could you expand on the concept of the space elevator?

Answer 1

A space elevator is a proposed structure designed to transport material from a planet's surface into space. Many different types of space elevators have been suggested. They all share the goal of replacing rocket propulsion with the traversal of a fixed structure via a mechanism not unlike an elevator in order to move material into or beyond orbit. Space elevators have also sometimes been referred to as beanstalks, space bridges, space lifts, space ladders or orbital towers.

The most common proposal is a tether, usually in the form of a cable or ribbon, spanning from the surface to a point beyond geosynchronous orbit. As the planet rotates, the inertia at the end of the tether counteracts the centripetal force of gravity and keeps the cable taut. Vehicles can then climb the tether and escape the planet's gravity without the use of rocket propulsion. Such a structure could theoretically permit delivery of cargo and people to orbit with transportation costs of a fraction of the traditional methods of launching a payload into orbit.

Recent proposals for a space elevator are notable in their plans to incorporate carbon nanotubes into the tether design, thus providing a link between space exploration and nanotechnology

Answer 2

i just brainstormed a bit and here's what i came up with. I bet you all are imagining the base of this elevator somewhere between the northern and southern arctic circles. But what if we used the fact that our planet has a very strong magnetic field? put the base of this elevator on either; magnetic north/south, or the point at which the earth rotates on the north/south pole. If done here, all the angular (circular) jibberjabber kinda goes away. all you do is spin. well, at these regions of iso-something-lines are closest, high-gradient of magnetic feild lines. can't we use that and build an elevator that somehow rests on this magnetic feild. say, making it out of iron/nickel/etc highly magnetised metal cable, thick, intertwined, etc. couldn't we use the magnetic field to support the weight of the cable keeping it taught? I like the idea of having an already prepared body lowering the cable right down the center of the magnetic field. (ok, i'm assuming that we can use one of our satellites in orbit already to travel due north of our planet, slow down from orbital speed to a mere spin mimicking earth's from above. heh, like a space chopper! lowers the cable toward the earth, as it gets real long, the magnets hold the weight, not the cable itself. hmm.
I think before we try to build an elevator, let's just get a cable attached to the ground and a satellite. once that's accomplished, we will know more about it. Unforseenable problems will arise and we'll learn from them. on the north pole, if a giant cable falls from the sky, who cares? clark kent?
if successful, and the link is made, the satellite can then slowly spiral into lower lattitudes, [Golden Spiral, ratio, etc?] until it's back in orbit on the plane of the equator, and it brought the cable with it which is still attached to the north pole. (i'm now having trouble picturing this so i'll stop)
I was thinking about another problem, one we would probably try after the successful cable is established. instead of cable, use a hose, a rubber hose lined with magnets all the way up. so suppose we have a hose connecting the north pole to the satellite. we heat the water near the base and pump it up the hose. I'm sure there's tons of ways to do that. then, the satellite breaks the link, and heads to the moon. getting as close as it can to the moon without falling, empty the tank and have it rain on the moon. I say moon cause we'd try it there first, but the goal here is having it rain (snow) on mars. I was watching the science channel and they were talking about warming up mars so that we could go there, built stuff, burn stuff, do stuff, and eventually enhabit the red planet. with water on the surface, we then can start all kinds of experiments.
NASA are you awake? are you getting any of this? Let's get a move on, i'm only gonna be alive for another half a century or so. I want to see the Earth from space. please
B

Answer 3

If "we" wanted to build it, I believe we could.
It would be a collaboration of several countries and it would have to be anchored to an island or an area remote enough, so if something happened it wouldn't be a catastrophic event.
The science behind it isn't bad, the materials could be produced.
It would have to support multiple elevators or multiple elevators that do different things. Maintenance and inspection would have to continue regardless of any other mission being raised or lowered.
The ability to independently get from one area of the "tower/strand" would have to be provided for.
Not just for maintenance reasons, but emergency reasons, as well.
Would it be more efficient?
I'm not sure.
How much energy would it take to lift x amount of tonnage up the tower?
If it took the same amount or a little bit more energy, would it still be worth it because the energy source(s) would be cleaner and more centralized?
Now the real question....how long would it stand?
What if there were a fuel system malfunction on a shuttle, space craft or satellite as it were being raised or lowered?
Every country or faction wanting to make a name for itself would target the space elevator.

Answer 4

to have a space elevator as proposed may not be possible with present technology.
The elevator motor platform would have to be in geosynchronous orbit 22,500 miles from earth.
As the cable extended it would not be in orbit around the earth anymore. As it got longer the weight of the cable would impose forces that would attempt to change to change the orbital parameters of the motor platform.
If a weight was attached to the earth end,the forces imposed on the motor platform maybe such that very large amounts of power would be required to stabilize it.
You could say you were substituting the strength of the cable for fuel,but how far could this go!!
Well it may be awhile!

Answer 5

Basically, what NASA wants to do is build a space elevator. Now, we all know about centrifugal and centripetal force. The concept is that it uses centripetal force to stand. There is a base that is locked to the planet either magnetically or physically. Then it stretches into space about 65,000 miles to get out of the planet's gravity well, and the space end has a mass on the end. Basically, the elevator wants to shoot off into space but cant because its held in place. It also wants to collapse on itself but cant because it wants to shoot off into space. Its very very delicate and it would need to be engineered to the angstrom. But it is very possible and well within our capabilities.

Answer 6

The main benefits to a space elevator are (a) cost and (b) safety.

(a) It's very expensive to launch things into space on rockets. One an elevator is in place - a big outlay of initial cost - it should be much cheaper to get things up there.

(b) Riding into space on a giant explosive rocket at great speeds (and returning at great speeds) is very dangerous. Shuttle accidents demonstrate this. An elevator should be safer.

Answer 7

Suppose that you have a satellite in geosynchronous orbit, 22,300 miles up. Suppose that it contains a winch with 22,300 miles of cable. Then you could drop the cable to the ground, attach to a load, and hoist the load into space without using hideously expensive rockets. Problems: you cannot make a cable that long that is strong enough to support its own weight, let alone a load; the force of the load pulling on the satellite will distort its orbit, and energy will be required to fix it.