Have you thought how long it would take to travel 23,000 miles, essentially by rail, in an elevator which is what you'd be doing in the case of a space elevator.
The cost per launch of a space elevator depends on it's rate of launches which depends on how quickly it can haul stuff into space which is rather dependant on how long it's taking you to travel that 23,000 miles. What's the rate of launches required in order to pay for the capital cost, the interest on the loans, the maintenance and running costs.
Does anyone have any idea how many launches per day it would have to cover it's costs? Does anyone have any credible numbers for any of the costs? I keep hearing $10 billion, but the ISS (a tin can in space) is more than $35 billion so far which means that the $10 billion being bandied about for a 23,000 mile long cable plus infrastructure is rather a joke.
All rail, monorail etc services share a fundamental problem which makes them largely useless to 90% of the population. They try to move groups of people from A -> B -> C -> D..... -> Z. The automobile in comparison moves individuals directly from A -> Z.
The implications are quite significant for the difference in method. Group vehicles have to be large, heavy to carry lots of people, the infrastructure then has to be large, heavy and expensive per mile. Group vehicles have to stop at every station to let people on and off. Very slow average speed. Group vehicles almost never take you exactly where you want to go, you have to change to other modes of transport and make additional journeys which means additional waits, very poor journey performance. Group vehicles have to run to a schedule. Everyone wants to travel at different times and schedules mean additional waits.
The result is that group vehicles have dismal performance. Which people are unwilling to pay for because it's so poor. They then have to be massively subsidised through taxation. Their optimal journey is from A->B with no stops in between. i.e. long distance, they shouldn't really be used for short journeys at all, they are being misused if they are.
There's nothing quite like seeing the original document. The ASCII text is great, don't get me wrong but it obviously can't do images, diagrams and the like. The space implications are obviously huge.
Google could get round the copyright problems by starting with the books in the Gutenberg list, already out of copyright.
23,000 mile journey into space. How fast are you going? Remember you're attached to a carbon fibre rope, not flying free, what's your top/average speed going to be? 100mph? 1000mph?
How long is it going to take? 1 day, 5 days, 10 days? How many lifts can be made per week? Per month? Per year?
The high cost of getting into space is more to do with the management and infrastructure than the cost of the fuel.
"But until FOSS gets its act together and treats the software business like a business instead of a hobby, we have little choice. "
So... What you're really saying here is that, Free and Open Source Software will be wildly successful as soon as it stops being Free and Open Source.
I have another reason it'll be (is being) wildly successful. It's a slut. It's that tiny little bit cheaper and very promiscuous. And that's pretty much all that's required. Eventually the people who don't use it will have higher costs than those who do, will be that tiny little bit less competitive and will be eaten up by the more efficient companies.
The difference is in the efficiency
on
VW Goes USB
·
· Score: 1
About 10% for your standard internal combustion engine as used in a conventional car in todays traffic conditions.
Compared to around 35% for an old conventional coal power station or 55% for a more modern coal gasifier power station or even 85% for a coal gasifier which sells it's "waste" heat as well.
Almost 1/5 the pollution per mile traveled doing it one way rather than the others.
Bollocks of course they can, if someone slanders of libels the linux user groups of course they can act.
"Anyone is free to write their own OS, call it Linux and then either sell it on or complain loudly about how demonstrably buggy Linux is."
Yes. That's the point of Free software. And everyone knows that anyone can do this. Guess what though, it's much easier to download a distribution, install, hack it to pieces and administer it badly then bitch about that. But hey if you want to go write an OS from scratch on you go, if you want to then call it Linux, well, lol good luck.
Set a date, any date, as long as it's two or more presidencies away and you basically don't have to come through with your promises, even better, someone else will take the blame.
Basically there isn't the political will to do something like this so they kick it into the long grass and allow schedules to slide, costs to rise until it becomes too expensive and has to be cut.
They're talking 100 billion anyway. They'd be better offering a 100 million prize for an orbital vehicle, half a billion prize for a lunar orbiter, a billion or two for a lunar base etc.
That's it. As a business philosophy it's brilliant, it's gotten them where they are today. As a product or innovation philosophy it turns out DOS, Windows, Office etc, a bunch of unbalanced, insecure, kludgy, unmanagable systems and applications.
A well thought out technically and detailed proposal such as this is bound to be well received by they people who actually have a faint idea of how the DNS system works.
Wait, we could put all the names into a big text file and email it around, that would be even simpler, no?
For a start, helium filled, multiple gas bags. These things are mostly empty space. You'll have to hit it lots of times punching big holes to have any effect at all. Little holes will just leak slowly.
Lighter and faster are the top two entries in my wishlist for Gnome.
While Gnome looks cleaner and more integrated KDE is 30% faster for network operations, it makes an enormous difference when you have 100 people running applications on a machine. Far fewer support calls, a real financial difference in the business world.
It doesn't. It's for domestic space/water heating and air conditioning. Most electricity is used for space/water heating and air conditioning. Heat pumps are just a 300%-400% more efficient way of doing it.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you thought how long it would take to travel 23,000 miles, essentially by rail, in an elevator which is what you'd be doing in the case of a space elevator.
The cost per launch of a space elevator depends on it's rate of launches which depends on how quickly it can haul stuff into space which is rather dependant on how long it's taking you to travel that 23,000 miles. What's the rate of launches required in order to pay for the capital cost, the interest on the loans, the maintenance and running costs.
Does anyone have any idea how many launches per day it would have to cover it's costs? Does anyone have any credible numbers for any of the costs? I keep hearing $10 billion, but the ISS (a tin can in space) is more than $35 billion so far which means that the $10 billion being bandied about for a 23,000 mile long cable plus infrastructure is rather a joke.
http://www.powergen.co.uk/pub/Dom/A/ui/Residentia
They don't care, they're selling you the fuel anyway.
All rail, monorail etc services share a fundamental problem which makes them largely useless to 90% of the population. They try to move groups of people from A -> B -> C -> D ..... -> Z. The automobile in comparison moves individuals directly from A -> Z.
c -transport-cant-work.html
The implications are quite significant for the difference in method. Group vehicles have to be large, heavy to carry lots of people, the infrastructure then has to be large, heavy and expensive per mile. Group vehicles have to stop at every station to let people on and off. Very slow average speed. Group vehicles almost never take you exactly where you want to go, you have to change to other modes of transport and make additional journeys which means additional waits, very poor journey performance. Group vehicles have to run to a schedule. Everyone wants to travel at different times and schedules mean additional waits.
The result is that group vehicles have dismal performance. Which people are unwilling to pay for because it's so poor. They then have to be massively subsidised through taxation. Their optimal journey is from A->B with no stops in between. i.e. long distance, they shouldn't really be used for short journeys at all, they are being misused if they are.
More details of why conventional mass transit can't work and what can:
http://mrprecision.blogspot.com/2005/05/why-publi
There's nothing quite like seeing the original document. The ASCII text is great, don't get me wrong but it obviously can't do images, diagrams and the like. The space implications are obviously huge.
Google could get round the copyright problems by starting with the books in the Gutenberg list, already out of copyright.
23,000 mile journey into space. How fast are you going? Remember you're attached to a carbon fibre rope, not flying free, what's your top/average speed going to be? 100mph? 1000mph?
How long is it going to take? 1 day, 5 days, 10 days? How many lifts can be made per week? Per month? Per year?
The high cost of getting into space is more to do with the management and infrastructure than the cost of the fuel.
You've almost hit on the reason a space elevator will never be built. It's essentially a 22,000 mile train journey.
Has anyone else at all thought about how a space elevator might be economically viable?
It's managing the construction and infrastructure of large, mostly one off projects.
Guess what a space elevator is going to be.
"But until FOSS gets its act together and treats the software business like a business instead of a hobby, we have little choice. "
So... What you're really saying here is that, Free and Open Source Software will be wildly successful as soon as it stops being Free and Open Source.
I have another reason it'll be (is being) wildly successful. It's a slut. It's that tiny little bit cheaper and very promiscuous. And that's pretty much all that's required. Eventually the people who don't use it will have higher costs than those who do, will be that tiny little bit less competitive and will be eaten up by the more efficient companies.
About 10% for your standard internal combustion engine as used in a conventional car in todays traffic conditions.
Compared to around 35% for an old conventional coal power station or 55% for a more modern coal gasifier power station or even 85% for a coal gasifier which sells it's "waste" heat as well.
Almost 1/5 the pollution per mile traveled doing it one way rather than the others.
I still don't have a good reason we continue to use it though. Other than, "it's always been that way".
I never really got a good answer to that one from my maths teachers.
"No, this will mean that they can't act."
Bollocks of course they can, if someone slanders of libels the linux user groups of course they can act.
"Anyone is free to write their own OS, call it Linux and then either sell it on or complain loudly about how demonstrably buggy Linux is."
Yes. That's the point of Free software. And everyone knows that anyone can do this. Guess what though, it's much easier to download a distribution, install, hack it to pieces and administer it badly then bitch about that. But hey if you want to go write an OS from scratch on you go, if you want to then call it Linux, well, lol good luck.
There's nothing to see here, move along.
" There is almost always political will to do space exploration "
There's political will to hand out government subsidies, there isn't any real requirement that they actually follow through with a mars mission.
"That simply means that whoever does it will only be $4.5 billion in debt"
Only if they spend $4.5 billion to do it. Y'know, they might figure a cheaper way.
Set a date, any date, as long as it's two or more presidencies away and you basically don't have to come through with your promises, even better, someone else will take the blame.
Basically there isn't the political will to do something like this so they kick it into the long grass and allow schedules to slide, costs to rise until it becomes too expensive and has to be cut.
They're talking 100 billion anyway. They'd be better offering a 100 million prize for an orbital vehicle, half a billion prize for a lunar orbiter, a billion or two for a lunar base etc.
"Follow the market"
That's it. As a business philosophy it's brilliant, it's gotten them where they are today. As a product or innovation philosophy it turns out DOS, Windows, Office etc, a bunch of unbalanced, insecure, kludgy, unmanagable systems and applications.
A well thought out technically and detailed proposal such as this is bound to be well received by they people who actually have a faint idea of how the DNS system works.
Wait, we could put all the names into a big text file and email it around, that would be even simpler, no?
For a start, helium filled, multiple gas bags. These things are mostly empty space. You'll have to hit it lots of times punching big holes to have any effect at all. Little holes will just leak slowly.
If I didn't know better i'd have sworn the pictures were coming from somewhere in Africa.
Looking at other areas in the US, It's interesting to note just how much of America is really poor.
So how many non functional transistors did they put on it?
How very bourgeois of them.
A can of black paint, people!
In the war between style and substance, you are the losers!
I know exactly what he was talking about. However this is just as much geothermal as that and is far cheaper, more practical and useful.
Lighter and faster are the top two entries in my wishlist for Gnome.
While Gnome looks cleaner and more integrated KDE is 30% faster for network operations, it makes an enormous difference when you have 100 people running applications on a machine. Far fewer support calls, a real financial difference in the business world.
It doesn't. It's for domestic space/water heating and air conditioning. Most electricity is used for space/water heating and air conditioning. Heat pumps are just a 300%-400% more efficient way of doing it.
You don't need a source of lava. Google for "ground source heat pumps". Far more efficient than direct electric or gas heating and AC.