It's kinda annoying to see every space elevator article attract a swag of ill-informed comments that get modded as insightful. Please go read question 4 of the FAQ.
the ribbon recovers for the same reason that it stays up in the first place. Centripetal acceleration is acting on the counterweight pulling it outward, and the lost angular momentum is replaced very quickly (essentially as fast as it is lost). The ribbon will never lose enough angular momentum to even deflect a single degree, let alone fall. The extra angular momentum is stolen from the Earth's rotation; we will have to worry about this effect slowing down the Earth and making the day longer if we ever decide to ship Australia into space.
Dude, you can't heap shit on Jersey Girl. Kevin Smith has said it's not for critics. So no matter how much you wanna say that it sucks you can't. Cause it's not for you.:)
Well, with that definition cars and fridges and just about anything man made qualifies as being alive because it is a product of life. So perhaps it is better to state that objects which are internally of low entropy indicate the presence of life in a system. If you go to an alien planet and you pick up something at random and sample the internal entropy and discover it is quite low you can be fairly certain that there is life on that planet or there was sometime in the past.
Well it's worse than that. Who goes to the movies by themselves? We're talking $50 for a night out at the movies for two. If you have a family you're looking at $80. Who can afford that?
I like the definition of life which is based on complexity theory. Anything that shows less entropy than the environment of which it is contained is typically alive.
Company 1 can't pay your paycheck. Company 2 probably pays you more than you're worth because they don't understand how easy it is to do huge-task-X with a perl script. I know which one I'd rather work at. Of course, it's much nicer working at a company that has both.
Maybe you should read the entire paper. The ribbon moves in a vacuum. The launch vehicles are lifted by an elevator up to 80km and launched from there.
On the side where the ribbon comes down you generate electricity which you transfer over to the other side of the structure where the ribbon is going up. That's how you balance the structure without expending a whole lot of energy. The author has been studying this technology for 20 years, along with a lot of other people.. it's solid. There have been scale models built, lots of them.
In two papers appearing in the Sept. 22 issue of the journal Nature, Dr. Rama Ranganathan, associate professor of pharmacology, and his colleagues detail a new method for creating artificial proteins...
That's the sum total of useful information in the article. Go read the full paper in Nature if you want to know more. Scientific reporting at its finest. Now and then I read an article where a "journalist" actually understands what has been written and has something profound to say about it that the scientists themselves didn't even think of (and actually agree with). Unfortunately it's increasingly rare these days. Even rags like Scientific American seem to do more puff pieces and press releases than well researched articles these days.
Yep, we need good computer simulations of cells. Unfortunately, simulating physical reality is still very much in its infancy. Imagine if you could test and perfect drugs or genetic manipulation without all that messy lab work and clinical trials? It'd be as liberating as developing software!
Combining the two would be good. Launch Loop/Space Fountain to get yourself into a low earth orbit and a MXER to boost your orbit to the desired altitude. There's that nasty issue of "catching" a space vehicle, but the major advantage over a space elevator would be the actual speed at which you could get into space. Riding an elevator for 3 days isn't my idea of 21st century technology.
Note that long list of things that can go wrong doesn't include "power outage". In the event that the Loop loses power the ribbon will keep turning and the structure will stay upright. The ribbon will slowly lose momentum and the structure will sink slowly to sea level. We're talking months here.
You kinda missed a key point. Ya know, like the whole dynamic structure thing? The point of the Launch Loop (or Space Fountain if you prefer) is that you can build extremely tall structures with present day materials by accelerating a high speed ribbon around them. The momentum of the ribbon is what holds the structure up, not the strength of the materials.
If you don't spend any fuel getting up there it's pretty easy to carry enough fuel to decelerate and re-enter the atmosphere. Heat shields are only necessary because we can't afford to launch surplus fuel to slow down.. we have to use the atmosphere to brake.
Sigh. Ya know, we could build a structure to space with todays (hell, 20+ year old) technology if we wanted. The Launch Loop concept was published 20 years ago and is viable today. It costs less than a space elevator is predicted to cost and, unlike the space elevator, can be built from the ground up instead of from orbit down. So yeah, please stop saying stuff like: once we have strong carbon nanotube fibres we'll have a space elevator two weeks later. It doesn't work like that. The majority of studies that remain to be done to make the Launch Loop a reality are much the same as the many studies that still need to be done to make the space elevator a reality. Someone has got to finance those studies and unless you can get PhD students to do it on government funding that means you've got to pour money into a hole that might never fill up.
Wait for Head IT Nerd to search Google for security solutions.
Make sure your company is in the top 10 hits by modifying the Google response in transit (and replace all the links to the other sites with a link to yours just in case).
and you give him a budget big enough to do his job. You know, sales? The basis of business? Oh, didn't think you'd need that? Note to investors: GET OUT NOW.
Slashdot Mirror
It's kinda annoying to see every space elevator article attract a swag of ill-informed comments that get modded as insightful. Please go read question 4 of the FAQ.
the ribbon recovers for the same reason that it stays up in the first place. Centripetal acceleration is acting on the counterweight pulling it outward, and the lost angular momentum is replaced very quickly (essentially as fast as it is lost). The ribbon will never lose enough angular momentum to even deflect a single degree, let alone fall. The extra angular momentum is stolen from the Earth's rotation; we will have to worry about this effect slowing down the Earth and making the day longer if we ever decide to ship Australia into space.
Dude, you can't heap shit on Jersey Girl. Kevin Smith has said it's not for critics. So no matter how much you wanna say that it sucks you can't. Cause it's not for you. :)
Well, with that definition cars and fridges and just about anything man made qualifies as being alive because it is a product of life. So perhaps it is better to state that objects which are internally of low entropy indicate the presence of life in a system. If you go to an alien planet and you pick up something at random and sample the internal entropy and discover it is quite low you can be fairly certain that there is life on that planet or there was sometime in the past.
Well it's worse than that. Who goes to the movies by themselves? We're talking $50 for a night out at the movies for two. If you have a family you're looking at $80. Who can afford that?
In Australia, $15 for a movie ticket, at least $8 for popcorn and a drink. And yes, a new release DVD does generally sell for $24.99.
I like the definition of life which is based on complexity theory. Anything that shows less entropy than the environment of which it is contained is typically alive.
Company 1 can't pay your paycheck. Company 2 probably pays you more than you're worth because they don't understand how easy it is to do huge-task-X with a perl script. I know which one I'd rather work at. Of course, it's much nicer working at a company that has both.
You've got to put in more than 15 seconds worth of effort, therefore I've got bad communication skills?
Whereas you, a person who hasn't even studied it for more than 30 seconds, can tell it's crazy talk. Sigh.
Maybe you should read the entire paper. The ribbon moves in a vacuum. The launch vehicles are lifted by an elevator up to 80km and launched from there.
On the side where the ribbon comes down you generate electricity which you transfer over to the other side of the structure where the ribbon is going up. That's how you balance the structure without expending a whole lot of energy. The author has been studying this technology for 20 years, along with a lot of other people.. it's solid. There have been scale models built, lots of them.
In two papers appearing in the Sept. 22 issue of the journal Nature, Dr. Rama Ranganathan, associate professor of pharmacology, and his colleagues detail a new method for creating artificial proteins...
That's the sum total of useful information in the article. Go read the full paper in Nature if you want to know more. Scientific reporting at its finest. Now and then I read an article where a "journalist" actually understands what has been written and has something profound to say about it that the scientists themselves didn't even think of (and actually agree with). Unfortunately it's increasingly rare these days. Even rags like Scientific American seem to do more puff pieces and press releases than well researched articles these days.
Yep, we need good computer simulations of cells. Unfortunately, simulating physical reality is still very much in its infancy. Imagine if you could test and perfect drugs or genetic manipulation without all that messy lab work and clinical trials? It'd be as liberating as developing software!
Combining the two would be good. Launch Loop/Space Fountain to get yourself into a low earth orbit and a MXER to boost your orbit to the desired altitude. There's that nasty issue of "catching" a space vehicle, but the major advantage over a space elevator would be the actual speed at which you could get into space. Riding an elevator for 3 days isn't my idea of 21st century technology.
Note that long list of things that can go wrong doesn't include "power outage". In the event that the Loop loses power the ribbon will keep turning and the structure will stay upright. The ribbon will slowly lose momentum and the structure will sink slowly to sea level. We're talking months here.
You kinda missed a key point. Ya know, like the whole dynamic structure thing? The point of the Launch Loop (or Space Fountain if you prefer) is that you can build extremely tall structures with present day materials by accelerating a high speed ribbon around them. The momentum of the ribbon is what holds the structure up, not the strength of the materials.
I'm swearing because I don't want to fuckin' elaborate. I want you to get off your fat ass and go do your own god damn research you fuckin' leach.
If you weren't a lazy fuck you'd open the PDF which addresses a power failure. I'll give you the short version: momentum.
If you don't spend any fuel getting up there it's pretty easy to carry enough fuel to decelerate and re-enter the atmosphere. Heat shields are only necessary because we can't afford to launch surplus fuel to slow down.. we have to use the atmosphere to brake.
More Launch Loop love.
Sigh. Ya know, we could build a structure to space with todays (hell, 20+ year old) technology if we wanted. The Launch Loop concept was published 20 years ago and is viable today. It costs less than a space elevator is predicted to cost and, unlike the space elevator, can be built from the ground up instead of from orbit down. So yeah, please stop saying stuff like: once we have strong carbon nanotube fibres we'll have a space elevator two weeks later. It doesn't work like that. The majority of studies that remain to be done to make the Launch Loop a reality are much the same as the many studies that still need to be done to make the space elevator a reality. Someone has got to finance those studies and unless you can get PhD students to do it on government funding that means you've got to pour money into a hole that might never fill up.
You're a cock smoker.
Copyright is evil and so are you.
Google Print is in Beta. When it goes out of Beta (and we know how long that takes!) you'll see it as part of the main search. Quit complaining.
and you give him a budget big enough to do his job. You know, sales? The basis of business? Oh, didn't think you'd need that? Note to investors: GET OUT NOW.