Slashdot Mirror
Japanese Begin Working On Space Elevator
thebryce writes "From cyborg housemaids and waterpowered cars to dog translators and rocket boots, Japanese boffins have racked up plenty of near-misses in the quest to turn science fiction into reality. Now the finest scientific minds of Japan are devoting themselves to cracking the greatest sci-fi vision of all: the space elevator. Man has so far conquered space by painfully and inefficiently blasting himself out of the atmosphere but the 21st century should bring a more leisurely ride to the final frontier. Japan is increasingly confident that its sprawling academic and industrial base can solve those issues, and has even put the astonishingly low price tag of a trillion yen (£5 billion) on building the elevator. Japan is renowned as a global leader in the precision engineering and high-quality material production without which the idea could never be possible."
"The first space elevator will be built about fify years after everyone stops laughing."
-Arthur C. Clarke
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
Nor did you RTFWikipedia. It's a held up by a weight at geosynchronous orbit. The only problem is that geosynchronous orbit is so far out there (the red dotted line is the International Space Station, the black dotted line is GEO), so it requires a WHOLE LOT of exotic material.
And as a sub-subnote, this is approximately the cost of developing a complete conventional man-rated rocket launch system. I'm skeptical of the quoted price tag, but it would be extremely cheap if it could be achieved.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
You have an anchor at the top of the ribbon. It needs to be very massive compared to the payload - so we need a large space station, or a small captured asteroid. You have it in an orbit that's slightly above geostationary, so that it tends to drift into a higher orbit and is kept in place by tension in the ribbon. That way, the top is pulling upwards naturally, and the payload doesn't drag the whole structure down.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Well, no. Modern materials are within a factor of 3 or so of what's required for a space elevator, and known materials with sufficient theoretical strength exist, it just needs to be figured out how to build them. It would not be surprising to have those materials move from theory to reality within a decade or so.
AI, human-indistinguishable androids, and world peace, on the other hand, are not things that people have any idea how to achieve. And FTL drives are prohibited by currently accepted physical theory. To compare a space elevator to any of those is either deliberately being stupid, or a result of profound ignorance about either space elevators or all the other things you mentioned.
A space elevator is certainly not going to be as easy as a Popular Science article makes it sound. But on the other hand it's not anywhere near as difficult as the pipe dreams you named.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
You're thinking of making a big tower (like a really large skyscraper). That wouldn't work. You have to approach the problem differently.
A simplified explanation of a space elevator is to take a really long, really strong cable (nanotubes), hang a weight on the end (more cable, an asteroid, lots of metal, etc), and anchor it on the equator. The weight goes out beyond geostationary orbit, and the tension of your cable pulls in on the counterweight to keep it from flying away. The tension keeps your cable taut. You can then run "cars" or "trains" up and down the cable on motorized wheels, most likely with electric power (solar, beamed microwave, or conducted through the cable). Your car can travel nice and slow, and be more efficient than a rocket.
If this doesn't make sense, imagine tying a weight to the end of a string, holding on to the other end, and spinning in circles. The weight will be held out at the end of the string and appear stationary relative to (since you're spinning too). Now put a caterpillar on that string that walks to the counterweight and back to you.
In short, the advantage is that you can use electrical power (which you don't have to carry with you) converted to direct mechanical energy to climb into orbit, instead of expelling fuel (less efficient) that you do have to carry with you. Your vehicle ("car") structure is simpler, more robust, and cheaper than a rocket. The elevator itself would be quite expensive, and requires some advances in materials science, but isn't physically impossible.
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
Being groped by space-whores could potentially be worth the wait anyway.
But remember, this is JAPAN we're talking about. They have tentacles.
Still, that amounts to $9.5 Billion USD at the moment. To put it in perspective, we're looking at spending $700B to bail out the banks this week. Over the course of the life of the shuttle, each launch as ended up costing $1.3B. So, for a little over a tenth of the bank buyout, or less than 10 shuttle launches*. Or, if you want to go with incremental costs ($60M), it'd be 158 launches - compared to the 115 launches as of Aug 2006. Still, I hardly think that it'd be fair to compare incremental costs of a dangerous platform with creating a new one with substantially lower incremental costs and hopefully greater safety.
Of course, the article does at least mention a number of issues - we need to industrialize a carbon nanotube production process that makes a cable that'd 4 times as strong as the best lab result to date. There's all sorts of issues with a pod that has to go 22k miles, straight up.
I heard a snippet of a speech by Reagan today about SDI and how we now finally have the missile defense stuff he proposed. They talked about him not realizing the difficulties and state of the art, at which I laughed a bit when, in the speech, he talked about it possibly taking 'into the next century'. Anyways - this topic reminded me of the SDI program - nice goal, but might end up being slightly out of our reach at the moment. Especially for a 'mere' 9.5B. Probably end up being 100B*, and an additional 40 years.
*Still cheap at the price.
I don't read AC A human right
actually it's the center of mass that is relevant. The device would be considered in GSO because the center of mass would be there, or minimally lower (a few feet).
There would be roughly evenly distributed mass from earth to GSO, Maybe slightly increasing as it goes up to GSO, and then a large weight beyond GSO.
The idea is to not have it pull up on the ground, or press down (much). Last thing they need is to have a huge chunk of the terminal flung into space.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
Can we please not use the word "Boffin" to describe scientists. Its a words used by the British tabloids, usually out of ignorance, and in a derogatory sense.
So don't tie it down. There's nothing about the design of the space elevator that requires it to be tied to the earth in any way. If there's a storm coming, pull it up (or fold it up) about a mile or so above the clouds.