←back to thread

Space Elevator

(neal.fun)
1773 points kaonwarb | 1 comments | 20 Oct 25 04:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
isgb ◴[20 Oct 25 12:46 UTC] No.45643283[source]▶
> Space elevators are actually a possible idea being considered by scientists. > The hard part is making a strong enough cable. And finding enough elevator music...

Most engineers would bring up a lot more issues than just finding a strong cable. Also, most attempts with e.g. carbon nanotubes have been abandoned ages ago https://www.newscientist.com/article/2093356-carbon-nanotube....

- We don't have a good ascent mechanism other than rockets - and then we might just use rockets without building an elevator. - We don't have a good (and safe) descent mechanism. - Maintenance? Protection from space debris? Protection from oscillations? Ground-protection if the elevator collapses?

This is dyson-sphere level of fiction. We can do back-of-the-napkin calcualtions on how things would work, but the practicalities make it completely impossible or impractical.

replies(10): >>45643401 #>>45643468 #>>45643478 #>>45643508 #>>45643735 #>>45644414 #>>45644701 #>>45644865 #>>45644889 #>>45645166 #
seanc ◴[20 Oct 25 13:12 UTC] No.45643508[source]▶
Kim Stanley Robinson's description of a Martian space elevator falling and wrapping twice around the entire planet convinced me that they aren't a good idea.

https://www.kimstanleyrobinson.info/content/clarke

replies(3): >>45643883 #>>45644969 #>>45645609 #
enraged_camel ◴[20 Oct 25 13:47 UTC] No.45643883[source]▶
A version of this also happens in the first season of Foundation, the Apple TV series based on Asimov's novels.
replies(2): >>45644219 #>>45644502 #
joenot443 ◴[20 Oct 25 14:21 UTC] No.45644219{3}[source]▶
Would you recommend that show to the HN crowd? The books are super well liked around here, for good reason.

Apple's put out a staggering amount of content the last few years, I wasn't even aware this one debuted!

replies(8): >>45644545 #>>45644561 #>>45644573 #>>45644621 #>>45644781 #>>45644791 #>>45644794 #>>45644975 #
1. Frotag ◴[20 Oct 25 14:47 UTC] No.45644545{4}[source]▶
It's pretty and scratches that scifi itch. I've only read a little of the books but it's supposedly an entirely different story that coincidentally shares character names.

In terms of hardness, it probably on par with Expanse, so mostly technobabble with the magical tech only used when it's convenient for the plot. The abuse of "psychohistory" is particularly egregious. There's so many scenes where it's visualized a hologram of scribbles and they zoom in on more squiggles while divining the future.

But again it's pretty, so if you're okay with drama in space, it's maybe a 8/10.