction of man's demise from NOW out to 7,000 years in future denote the unknown that could befall our species as it has other species before Homo sapiens. Something akin to Smallpox-or some unknown affliction, warfare, etc and man would be denied the capability to escape Earth gravity.

Will the space elevator rise?

Sam Costanza, Little Elm, TX — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 08:34:06 GMT

A few points some seem to have overlooked:

1-If the tether breaks at the top end, everything below the weight would fall to earth, while the counterweight/station would go rocketing off into deep space at a pretty serious clip. IIRC, sufficient to escape the SOLAR SYSTEM. So, if terrorists were to attack the tether, unless they can get to the station at geosynch, the tether would shoot off into space, as the most likely point to be attacked would be near the anchor.

2-At 5 meters/second, if the lift were going to the station at 100,000 km, it would take 231 days...provided the lift wasn't able to accelerate to a higher speed once it passes the point where centripetal force takes over. I'd think that above the 23,000 miles/36,800 km geosynchronous point, the lift would accelerate to a much higher speed, and only be reduced when the lift approaches the station.

3-While the idea of the geomagnetic field generating power is a distinct possibility, IIRC, the tether has to actually MOVE through the magnetic field to generate energy. If it is basically stationary with respect to the earth, there may not be any power generated.

4-If God, or your personal Deity of choice didn't want us to explore the universe He/She (don't want to offend anybody) made, we wouldn't have been granted the ability to dream these daring dreams.

Will the space elevator rise?

Alex, Birmingham, UK — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:45:32 GMT

Great. Yeah good idea if you can get past the knowledge problems. To be honest, I do not know why SPACE PEOPLE get tech like they do on deep space nine, like build the super deep space nine spacecraft on earth, then fly it to the moon, with all necessary building equipments, and then fly to mars, lots of space to colonise in no time at all, i.e very quickly

Will the space elevator rise?

Capsman, Lodi, CA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:04:55 GMT

Any payload you send up would still need to be accelerated horizontally in order to keep up with the tether. So what is the gain by using a tether?

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:37:44 GMT

No M. Simon, I don't live in fear. I live in reality. The reality is we are still using technology that was around in WWII for our space program. The same exact technology will be used for the upcoming Orion project NASA will now waste all of their money on. There are no plans for any major work with the tethers or space elevators this article speaks of. There are no major plans for major work on advanced propulsion techniques. Why? The reality is: why should major defense contractors invest in anything new when they can make major profits using archaic technology? An example: computer hardware and software has gone from slide rules and room sized punch card computers 40 years ago to laptops that have more total processing power than all the computers in some entire states probably had 40 years ago. All of these advances happened outside of the American aerospace industrial complex? Why? because there is real competition and, more importantly, real reward for giving comsumers the best product. In the aerospace business, on the other hand, there is no reward for innovation. NASA and the government are content to pay ever increasing prices for basically the same space technologies that existed in WWII and were perfected in the late 1960's. In sum M. Simon, when I was a kid my imagination had us putting a base on the moon. The reality is it didn't happen.

Will the space elevator rise?

Mike, Lincoln, RI — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:09:01 GMT

I'm sorry, but this idea is so archaic it's not even funny. We can't figure out an efficient and effective mean of propulsion to lift us off Earth, so we build a "space elevator"? What a step backwards. We might as well just build a big ladder and climb to the moon.

Will the space elevator rise?

Robert Alto, Texas — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:36:35 GMT

What about conservation of momentum? Wouldn't it slow the rotation of the earth? Just one probably wouldn't be enough. The Russians would have to have one, the Chinese would have to have one, and maybe India too. If they are so cheap to build.

Will the space elevator rise?

Redoubt — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 15:16:04 GMT

The naysayers are the same species of short-sighted creature that once said that heavier-than-air flight was impossible. They base their beliefs on a static-present where time and technology stand absolutely still. Cancer will never be cured, the speed of light will never be broken and of course, there will always be a gasoline engine under the hood of your car. Nothing can or ever will advance beyond their limited field of view. If they can't imagine it, it just could never be.

Will the space elevator rise?

Monte Davis, Langhorne, PA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 15:23:23 GMT

One need not be a "skeptic" to believe that 12-15 years is a very, very optimistic estimate for the ribbon. There are many hurdles to be cleared -- in basic science as well as process engineering and economical scaling-up -- between a few cherry-picked CNTs and 100K kilometers of highly aligned, virtually defect-free ribbon. It could well take as long as the progress from the first Bell Labs transistor in 1947 to a contemporary IC fab plant.

The space elevator is a terrific idea (and has been for 50 years now), but the expertise of virtually all of those claiming it could be done in the near term is in aerospace science and engineering, not the physical chemistry of CNT synthesis. Talk to leaders in research on the latter, and you won't hear a lot about imminent breakthroughs and tipping points.

I'm happy to listen to aerospace people about how a CNT ribbon would be launched, deployed and used. But their estimate of when the essential material might be available carries about as much weight as a chemist's estimate of when we'll have a hypersonic airliner or a SSTO launcher -- i.e., no more than that of the wishful-thinking layman.

Will the space elevator rise?

Harmon, Tampa, FL — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 15:55:47 GMT

Let's see. A multi-million dollar theme park in Orlando that would give people a ten story ride in an elevator disguised as a space elevator to a room disguised as a space station. Hummmm... considering that I take an elevator to the 40th floor of an office tower every day and I don't have to pay for it, I'm wondering why anyone would. Besides, there's already an elevator ride at Disney.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ray Farrington, Syracuse, N.Y. — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:11:42 GMT

Even if we are capable of eventually developing the technology for a workable space elevator, I wonder if we really should use it? We have enough pressing problems here on earth that need to be addressed first before billions of dollars and the raw materials that will be needed to build another "pie in the sky" project so a few can realize obscene profits from this endeavor at the cost of further degradation of our environment.Besides that slick video presentation was sorta creepy. Not so subtle propaganda!

Will the space elevator rise?

Carl — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:31:30 GMT

If we built a space elevator on Eath and also one on Saturns moon titan, the vast hydrocarbon reserves on Titan could be mined lifted off the surface, and where tanker shiips like todays oil tankers could provide Earth (and the solar system) with virtually limitless energy reserves. Of course, such an infusion of hydrocarbon fuel into Earths biosphere would quickly turn Earth into Venus 2. I think the future of space travel is contingent on us building space elevators.

Will the space elevator rise?

Pete Paradise Valley Az — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:39:02 GMT

As one who has worked in space debris field, space systems engineering, and space elevators; I have shown that the space elevators and debris issue is an engineering problem that is trackable.... Space Elevators will not be severed by space debris! see Space Elevator Systems Architecture book.

Will the space elevator rise?

Mike Puckett, Charleston, WV — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:51:11 GMT

"If GOD wanted us in space, he would have Created us there. "

If he has wanted us to fly, he would have given us wings too Bob.

"Can you imagine the good that can be done if that 7-10 billion was spent to expand Faith-based programs?"

The poor we will always have with us or so the Bible teaches Bob. Please feel free to donate directly to them Bob.

" Don't you think there's a reason we were Created here on Earth and not in space?"

Smae reason we weren't created at the bottom of the sea Bob, kinda need air. Now we can take it with us. Like we do when we go under the water you know.

If God hadn't wanted us to do this, he would not have given us a mind.

Will the space elevator rise?

Edward Norton,milwaukee,wi — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:16:10 GMT

I think its much better if we take care of our own earth here it self.Every single piece of ice is melting out on this planet.I am not saying talking about this kind of technology is impossible i think its already being available but we need to materialize it.I think solar powered tubes be better idea and this rope could be tied
up with solar panel disk in space which could provide sufficient energy as well anker to this whole system

Will the space elevator rise?

dirk alan, toledo. ohio — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:26:00 GMT

we should attach a nuke engine to deimos slow it down a bit to mars synch orbit. park over chosen sight. might take a while but so what. you now have a com sat a fuel dump a space station. lower tether. bobs your uncle. also plenty yummy materials to work with.
easy land easy launch more like dock undock. osamas boys flog themselves in frustration. tether earth hard tether mars easy. deimos is de most. we got stuff to do.

Will the space elevator rise?

Jeff Barsky, Las Vegas, Nevada — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:10:05 GMT

Atmosphere = 62 Miles

Effective Atmosphere (75%) = 7 miles

Length of the tether = 62,000 Miles

Drag on tether versus length of tether = Insignificant

Distance to station from ground level = 120 - 200 miles

Time it would take an elevator to get to station (at 5m/s) = 10.6 to 17.7 hours

Thickness of the cable when COMPLETE = Not sure, but probably thicker than any cable ever produced in the past.

Terrorist blow up the base of the elevator = the tether and station float away (to be reattached later).

Terrorist blow up the space station = Maybe 200 miles of cable comes down to earth (hence the oceanic based attachment points): I think Kim Stanley Robinson was wrong, but it made great science fiction.

Terrorist blow up the counterbalance = the cable floats till a new counter balance can be set.

Space junk = depending on the size, little to no effect on the tether.

Worst case scenario = A huge meteor hits the tether and pulls the whole thing down.

Solution to worst case scenario = detach the tether from the base, let it float away and retrieve it all later (after the huge meteor has devastated the Earth.)

Need for point to point energy transfer? why not embedded a "Third Rail"?

Powering the thing? Why not let gravity do the job, one car goes up powered by the power generated off the other car coming down?

Cost of lifting a pound? Well, after amortizing the cost of the elevator, maintenance, and a nice profit margin, maybe a few bucks a pound.

People, if you do not understand the physics it is ok to say so, but this is sorta like thinking about a weight on a string. You can spin it over your head, the string stays straight; you let go and it flies away. This is not like a kite, that analogy is not appropriate here since only 0.1% of the tether is actually in the atmosphere. This is also why this concept is very safe and very doable.

Other consideration: Base point can be at a high altitude, eliminating some of the atmospheric effects. To manage lightning, why not embed a lightning rod(s) and possibly harness the power. Also, why not create a launch tower, maybe several thousand feet high to get past more of the atmosphere. The elevator cars can use a "screw" type track to elevate torque stress on the motors, allowing motors in use today to power the cars. (oh, and I have a cool method to allow many cars to run the cable at once.)

just some clarifications and ideas.

Will the space elevator rise?

Roger Richardson, Mundelein,Illinois — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:36:11 GMT

Who says the space elevator has to go all the way up? Would it be possible to set a station on the bottom and have the craft fly there and then do the elevator ? You would still have the amplification of the string and built in manuverability of the other end.
If you can't find holes in this idea you aren't looking but perhaps, just perhaps there is a trade off here.
The only other thing we can hope for would be a true breakthrough in power generation. While it might happen keep your eyes on what can do now

Will the space elevator rise?

Katie Aurora Illinois — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT

Is all this space exploration so the Rich can escape this planet after IT"S DOOMED????????????????????? due to our selfish consuming of it??

Will the space elevator rise?

Chuck Sweet — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:24:31 GMT

The tethers in the Red Mars series the tether was rather larger than the ribbon they are looking at now. One instance of tether ideas I read had a Boro-silicate fiber mixed and woven with carbon-carbon filaments, and then it was used to make a 2 meter diameter super tether that had rails and supercunducting lines running both up and down, on opposite sides of the tether, allowing cars to run up and down continuously, up one side and down the other. Of course, it had a large mass to attach to and had to be lowered down from orbit Very Carefully, and meet the ground and the mass at the same time. Just a bit of celestial juggling that has been the study of several very good Sci-Fi writers to the point it is seen even as a background item that would just Have to Be there.
I myself wonder tho, with respect to the project now, why not run two thethers, built to carry some current, and thus allow traffic up and down, also giving a bit more orbital stability if the two tether sites were, oh, say 50mi apart?? Not sure, but I think that may be enough to offset any twisting or connection between the tethers, Lightning would indeed be a possible problem, but there Should be some way to either ameliorate the ionization in the areas of the tether and Use that energy instead of being fearful of it....yes it is dangerous, lightning is, but it should not be too hard to use the tether itself to help balance differences in potentials so that the lightning does not occur, but the electricity that would have powered it is instead used for constructive purposes, like lifting the loads, or brakeing them as they come back down the ribbon too. Just things to think on, Thank You Alan for letting us have this chance for input on this Awesome Project, this is Long Overdue!!

Will the space elevator rise?

Nickolas Edwards — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:56:23 GMT

nothing new under the sun--everthing has been done before--Socrates. No such thing as teaching--only remembering--Socrates. This is no surprise--only one of many steps to put man back in space as there is no doubt we have landed here from other worlds. Whatever has been forgotten will be remembered again.

Will the space elevator rise?

Kevin Cameron, san jose, ca — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:03:28 GMT

I doubt a space elevator will ever be built. It's technically possible (including issues of wind, space debris, etc.) but it won't be worth the cost. Building it will require a huge investment in advancing various technologies; many of which will be usable for improving conventional launchers. Most especially, the availability of large quantities of high-strength carbon nanotubes will revolutionize rockets and the payloads themselves. That will reduce the costs enough to make the elevator considerably less attractive.

Will the space elevator rise?

Kevin J Gaughan, Seattle, Wash — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:18:04 GMT

Simply amazing the amount of people that watch TV and are naive enough to think aliens look like we do. Please see any version of Star Trek and you will see what I mean. The reality is if they exist and if they have been here and don't want us to know it then we will not know it.

I believe Einstein was wrong about his theory of relativity and that someday this will be proven. I say that because the distances between star systems is almost incomprehensible and even warp 10 would take eons to get to another galaxy.

I believe aliens exist but I also believe they are multiple millions of years advanced in technology not just hundreds or thousands as is most often talked about and have found ways to travel these distances without distorting time and coming back to their home planet(s) within their own lifetime. Folding space, wormholes etc is probably childs play to them and maybe not even the technology they are using.

There are star systems that are 11 billion light years away from us and still moving outwards. this means they were here almost 11 billion years before we were and if they have life and it has evolved they could be 11 billion years ahead of us in technology, try and think through that for a minute.

Tethers in space? All of these efforts should be global ventures. We need to stop thinking as individual countries and think more as planet earth when conducting space venutures.

We have SETI that has been looking for alien life for quite some time but let me ask this? If we do find them, then what? I ask that because we cannot get along with each other and we are all one species. How are we going to get along with aliens from another world?

I keep hearing we need water for life and that we are looking for it all over Mars, the Moon etc. Have any of these scientists stopped to think that mabe not all life has formed by needing water?

Also if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding in to? Imagine a balloon as you blow it up and that balloon is the universe expanding and contained insdie that balloon and around the edges are the galaxies. Then what is the space that sits outside of the balloon?

We are going to need a lot more that 7-10 billion dollars. We are first going to have to stop creating nuclear weapons and hating each other or there won't be any earth left and we won't be going anywhere.

I would imagine when a civilization like ours gets to the point where they can destroyu themselves they come to a cross road where they make a global decision to do so or not to do so. I will bet this has happend many times throughout the universe and we still have a path to choose, otherwise we will not be building anything except 6 billion grave stones.

Will the space elevator rise?

alice — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:26:14 GMT

you are all idiots! like this will ever happen. Its a waste of time and money and I can't belive people get paid to sit around and think about stuff like this.

Will the space elevator rise?

percy stepp — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:28:47 GMT

space elevator technology would be the next final frontier. we have already sent explorations to mars, and to the outer reaches of the galaxy, it's not so hard to believe this can be a reality, no doubt when exploration to the moon was first mentioned it was thought of along those same, it can't be done lines of thinking. we have eclisped the future, in building a workable space station, the future is the next generations to claim.

Will the space elevator rise?

oodoctor — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:31:55 GMT

Im with spock.....use the laser as the tethers

Will the space elevator rise?

Vilmos Levay, Albany, NY — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:37:39 GMT

Thomas Ashby of Calgary summed it up quite well: "We can't even get a high speed rail system built in North America that is horizontal...Go figure."

Will the space elevator rise?

Ron McGill — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:48:56 GMT

With Millions of failure points along that 62,000 miles I simply don't see why people would even consider using it. It's too easy for it to fail and in failing how much damage would it do to the people of earth as it falls back down?
Just think of 62,000 miles of space junk failing back to earth. That's not an idea that needs to be worked on.

How about using the lasers to power cars and trucks instead of a crazy elevator. That would save billions of dollars a year and help the planet more so then a space elevator.

P.S. the lift cost of using the rockets of today would go down as more rockets when up into space. That's always the case and basic economics.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dian, Mound City KS — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:53:36 GMT

Space Elevater, where to get the money from??? How about the next President cancel the Marshal Plan that started out in 1945. Money to rebuild Eourpe after the war. The USA now supports over 150 countries world wide, oops, now add on Iraq and Afghanistan to that Plan. It has been 63 years of these countries collecting of Our money. I do belive this money would be better spent in space and for medical care of Sr. Citizens and Disabled, than on war.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ron McGill — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:54:23 GMT

Bob of Meridian, Mississippi that is simply crazy talk. Here, try it this way. If GOD didn't want us in space he wouldn't have created it in the first place. He wants us there so he created it. How about that?

GOD created the heavens and the Earth for us to be good stewards of both. He didn't say for us NOT to go out and explore.
Stop using GOD to rebuke things you don't agree with.

Will the space elevator rise?

BigEvasive, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:58:04 GMT

Whatever needs to happen, make it so. A trillion dollar price tag wouldn't even be too much and the money generated by off shoot technologies would be huge. The benefits are staggering. Disposal of waste safely into space, daily carbon neutral trips into orbit instead of every couple of months, and a truly feasable way to get a lot more people into space. DO IT!

Will the space elevator rise?

el brew ho, Washington DC — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:02:16 GMT

John Doe's post (#7 in sequence) is spot on. There are so many self-inflicted problems of environmental damage and social malaise that we need to solve before we really can spread off planet. And that is as it should be, if we can't learn to stop killing each other over things like questions of which way is the right way to talk to God or how to distribute the wealth from pillaging planetary resources of fossils fuel, we really don't deserve to play in a bigger sandbox.
OTOH if we focus our collective consciousness on how to live harmoniously with others, we may find other doors open and we can surmount the problems we've created for ourselves.
Think about it, space junk is just the detritus from our first attempts to get off planet. We haven't even made it out there and we're already fouling the neighborhood!

Will the space elevator rise?

Timothy Cash, Severna Park, Maryland — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:05:23 GMT

I feel privileged to be part of the National Space Society Space Elevator Team participating in the 2008 Space Elevator Competition this October in Arizona. I wish to point out that this year's goals for the climber competition are an Order Of magnitude more difficult than last year's goals (1 km vs. 150 meters), which makes the problem of keeping LASER energy on the PV cells TWO Orders of Magnitude more difficult. This may deter further development to all but the most experienced of engineering groups, and prove to be counterproductive.
I am a contributor to "Liftport - The Space Elevator: Opening Space to Everyone", and since the book was published in 2006, I have seen a great deal of progress in the basic engineering analyses work on space elevator. The rationale behind this basic work is to drive the development of a least cost system to deliver megatons of material to earth orbit for the construction of the solar power satellite constellations. The awareness of the public consciousness to "Peak Oil" and the resultant price of energy is the modern equivalent of the Sputnik challenge of 50 years ago. I look forward to aiding the cause of delivering solutions to energy and low cost launch systems in the near future.

Reference:
"Liftport - The Space Elevator: Opening Space to Everyone" Bill Fawcett, Michael Laine, Tom Nugent Jr. (Co-editor), et al
ISBN-10: 1592221092
ISBN-13: 978-1592221097

Will the space elevator rise?

Darque, Siloam Springs, AR — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:05:26 GMT

I am not sure why it is thought that the space elevator will not work, or why it would be considered a pipe dream. 100 years ago, it was said that we would never go to the moon. In 1969 we landed on the moon. The funny thing is, we did it with less computing power than what my current cell phone has. Why is a space elevator impossible?

Is important to save our planet? Yes. But how are you going to keep the human population from growing without encroaching on basic human rights and freedoms? The answer is to expand outward among the stars. If god didnt want us to expand into and explore the universe, why did he make it?

The space elevator will happen, the only question is when.

Will the space elevator rise?

Michael Ferguson — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:09:41 GMT

Well, the thing is, a scram jet, while also presenting daunting technological challenges is a whole lot easier. It is true that it won't be able to do the same kind of heavy lifting; however, other than people, there isn't much down here that there isn't a whole lot more of up there.

Will the space elevator rise?

Jason, Baghdad — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:11:36 GMT

Absolutly worth the 7 - 10 billion dollars. The U.S. will spend billions of dollars every month on a war to fund the coalition of the willing. The U.S. should definetly help fund this project with a requirement for participation from every nation in the world to help protect it.

Will the space elevator rise?

energy buff, south carolina — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:17:13 GMT

we ought to be using our money on more here and now types of planet saving, instead of trying to cause global destruction with a 62,000 mile bull whip.

try reading about carbon neutral wind-fuels instead of reading about a worthless space elevator.

www.dotyenergy.com

Will the space elevator rise?

Bill M,. Overland Park Ks. — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:20:58 GMT

Other considerations aside-if power can be beamed to Earth from orbit would not that same power beam be usable as a weapon if aimed at a target other than the normal power receptor? All this talk reminds me of when nuclear energy was being first discussed when it was being said 25 cents worth of nuclear fuelwould power New York city for years etc. Nice dreams.

Will the space elevator rise?

Bob, Long Island, New York — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:31:31 GMT

When mankind, as a species, stops exploring the world and universe around us, we will all surely die... We must keep pushing the limits of technology and continue to move forward... The problem is our priorities are all screwed up... We continue to spend trillions on a useless war in Iraq when so much good and exciting work could be done...

Will the space elevator rise?

Adam Rhinehart, Atlanta, Georgia — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:31:33 GMT

I hate to sound like a bleeding-heart here (and liberal I am not), but before "we" start building structures into space, might we better use our money and resources to first help feed, clothe and shelter our nation and others? Technology does amaze me, and I recognize the worldwide benefits of it, but sometimes it seems that our technology advances faster than our morals. If Mazlow's pyramid is any good indicator of needs-before-wants, then I would suggest reserving such a hefty amount of dough to perfect our "homework" instead of our "spacework."

Will the space elevator rise?

Gabe the babe Phx AZ — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:36:37 GMT

nanotube technology im sure will have other viable applications but a space elevator? Sounds like a waiste of time. I'm sure if scientist and space gurues put their ideas and brains together they would see that 7 billion dollars for a elevator to no where is stupid. How about spending 7 billion dollars to build a real life light saber!

Will the space elevator rise?

Han Solo — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:38:45 GMT

wow what a really really really bad idea. what a great way to scew up earths orbit... hey how about when it falls down... you know after some crazy terrorist blows up the base... and then falls with debris covering hundreds of thousands of miles....
wake up people.... helium 3 will provid us with the power we need in the future.... think spaceships.

Will the space elevator rise?

Capt. Bill, Sandpoint, ID — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:40:36 GMT

For BOB, of Meridiain MS,
Sorry Bob, but humans are already in space. where do you think the Earth lives, anyway?
If humans did nothing until they were right with God, Columbus would have never sailed. Cave men would still be arguing whether fire was a good idea. for a coupla small examples of exploration before getting right w/ God.

As for the risk of the ribbon being severed by flocks of geese or wayward airplanes, well, we could have several ribbons to a large platform. We could then survive the loss of one or two.
So far as powering the ribbon, why not make it like a fan belt, running on a geared wheel? Then it could be powered by motors right on the ground? Place these near hydroelectric dams...and watch!

Will the space elevator rise?

Gloria, Portland OR — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:40:42 GMT

I had to laugh when I read Bob's (from Meridian, MS) comment about if God wanted us in space. History does repeat itself.

I would imagine that technical issues associated with a rotating, and revolving foundation can somehow be worked out--if they haven't been already (theoretically), and that the space debris issue can also be mitigated if not resolved.

Great website Alan.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ron, Moberly, MO — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:46:03 GMT

To "Bob in Meridian, MS":

> Can you imagine the good that can be done if that 7-10
> billion was spent to expand Faith-based programs?

Dude, if you want to know what it's like to live in a place with "faith-based programs", then I'd suggest living in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. for a while so that you can see what it's like. There's a reason why religion and government should be kept apart, and our nation's founders knew it.

As for the "space elevator" idea in general: I think it might be feasible in some form or another, though I don't know how probable it'll be. I was lucky enough to watch all of the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions as they were happening. It seems to me that we (as a nation) have been dragging our feet as far as space is concerned. After all of these years, we're still trying to get that fool "tinker-toy" ISS built, instead of a space station as envisioned in the early 1960's in "Time" magazine or in the book / movie "2001". I think a lot of the experiments that are being done in space are stupid and not extremely helpful in advancing science and technology. Yes, we need a more cost effective (and safe) means of getting things and people into space and back. I also think that there should be a means developed to clean up all of that junk floating around in Earth orbit -- maybe drone space craft with a carbon nanotube netting strung between them going about like fishing trawlers following a pre-programmed flight pattern around the Earth snagging whatever junk it can catch (just leave everyone's satellites alone please)and reeling it in for transfer to a "garbage scow". Now that would be of a great help, IMO.

Will the space elevator rise?

naples,FL — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:46:13 GMT

why is it all ways about the cost or the money of doing things like this and others in the science field?
it should be looked at in another view.
it should be done for the better of all of man kind
not looked at for the cost.
all the great scientist and others should do it free
knowing that it would better for the advancedment
of man kind and may be a better way of living.

Will the space elevator rise?

d, mass — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:52:03 GMT

this is the stupidest idea and waste of money i have ever heard. it just goes to show you how ridiculous science can get. what idiot funded this act to stupidity. why doesn't science concentrate on something more tangible. a space elevator it sounds like a bad sci-fi film. [...]

Will the space elevator rise?

amber, columbia, sc — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:56:40 GMT

from what i understand we want to attatch an elevator to the space station, right? well doesn't the space station orbit like really fast? so if it was attatched, wouldn't that cause a lot of prroblems? you can't stop the station from moving or it'll come crashing down, and if it's directly connected to the ground or ocean or whatever, the cables will start to pull it down as well... i wish they would explain just how they plan on doing this, maybe i'm misunderstanding... while it's a good idea, i don't see how it would work

Will the space elevator rise?

Wesley Emenhiser, Anchorage, Alaska — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:03:50 GMT

I here people talking about this being a tiny price tag that would be well worth the investment. And, I have also seen people quote Russians??!!!! are you serious? Look, Unless other countries on this planet are willing to help with the cost...scrap it. Because here we go again making investments that will probably have no return or just drive our economy further into the dirt. So..you telling me we are going to spend 10 billion dollars that could be destroyed by one single piece of space trash, violent winds, or severly cold temperatures of the upper atmosphere. Well when we have YOUR tethers crashing back to earth because of the collision of a $10,000 piece of space trash, just think of the more logical applications that money could have went to!!

Will the space elevator rise?

CRELYEA, Columbus, Ohio — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:09:44 GMT

When I was a freshman engineering and materials science student back in the stone ages. We did an exercise on this concept. Of coarse this was well before the discovery of nonotubes, however, as I recall the exercise, we calculated the require strenth of such a teather using as our baseline the bond strength of the carbon carbon bonds in diamond. Esentially we theorized a carbon nonotube and the bad news is...the tether is a couple of orders of magnatude away from being able to support its own weight. Not to mention the practical challenges of producing a 100,000km tether withoug splices. Although it is an interesting mental exercise, we should recognize this for what it is...science fiction

Will the space elevator rise?

William Pasadena, md — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:16:36 GMT

Sorry to say. We are in no shape to do these things for the future. We can't even feed the world yet. There is to much to do here before we go there....If it is attempted. Something here on earth will suffer the consiquences. It's kinda like being a house cleaner. clean these homes and spiffy and clean., and your place is a wreck. .That goes for our planet earth.
It's kinda like a test. If we can get our act together here, then lets expand. We are noway shape or form ready for this technology yet. We can't even do the basic support of our own planet. We invade all aspects the way the planet should be treated. We do what we have to do to survive. If the earth could take care of itself. Humans would be it's first target to go.. The sad thing is it's to late!!!!!!!

Will the space elevator rise?

DAMIAN BELK WINSTON SALEM, NC — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:16:55 GMT

WE HAVE MONEY TO WASTE IN IRAQ. LETS TRY LOOKING OUT FOR AMERICAN ADVANCEMENT FOR ONCE!!

Will the space elevator rise?

Albert K. McHenry, IL — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:20:51 GMT

An interesting concept......

But will it be feasable before 12-21-2012 ?

Will the space elevator rise?

Jim Raney, Foley, Alabama — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:33:34 GMT

The only way we survive as a species is to leave this rock. The cheaper the better. If it can be dreamed, it can be done.

Will the space elevator rise?

Steven — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:35:36 GMT

Wow, some of these comments are just astonishing...

No, wind resistance won't affect it. Picture a suspension bridge. You start building out both ways from geostationary orbit. When it touches the ground, you anchor it, then anchor an asteroid at the other end to keep it taught. It turns at the same rate as a geosync satelite, so it's always in the same place.

Will the space elevator rise?

michael Bowlus jacksonville Florida — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:52:23 GMT

Mr. Otis your car is ready.

Will the space elevator rise?

Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:56:08 GMT

take the stairs

Will the space elevator rise?

Xer, Olympia, WA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:57:31 GMT

<shrug> If we don't do it the Chinese will...

The Chinese will fund it from the money we already owe them! And, the Chinese don't let negative thinking stop them when they set their mind to something. We did not have the technology to go to the moon when Kennedy set US on that course. We didn't have the technology to build today's Internet when the first two universities were connected. I used to run mainframes and there was a dedicated phone line for EACH modem. Each modem went to ONE remote mini-computer. Technology has changed a lot, though reading some of these responses one would think technology has always been what it is today and will never change!

WOW! Such thinking seems terribly self-limiting, doesn't it?

As pointed out, the Chinese don't suffer that syndrome. Does anyone besides me remember when DVD's were science fiction? Gee, I remember in the 1960’s reading a Sci-Fi short story by Ray Bradbury about a time when everyone would carry around their own mobile phone. At that time everyone KNEW it would never really happen (not in OUR lifetimes), too many technological obstacles to overcome!

As for space debris, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize WE are going to have to address our own mess someday, just as Global Warming is catching up to us now. Of course the longer we wait on both issues the more it will cost us. Trying to play catch-up with the Chinese Space Elevator will cost a pretty penny too, and they will be the ones holding our pennies!

Will the space elevator rise?

fred kruger atascadero calif — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:58:17 GMT

Dittos to Travis of Canada, I have read the first two books, this will happen at some point in time, but as it is written, good and bad is in everything, but progress is the only way people & this earth will survive. Unless you want to go back to the stone age, (try that if you can) the rest of us are going foreward.

Will the space elevator rise?

Raymond Belanger — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:09:17 GMT

"Will the space elevator rise?" NO.

Will the space elevator rise?

Lord Isaiah, Aurora, Colorado — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:09:29 GMT

Oh my God...a technology that only God can assist with...

Get a grip people!

Global Warming- Well, I'll be the first to say, it won't be pretty, and millions (perhaps billions) will die, but humanity will overcome this.

Energy Crisis- See above...

Face it, humanity has one, inbread, evolutionary goal that will over ride everything else...it doesn't want to DIE! And, eventually, it will fight to survive, regardless of all else. We already have the technology to ensure our survival else where.

Will the Earth of the future be a free, liberal, environmentally friendly society of Star Trek...or the oppressive, totalitarian, locust-like regime of Warhammer 40,000...who knows.

Will the space elevator rise?

Frank W, Boston, MA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:12:58 GMT

Ha, Massachusetts spent 14 Billion of mostly government money to depress it's major arteries underground by less than 100 ft.

While I think this is a good chance to improve our life, I think this is just a small amount of the true cost it will take.

Not to mention there will be lives lost.

Will the space elevator rise?

Claude, Bonney Lake, Wa. — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:15:57 GMT

Has anybody ever even thought about using the laser beam itself as the tether. Since we use a laser beam for missle guidance systems. Why not think about that?
It may work better that a "nanotube" tether. And to power it with laser sounds good too.

Will the space elevator rise?

Solera, S, ATL, GA — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:17:30 GMT

A space elevator, not impossible, just improbable.
How is it we can perform this but can't solve the following?
1. The issue of global warming is at hand.
2. We are currently still in a war.
3. America is in a trillion dollar debt!
4. Fuel? Cars? New mobile technology? What about money for that? Something that really matters at this point. And ethanol doesn't count. It's the stupidest idea ever.

As soon as we move these issues out of the way, and no not aside, we can work on our space elevator, which will prove to be quite an accomplishment and asset.
But im sure certain groups of people will protest against it. Just like they protest against: Legalization of Marijuana, Abortion, Death Penalty, Assistant Suicide, Same Sex Marriage, Illegal Immigration, etc etc...

Will the space elevator rise?

chartley39, Sun City, California — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:18:03 GMT

Even if the technology happened to work, what do we want to send into space? This would turn into another expensive NASA publicity stunt with no real use. Getting people and stuff into orbit just for the fun of doing so is already a waste of money and that wouldn't change with these new gadgets.

Will the space elevator rise?

Joe, Knoxville TN — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:43:52 GMT

What seems so sad about all this is that based on the 35 more or less wasted years between the end of the Apollo era and now... we will most all of us be long dead and gone before any of this takes shape in reality.

Arthur C. Clarke was right...this may happen about 50 years after everyone stops laughing. It's hard to think positive with so many negatives abound.

Will the space elevator rise?

Matthew Zicafoose — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:44:46 GMT

Any society that does not take space travel seriously now will ultimately either slide through the proverbial gap of our timeframe on this earth or miss it altogether. This kind of thinking is really great!

Will the space elevator rise?

Daniel, Toronto, Ohio — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:18:57 GMT

Ok, let's get some facts out in the open. I've seen only one other person talk about shear force of the payload.
At ground level we are already traveling at 1037.55 miles per hour. (i.e.: 2*pi*radius / 24 hours)
You can't just stop this thing anywhere along the way since it will not have accelerated in side velocity to sustain an orbit. It has to be risen all the way to geosyncronous orbit before you let go of it, otherwise it would fall back to Earth. Geosyncronous orbit is 22,240 miles above the ground. Again, using 2*pi*radius (2*pi*(22240 + 3963.14) = 164639.1843) / 24 hours, the velocity of the payload is now at 6859.97 miles per hour. That is a difference of 5822.42 miles per hour that the tether will have to accelerate the payload to in a shear direction. If the payload is too heavy, it could pull the whole thing down, much like the argument with the wind, which is also a good point. Another fact that I hadn't considered, as mentioned here, is the orbital hazzards. Since this thing will have to lift payloads to, or above, geosyncronous orbit, the portion of the tether that is the counter weight must be beyond geosyncronous orbit, thus the reason for the 62,000 miles of length. Any satelites below geosyncronous orbit will be travelling much faster than the tether and could easily colide with it. And all satelites traveling above geosycronous orbit and the 62,000 mile height will be traveling slower than the tether and the tether could whip into it.
I don't see this being feasable until we replace our satelite system with a ring around the Earth where the people of the planet can reside, while the Earth is reserved for farming and the rest of the wild life. We're talking thousands of years in the future.

Will the space elevator rise?

David K. Enders Aurora Illinois — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:22:40 GMT

I think it is very important that we get back to an aggressive space program. Maybe the space elevator won't work, but at least it gets people thinking about space again. Our survival as a species may depend upon it.

Will the space elevator rise?

Jeret Shaw, Mt Vernon, IL — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:23:26 GMT

Science can do amazing things. Isn't this a little far fetched? Sure it is a drop in the bucket to this war bush helped us get into. The study of such stuff is ok, but don't we need to take care of our own world first?, I worry about when to eat or how to pay the bills in this great country. Why not do something at home instead?

Will the space elevator rise?

Boon Doggle, Port Hueneme, CA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:30:28 GMT

I hope, at 30 years old, that I am alive to see a working space-elevator come to fruition. However, maturing the technology before spending on unproven technologies is key to the success of ths progeam, and possibly the funding of others.

"IF" 7-10B dollars are made available for this elevator and it "DOESN'T" work, then what? I fear that much more money will be spent, somewhere in the vicinity of trillions, to create a successful space elevator as businesses win contracts in an area where they lack expertise. I have not researched this, but I believe that there are less than 100 people in the world with expertise in high-powered lazer-guided beaming systems that have an understanding of the precision and tracking necessary for successful delivery, expecially under an environment exposed to the elements such as cloud cover. Hopefully the initial investment will not come for some time until the technology has been more established, tested and proven to work. Even something as reasonable as 3-5 years would help to guarantee prevention of wasting taxpayers' dollars.
Additionally, if we did this now, what would be the benefit? Even if 7B was enough to fund and build successfully the space elevator tomorrow, and assuming that every payload carried is at the maximum stated in this article (60k), it would take over 1 million shipments before a return on investment would exist. With so few people in space, compared to the forseeable future, would there be a benefit to building a space elevator at this time? I do agree that much cost-benefit analysis needs to be done, including the cost-benefit of developing new technology before jumping gung-ho into a new program that might be at serious risk of a boondoggle.

Will the space elevator rise?

fmoy.wantagh, ny — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:43:13 GMT

China's goal is to land on the moon; guess why? $ or natural resources or stepping stone to space colonization as they have millions of people to care for. Think of all the $$$ that might motivate us to move - minds have gone there already, its just lack of will and not money !!!

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:55:29 GMT

ok, so what if some terrorists bombed the elevator? Then the rest of it would come crashing down to earth and who knows how many people it would kill...

Will the space elevator rise?

dan, Salem,OR — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:55:51 GMT

[...]

from an engineering and scientific standpoint, it is very feasible, the only drawback, is that the materials don't exist yet.
However, the materials may very well be available in the near future.

Let's carry it a step furthur, multiple elevators around the world, with another ribbon stringing them together in geosynchronous orbit.
factories, and solar panels along those points, sending goods manufactured in space down those elevators, beaming power from those solar panels, etc.

Dreaming? at this point, yes. but there is no real reason that it can not work.

Will the space elevator rise?

Brian, Cincinnati OH — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:06:46 GMT

Who knew? If only the builders of Tapei 101 would have known when they spent $1.8 billion for structure that is about a third of mile high, that for a mere $8.2 billion more could have locked in the height title for good with the addition of another 62,000 miles. This proposal is absurd from so many standpoints it is hard to guess which blast of reality will be surface first to torpedo the whole idea. I would be surprised if the 4 mill is not being funded by the Public Relations and marketing budget at NASA- not for serious scientific consideration.

Will the space elevator rise?

Corbett Crook, Fort Collins, Colorado — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:10:31 GMT

If you want the U.S to seriously get this project moving, we need another nation (say Russia) to get interested first. the competition of getting the first man to the moon was the only reason we got as far as we did. but now the race is over and Americas space program has been in a slump for years. so if we had other nations trying to top our space program and build the first space elevator, the U.S may just put its ego over its doubt (and maybe even its debt)

Will the space elevator rise?

Dale, Garden City, ID — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:16:46 GMT

I see some commenters are ignorant of science. The reason the tether has to be 62,000 miles long is so the top will stay in one place over the Earth. It's how communications satellites stay in the same place. They orbit at the same speed as the Earth.

The biggest dangers are within the first 200 miles: space junk, storms, aircraft, and earthquakes. The space elevator is possible, but whether it's practical is another story. If it's going to take 200 years to put one up, forget it. New types of propulsion will make it obsolete.

At best the space elevator is a stop gap technology. We have a a critical need for a new type of propulsion to replace rocket engines. That need is going to grow as we push further into space.

Will the space elevator rise?

Junior St.Juniorez — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:29:21 GMT

God bless you, laser scientists.
I admire your courage.
More garbage disposals in space, those pesky "third world" countries are just too full of our garbage.

Are dinosaurs in heaven?, Please make this a feature topic on MSNBC.com.

I love your hair.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dave Newfoundland, NJ — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:31:17 GMT

What kind of effect would sending nuclear waste into the sun have? I hope none...but isn't that something all our lives depend on?

Will the space elevator rise?

Todd Smith, Los Angeles, CA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:38:00 GMT

My solution shut DOWN NASA and BUILD the Elevator.

Let private businesses take over space! NASA is now a FAILURE.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dave Wheaton, Henderson, NV — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:44:58 GMT

What we really need is to spend this money to develop solar farms throughout the southwest to at least supply electric during the day in that area instead of turning to "clean coal" which will keep injecting carbon into the atmosphere.
As for this space elevator, what happens when the tether fails (either severs or has a temporary breakdown). Will we have tons of food stockpiled at the top for these folks to survive on or will we have an emergency space shuttle standing by to ferry them safely to earth? The logistics to cover breakdowns is just mind boggling!

Will the space elevator rise?

Lawnboy, seattle wash — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:53:15 GMT

Mike in Tacoma,

Population would be self limiting if we didn't set an outsize value on human life. The recent and current idea that every death is a tragedy is responsible for the population explosion. If you stop cultural groups from obliterating each other for economic and territorial reasons you get over population. Once you have overpopulation and overvalue human life, you require industrialization of everything, including food production in order to sustain the overpopulation. Then you get environmental degradation as an inevitability. The prime mover in destruction of the environment is not industry as commonly supposed. Industrial pollution is a by-product of overpopulation which in itself is a by-product of excessively valued human life. War and disease fix the problem, not exacerbate it. The only thing left to decide is whose life is valuable? The answer is, if you can keep yourself alive your life is valuable. If you can't its not. If you are dependent you are not valuable. When we get to a place where the human population is again living under evolutionary conditions we'll have achieved the ultimate goal of the radical environmentalist. Sustainability. Lets give up the space program and work towards that.

Will the space elevator rise?

I love WASHINGTON — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:54:27 GMT

I think it's cool

Will the space elevator rise?

William C — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:08:58 GMT

OKay I'm not a science geek or anything, but I think this is stupid. I think aiming for the stars is great and it will surely lead to outstanding leaps in technology, but an elevator????? Too many chances of killing millions of people and wasting billions of dollars. Oh ya and using it to fill space and other planets with the crap ans waste we produce here on Earth has got to be the most ridiculous idea I have ever heard, and hurling toxic and nuclear waste into the sun.....Brilliant, lets see if we can destroy the Sun, make it burn out millions of years before nature intended it to. We better start spending some of this money on ways to continue life with out the Sun, cause thats gonna be a tough problem to solve.
Again I'm just an average guy, but wont a huge elevator flying around in space tethered to earth cause even a small amout of drag....could set the earth off of its natural path.....don't know till we try it right?
Or I could be wrong.

Will the space elevator rise?

D Smith Oshawa ont canada. — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:18:07 GMT

10 billion dollar lightning rod? Gotta see that.

Will the space elevator rise?

William C — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:18:26 GMT

All this time and money would be much better spend developing easier and more capable space travel, not requiring an earth tether. If there is life on other planets or in other solar systems were going to make sure they hate us by throwing all our trash in there backyard.

Will the space elevator rise?

Corbett Crook, Fort Collins, Colorado — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:24:53 GMT

There is also another thing i would like to say. first of all to all of you who think that this is a work of science fiction rather than fact, remember that sometime in the late 1800's it was declared impossible for a machine to propel itself. by the 1900's we had the automobile.

also I wanted to clear up a few tings I read of the first few pages. firstly this space station will have no tidal effects. just because it will be 1/4 the DISTANCE to the moon, doesn’t mean it will be 1/4 its MASS or even close to that. man hasn’t come as far as to build entire planets from scratch. and to one comment I saw saying that all the satellites would eventually collide with this tether. I would like to remind you that space is three dimensional (or 11 dimensional according to string theory) if there is a big object in front of you, the simple solution is to go around. and the orbits of space stations and satellites is carefully monitored. also to the man who was worried about birds flying into it, the same rule applies. its not like we are putting up a web, any bird stupid enough to fly into it would have already been killed after flying into many a tree.

And if you need further convincing, then take this for example, many people think that science has come as far as its going to go. And just recently scientists wrapped radio waves around an object and made them reform on the other side, in other words they made that object invisible to that from of light (granted It wasn’t very big and yes, radio waves are a part of the light spectrum). Also to Kevin J Gaughan there is lots of stuff you said that I disagree with ( like Einstein’s theory being wrong, as lots of things he theorized has been proven) but let me start by saying that a light year is a measure of distance not time. If there is other life out there it could be possible that they where here since the beginning of time estimated at 13 something billion years ago, (however I would assume it would take 4-5 billion years to evolve to our level) however I do agree that we should start working as more of a global alliance than individual nations if we are to make any progress.

Also if you have any opinions or complaints you would like to share please e-mail me at Clcrook13@gmail.com

Will the space elevator rise?

One Voice — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:41:16 GMT

Dian, Mound City KS....To your comment about the Marshal Plan, maybe you dont know your history that well, or maybe you just didnt understand what it did. But when the Marshal Plan was instituted after WWII it lent Europe money that they HAD to spend on U.S. made products. Perfectly sound plan to help the U.S. economy after the war...Give a country money, let him purchase our supplies to give the money back to us AND promote our sales...As for a Space elevator, most of you pessimists obviously havnt done research posting stupid comments like "lol what a stupid waste of time, may as well build a real life lightsaber..." If you had bothered to do research, or at least read the other comments maybe, just maybe, you would see that it is a feasable idea and even if it fails, the technological advances that would emerge from such an explortion would be tremendous.

Will the space elevator rise?

SilentBoy741 — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:57:45 GMT

From "Bob": I believe that the we need to get right with GOD before we start another space program. Don't you think there's a reason we were Created here on Earth and not in space? If GOD wanted us in space, he would have Created us there."

Uh, Bob, the Earth *IS* in space...

Will the space elevator rise?

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:00:55 GMT

HAHAHAHAHAHA LOLOLOLOLOL
How idiotic is that? C'mon....

We have technology that is sitting on shelves like the S.E.G.
and other Electro-Gravitic systems and zero-point propulsion.

The solution to all these problems have been here for over 100 years people...

Why use nano-tubes or sythetic anything when the budget could be distributed Correctly ONE TIME to TheOrionProject.org

No more gas, no more electricity and no strings attatched.

Three things better than the 'space-elevator'

please check out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAV7MBMe0uI

Will the space elevator rise?

DM, Santo Domingo, D. R. — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:01:00 GMT

It's a waste of time and money to even think of something like this. Do these people have nothing else to do? Instead, if we want to save the planet, instead of looking towards space, we better start saving whatever resources we have left. Let's spend time and money developing new fuel and energy sources. Then we can think of a Space Elevator.

Will the space elevator rise?

joe hermann parker az — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:02:26 GMT

if the dinosaurs could have built one they probably would'nt be extinct,look at the elevator as a lifeboat.give our grandchildren a chance to leave this nest we've fouled so completely.10 billion is chump change.build it and quit waffling.

Will the space elevator rise?

Sarah — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:06:35 GMT

This is something we did in my Speech class last school year. We discussed all of the pros and cons about this project, and one that I pointed out was the possibility of birds getting killed by it, and what happens when an airplane crashes into it? Would the tower fall, and how many people would be killed in that incident? There would be so much destruction that we could probably never imagine. I think it's possible for it to happen one day, but it being built in our lifetime won't be possible.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ethan — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:08:18 GMT

Uhh.. What happens if lightning strikes this thing?

Just wondering.
And to Mr. Bozeman, I'm pretty sure the 1996 tether was moving through the magnetic field at high speeds.

The concept probably won't work if the whole thing is geostationary!

Will the space elevator rise?

Tom, Humble TX — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:18:00 GMT

If all of you people who think this will work. Then lets put those wonderful minds to work coming up with a solution to the problems we face here on Earth today. First and Foremost, lets take care of AMERICAN CITIZENS, if you want to live and work here I dont haveaproblem with that. Just remember you came here we did not ask you to come. Therefore pay taxes and take a part in the survival of America. We need to focus on the solutions to overcrowding, high fuel costs, etc.... If we can not solve those issues, how on Earth do you people really think we can build a ribbon to space. Wake up and smell the coffee, Folgers not STARBUCKS. Star Trek is over, Captain Kirk has moved on and so should you.

Will the space elevator rise?

Steven Rodrick, Carlsbad, California — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:28:51 GMT

All this intelligence (well there are a couple of ignorant responses but being human and open to all, the internet must let them speak as well), and no one, not even the author, mention Buckminster Fuller!

First off, he did the initial engineering concepts on Asimov’s concept. Secondly, he stopped laughing. And third, he predicted the carbon nanophysics -- called affectionately "Bucky Balls" -- just before his death. Scientists laughed at him, but the balls have been found, the strings have been made and the tethers are only a few years away.

Technical problems will always be present; environmental problems will always be present; but space debris is a manageable situation, as are power, anchoring, and pessimistic, and some downright loony critics. Some represented in these emails here, but surely these same spirits opposed Columbus, Perry and even NASA and a thousand other individuals and corporations that have cured diseases and created Teflon.

In 1902, a “top engineer” proclaimed that driving in a “horseless carriage” over 20 mph would kill a human; and they also were around to explain “scientifically” that no human could run a sub-4 minute mile. Then Nature gave us Roger Bannister.

The critics are needed to inspire the dreamers. Dreamers actually LOVE their critics so long as they can still get the funding from those investors willing to help a dream fly.

Buckminster Fuller knew well those nay-sayers, we all know those nay-sayers.

They will live and die in their own past, while the rest of us rise on the wings of angels.

God bless these folks who dare to try the “impossible,” and thank God we have men like Asimov and Fuller to lead human imagination on to the next great frontier – the ocean – space – and the inner world of our spiritual essence.

It’s all bound up together along with the intellectual cowards of every age of man.

Careful, don’t drive over 20!!!

Will the space elevator rise?

Joseph Hiddink, Ajax, Ontario, Canada — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:38:37 GMT

The system used by Flying Saucers is simpler. The power is taken right out of the aether, like Tesla did with his Pierce Arrow Car in 1931. It was invented in 1978 and patented in 1978.
Just Google > One Terminal Capacitor Joseph <
The Nasa Propulsion Engineers did not like it, who would need them if we could fly to the Moon in an hour?
They are being paid big bucks and are not going to kill the Goose that lays Golden Eggs.
And so what if another country beats the USA by using it. They have their well earned pension and could not care less.

Will the space elevator rise?

James, Washington DC — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:41:26 GMT

I just did some research. The average cost to launch a Space Shuttle is about $450 million per mission. The Space Shuttle Endeavour, the orbiter built to replace the Space Shuttle Challenger, cost approximately $1.7 billion. Now looking at just those figures. It seems pretty obvious that if you have several shuttle launches per year you would easily spend the $10 Billion or "MORE" then the proposed cost of the space elevator.

Will the space elevator rise?

Chris, San Jose — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:41:43 GMT

Shame it won't work. Highest strength carbon fibers holds 565kg/mm2. It weighs 1750kg/m3. Dividing the first by the second shows a strand can support it's own weight up to a length of 322857m. That is 0.32% of the length required. 300 times too weak. Sorry.

Will the space elevator rise?

Raphael, Santa Cruz, California — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:48:38 GMT

Anti-Gravity propulsion systems are on the horizon if not already in operation (behind a governmental cloak of "top secret" as opinion) and will in time make the space elevator concept a useless effort in esoteric engineering.

Will the space elevator rise?

Tiny speck of dust in universe, Little Rock, AR — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:52:47 GMT

Didn't I see a Star Trek episode along this same line of thinking? Hmmm .. seems Star Trek has more than once been several years of our time in thinking. However, the world will end in 2012 ... anyway ...

Will the space elevator rise?

Michael, Folsom, California — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:55:04 GMT

This is my third and final comment to this post:

First off, virtually no money has been spent on the Space Elevator, yet. This is a big reason why it isn't suspended in the sky right now. Considering the potential benefits, mentioned by others in this blog, I believe we should at least attempt it.

As for those who have clearly shown they have no clue what type of strengths are required and believe developing this material is not a challenge, let me fill you in. The best and brightest material scientists are working on this, because in addition to a space elevator tether these materials could be used to greatly improve structures here on earth, and so far no one has demonstrated a tether with CNTs that is any better than current state of the art. While entirely possible, it is not a walk in the park.

My team created a tether that could carry 750,000 lbs, if it was as big around as your thumb. That is 250,000 SUVs! Are you starting to get it yet? Or should I point out that STEEL could only carry 80,000 lbs, for the same size? So, do not tell me that we are complaining because we can't make a material, if the size of your thumb, that could carry 3 Million pounds...for a measly $2M dollars!! If a team can increase their strength by 20,000 - 80,000 lbs (2-10%) without increasing the size of their tether, then I think they had earned $50-200k!!

It is not a matter of if, but when; support teams like us by asking NASA Centennial Challenge and Spaceward to provide real incentives for their Tether Challenge.

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:56:36 GMT

Best case scenario, everything goes fine for a few months. Once everything gets set up, problems will arise, the budget will soar and cutbacks will be made. If the elevator is in orbit by this time, we're screwed. If this thing falls because of neglect, which it surely will, or if terrorists get involved (they will), we're even more screwed. If the tether falls and wraps around the earth, it will cause god only knows how many different impacts that will surely make global warming look like childs play.

Will the space elevator rise?

n.g., milwaukee,wi. — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:08:50 GMT

just a thought: with all the knowledge we now have on what a lot of what man has done to the environment, plus the realization of the delicate balance of nature; why would anyone consider sending nuclear waste into the sun. it already sends a whole lot of radiation to earth. how do we know that pouring radiocative material into it wouldn't cause an imbalance that could cause it to explode thus obliterating earth. these folks may have phd's but their so narrowed visioned that they forget about the potential impact of their projects!

Will the space elevator rise?

Jill Huddlestun, Butler,Illlinois — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:12:06 GMT

Have you ever watched the movie Wall-E. Well there is a story behind it. The people who live in space on a big ship are fat and get no exercise. The earth is destroyed by people because they did not take care of it. So they lived in space. We need to take care of the earth so that we can live here for thousands of years. It would be terrible to live in space. We need to take care of the place where we now live. Hundreds even maybe thousands of people in space, I really don't see it happening. It would be the worst mistake ever. Sure it would be a neat idea, but how long would it last? People living on Mars, then destroying that planet. Like I said, I have no intention of ever going in space during my lifetime. Spending that much moeny on a project is ridiculous. We need to focus on getting our men out of Irag and worrying more about the war. We need to worry about lowering gas prices also.

Will the space elevator rise?

Wayne, Portsmouth NH — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:20:22 GMT

IMHO all existing funds should be spent on cold fusion ; beaming of solar energy to earth points ; and whatever the "real world" equel is to the "warp bubble". Space travel with fossil fuels isn't the way to go... it's just a diversion from the real future.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ryan, Mapleton, UT — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:21:45 GMT

Make the elevator, more nuclear power plants, and use it almost exclusively for sending nuclear waste to the sun, just don't have any accidents!

Will the space elevator rise?

Pat, Atlanta, Ga — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:39:41 GMT

I'm sorry to rain on anyone's parade but an elevator to the sky is not going to happen. Not in a cabling sense. Take the cables out of it and use the lasers to guide and power and now it can happen. Light will bend but not break, cables will bend and break and I can only imagine where 62,000 mile of debri will fall?

Let's all use this mind energy to find ways of fixing the problems down here first, then let's screw up what's out there.

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Minneapolis, MN — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:46:53 GMT

We are thinking of bailing out Mortgage Giants at a cost of several trillions of dollars! as such $10 billion would be just pocket change..

After all, the way we are headed with foreclosures, this would be our only hope to start anew some planet in the universe, where the housing is much more affordable...

Will the space elevator rise?

bydand, USA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:48:23 GMT

Space elevator: What a great idea. We could us it to send criminals out to space. Of course it would take a couple of hundred years before anyone would go.

I feel it would be a really good idea to build one as we have all the money and technology to do it. What a benefit for the earth it would be. I mean we can feed everyone and they all have houses and wealth. So it's a good thing to plan.

Wouldn't it be better to try to build a better earth and take care of everyone before we try to leave?

Will the space elevator rise?

Don, LA, CA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:52:10 GMT

Elevator!!!!
WHY? everyone is all wow only 10 billion to build an elevator that by the time it was done would cost 60 billion. the whole idea stinks when there are better more cost effective ways to get into space and beyond i mean instead of trying to build a better mouse trap with solar power and fossil fuels we should be using the anti-gravity technology also called gravity shielding that we already use, its what allows stealth bombers to BE stealthy and some of which has been declassified to the point where other non government scientists have been able to write papers that have even been reported about on MSN.com news
so instead of spending money on something new that comes with a whole slew of problems i mean what terrorists could resist an elevator taller than the tallest building ever built when the next crazy wack job flies his plane into something

Will the space elevator rise?

Hunter Evans, Jacksonville Fl — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:33:40 GMT

Damn I love these people. Astrophysicists are my Jesus. I commend you all. Amen.

Will the space elevator rise?

Megan, Grand Haven, Michigan — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:34:14 GMT

We can't even get a high speed rail system built in North America that is horizontal...Go figure.
Thomas Ashby, Calgary

LOL. Yes, I have to agree.
WOW. A space elavator would make exploration so much easier and more cost effictive. While it may work in theory, I don't think the technolgy is there for something of that magnitude. Also where would they build this? Who wants a giant elevator sticking up? I like the questions raised on debris. Would the elevator collapse? Hmm. Kudos to the people creating the nano wire. I am always amazed at what science and dedicated people can produce.

Will the space elevator rise?

Don Seattle, Washington — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:35:59 GMT

My first take on a Space Elevator is that it would not be practical. For one how you you prevent the enviornment from causing it to come crashing down. The you have another factor which is a plane running into it just to destroy it like what happened to the twin towers in New York. No, this is not practical there would be way to many things that could go wrong and kill a lot of people. I admit it would be something to see, but I just don't think it will happen. At least not in my life time.

Will the space elevator rise?

Ryan Doe, IN — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:41:47 GMT

In my opinion, yall have your heads in the clouds. No, 7-10 billion isn't much to the great squanderers in the capitals, but what is its utility??? Even if the first leg of the journey becomes (somewhat) affordable, space travel requires horrible amounts of energy. Anyone heard of peak oil? We have so much to innovate on the ground before any real forays into outer space. And what is the point of this elevator before those innovations?

Will the space elevator rise?

Cash Less — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:45:29 GMT

Mr Travis Costello, if you can afford to have your taxes increased by $1000 a year thats fine but we can't, this idea is stupid, I think the human race tried this once before and it didn't work, it would never survive the natural forces arrayed against it (true eco terrorism) like gravity, rotational, and aerodynamic forces, sorry put the sci fi/fantasy book away and read something worth while.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dave in Houston — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:45:33 GMT

Much Ado about nothing. Otherwise known as: a fool and his money are soon parted. Better to use our brains to establish a moon base from whence to explore space. Space elavator? I don't think so....

Will the space elevator rise?

Cash Less — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:52:11 GMT

Oh yeah thats it Genesis Chapter 11, Verse 1-9! Go ahead try it see if it will work, just don't ask me to help pay for it. Is it truely for the betterment of mankind or for the glory of mankind?

Will the space elevator rise?

Steve, NY — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:19:33 GMT

I'm no expert on the studies associating with space elevators, but let's take a very important perspective into the whole project:

* When mankind first looked into the stars, nobody ever though it would ever be possible to be able to venture up into space, let alone FLY.

* Whether or not it was true, Icarus and Daedalus (ancient Greek story) presented the idea of flying using light wings made of feathers (like a bird) and it inspired many that we could fly, but only with crude basic materials (like giant plastic bags for instance)

* Da Vinci (whose concept drawings of proposed inventions have proven to be feasibly capable for the most part) illustrated that with lightweight wings aerodynamically designed to fly, we could venture into the skies, but only so far up

* It wasn't until the early 1900's when the Wright Bros. proved we could fly. From there we developed ideas that perhaps - we could break the rule that "the sky's the limit"

* German engineering in creation of V-2 rockets proved that space travel and navagation is indeed possible, unbeknownst to many. While the rockets were defective due to mass sabotage, they could have gopne into space and accurately target many of the cities of the world (i.e. New York)

* While the Russians did it first successfuly in the mid-1950s, everyone eventually caught up with them (including the U.S. of course, within the next 5-15 years).
--> Just like now, as back then, there were many doubters, and through the course of time, we have eventually proven them wrong almost every step of the way!

* Numerous space missions and chemical engineering exploits have proven that such construction of a space elevator, while cumbersome at first, is definitely possible.

Being that we were given the power of the human mind to do such incredible things, as granted to us by God (or supernatural forces if you're an atheist), we were most definitely meant to break these barriers with our discoveries, simply because we were given all the resources we needed, and IT HAS BEEN DONE. Seriously, think about it.

However, the only way to make this project successful is to break our age-old tradition of going against each other, and working on it together - IT IS A JOINT EFFORT. At a relatively cheap price (relatively, as in comparison with other things), it is totally worth it, with all of our visions realized.

Let's think about it. Let's dream about it. Let's work on it.
LET'S BUILD THAT DREAM.

Will the space elevator rise?

Travis Costello, Canada — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:34:29 GMT

To Cash Less, You should read a little more about this subject before commenting. Gravity and rotational forces will not affect it like you are thinking. The only true problem will be with the aerodynamic forces as you mention. And no, humans have never tried this before, unless you are thinking of the tower of Babylon.

And for all who think this is a waste of money, think about all the lab work that can only be completed in space. From creating “perfect” medicines because chemical chains or crystals will form more better in zero g’s,to getting vast quantities of energy to give to all mankind or just finding, to just having a chance to do what we do best, explore. A space elevator should be called more like a door to the next level.

How much money do spectators spend to watch football, at the stadium or at home in just one year? How much do we spend on fast food or cigarettes? How much do we spend on sea-doos or SUV’s? How much do we spend to give ourselves entertainment or satisfaction that only lasts a short time, and then have to spend to get it once again?

To use another sci-fi example (don’t judge me Cash Less ;) ), a moneyless society is why the vision of traveling to far reaches of the galaxy worked in Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek. Humans in his vision advanced to another level because they realised that money is what was holding them back. The true passion to advance, explore and love one and other should never be held back by finances. I believe a technology like a space elevator WILL cure types of diseases, give everyone heat and light and also give us the chance to explore space, scientific boundaries and our own mind.

For me, $1000 a year is a small price to pay to open a door, which is really an elevator, to truly give the next generation something we never could wrap our minds around, world unity. Though I have the feeling that some people believe driving to a football game in an SUV while chomping on fast food is more important.

And for all who think this is a waste of money, think about all the lab work that can only be completed in space.

Will the space elevator rise?

derk — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:51:02 GMT

Human beings have long since learnt their physical limitations but they keep on trying to reassess it all the time, but it won’t change anything. The way forward is to create a virtual reality world where everything is possible, all you have to do then is stand or sit in one place wear a headset and BELIEVE, come to think about it am I not already in one and got one, its called a BRAIN?.

Will the space elevator rise?

danwill — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 07:10:43 GMT

ng; the sun throws out the equivalent of 100,000,000 h-bombs every second, we could throw the entire earth into it and the sun wouldn't even burp.

cash less; it's for the betterment of man, the next step would be to capture an asteroid and bring it into geosynchronous orbit both to send the raw materials back down to earth, and to build our factories in space where they won't foul up the environment down below (you know, where we live?).

and please don't confuse this with the tower of babel.

Will the space elevator rise?

David, Hong Kong — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 07:19:05 GMT

Sigh.

Oh dear. I guess the dumbest generation is here already.

http://www.amazon.com/Dumbest-Generation-Stupefies-Americans-Jeopardizes/dp/1585426393

Really... some of these posts show an incredible lack of understanding of basic science, or a lack of awareness of the real world in rubbishing the Space Elevator - and thus the real science behind it. But perhaps it is science understanding that is the real problem?

Planets rotation vs a stationary Space Elevator - Geostationary orbits anyone? That's why it works. If the earth did not rotate you'd have problems... you'd have to use the lagrange points instead like a lunar based space elevator would.

Population explosion? Nope - most of the world is in either zero population growth or in decline. A few notable exceptions aside the world's population is stablising and the big news in population is how rapidly it will decline or crash after reaching 10 billion by mid century.

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Human_population_explosion

Atmospheric issues? - do you realise how thin the atmosphere is? How insignificant it is concerning the distances a space elevator spans? The bigger issue in this regard is lightning and the space elevator will be placed where there is little.

http://www.spaceelevatorblog.com/?p=503

Wrap-around-the-world disasters? No the thing is in tension - it will drift away... and it is so lightweight that paper is heavy in comparison.

Power from the air? Please. I know what you mean but the point is you have to be moving through the earth's magnetic field - the space elevator is stationary.

Birds getting tangled? - sheesh. It's a thin black sheet metres wide - not some net of tangled threads.

And the many posts that ridicule the notion without understanding it? Well...

It all comes down to ignorance. This is why Japan is taking the Space Elevator seriously - they have an education system that allows understanding. If these posts are representative of interested educated Americans all I can say is you deserve the place in the world you're heading for.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5703/1877a
http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/snapshot/sf011210.htm

I like Americans - I really do. But it saddens me how your schooling has so let you down that it is only through your large population that the US produces enough bright sparks to keep your technology industries going... that and Chinese and Indian immigrants.

The Space Elevator is a real touchstone for the future. When the Indians, Japanese or Bahrainians take this more seriously before the US does - that's the future calling out; "America - your time is up"

Shame really. But you could fix it - get real with education reform.

Will the space elevator rise?

Katchen, Fort Worth, TX — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:18:03 GMT

Anything that enters the mind of man is possible to accomplish. However, man's appetite for exploring the unknown is larger than his wallet.

Will the space elevator rise?

Josh Levin, Cherry Hill, NJ — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:40:04 GMT

In response to "John Doe, Seattle, Wash":

I think it was established in previous discussions that severing the tether close to earth would make the rest of it fly off into space.

Will the space elevator rise?

Todd, Billerica, MA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:34:21 GMT

I agree with David from Hong Kong. There needs to be a basic test to measure the intelligence of posters before they are allowed to post here.

I've always liked the concept of a space elevator, but technology development to make it happen is not where it needs to be yet. Strong cable material, too much space junk in orbit at present to name a couple.

Will the space elevator rise?

gottarock?, Campbell, KY — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:53:27 GMT

I am neither an engineer or a scientist and cannot comment on the feasibility of this seemingly far-fetched idea. But I think it has merit. This whole idea strikes me as "Stone Soup". Remember that story? How the three soldiers proposed to make soup from a single stone? If only they had an onion...the villagers produce the onions. Of course it would be perfect with a few carrots...and lo and behold the carrots appear. On and on until the soldiers produce "stone soup".

While there may never be an elevator to the stars look at all the benefits we will derive from the attempt. Now that's the stuff dreams are made of.
C'mon folks, anybody got a stone?

Will the space elevator rise?

Bob — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:25:09 GMT

It always amuses me when people try to insult some proposed technology as "science fiction." Do they not realize how much of our CURRENT technology has it's origin, at least in part, in fictional works? And how much more of these "fictional" ideas are becoming reality?

The airplane, submarine, televisions, space travel, microwaves, and even your cell phone all were just "science fiction" at one point.

In the last few years there have been breakthroughs on things like energy shields, invisibility fields and teleportation.

Nothing is impossible, and the vision of "science fiction" writers often provides the motivation for our greatest discoveries.

Will the space elevator rise?

Secular HomeSchooling Mom, Colorado — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:54:50 GMT

David, Hong Kong,

<<<Shame really. But you could fix it - get real with education reform.>>>

David, you've seriously hit the nail squarely on the head with this comment. Americans are becoming more and more ignorant as the public school systems let them down. Some of these comments show a lack in comprehension of the article itself, not to mention the simplest concepts of science.

As for the elevator, I think it's a good idea. But, in the end, it will probably be decided by politics.

And, Alan...my compliments on your patience.

Will the space elevator rise?

Eddy Glover, Texas — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:07:32 GMT

Why not spend the money for anti-gravity research, in order to build anti-gravity machines? Wouldn't they be much safer and less complicated, as well as easier to maintain?

Will the space elevator rise?

elefterios-athens-greece — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:39:20 GMT

thanks because when visit your website i lesson more things from space.

Will the space elevator rise?

Eric, VA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:23:01 GMT

Just how is it possible that we are going to overcome gravity? Regardless if a tether ends in space where there is little to no gravity, it will still be acted on THROUGH THE TETHER by planetary gravity. Any payload will only increase the pull. I can't see any possible way of counterbalancing or even booster rockets for compensating. Why are these fundamental ideas overlooked? Is there something I'm missing?

Will the space elevator rise?

gnomic, mid atlantic — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:36:59 GMT

It could be built - if it were linked to a cooperative project to solve the earth's energy needs. Nations could invest against future load slots.

And why haven't they considered powering it using the static charge that will build up on the tethers or using power generated by the rotation through the magnosphere? There should be plenty of power.

As for collision with debris, simply create a ballon around it filled with the same material the make the newer gunshot vests out of, a mix of kevlar and a material that hardens under impact. Or better yet, the new graphene material. Build up enough mass and it will be its own effective counterweight.

Will the space elevator rise?

MF MA. — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:02:44 GMT

While I don't have time to read all of the comments posted here, only one concern comes to mind. Cost. They say that it should cost 7-10 billion. 20 years ago, we were told that a tunnel through Boston would cost 2 billion, and take 5 years. 20 years later it was finally completed at a cost of 22 billion. Need I say more?

Will the space elevator rise?

JSteph Omaha, NE — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:12:08 GMT

Isn't the real problem just getting fuel into low earth orbit? This would cut costs dramatically as space vessels could just fill up in LEO and wouldn't need as much fuel to get there, and thus be quite a bit smaller. Maybe a tube, about 2 inches in diameter would make more sense than a ribbon? Even of carbon nanotubes you would have to make it a bit thicker, but because it is not supporting any cargo weight, it would still be under 4 inches in outer diameter.

Will the space elevator rise?

Guy S. Newell — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:40:19 GMT

The "space elevator" is even dumber than the the "space shuttle" idea. What is the problem we're trying to solve again? Cheap access to space. So that we can do what? Launch garbage into the sun? Seriously? Reading this makes me want to start wearing a tin-foil hat again.

Will the space elevator rise?

VoteObama — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:49:41 GMT

How about actually investing in something useful instead of more junk in space? Aside from telecommunication and surveillance we haven't put anything useful in space. We need renewable energy not more space toys. Universal health care would be nice too, but that’s never going to happen. It’s pathetic that a bunch of intellectual dreamers can literally throw money into space with no foreseeable return. We need to ditch NASA and funnel the billions already being wasted into programs to help real people. We might as well fund the search for Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or the Easter Bunny!

Will the space elevator rise?

David Howell — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:59:44 GMT

Good brain fodder for the math majors and physics wannabes. But, the reality is gonna be a cold, hard failure. When you think that all it's gonna take to put the "space elevator" out of commission is one broken nanotube or maybe one big solar storm, or even some intentional act by the nuts attracted to the big tube into the sky...there's no way for this to succeed.

Theory is great, application is a bit harder. Fun to think about in the "perfect world." Great stuff for spacey novels. Fun to draw from the engineering standpoint. So, a lot of people can be entertained, amused and occupied by the potential, but again...the reality is bound to be a bust.

Better to think about big balloons. Fill 'em on earth, turn it loose. As it rises, baloon expands. When it hits the top of the atmosphere and gets weightless, exhaust all that trapped gas for propulsion higher and higher.

Makes the same kind of sense. And, just like the elevator to nowhere, it's just as impractical.

Be talkin' to you.

Will the space elevator rise?

Joe - Canada — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:28:13 GMT

What a shame when we can spent trillions of dollars killing people without batting an eye, and against the public's will, but we can't do what we do best, ADVANCE civilization...

Humans will be the downfall of human society because corporate greed, and stupid leaders will ensure that... and what a shame that is. I for one know of at least a few billion people who would like to leave a positive influence on the world through advancement rather then spending 100X the amount waging war.

Will the space elevator rise?

A Student of Science — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:31:23 GMT

In response to people who question the spin-offs and other technology made possible by/started by NASA and the space program:

Cell Phones
GPS
Scans that help the environment--i.e. tracking oil
spills, deforestation, radiation etc.
Air and Water purifiers
Air Quality Monitors
Scratch resistant lenses
Solar Energy

And many more.

Another of Arthur C. Clarke's conceptions were satellites. Anyone care to argue about how useless they are?

Will the space elevator rise?

Fara Braid, East Kootenays BC — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:58:43 GMT

I think this is entirely possible. Look how far computers have come in 30 years. We can't imagine at this point what the state of robotics will be in 30 years.

I'm not sold that an elevator is the ultimate access route, but I'm very confident robotics will be an integral part of the 'gateway to space' solution. Likely even the space junk problem.

Will the space elevator rise?

Corbett Crook, Fort Collins, Colorado — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:59:45 GMT

To David in Hong Kong,
yes I couldn’t agree more with you, and it saddens me that my own country has done so poorly when education is concerned. Also i would like to say to Eddy Glover of Texas, anti-gravity isn’t at all possible at the present. do not know enough about gravity to even think of the idea, it would take another Einstein sized breakthrough in physics to do so.

Also I don't think that everyone read the whole article because I see lots of comments saying we should focus on alternative energies and things like that. one of the hopes is that with the elevator we would be able to use laser technology to help collect and transport solar energy from space. also if we could though our trash into the sun it would help our environment greatly.

it also would make space travel easier and more practical. and places like mars might not seem so out of reach. also I believe that mars can be colonized. there is a reason it's called our sister planet. it has polar ice caps like earth it has a 24 hour time zone like earth and many other similarities. the one thing it doesn’t have is a layer of greenhouse gas. if we could go to mars and build a factory of sorts with the purpose of producing greenhouse gas, and by doing this we can Terraform the planet and enable it to support life. ( granted the time it would take to do that would be somewhere like 1000 years).

Will the space elevator rise?

John, Seattle, WA — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:09:53 GMT

What I see of the opponents of the space elevator is fundamental misunderstandings of the technology being proposed. The most important piece of this is the tether technology. The current most popular design is a ribbon most likely composed primarily of carbon nanotubes. This is a dramatic contrast to the cable envisioned in every concept of the space elevator before the work of Dr. Bradley Edwards.
A second difference is that the elevator might have no counter weight. Instead the tether would extend to the point where its center of mass is geostationary, meaning that the tether as a whole remains in orbit above a fixed point on the earth.
One of the biggest concerns voiced was the possibility that the tether would be cut and cause damage on earth. The people discussing the elevator are aware of the issue. If the ribbon was cut near its center of mass it would be hours before the event would have much effect on the position of the cable within the earth's atmosphere. In this time the anchor on earth could be released and the ribbon would be pulled from the earths atmosphere and both ends of ribbon would seek a stable orbit at a point half way between them. Even if this did not happen once the friction from the air reached the combustion point of carbon the cable would be cut, that would be somewhere around the speed of sound.
Most proposed good locations for the space elevator are very remote i.e. somewhere in the Pacific near the equator. If the cable were cut near the earth it would most likely fall into empty ocean.

Will the space elevator rise?

JC, Fairbanks AK — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:35:26 GMT

get real: perhaps you should do some research before sneering; there are a number of scientific papers on this subject written by quite sober scientists and engineers, of considerable vision. They all identify material strength as the major obstacle to constructing a 'space elevator', a problem which we are close now to solving. For my part, I am GLAD there are people of such vision in the world; if all we had were sneerers we'd still be banging rocks together to make fire . . .

In point of fact I view building something like this vital if people ever want to actually move into space (as opposed to sending hail-mary 3 man crews up on 'stunt missions'). Rockets will NEVER be up to this.

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:46:05 GMT

Student of science - are you saying NASA built and launched the first satellite? If so, you need to go back to school. Secondly, many of those inventions you listed may not have been invented by NASA. They were probably perfected by NASA. So, is it worth it to spend $200 million plus on shuttle missions if the result is scratch resistant lenses? Or if the result is perfecting a water purifier? How much did Bill Gates spend to create the first Windows OpSys? Close to $200 million or close to $2000? How about Steve Jobs and the first Apple computer? Close to $200 million or closer to $20000? How much are the people who are working on electric hybrids cars in their garages spending? So, student, add up the total money NASA has spent on the shuttle, adjust it for inflation, then divide that into the total number of completely new discoveries from the shuttle and let us know if it was worth it. I'll always maintain that the shuttle/ISS was not worth the benefits and the money would have been better spent on future techs, like this space elevator.

Will the space elevator rise?

Christopher G Jesudason — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 02:33:31 GMT

I do not have the time to read even the outline of the technology and methodology but all of the above seems to have the carbon nanotube or other material tether be sent to space from the earth through laser beams etc. Surely another method would be to lay the tether from the space downwards by first taking the cargo into space conventionally and then finding a mechanism to lay it down.
This is a relatively simple procedure.
Chris

Will the space elevator rise?

Jeremy H., Cleveland, OH — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 02:56:36 GMT

So wait, if humans were able to build a space elevator, and considering all the phenomenal engineering feats involved in putting such a thing into practice, don't you think we'd be able to blow some space junk out of the air with those gigantic lasers? Just asking.

Will the space elevator rise?

Bob, Irving. TX — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:33:15 GMT

The tether would not work on the moon. The rotation is too slow to maintain lunar-synchronous orbit. Mars, however, would be a good candidate with a rotation only slightly slower than Earth but with a third of the gravity.

An areostationary orbit (abbreviated ASO) is a circular areosynchronous orbit in the Martian equatorial plane about 17,000 km above the surface, any point on which revolves about Mars in the same direction and with the same period as the Martian surface. (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
This compares to a geosynchronous orbit of 35,786 km.
Mars gravity is less than half Earth's so the tether would only have to be half as long and half as strong as one for Earth.

Will the space elevator rise?

John Doe, Seattle, Washington — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:04:49 GMT

I was in the conference, and I won’t explain much because is like explain science to a chicken, it amazed me how the stupidity can reach a so high level to talk without knowing.

Stupid comments,

Why we want to send payload to space, is so ridiculous that won’t even explain, keep living in you bubble buddy may be some day if you look around you can learn something.

We should spend more money on alternative energies; one of the means of the space elevator is provide safe solar energy at half of the current cost. And this is with just the first one, after the first the cost goes down for at least half for each build. In space with current technology we get 9 times more energy from PV cells, also we don’t need to cover half of the Sahara desert to do it, it is not affected by weather and PV films can be used instead the heavy PV cell.

Why should spend more money in global warming; Space elevators will solve some of the issue, rockets become part obsolete which currently pollute immensely the air. After we throw in space one millions rockets you will see what we are talking about.

Why we need a ribbon if we have the laser; the laser has nothing to do with the ascension, the laser provide power to the climber, a hybrid system can give the optimal solution a laser to LEO then Solar power to GEO and beyond .

If this fall down it will kill so many people, take a roll of toilet paper and throw it from a building, if you are lucky you might hit someone, now unroll it in a ribbon from the top floor to the bottom and let it go down, see what happen, physic 1/1. (Any way almost complete will be burn in the atmosphere in the reentry).

What is the impact that throwing nuclear waste to the sun will do; the sun is a HUGE NUCLEAR BOMB, it coverts hydrogen into helium, throw nuclear waste and it will be vaporized before be even close to the surface, anyway the empty space is a radioactivity environment, is a HUGE number, but to make it really small and compressible is like throw a drop of water in the middle of a active volcano. (Anyway she sun is a target to make it go some place, if you don’t want the sun, we can send it to Sirius, it will take just 8.6 light years to reach there).

This will be a huge waste of money they say 10Billions but will go much beyond that; so far is not a government project the money will not be useless wasted, for that reason privates founding are needed, as long NASA and the government can be avoided it can work in time and money projections.

Environment effect, what about birds colliding with the ribbon; I can give that, if we take a blind bird to hit the ribbon yes it might have just a headache, but hey we already have suicide birds flying in the turbine of airplanes and no one complains about that, how come?

The ribbon floats and is not attached to the earth, if you wonder why it won’t come down or fly into space, then please don’t make the comment, is kind of absurd, you need to know so little to know how it works.

What about satellites and planes to collide with the ribbon; the ribbon will move around to avoid satellites, planes have a 50 miles non-fly zone, if you think a lost plane can fly close, then is like the same with a “lost” airplane try to fly over the capitol, don’t try it or you won’t even know what hit you.

Orbital debris, the ribbon can take some damage for unknown debris and can be repaired as for example micrometeorites.

Now the real facts. If you think you know more than Scientifics, physics and mathematics, and then the comment are less than stupid then you are welcome in the conference, this is an open topic and government is not involved “so far”.

The problem discussed in the comments are less than serious, there are real HUGE amount of challenges that need to be resolved to make this happen, you think anyone will put 10 billion dollars without knowing that it might work or be “worried” about space debris, come on!!! That are not the real problems and this is what the research is about and that is the problem we are interested in resolve.

I’m not an advocate, we don’t have the material yet to happen, the theory of CNT tell that it might (200GP), but AT LEAST needs to be 30 times harder than what actual is. Currently there are CNT with 4GP when at least is needed 120.

My opinion is that we live on a “real world” so, CNT will become stronger until 20GP and we will make money and use of it for at least 10 years making bridges, buildings, airplanes, cars and of course bullets and projectiles to kill each other where military is expert in wasting money doing that, until more research is done because “we will need” more than 20, then another 20 years before we need 120GP for something else than space elevator.

My point of view is until a PRIVATE company doesn’t have the funding and reason to go beyond 100GP then it won’t happen, idealist like me don’t have money, capitalist do and first is what is the revenue that can be done with the short research made in a short term, so lets make money with 10GP then 20GP then 40GP and so on, we need another 30 years before it will be done.

Anyway, if tomorrow some private company discovered how to make the material strong enough then 100 companies will be willing to put the money.

Will the space elevator rise?

Pablo Climent, México City — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:54:48 GMT

Why would we want to rush to space and colonize new planets? We can´t just run away from our responsability towards Earth. Wake up people!

Will the space elevator rise?

Shayne, Austin, TX — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:53:10 GMT

Aw c'mon folks, spend the money on it! People are worried about whether or not this will work, yet they're happy wasting trillions fighting an unwinnable war in the land of the hopeless? Spend the 10 or so billion and try something new! It's about time we all started using our imaginations again.

Will the space elevator rise?

Perry, Two Rivers, WI — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:38:31 GMT

The concept is quite viable; however, it is often presented as the simplistic one strand cable. In reality, that wont work for several reasons. Much more likely would be that what will be built will have 4 to 6 cables constructed of many strands.

The reason for that is for maintainability. Nothing last forever, everything wears and fails. Building the space elevator is something that needs to be fail proof and thus maintainable.

It needs to be able to survive severe cable damage - and even the complete severing of an individual main cable and be repairable. You can only do that with multi-cable construction, and with cables that are multi-stranded.

I am sure we will get to the point of having the technology to build it - and it will be well worth it as well. Then we will forever be replacing short sections of individual strands for routine maintenance and to repair any collision damage that will occur from time to time.

Will the space elevator rise?

Bill M — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:42:53 GMT

Although the tether concept is viable, there is a faster way to colonize Mars. Send robots to farm for chunks of frozen water in the asteroid belt. When they find a chunk of frozen water, they just push it into an orbit that would cause it to collide with Mars. That could be going on while we work on our moonbase and the ship that will take us to Mars. Bu the time we get to Mars, we might have clouds, ponds and rain. As you add water mass to Mars, you can begin converting water to Hydrogen to burn as fuel and Oxygen to breathe. That would be the cheapest way to begin terraforming Mars and the robots could continue their work for a hundred years.

Will the space elevator rise?

Bill M — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:07:02 GMT

Solera, S, ATL, GA.
One trillion dollars in debt?
You should do a little more research.
We are 56 trillion in debt when all of our debts are added up, including SS and medicare.
That is why wasting $1B/day in Iraq for 6 years (more than $2,136 Billion so far) is killing our country and our economy. We could have built 213 space tether lifts or educated every kid in America with a PHD or replaced the Shuttle fleet with ones that take off from regular runways or cleaned up the plastic dump the size of Texas in the oceans, or replace the Hubble with the Large Space Telescope array or .....
We could have spent 8 years making the planet a better place for everyone and moving next generation kids closer to the stars.

Will the space elevator rise?

Joel, Calgary, AB — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:27:41 GMT

I want to be the first ever space bellboy.
"Going up?".
Oh man, what a job that'd be.

Will the space elevator rise?

TC Canada — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:53:57 GMT

The one thing I am happy to see here is the fact there are more people educated about this subject than I have ever thought. I knew a little about it and have learned a lot by reading people’s views, ideas and links to the newer technology. The plain fact here is this is the first major step forward for humans I have seen in years. Only 20 years ago they said we could NEVER make a material for the tether, now we can, just not in enough quantity. I am happy to see more and more people letting their voices be heard and in unison to boot. There will always be those that see no need to explore the unknown, and thankfully people like Christopher Columbus paid no attention to them.
In a world I thought was so stagnated to ever move on, I am happy to hear people that can see the vision and even those who can’t. Talk about the space elevator, from the believers and non, has done something very important. It has shaken the dust from our minds, show the impossible is not so impossible and maybe, some day, find the lost sense of curiosity and adventure not seen in generations.

Will the space elevator rise?

Frank, Dallas, TX — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:59:39 GMT

If it is anchored to the equator it needs to only be about 2/3 as long. Problem is, equatorial orbits have the greatest odds of a satelite/debris collision. Maybe the whole thing is an excuse to perfect ASAT technology.

Will the space elevator rise?

Tim Jackson — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:33:03 GMT

7-10B is to finish developing the technology that would get it to work, AND build it...

Even so.. 7 10B is chump change, this isn't some giant amount of cash. This amount is reachable to companies NOT just nations.

Read the article again, the meating is at Microsoft with other companies. This isn't some world leader event here. This is the privite sector. 7-10B is Very very reachable

Even IF you disagree think of other nations, 10B for a space program?!? your kinding right? "what if it doesnt work?" um so? 10B is nothing in this world and the technologies developed to actually build this would more than pay for it even if it didn't work. "But we can spent it for XXXX so much beter" Yes actually we probably could but guess what? WE AREN'T even if we dont pay for this that money wont go to what you want anyway.

What if it brakes.... What if it is blown up What if it.... this is the job of the desiners to figure out. There not going to build something that that would destroy the world. All you people who say this is science fiction and yet you use science fiction to refute it...

This is cheap fokes, were not talking trillions here this is billions. 10B is reachable by EVERYONE. I would much rather a civilized nation do it first rather than some third world nation that would take short cuts.

Will the space elevator rise?

Kevin, Arlington MA — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:42:32 GMT

Doesn't every satellite that is not in geosynchronous orbit eventually cross the path of any fixed space elevator? In space elevator versus international space station, who wins?

Will the space elevator rise?

Jaycubed — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:39:05 GMT

"Even if the space elevator concept does not work out, does anyone really think that we will not have a reliable means to get into space a few hundred years from now?
David R, Halifax, NS"

I'm not certain that human civilization will survive a few hundred years at the rate we're despoiling our home.

----

Far more realistic than the "theoretical" space elevator are the proposals for an equatorial electromagnetic launcher powered by OTECs, as all the components are practical contemporary technologies.

Imagine a launch system where you enter an unpowered space capsule at (say) western Papua. The capsule is placed in an evacuated tube anchored a few hundred feet below the surface. It is propelled by an electromagnetic drive powered by a string of OTEC stations on the Equator (where there are never cyclonic storms & the surface temperature is always high enough to efficiently power the OTEC process with the cold deep water also found completely across the equatorial Pacific) running 8 to 10,000 miles until arising in South America and launching from a few miles elevation in the Andes.

A slow acceleration that is acceptable to any organism or device, rather than the crushing G's of a rocket blasting off. An hour to orbit rather than the week or two usually predicted for a space elevator ride.

I would also build a shorter launch tube facing in the opposite direction (say from Java to East Africa) for sending water & construction materials into space and to counter any spin down of Earth's rotation from the primary (people) launcher.

Will the space elevator rise?

john jj — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:46:56 GMT

very stupid idea, can we fix the problem at hand first. we haven't even find an alternative good enough to replace gas.

Will the space elevator rise?

Scott M., Salt lake City, Utah — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:10:55 GMT

A space elevator? Maybe "we" can built it --- but why? As other writers have noted, imagine the pollution, congestion and battles for scare resources here on Earth while we spend billions of dollars on an "elevator" to an even more inhospitable environment. As with the race to Mars, it's a sign of our species weakness: group insanity enabled by our opposable thumbs. Build it and they will come.

Maybe we can adopt Martians instead of taking care of our own. NASA and space exploration is our attempt to avoid our reality (and home) on Earth. As Jiddu Krishamurti once said: "It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a sick society".

Will the space elevator rise?

to the future — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 01:35:15 GMT

this is possible today, if only the entire world were of the same mind.some of us forget that other parts of the world are not interested in technological advances,but more in faith and protecting that faith. i am sure this is a threat to their faith. but alas i am of the dreamers for the future. if we can imagine it, it is possible.

Will the space elevator rise?

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:24:05 GMT

On 7/20 at 0937 John Doe said he does not live in fear. That may be true if his name is actually John Doe. I doubt it. So … SCAREDY-CAT SCAREDY-CAT SCAREDY-CAT!

Pete in PV,
Is your statement based on the norm? Like, “People on sidewalks will never be hit by cars.” Or do you take into account the out-of-normal, drunk/distracted driver scenarios?

Jeff Barsky,
Very well done. I’m the one who put up the kite scenario. In a hurricane high winds would be seen up to 12 to 15 miles. They would act against the profile of the ribbon. You indicate it will have quite the profile. WCS is a cat 5 going static with the cable near the eye, maybe 20% out. We now have nominal wind speeds of 175 mph against at least 2 miles of cable cross section and then decaying winds above that adding to the net force. So we have a cable anchored to Mother Earth and an orbiting, moveable counterweight. The wind produces a tensile force that pulls down on the counterweight, moving it closer to earth, increasing the effect of gravity and lessening the centrifugal force. Additionally, it’s pulling up on the anchor point. It may not pull a 100 acre yard block of concrete out of the ground, but it may pull out of a 100 acre yard block of concrete. It may also fail. Failure of the anchor or cable aside, let’s just look at the pull down issue. In just the bottom 2 miles you have 175 mph (78 m/s) winds acting on 40k feet of a cross section of, let’s say, 1 foot (A=3700 m^2). Assuming typical hurricane air density (p=1.29) and a round cable (Cd = 0.5) the drag force is about 1.6 million pounds. I’m not sure what you meant with the drag vs. length, but I’d call this significant. My math has been wrong before so check it. I didn’t do Reynolds. That force over 2 days while the hurricane sits over warm water. We may need more than 1 foot round cable to hold that force. But then the force goes up. But fortunately for us, everything holds. We have the best engineers in the world. The satellite is being pulled down with over a million pounds force for 48 hours. How many problems can we come up with? 1: The cable bows under the wind force and collects what will soon be slack in the back side of the hurricane. As the hurricane moves on it essentially drops the cable, the satellite still outside GEO takes up the slack – that means it’s moving away from the planet at some velocity when the slack is gone. Not a static tensile force but a jolt. At least this would shake off cargo. 2: The satellite gets pulled below GEO, then it doesn’t matter when the hurricane drops the line, the whole thing is going to make a splash. I’ll point out that the counterweight would not be expected to burn up. It’s speed is faster than surface so it would fall to the East. I say we attach it in Israel. 3: I’ll leave this one for you, use your imagination.

Roger Richardson,
It has to be attached to us. Otherwise you have a very precarious balancing act to stay at the same altitude, you have to supply thrust to the load and the bottom station is whipping around the atmosphere as it’s pulled by the satellite.

Will the space elevator rise?

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:20:36 GMT

Eric, VA,
Take a small bucket, tie 2 feet of strong cord to it, fill it ½ full with water. Now turn the bucket over. The water spills out because of gravity. Turn it right side up again and fill ½ full of water. Now lift it by the cord. Start turning in circles. The bucket begins to rise as your rate of turn increases. (At some point stop turning or you’ll get really dizzy. Just keep the bucket swinging around like a cowboy with a lariat.) You can eventually get it to swing in a horizontal circle with the bucket sideways. The water stays in the bucket. Now start moving the circle it swings in until it is vertical instead of horizontal. At the bottom of the circle the bucket is right side up and it makes sense that the water stays in. At the top of the circle the bucket is up side down and you’d expect the water to spill out like it did before. The reason it doesn’t is because there is a force pushing it into the bottom of the bucket even more than gravity wants to pull it down. That force is called centrifugal force. In orbit, below geosynchronous orbit altitude a satellite orbiting in geosync has less centrifugal force pushing it away from earth than gravitational force pulling it toward earth and it comes down. At geosync altitude the forces are equal and beyond geosync the centrifugal force is stronger than gravitational force and the object wants to go farther up. In the case of the elevator counterweight, like the bucket, is kept from flying away because it’s tethered. The payload is like an ant crawling up and down the cord between the bucket and your hand.

Will the space elevator rise?

Terry Thomas / Atlanta, Georgia USA — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:25:23 GMT

If NASA thinks this will be done in 200 years why not now? What's stopping us? Why was that left out of the article.

Also left out of the article was what I always thought was an important aspect of the mission: the capture of an asteroid to use as a counterweight and the towing of it back to earth and establishing it in a geosynchronous orbit over the eventual anchor point. From what I remember, the tether would be lowered from the anchor and be knit/manufactured/assembled on the way down to the anchor point.

An anchor point question: why station it in the ocean where tides, waves and hurricanes could be a problem? Why not put the anchor point in the middle of an African desert at the equator? Other than sand storms and political issues would that not be a more stable anchor point? Plus think of the positive economic impact the anchor would have for Africa.

If not a point in Africa what about on the island of San Cristóbal Island the easternmost island in the Galápagos archipelago? It's right on the equator and has airports and a harbor and is politically stable?

A lot of people writing here are concerned about winds at high altitudes and space debris. So why not prove the Space Elevator concept as part of our return trip to the moon? That is, use robots and astronauts to put a space elevator on the moon.

First of all, the moon has less gravity so the tether won't have to be as long. The counterweight (astroid) would therefore need to have less mass. If the tether fell it would only hit the moon and no people would be harmed. All in all, it would cost less and eliminate the need for an Apollo-type of Lunar Decender now in the planning stages. Then we could use the proven technology on earth. And later repeat the process on Mars.

Questions about space debris being a problem: Since the counterweight is in a geosynchronous orbit it is not moving much, if at all, (relative to a spot on the planet). This is unlike other systems like the Space Shuttle or the Space Station which must move very fast to stay in orbit. So what's actually moving is the space junk itself. Missing from the article are facts like how fast is the junk moving and can't part of the process be to clean up the junk which would endanger the tether?

Question: why not end every Shuttle mission by sticking out a big net to capture a good share of the space junk prior to de-orbit?

Terry Thomas
Architectural Photographer
Atlanta, Georgia USA
http://TerryThomasPhotos.GooglePages.com

Will the space elevator rise?

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:43:53 GMT

Jaycubed,
An OTEC only has a carnot efficiency of about 8% to 1000 ft depth (where the thermocline restabilizes). That’s before pumping water up the 1000 feet. That could probably be increased by black sacking the hot water at the surface, like you do for solar hot water at home. You’d be lucky to get 1 megawatt per generating station useable power. Probably far less. I have no idea how much power it would take to come up to launch speed. I guess you’d be using some for magnetic hover like the bullet train. Perhaps feasible with advances in room temperature superconductors. Evacuating a tube for acceleration is a bit of a problem, as is opening it for launch without slowing the launch vessel. Maybe venting along the way after the vessel passes, or using angled nozzles near the end. They would equalize pressure before opening the end cap so no reverse gust and would educt the craft forward. That would boost speed a little for the final leg which would be pressurized. You could get away with not pumping the hot water.
Some of the produced energy was used to pump up condenser water. The effluent either needs to be pumped back down or released at the surface. Release at the surface uses less power and doesn’t heat contaminate your sink. This cools the surface temperature (La Nina) which contributes to draught. It would probably also add to global warming, although it would probably give us a short reprieve before we noticed. It may even induce reglaciation. It would deepen the zone of low oxygen below the surface, perhaps killing off some gill breathing species if they have to pass up through this zone to feed as they wouldn’t resperate. And also be detrimental to lung breathers who dive through the zone to feed as they would have to dive deeper. I don’t know what those species would be, I’m just saying. It is an intriguing idea, for a booster if not full launch. Startup and maintenance costs could kill it, though.
Pumping up water off the coastlines in the Arctic/Antarctic might not be a bad idea, even without power applications. The platforms would probably produce enough power to be self sufficient. They’d be a relatively warm reef, might attract enough sea life for a sustainable food source. Set a crew out with enough bread and books.

The equatorial cyclonic is another matter. It’s happened. Vamie or Vaime or something. Formed near and extended across the equator. Could be a fluke of wind patterns. Could be that cyclonics form with a higher minimum latitude with colder global temperatures and as the temperature (available energy) goes up the minimum latitude heads toward the equator. They seem to be getting stronger, which would follow, but maybe that’s just a function of my awareness. As the planet warms and more energy becomes available we may see cyclonic storms range over the entire planet. But that only makes an Andes launch site more appealing. Weakest storm region and west coast.

Will the space elevator rise?

Dean, Cincinnati, OH — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:21:27 GMT

The wind resistance issue would likely be minimized by not having the teather reach the ground. Indeed, there is no reason to have the teather come any lower than 50,000 feet 15,240 meters). At that height, about 90% of the atmosphere is below it, there are no birds, and a commercial jet can be re-designed to reach that height with minimal effort. Currently, cruising height for a commercial airplane is 30-35,000 feet (about 10,000 meters), and many are capable of 40,000 plus feet without any changes.

With a little more effort, 100,000 feet (30,500 meters) would be even better. Again, minimal engineering effort is required to design a plane to take you to the "launch pad" at that height, and 99% of the atmosphere is below you.

The height adds other advantages, including a reduction in cost as well as increased security.

Will the space elevator rise?

Karel P Meerbach, Puyallup, Wash. — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:56:29 GMT

Amazing the many views provided.
I only have one comment. The Space Elevator should be placed on a STABLE continent. Not on a storm/earthquake prone land like the USA. Nor on the northern populated continents, Or in a wild windy and blustering oceans. The only safe place really is in the centre of Australia. No major earthquakes there, except mayby along coasts. No volcanoes active or dead. And if the thing should come down then there is basically miles and miles of empty land and of ocean, either side of the continent. And the population is all along the edges and not too heavily populated. Am I for the Space Elevator? Oh yeah mate..

Will the space elevator rise?

bob — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:42:38 GMT

The space elevator is really doable, but it should have warning lights so Santa Clause will not run into it.

Will the space elevator rise?

bob2 — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:46:16 GMT

to Bob, Meridian, Mississippi

Hey Bob, you might want to check with God on this, but I am pretty sure that the Earth is in space...

Will the space elevator rise?

Mike B, Massachusetts — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:19:51 GMT

It's pretty funny to read the many comments on why a space elevator can't be done. I suspect the Apollo program had the same nay-sayers before it got underway.

Will the space elevator rise?

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 09:54:36 GMT

What about the power transfer system? We get into a situation of trying to hit a sub-second of angle moving target through an atmosphere with lensing qualities. Even a round acre sized target that feeds back information about where the beam is hitting seems small. I guess worst case is it would stop and wait to reaquire. If I remember correctly we had quite a bit of trouble tracking and hitting a missle sized target a few years back. With all the fanfare I'd expect that was a real effort. Has the technology advanced very far?

Will the space elevator rise?

John, Lancaster, pa — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:36:21 GMT

the last paragraph is frustrating, you get through reading all of this and then you read the base would be in orlando...talk about standing up to the elements, that elevator would have to stand up against 3+ hurricanes a year, let alone space junk!
I really really really hope this concept becomes reality one day, though!

Will the space elevator rise?

kelly lewis, Ofallon, missouri — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:07:48 GMT

Ive always said, "Someday I would like to go to the moon" My wish might come true, huh!!!???

Will the space elevator rise?

Brian Rundle, Portland OR — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 04:57:12 GMT

Am I the only one considering there is still a trmendous amount thrust required to accelerate the object from zero to 25,000mph once it is out there on the far end of the rope? You can't just lift the thing...you have to add enertia in the direction of earth's spin...that thing is going to need a good push. Call me crazy...but even with super strength material for the upward pull...you will still need a rocket engine pointed sideways to get it moving sideways.

Will the space elevator rise?

Joe Dufour, Manchester, NH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 12:24:04 GMT

The space elevator is a neat idea. Its defenitly a goal that can be accomplished. If we are willing to invest in it, it will be another big step foward into space.

Will the space elevator rise?

Alex, Fulton MO — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 07:32:28 GMT

I just researched and wrote a persuasive speech on converting the United States energy dependency to nuclear power plants as opposed to coal burning plants. Almost every aspect was better, accept for the issue of how to rid ourselves of the radioactive waste. I have found this to be the only feasible method of such waste disposal. If we put the money into developing this project, then we would consequently be able to build more nuclear power plants, and eventually cut our air pollution nearly in half by making coal plants obsolete...

Will the space elevator rise?

Crafty B, Illinois — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:15:10 GMT

"This is just one more new and better way for a bunch of crackpots to waste huge amounts of money on a silly program that will go nowhere. Remember the flying car? Space travel for the masses? Star wars? Cold fusion? Fusion-produced electricity that would be so cheap it would essentially be free? Fission-produced electricity that would be so cheap it would essentially be free? Is there no limit to human gullibility? Absolutely not!"

Says a guy with a cell phone in his pocket, satellite TV at home, an OnStar system in his car, up-to-date satellite weather reports and portable GPS for his skiing trips in Boulder.

Dude, just shut up and stay out of the way. Then when the derivative products that this paltry research generates profound changes in our technological abilities and stimulates trillions of dollars of spin-off industry, you can sit an old man b*tching about how much of a waste of money the $7 billion was [...]

Will the space elevator rise?

Aja Leija, San Antonio, TX — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:43:53 GMT

That is amazing. It would be spectacular. Though we would have to have ALOT of money at that point. And we cannot just borrow from the rich. I feel crazy because I am a 7th grade girl. Going to Kruger Middle School, and I am reading this stuff.

Will the space elevator rise?

Pete Case — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:58:33 GMT

ummm.. 62000 miles times a 3 foot wide tether plus the error for a cable that isn't a straight line is... one billion square feet of surface area. Lol. I really want to have a renewal and replacement budget for the 1billion square foot cable that snaps every time a pea strikes it at 25000mph. Especially a cable made of magic materials. If you think an monster hdmi cable is expensive...

Will the space elevator rise?

FreeFall — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:05:18 GMT

I am surprised that so many people are willing to write this off without even taking the time to look through the Spaceward Foundation site (which addresses many of the concerns expressed here). It is no wonder that this nation is falling behind, with such a stagnant attitude towards new technology.

http://www.spaceward.org/

The Space Elevator will come. We engineers and scientists will not let it fail. The only question is whether the rest of you will fight us and delay it, or aid us and see it rise within your lifetimes.