The New Structural Gate To Space

For discussion of structural innovations ranging from 3D Honeycomb to genomic and self-generating formal systems. All welcome.

Postby Atalla Wanderer » Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:45 pm

What would happen if you palced it at the bottom of the world? Antarctica? How would that simply change everything? Antarctica is a no-man's land. No country would allow another country to get this placed in a country. Everybody in the world will be equally happy and unhappy with the prospect. It would be approved.
It's not pretty, but nothing's ever perfect. And this transcends any kind of mere business or art. This is world-changing.
Atalla Wanderer
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:19 pm

Postby justellus » Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:41 am

It is interesting to see the ideas and implications also of these.

Building it in Antarctica, Atalla, suggests it will be made all of ice, as sand and dirt would not be as readily available. And then the extreme temperatures would be faced from ground zero. Then there are the technical logistic barriers of getting this amount of materials to such a remote location.....

One country alone may not be able to get it placed? There are some very rich and with the will-power to be number one, such as Dubai for example. The global approach of cooperation seems best.

It will be beautiful also, and needs not carry of image of being otherwise.

Truly it transcends any business or art and is world-changing as stated.

As it is such a big operation, it takes years of planning but at the right moment can be erected very quickly, as can be seen from the description of the construction technology.

It will be interesting to see as positive suggestions such as these develop on this subject matter.

Can one think of other possible locations other then a desert with such an abundance of the raw materials needed?
justellus
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:37 pm
Location: World Wide

Postby Atalla Wanderer » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:11 pm

No, I am not suggesting it will be made of ice. Import whatever materials you need. The budget is already astronomical. And no matter what, there will always be technical logistical barriers.
The global appraoch of cooperation has never worked before, and with a weapon this powerful, it won't work this time around either. Hand this type of power to any one country and either that country won't stand or the elevator won't.
It will be beautiful, certainly, but it will also be extremely powerful - useful for military, space, and economical operations. Who knows how it can be applied. Despite it's beauty, it's the most powerful politcal and economical, and possibly military, design created. Put it somewhere everybody and nobody controls, or don't build it at all.

Business is business.
Atalla Wanderer
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:19 pm

Postby justellus » Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:27 pm

There are international agreements and restrictions on the use of Antarctica, so don't know whether a project like this would pass. Certainly military operations are prohibited, and those of scientific endeavor are encouraged. To have a large mega-structure for habitation and shopping centers, thus, huge cities in Antarctica would not pass either. And areas of Antarctica are being disputed also by different countries, so it is not entirely a no man's land. Several countries have laid claims to different areas and some may even overlap, apparently. To claim such a huge area would certainly bring hostilities and opposition.

And, as can be seen, the structure relies on large quantities of dirt and sand, not readily available in Antarctica, as it would be buried beneath kilometers of ice. So not an ideal location in this regards. Now, on the fun side, as a supposition - if the entire structure were made of ice, with sections of the interior core of concrete and other materials, with proper insulation and shielding from the ice sections, it could work also. The ice could serve as the basic structural core and would allow a large structure to be erected quickly, as the water is placed and ice freezes...so is an idea perhaps also worth consideration, but for another application and not on this project. A new project can be initiated, to construct a large scientific base using this technology and this idea being explored here.
justellus
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:37 pm
Location: World Wide

Postby Atalla Wanderer » Sun Mar 08, 2009 6:58 pm

If you ignore the entire Antarctic Treaty and decide to build there, what would be the effects of have a space elevator reach out to space from the bottom of the planet as opposed to the equator? What are the astrophysics involved? How will it be effected by the spin of the earth and so forth? and what would be difference as opposed to somewhere along the equator (relatively)?
Atalla Wanderer
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:19 pm

Postby justellus » Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:19 pm

A space elevator of the type proposed would function best if located optimally, so that all points of the suggested upper ring were to cross major countries and populated areas, so as to provide the most benefit of access. However, the ring could be minimized in size and diameter at the South pole, if we consider a small ring encompassing a small area of a few miles, thus simplifying the construction. This would effectively result in a much smaller budget, to reach the first stages of economical space access. It could be held in space using the same method proposed, but a counter-weight cable connected to the earth would need to be inserted, to tie in the structure to the ground, to act against the centrifugal force of the rotating objects connected to the ring, which would suspend it in space. A ring circling the entire earth would not need this earth connection, as the counter weights provided by the moving orbiting bodies would hold it up against the weight of gravity. So this smaller ring could be connected to support the counter-wights by 140 Km cables to the earth, using the same carbon nano-tubes being proposed for "Liftport" and Nasa's project as well. This small ring could eventually be connected to a space ring that could be lighter in size and supported in space by the same counter weight method. Such smaller rings could be inserted in multiple earth positions as well, at various points along the length of the upper longer lighter weight ring. The location would not be optimal however, as if placed at or near the Northern hemisphere, it could connect up major countries such as the US and Europe with China and the Eastern countries. If the ring runs North/South, it would provide a connection between the Americas and Asia, but would miss Europe. But the ease of construction and speed of implementing the project in much less time would most likely out-weigh the benefits of Northern located ring and gateway.

In effect, we have a much lighter, more effective project as a fraction of the cost of the original proposal.

And as mentioned, constructing the entire project as a laboratory would get it past the regulatory impediments. Yet the pyramid project would not reach such heights, due to the structural limitation of using materials which would crush in on themselves under intense weight. It would be interesting to see however how much weight ice can hold before crushing in on itself under it's own weight. Earth and sand, on the other hand, can hold much larger compressive weight most likely, before succumbing to their own weight. If a large pyramid is made of sand and earth, it could reach 140 km, as it has nothing to collapse into but itself, so there is no way it could just collapse. If built of ice, the pressure on the ice could cause it to crack and crumble and implode in on itself under such extreme weight. A tower, for example, could not reach such a height under traditional building methods, as there is no known material that can withstand such enormous compressive weight, except maybe diamond, and even then... and this would be impossible as well, due to quantity of materials and cost... so the original proposal still seems best, and this is why the desert location was chosen.

Certainly the South pole is the coldest and thus less subject to as much melting of ice, so would in a sense be more secure, if the laboratory is built of ice. It would not face as much the threat of the ice melting.

The pyramid would be much smaller, and one would have to rely on the gateway to reaching the ring, rather then the combination gateway/pyramid, as proposed. So this is somewhat of a dis-advantage. Unless the pyramid is in one location parallel and below the ring, and the gateway is placed on the South pole, directly above the laboratory and smaller pyramid, and also at other global positions below the ring.

I can't see how one could just ignore the Antarctic treaties and launch this with any other use then as a laboratory. With global support, the use could be expanded however.
justellus
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:37 pm
Location: World Wide

For all the science and technology minded Architects

Postby justellus » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:49 pm

For those who find threads in science and technology interesting, a few threads below are related as well to this thread:

Global Innovation & Architecture - The Pyramid

http://fireside.DesignCommunity.com/topic-19088.html

This is a fascinating topic as well:

The Mysteries of the Cosmos - A Journey of Discovery

http://fireside.DesignCommunity.com/topic-24490.html

I have posted some ideas and research on this page as well:

The Mysteries of Ancient Civilizations

http://fireside.DesignCommunity.com/topic-24545.html

Here is another related topic, with sparse additions from time to time, related to these same scientific ideas and their relationship to the cosmos:

The Mysteries of the Cosmos - A Journey of Discovery

http://fireside.DesignCommunity.com/topic-24490.html

And here is a topic on science, with many ideas I have been presenting which could benefit these projects as well:

Discussions on Science, Creationism, Evolution - with my latest scientific theories towards the end of this topic

(One can see this topic generated much controversy. My general theory related to the 2D planar and my latest new scientific ideas are presented towards the end of this topic.)

http://fireside.DesignCommunity.com/top ... c-765.html

From all these pages much can be added to this discussion and much to ponder regarding our past history and technology and how it impacts the present and future technologies we develop.
justellus
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:37 pm
Location: World Wide

Postby WalkerARCHITECTS » Fri Feb 05, 2010 8:47 pm

I do not understand this.
WalkerARCHITECTS
 
Posts: 808
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 3:12 am
Location: BRIER WASHINGTON

Previous

Return to New Structure Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron

User Control Panel

Login

Who is online

In this forum zone there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 508 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:21 am

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
DesignCommunity   ·   ArchitectureWeek   ·   Great Buildings   ·   Archiplanet   ·   Books   ·   Blogs   ·   Search
Special thanks to our sustaining subscribers Building Design UK, Building Design News UK, and Building Design Tenders UK.