A cheap way to the stars?

This sounds straight out of a science fiction novel… infact it is. Sounds slightly unrealistic. But NASA seems to be putting “several million dollars” into this concept. The research into the special fibers remains to be completed so definitely not something any of us will get to see in our lifetimes, i think.

The cheap way to the stars - by escalator, David Adam
The Guardian, 13 September 2003

If climbing a stairway to heaven sounds like too much hard work, then a conference of 70 scientists and engineers opening in Santa Fe today may offer hope of a more leisurely way into space.

In two days of discussions, the scientists aim to turn into a reality an ambition that has been around for at least a century: the creation of a space elevator that would deliver satellites, spacecraft and even people thousands of kilometres into space along a vertical track.

Engineers say that recent advances in materials science - particularly in the development of carbon nanotubes - mean that such a system, which first gained widespread attention when the science fiction writer Arthur C Clarke described it in his 1979 novel Fountains of Paradise, is no longer pure science fiction.

Mr Clarke - who once said a space elevator would only be built “about 50 years after everyone stops laughing” - was due to address the scientists at the Santa Fe conference today by satellite link from his home in Sri Lanka.

The American space agency Nasa is no longer laughing. It is putting several million dollars into the project under its advanced concepts programme.

At the heart of a space elevator would be a cable reaching up as far as 100,000km from the surface of the Earth. The earthbound end would be tethered to a base station, probably somewhere in the middle of the Pacific ocean. The other end would be attached to an orbiting object in space acting as a counterweight, the momentum of which would keep the cable taut and allow vehicles to climb up and down it.

A space elevator would make rockets redundant by granting cheaper access to space. At about a third of the way along the cable - 36,000km from Earth - objects take a year to complete a full orbit. If the cable’s centre of gravity remained at this height, the cable would remain vertical, as satellites placed at this height are geostationary, effectively hovering over the same spot on the ground.

To build a space elevator such a geostationary satellite would be placed into orbit carrying the coiled-up cable. One weighted end of the cable would then be dropped back towards Earth, while the other would be unreeled off into space. Mechanical lifters could then climb up the cable from the ground, ferrying up satellites, space probes and eventually tourists.

The biggest technical obstacle is finding a material strong but light enough to make the cable; this is where the carbon nanotubes come in. These are microscopically thin tubes of carbon that are as strong as diamonds but flexible enough to turn into fibre. In theory, a nanotube ribbon about one metre wide and as thin as paper could support a space elevator.

No scientist has yet succeeded in making such a fibre, but Rodney Andrews, a carbon nanotube expert from the University of Kentucky will tell the conference: “Until some of the basic science concerning how to connect nanotubes together and transfer load between them in a composite is understood it will remain elusive, but a lot of progress is being made.”

Brad Edwards, a space scientist who has been developing the space elevator concept for several years, said there was still a lot of scepticism to overcome. “Initially, people look at me like they’re trying to work out whether or not I’m pulling their leg,” he said.

Dr Edwards says the original satellite used to send up the cable should provide enough tension in the cable for the first vehicles to climb into space, each of which would then be added in turn to the counterweight. These lifters would clamp caterpillar tracks to either side of the cable and would be powered by converting laser light beamed up from the ground into electricity.

“None of it is really extravagant,” said Dr Edwards, who estimates it would take about $7bn (£4.4bn) to turn the concept into reality. He hopes to have a final elevator design hammered out by next year.

He said the floating base platform would be placed hundreds of miles from aircraft routes and shipping lanes and would be in a region of the sea where storms, lightning and high waves are rare.

The biggest hazard could be space junk, but Dr Edwards said the floating platform would be moved around to steer the cable out of the way. He says it would slash the price of access to space 400-fold, and could allow cheaper, faster travel to other planets.

One unlikely problem could be capturing the public’s imagination. “When we actually start launching this it’s going to be kind of boring,” Dr Edwards said. “There’s no smoke, there’s no pillars of fire and there’s no loud rumbling noises. There’s just this thing that slowly ascends the ribbon into space.”

hehe cool :smiley:

waisay i’ve always wondered…what’s the craze for going to the moon/stars…wahan rakha kya hae aakhir? mujhay to earth hi psand hae :mash: :smiley:

**

lolz. Maybe it’s the desire to explore something that still appears mysterious. Before modern forms of transportation, faroff countries used to seem exotic and mysterious - mostly because they were physically inaccessible. Ab tau we’ve “discovered” pretty much everything on earth (well, with the exception of the deepest parts of the oceans and some volcanoes)… now what remains is space i guess. The more elusive something appears, the more we want to go after it. Human nature i guess to want what we can’t have…!

But you are right, i think. And i’m glad to read that you like earth so much:D

Re: A cheap way to the stars?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *

To build a space elevator such a geostationary satellite would be placed into orbit carrying the coiled-up cable. One weighted end of the cable would then be dropped back towards Earth, while the other would be unreeled off into space.

[/QUOTE]

Looks like a very well read physicist write this article. :p

Re: Re: A cheap way to the stars?

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by who---me: *
**Looks like a very well read physicist write this article. :p
[/QUOTE]
*

hm. i can't verify the accuracy of what he has stated (and i won't even pretend to state i know anything about astronomy which i don't); i checked - he's the correspondent for all science-related issues for the Guardian... which happens to be one of the UK's major newspapers. If they make any (detectable) errors in any of their articles, they typically print a correction within the next couple of days.

Oho lighten up! :hoonh:

Its pretty hard to just drop stuff from a Geostationary Satellite. For example you can’t throw anything towards earth from the space station or the Shuttle (which are moving very fast). You basically have to slow the thing down…which…well isnt possible with a Geostationary Satellile cuz it would fall itself.

Although I am sure the good Dr Edwards knows this and has a solution.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by who---me: *
**Its pretty hard to just drop stuff from a Geostationary Satellite. For example you can't throw anything towards earth from the space station or the Shuttle (which are moving very fast). You basically have to slow the thing down...which....well isnt possible with a Geostationary Satellile cuz it would fall itself.
*
[/quote]

oh... i see. Acha.

[quote]
Oho lighten up! : hoonh:
[/quote]

:o heh.. sorry. i think arguing 24/7 in the religion forum has made me too serious.

It means that you won’t be able to drop it straight down… you’ll need to fir at off back to earth at an angle. You’ll need a very robust anchor that could withstand the stress of re-entry against the earth’s spin, probably with some kind of rocket to maintain momentum. Also, powerful calculations will be needed to ensure the achor lands at a suitable point.

I’m not sure what kind of temperatures carbon nanotubes could stand.. thay might not be able to take the stress of re-entry.

I wonder if a viable alternative could be to spool the ribbon straight away from launch.

I don't think getting the tether back to earth would be the main problem. It's in the composite fibre strength I suppose.

I remember when Buckminsterfullereen sp? was going to save the day, having a form of pure carbon that one can mold and re-shape with strength and durability of diamond would be pretty handy in all sorts of things.

Arthur C Clarke has had a great many 'good' ideas in his works of fiction, I remember reading a lot of his stuff as a kid, one thing I've never forgiven him for is the notion of free international phone calls. He suggested that when enough satellites were being used for information relay phone calls would be a free by-product, wanna see my phone bill every month.

will there be bathrooms at regular intervals along the escalator.....such a space trip could take long u know :D

Whoa! :eek: yeh to koi bohat he game lagti hai bhai…jo bhi hai..bauhat he hairankun balke tension-kun hai :halo:

Sounds like the Tower of Babel.

Re: A cheap way to the stars?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *

At the heart of a space elevator would be a cable reaching up as far as 100,000km from the surface of the Earth. The earthbound end would be tethered to a base station, probably somewhere in the middle of the Pacific ocean. The other end would be attached to an orbiting object in space acting as a counterweight
[/QUOTE]

What about the storms in pacific oceans? i am sure they cannot control the weather. This is a joke...flop idea.