←back to thread

Space Elevator

(neal.fun)
1773 points kaonwarb | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
tempestn ◴[] No.45640679[source]
TIL it's estimated that over 48 tons of meteors hit the atmosphere every day.

Regarding actual space elevators though, while they're not sci-fi to the extent of something like FTL travel - ie. they're technically not physically impossible - they're still pretty firmly in the realm of sci-fi. We don't have anything close to a cable that could sustain its own weight, let alone that of whatever is being elevated. Plus, how do you stabilize the cable and lifter in the atmosphere?

A space elevator on the moon is much more feasible: less gravity, slow rotation, no atmosphere, less dangerous debris. But it's also much less useful.

replies(10): >>45641098 #>>45641279 #>>45641321 #>>45641436 #>>45641636 #>>45641725 #>>45642489 #>>45644099 #>>45644600 #>>45647734 #
Yizahi ◴[] No.45641279[source]
The problem with space elevator is not only the lack of material today, but also the fact that such elevator is an ultimate and very fragile weapons platform, you basically get stones up the well and then drop them on the enemy. Meaning that any authoritarian country would destroy it even before it is ever built. And sturdy enough space elevator after it's break at any high point would start falling down on the planes in a loop, eventually flattening everything in its path when higher portions reach supersonic speeds. So unfortunately there is low chance it will be built, unless we sort out stuff on the planet first.
replies(1): >>45641357 #
pbmonster ◴[] No.45641357[source]
I don't see it. Why worry about a weaponized space elevator when stealth bombers, cruise missiles and ICBMs exist?

If the power building the space elevator wants to bomb you, you're going to get bombed.

replies(3): >>45641613 #>>45642059 #>>45642733 #
tsimionescu ◴[] No.45641613[source]
The bigger problem I think is the elevator itself. Cutting it and letting it fall would be far more destructive than any weapon ever fired or even conceived.
replies(1): >>45641919 #
pbmonster ◴[] No.45641919[source]
Probably no easy task.

Snipping off just the first few kilometers is not catastrophically destructive yet, and cutting it down further up would require multistage rocket designs, sophisticated steering/targeting and potentially significant yield (you'd need to cut unobtainium, after all...). If you can build a space elevator, you can defend against those.

You better thoroughly inspect what cargo you put on the elevator itself, of course.

replies(4): >>45642342 #>>45642743 #>>45642830 #>>45652705 #
Yizahi ◴[] No.45642743{4}[source]
One nuke will kill any realistic sci-fi material. And guidance for those is a cheap and tested.
replies(2): >>45643202 #>>45646359 #
1. pbmonster ◴[] No.45643202{5}[source]
Yeah, but then we're discussing opponents with nuclear arsenals and ICBM programs. Those opponents are generally reluctant to nuke stuff, or commit acts of war similar to nuking stuff.

But yes, a space elevator would be difficult to defend in World War III.