Space Elevator Prizes Proposed 214
colonist writes "Space elevator proponents are planning competitions for space elevator technologies, similar to the Ansari X Prize. Elevator:2010 will organize annual competitions for climbers, ribbons and power-beaming systems. In other space elevator news, researcher Bradley C. Edwards recently left the Institute for Scientific Research to work at two companies on materials and technology. Also, the space elevator has caught the interest of Google's founders: 'At a space camp in Alabama last year, Brin talked about creating a space elevator to transport cargo up a special tether attached to earth. Also last year, Brin joined Page in proclaiming they should found a nanotech lab at Google.'"
Lab? Isn't that a forum? (Score:5, Interesting)
No link to pursue, but one feels that if it's at Google that would be more like a discussion forum than a lab. Unless, of course, they are proposing that Google starts funding a research center. If they follow, for instance, IBM's and ATT's footsteps, that would be a Great Thing(TM).
Has Google jumped the shark? (Score:5, Interesting)
The real test if Google is any different from any other flash-in-the-pan will be when they hit some real adversity. Until then, they're just the latest Lycos/Altavista/Inktomi fair-haired boy to make a splash with VC funding and a slightly better idea. The truth is, no search engine has substantially improved once it's been deployed on a large scale. If no one's passed Google on quality, it's mainly because they were the last to get funded before the crash.
Flame away
Re:Has Google jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Has Google jumped the shark? (Score:2)
Just a minor point but don't forget about Johns Hopkins [jhu.edu] or Duke [duke.edu] to name a few universities founded by rich men.
Re:Has Google jumped the shark? (Score:2)
Re:Has Google jumped the shark? (Score:2)
Re:Lab? Isn't that a forum? (Score:4, Insightful)
[sarcasm] Today, General Motors announced they were launching a chain of fast-food resturaunts called "MotorEaters" and Coca-Cola began construction on a new factory to produce cruise missiles for the US military. [ /sarcasm ]
Whatever happened to sticking to what you do best? Perhaps all that IPO money is going to fund an attempt to make Google into a frankenstein conglomerate of all the founders' whims.
They will learn to seperate "Google" (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They will learn to seperate "Google" (Score:3, Informative)
His investment company is called Cascade Investment LLC, and needless to say, he's all over the place.
Some other investments of his (or at least of cascade investment):
ICOS Corporation
Teledesic
Corixa
Seattle Genetics
Pain Therapeutics
Alaska Air
Boca Resorts
Liberty Satelite and Technology
Canadian National Railway
Otter Tail Power
Schnitzer Steel Industries
Avista Corp
Cox Communications
Newport News
Like I said, he's all over the place, s
Re:Lab? Isn't that a forum? (Score:2)
Think about it this way; they will never spend huge amounts of cash on the search agent - it's not a job that throwing gobs of money at will help all that much. So, if they're going to have billions burning a hole in their pocket, why not let it serve the greater good?
Welcome to planet google (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Welcome to planet google (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Welcome to planet google (Score:2)
I say we take off and nukethe site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Mal-2
Haha! (Score:5, Funny)
Google Should fund it (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:2)
And a few hundred dollars to buy a small bomb to bring it all down, miles upon miles of it crashing to the earth. The space elevator is a cool idea but not in this hate-filled world. Too dangerous.
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:3, Interesting)
Moron! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Moron! (Score:2)
You don't have the first clue how it all works, do you?
In many ways, I think that your answer makes the gp's point. s?he makes that point that security will be an issue. The faq, that you point to, says as well. In this day and age of 911 and GWB's generation of 1000 of new recruits for Al Qaeda, security will be an issue.
Now, that does not mean that we should not build it, but security is an issue for anything from the USA.
Security yes, crashing down and damaging stuff no (Score:2)
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:4, Insightful)
You have to be kidding me. The above is from your site and is absolutely rediculous. Yet at the same time as arguing that black holes don't exist, you make the extraordinary claim that the bible contains the blueprints to an AI system?
You sir need to get a new tinfoil hat. I believe the old lead one you're using has leaked into your brain.
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:2)
A bomb higher up will cause quite a lot of the elevator to come down, if you can find a way to get your bomb to geostationary orbit and explode it close enough to cut the really very strong cable. However: (a) it comes down really slowly, over the best part of a day and (b) atmospheric resistance will, depend
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have a viable design for a space elevator, you can have your own IPO and raise plenty of cash. That's why there's no real need for artificial prizes. The revenue generated by the thing would be the real prize.
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:2)
It's raising the several billion dollars when any revenue is 10-15 years off that's proving to be the problem.
p
Re:Google Should fund it (Score:2)
It's highly unlikely that anyone will be able to build such a thing without the blessing of a major world power for the following reasons:
This is one thing I'd like to see before I die. (Score:3, Interesting)
If we can get that far without destroying the hope of future generations I think mankind might have a chance to be more successful than the dinosaurs were.
Re:This is one thing I'd like to see before I die. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:This is one thing I'd like to see before I die. (Score:2)
Re:This is one thing I'd like to see before I die. (Score:2)
How exactly do you define true artificial intelligence, and, assuming it's
possible, would it be useful?
Re:This is one thing I'd like to see before I die. (Score:2, Funny)
HALFWAY?
SO OPTIMISTIC.
SEE YOU NEXT THURSDAY.
Signed:
DEATH
She'll probably be quite willing to do that... (Score:2)
Google Space Elevator? (Score:4, Funny)
I heard people complaining about how Google's a one-trick pony, but that kind of diversifying probably isn't what they're talking about.
Re:Google Space Elevator? (Score:2)
Thou Shalt Not (Score:2)
Re:Thou Shalt Not (Score:2)
TNG DOS TNG
Which is obviously a double-reference to Star Trek, as well as MS-DOS. I don't get the correlation though...
More importantly... (Score:3, Funny)
I suggest some calming Thievery Corporation or maybe Air might be more appropriate.
Re:More importantly... (Score:2)
Re:More importantly... (Score:2)
Rename "Clarke orbit"? (Score:3, Interesting)
Cool...but (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Cool...but (Score:3, Interesting)
All I'm saying is, I can hardly imagine some nut getting close enough to do damage (or climb
Re:Cool...but (Score:3, Interesting)
murdering nutjob from find some way. So perhaps no tourism. Damn!
You're probably right -- the world's only space elevator would be too valuable to let the general public near. Fortunately one thing our first space elevator would be really good at is lifting into orbit materials for the second space elevator. Once there are a few dozen space elevators in place, it would be less catastrophic if one or two of them were
Re:Cool...but (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Cool...but (Score:5, Insightful)
If your attitude is that of the rest of the U.S. Your status as world leader ended on September 11th.
Do people stop going to Spain on holiday cause of ETA? Did people avoid British cities, train stations, and Norther n Ireland, while the IRA were busy murdering people? Do you avoid driving as you might die (afterall, more americans died in 2001 from car accidents then terrorism)?
Re:Cool...but (Score:2)
Thank goodness. It was really starting to annoy me having to be in charge of the world like that.
Actually, this whole "threat level orange" silliness is just the way our lizard overlords keep us too worked up to realize that we are ruled by lizards. The only terror Sept. 11th brought into my life was terror that my own government would reinstitute the Dark Ages as a matter of law.
The U.S. isn't a hype
Re:Cool...but (Score:2)
Re:Cool...but (Score:2)
That but implies its a good idea on paper, but the problem is someone will try to blow it up.
Re:Cool...but (Score:2)
Rotovator(tm) (Score:5, Interesting)
Hans Moravec's Rotovator(tm) [google.com] picks up hypersonic (near mach 12) payloads from an altitude of 100km and slings them to orbit.
Current proposals for implementation of the Moravec's design [tethers.com] rely on a hypersonic air-breather of advanced aerodynamic design like the Boeing DF-9 (that exists only on paper).
Is there anything likely come along in the near future that could take paylods to 100km and mach 12?
Probably the same thing that is driving the bureaucrats to make all this noise about space elevators now:
A key to the Rotovator(tm) is getting hub mass in place to keep it out of the atmosphere while it picks up mass from 100km@mach12 -- but that mass can be any old space junk (what is the dry weight of the International Space Station?) -- at least at the hub where it counts the most for high strength materials like carbon nanotubes. However, you can do a Rotovator(tm) with off-the-shelf commercially available fibers and still have a factor of 2.
Nice thing about Rotovators(tm) is that they can be built with much lower capitaliztion over a much shorter period of time using existing commercial materials. All you need is a bunch of mass orbiting near earth, some quite-doable tethers, and sufficient manuverability and speed in the atmospheric leg to hook up with the tether as it reaches the nadir.
Modest prize awards toward early milestones of a space elevator could end up enabling the Rotovator(tm) as well.
Re:Rotovator(tm) (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Rotovator(tm) (Score:2)
The atmosphere at 100km is very thin, so there won't be nearly as much drag. In fact, the 100km boundary is called the "karman line". It's considered the boundary between air and space, because anything past that limit will not experience very much drag at all. So they would have to beef up the end of the tether, but no
Don't know if this would be such a good idea... (Score:4, Funny)
Imagine going upwards for alot of miles ; in the meantime having to listen to Julio Iglesias' songs, performed by some guy on a synthesizer. NOOOOOO !
google should rename themselves (Score:3, Funny)
Google Nanotech (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Google Nanotech (Score:2)
Tell you what... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Tell you what... (Score:2)
Re:we're almost there... (Score:2)
Usual Elevator slashdot posts (Score:2, Insightful)
1) What musak should be playing in the elevator. This is the height of modern humour people, make as many jokes as possible.
2) Fear of terrorist attacks, despite the obvious difficulty of trying to snap a super-strong cable. And since when did Terrorists attack where they were expected?
3) Fear of accident, 'what if the thing fell to Earth?!!?!! it would slice through everything!!!". As if the brilliant scientists who are developing the elevat
Re:Usual Elevator slashdot posts (Score:2)
Guess you weren't among the millions of people who saw a plane attack on the world trade center months before 9/11 -- on The Lone Gunmen pilot episode! You can review the weird prescience of this show here. [plaguepuppy.net]
The truth about Google (Score:3, Funny)
Who's your Daddy now?
But... don't tell me... (Score:3, Funny)
Mods: please don't get too highly strung, go ballistic or hit the roof over this.
Re:But... don't tell me... (Score:2)
LOL
Yeah, these guys seem like space cases at times
But more seriously, until they get some serious funding this is all pretty thin. I suspect they have a long ways to go.
I hope not!
SB
Excuse me, but WTF?? (Score:2)
Talk about a huge leap of focus here...
why doesn't Yahoo! start getting into genetic engineering now?
Floor 11,947 - Lingerie, Housewares. (Score:3, Funny)
A bit premature? (Score:5, Insightful)
A "space elevator", on the other hand, is totally unlike anything ever done before. As I read in a Slashdot post some years ago (referring to nanotubes, the favorite among space-elevator aficionados), "When somebody has built a 40,000 millimeter bridge across a creek on campus, then we can start to talk about a 40,000 kilometer bridge straight up".
The fact that we have not yet achieved one millionth of the task (and in fact fall several orders of magnitude for that) suggests to me that, much as I would love to see a space elevator in place, the job today belongs to materials scientists who are looking at shorter-term goals.
An eye to the future is great, but experimenting on climbers is like practicing the high jump: if you're jumping twice as high today as last year, I wouldn't start drawing any exponential curves. The ribbon is the really, really hard part, and we're currently so far away from it that research energy is better spent elsewhere for a while. 2010 is way, way too close.
Maybe with enough motivation we could get that 40,000 mm bridge by 2010, but somehow I doubt you're going to raise $10 million to build a bridge. The X-prize shot somebody into space for that kind of money.
I'm prepared to be wrong. I'm a software developer, and I've learned that as a consultant I can say, "Your project is doomed" with 95% accuracy before I've even heard your name. Being a nay-sayer is easy. But the real trick is being able to spot the 5% that will actually be profitable, and there are a lot of projects more immediately deserving of this kind of money.
Re:A bit premature? (Score:2)
You say "your project is doomed" to anyone with a project? :)
It's just a long, strong cable. (Score:2)
Re:A bit premature? (Score:2)
The two pursuits are not comparable. The elevator is not like a bridge. A bridge distributes force to the loading points, the space elevator relies almost entirely on tensile strength. They're not even similar structures!
busted cables? (Score:3, Informative)
for example, say i wanted to lift a 100kg man up to 380 km (ISS height). This would put a force of 1000N(the man) + 380km *area * density (of cable).area of say 30 cm^2 gives a force of 1000 +1140* density. failure is usually measured in stress (force per area) soooo lets see.....
with
material/stress/density steel 250Mpa 7850 kg/m^3 nanotubes 63GPa 3520kg/m^3 calculated stress steel = 2.9Gpa calculated nanotubes = 1.3 GPa
SO nanotubes may handle the stress, but noone can make 380 km of nanotube rope yet. Even that much kevlar would be tough. and this is without incorporating the added stress of accelerating the man (starting his trip up the rope).
In short, new materials are needed!
Sergey Brin related to David Brin? (Score:2)
Remember, you are special, just like everyone else.
Re:Sergey Brin related to David Brin? (Score:2)
Babysteps (Score:3, Interesting)
A space elevator would be an insanely profitable project, one that has tremendous implications for things like power generation, communications, space exploration, tourism, and precision manufacturing.
No doubt about any of those things.
But, before we go building a space elevator, wouldn't it be a good idea to give it a few thorough evaluations here dirtside?
There are countless questions that people are going to want to ask - is it strong enough? What if it breaks? Are C-tubes durable enough? Will it conduct electricity and "short out" the ionosphere? What about storms? What about terrorists? Do C-tubes wear out?
The first, best use of C-tubes would be a good bridge. If you had a suspension bridge built with pencil-thick C-tubes, people would get used to the idea that something to small would be so strong.
I figure the best place would be to build a suspension bridge over the straight of Gibraltar. Can you imagine how beautiful and spider-web like such a bridge would/could be?
That would provide major economic boon to North Africa, provide cheap tourism for Europeans, and provide an excellent proof of the viability of C-tubes as a building tool all in one.
The next step for what we call "civilization." (Score:2)
Or else we're finished would have to be some kind of a geostationary site that collects energy from the sun directly.
The reason why I surmise this is based on a few reflections I made about modern society and what we're doing. Here are a few starting points (certainly not the defining factors of what makes our present society tick):
These fossil fuels are not replaceable and the current "replacements" for these fuels cannot
Re:The next step for what we call "civilization." (Score:2)
Anonymous Coward writes: our society is dependent of fossil fuels, but we won't be running out anytime soon.
The reason why I wrote what I wrote is because I am looking forward to the next 1,000 years. Our civilization has records (many incomplete) that date, more or less. back to 5,000 years ago and one can see, over time, a continuous improvement in the technology we use to hold our societies together with a few "dark ages" causing a hiatus in further development in certain areas.
I have never come acro
Cool, man (Score:2)
Re:Cool, man (Score:2)
Re:As I understand it... (Score:4, Informative)
An artificial satellite in geostationary orbit, that is at an altitude (close to 36000km) where the orbital velocitiy is the same as Earth's rotation.
don't we then have to worry about the strength of the tethers
Yes, that's the main problem.
ultimately the consequences of altering Earth's rotation?
No, since the satellite would be rotating at exactly the same speed as the Earth.
Re:As I understand it... (Score:2)
Re:As I understand it... (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, it does have to be higher... since by definition it will be orbiting at the speed of rotation of the earth, anything lower than geostationary orbit is going too slowly and will tend to fall back; anything higher is going too quickly and will tend to move away from the earth.
The idea is to have enough mass higher than geostationary orbit that this pull supports the rest of the structure.
Re:As I understand it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, and don't forget the mass of the cargo. It's an interesting situation, because it's dynamic. The mass of the cargo being raised or sent down will change from day to day, and the altitude of the satellite must be adjusted accordingly. However, to change the altitude isn't that simple. You must make it go faster, so it will start overtaking the Earth, moving east, before it starts rising. There will be ripples in the tether as a consequence, and the cargo pods will follow.
Also, the cargo will come from someplace and be sent somewhere. What about the launch system at the satellite, to send cargo pods to other orbits and receive them? An electromagnetic rail launcher seems right, but it will add and subtract momentum from the satellite.
How about creating a simulator for that? http://spaceelevator.sourceforge.net, anyone?
Re:As I understand it... (Score:2)
Re:As I understand it... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:As I understand it... (Score:2, Funny)
Think of the potential rewards... A goose that can lay golden eggs. That's gotta be worth something. Of course the giants may be a problem, but I'm sure we could take it. We've needed a use for our tactical nukes anyway.
I'm not so sure (Score:5, Informative)
They do have the material, carbon nano tubes. They just can't be made to the length needed, yet. They have ideas on how to avoid the space junk.
Re:I'm not so sure (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I'm not so sure (Score:2)
Re:I'm not so sure (Score:5, Interesting)
I wouldn't suggest that reducing the total cost to low earth orbit is a bad idea --it's a great idea, that needs to be considered very carefully. I don't think raising a valid criticism or reasonable doubt constitutes jumping to conclusions either.
I was stationed at NORAD in the early eighties and junk in low earth orbit was a major concern as the shuttle program transitioned from idea to reality. I expect the problem is much worse now. I think "cloud" is a more apt description of the debris field. Yes, stuff re-enters the atmosphere all day every day, so I guess you could say it's a self healing process, but it's a long process.
The trouble with ideas is that they cost taxpayer dollars even if it turns out to be a bust.
I don't think most people have any idea what it would take to successfully swing a cable through maybe 20,000 objects at various altitudes, all travelling at 17,000 MPH or so, all day every day without hitting anything.
There's a long ugly road between this idea and reality.
Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if NASA didn't fund the programs. It would be O.K. with me if someone with an idea wanted to fund the research themselves or recruit funding from corporate types.
MADMEN is a similar boondoggle. But, don't take my word for it, ask Duncan Steele, PhD. In 1995 Steele published a book called "Rogue Asteroids and Doomsday Comets" addressing this particular option (throwing material off an dangerous asteroid using a mass driver). Thomas Ahrens and Alan Harris at the California Institute of Technology looked at this very system (page 229). They dismissed it in 1992 because the ejection requirement was "...many thousands of tons..." over a lot of years. What did they come up with in answer to that? A "fleet" of mass drivers throwing stuff off. MADMEN indeed.
Re:I'm not so sure (Score:2, Informative)
Orbital velocity is 17,551mph minimum for low earth orbit. That's Los Angeles to New York in a little more than 9 minutes and it gets you 16 orbits in a day --that's crossing the Equator on an ascending and descending node (that's where the cable would be) on every orbit.
And you're right, relative velocities are the bigger problem, and not all of them are moving at the same speed.
For small objects in near circular orbit it's bad enough, but not all objects are in near circular orbits. Some are in highly
Re:I'm not so sure (Score:2)
Re:sigh - not this again (Score:2, Insightful)
Right, and what were these alleged theories? Are you even remotely capable of pointing out one that has even the slightest shred of credibility?
>Apart from the cost (several hundred billion)
That is easily on par with the cost of several recent US-led conflicts in the world. Just the latest increase (not the total, just the increase) in the US defence budget is higher than 100 billion USD. The money is the
Re:sigh - not this again (Score:2, Informative)
I've always thought that the main problem with this sort of thing would be the immense electrical charge difference in the various levels of the atmosphere
Hrm... yes... very large potential difference across a conductor, sounds like a possible method of power(assist)ing this thing? IANAP though, I'm sure one can point out why this wouldn't work.
Re:Forget space elevators... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:kim stanley robinson (Score:2)
Re:kim stanley robinson (Score:2)
* Don't reveal plot points like "the space elevator gets destroyed!" It's the climax of the first book.
* Try to write in sentences. Your stream-of-consciousness babbling is hard to read.
* A LOT is two words. A--LOT.
I've read Red Mars and I didn't think much of it. None of the characters seemed very interesting and the sci fi seemed very unrealistic, particularly the terraforming.
Re:kim stanley robinson (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry if this is unusually harsh, but I'm sick to death of this reply. Whenever anybody brings up the plans to build a space elevator, some bozo says that it's a bad idea because of something that happened in that series. I like to think that most people can te
Re:Big Generator???? (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, you fly a satellite which is a conducting tether with some great big batteries in the hubs. Run the tether through a strong magnetic field like that around Jupiter and you get instant power.
Of course, you also get drag since the energy is coming from the motion of the satellite through the magnetic field, so you lower your orbit. Later, run a current through the wire at the correct time using the stored
Re:Big Generator???? (Score:2)
Re: Satellite with tethers generating energy and later using energy to "lift" an orbit up.
There was a SF short about this I remember. Where basically there was a space station that had funding problems for orbital fuel, and solved it in this manner.
Forget the name and author of the peice. Anyone remember?
Re:Big Generator???? (Score:2, Insightful)
Earth spins, while a lump of rock infinitely bigger than any space-elevator orbits around it, conveniently dragging the entire mass of 7 earth-bound oceans behind it causing them to move in a regular, predictable manner, right next to large empty bits of land, and in the same country (not to mention the same planet) as the places whe