From cnn.com : A new space race is officially under way, and this one should have the sci-fi geeks salivating.
The project is a “space elevator,” and some experts now believe that the concept is well within the bounds of possibility — maybe even within our lifetimes.
A cable anchored to the Earth’s surface, reaching tens of thousands of kilometers into space, balanced with a counterweight attached at the other end is the basic design for the elevator.
It is thought that inertia — the physics theory stating that matter retains its velocity along a straight line so long as it is not acted upon by an external force — will cause the cable to stay stretched taut, allowing the elevator to sit in geostationary orbit.
The cable would extend into the sky, eventually reaching a satellite docking station orbiting in space.
Read the full article here, it’s a must read!
Well yeah but even if they do manage to get that up and running it'll still be as expensive as flying in an actual rocket, which is too much for most people.
Science fiction writers have seen this as a viable way to get into space for years. They also largely agree the only way to get the materials into space in any close to economical way is to find them there. Since we are so completely far from harvesting or even moving asteroids safely I would say that this is a pipe dream. Are you sure Al Gore didn't write the article?
i've heard about it, some russian guy got the idea when he saw the eiffel aroud 19th or 20th century (sorry can't remember it)
The counterweight is supposed to be in geosyncronous orbit for this to work.
It is a theory being thrown around aerospace engineering schools. I remember many animated discussions during my undergrad…
Carbon Nanotubes could make this possible, was the last arguement I heard. A few years ago…
i think its not inconceivable. the design is one thing, even me sitting at my desk can see how it would work once built. but the construction, that would be where the difficulties lie. and to what ends? the only thing that i can think of that would make it financially feasible is to make it commercial. to attach a hotel for the extremely rich to it. for space exploration, it might also be used. there is little profit in that, and no one will fund something that will not bring returns. even the first space race had a motive; it was a part of the cold war.
for the most part, i think, no one who has the money will be inclined to spend it on such a venture unless people can make it profitable (like in the hotel idea above). although, i think once it were constructed, it would be a shame for some large corporation to hold dominion over it.
What end? How about turning the cost of putting something into orbit something that the average man can afford? Space commerce (the aforementioned hotels, etcetera), but not just for the super rich. We're talking perhaps a few thousand to get up there. Not to mention that manned vehicles could be built piecemeal UP THERE, saving billions in payload for fuel, re-entry protection, etcetera.
@torebki, it's not a self-supporting tower, that would be utterly impractical. If you place an object 22,000 mi above the equator, it will stay there by itself, since it it is actually in orbit and revolving at the same speed as the earth turns (this is how all the TV satellites work – your dish doesn't need to move since the satellite doesn't appear to move). If you try place an object at a higher altitude, e.g. 24,000 mi, it needs to be orbiting at a slower rate than the earth turns, to stay in orbit. If you make it rotate faster to match the earth's rotation, you can use a cable to 'hold it down' and keep it at that position. The tension on the cable can then be used to advantage, since you can winch things up the cable, which is far, far more efficient than rocket power. So, the 'structure' is just a cable attached to a large foundation on the earth and a weight at the far end.
That part of the idea is straightforward; the problem is the cable. You need to make a cable about 24,000 mi long which can hold its own weight, in addition to whatever load is on it, which isn't easy. Most of the cable is just hanging from the cable above; only the upper part is contributing 'lift' due to the rotation. Then you have to figure out how it's to actually built. Also, it has be anchored exactly at the equator; that leaves a relatively small choice of land locations and you need to find one which is both geologically and politically stable. And @mike, the 'cable' could be a tube (it could be a ring of cables joined to form a tube) and it would make no difference if you are inside the tube or not . Aerodynamic effects would be different – but the whole point of this is that you don't need to go fast, unlike for rocket power; you can take your time. A 'too slow' rocket will actually burn more energy, or fail to get to orbit at all; whereas in this case you can go as slow as you like, and even take breaks to admire the view, since you are working against a fixed structure.