If money and politics were no object...
How wide would it have to be?
How long would it take to build?
How much would it cost?
What would be the dangers or advantages of such a massive superstructure?
2007-02-10 13:56:35 · 9 answers · asked by M J 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
At the present time I do not think the possibility exists to build
any kind of structure that approaches space which would be
around 50 miles high or more.
Current structures are limited by the pressure of the overhead
structure on the base legs or beams. About 5000 feet seems
to be the maximum possible and that is a risky bet with the
possible influence of hurricane winds and tornados, not to mention earth quakes.
Money and politics are an "object" that must be kept in mind.
I realize that you wanted to set it all back in the background
and not mention it, but consider that this huge thing could
collapse onto someone's adjacent property. That is a major
problem with anything this immense. You would need to own
all property in the nearby vicinity to eliminate objections.
Cost would be prohibitive because it has never been done
before. Insurance would be out of this world. It would take
forever to build because no one knows how to do so at this
time.
I can think of no advantage to having such a structure.
The dangers are that it might (probably will) collapse and
kill everyone inside of it.
2007-02-10 14:22:29 · answer #1 · answered by zahbudar 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Firstly all other answers are good but they all miss one important detail if you want to build a tower into space, lets just say that money, politics and materials are available for such an project of this scale. The thing that all the other answers miss is that they don't mention the atmosphere, look what happens when a space shuttle comes back to Earth it reaches incredible temperatures on its reentry to Earth so having a tower that went high enough to go into space you would need a differant heat risistant and cold reistant material to overcome this problem.
I hope that this helps answer your question
2007-02-11 01:35:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Question 1: about up to a mile. The Japanese are actually going to build a tower called "Atomic" tower.
Question 2: Any higher than mentioned above will be possible in future, but useless, for you'd need more material for structural integrity and elevators than you would have room for people to live and / or work in such a building.
2007-02-10 22:40:07 · answer #3 · answered by jhstha 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was watching 2057 on the Discovery Channel and they were talking about how an elevator into space is in its VERY early stages of development. They are using nanotechnology to create a strong enough building material that they called a "ribbon" by which the elevator will go up and down. In researching this, I found the Russia plans to build a space elevator from the Earth to the Moon supposedly by 2015. That's 60,000-km high.
2007-02-10 14:19:06 · answer #4 · answered by livin.like.this.aint.easy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Current technology is limited to about 1 mile high. The base would have to be about 500 feet across.
Even a solid steel tower can only be a few miles high before it's own weight crushes it and that's without wind or earthquakes. It's 50 miles to space so I doubt it will ever be possible.
2007-02-10 14:13:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Check out the space elevator. Not a tower but a cable fixed to the Earth and held out tight by centrifugal force of the far end. To work, the far end must be above geosynchronous orbit altitude, which is about 25,000 miles. The cable would have to be extremely strong, stronger than any steel. But carbon nanotubes may be strong enough, if they can be made into a big enough cable. The source is a wikipedia article about it.
2007-02-10 14:12:17 · answer #6 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are some concepts to get instantly earlier speaking about how tall to construct... a million)it really is probably intuitive that the taller something is, the added of a base it desires. A pyramid is extra sturdy than a container tower, yet a container tower may nicely be sturdy sufficient even if that's not too tall. 2) A construction or tower is equipped for objective, now to not in basic terms be too tall. The accessible area is the degree of usefulness. to those factors, a one hundred tale construction is equipped to be tall and large sufficient to be useful, yet solid sufficient to face. i assume it really is obtainable to construct 2 hundred or three hundred thoughts, although the bottom to help it should be so huge that the usefullness of the area is more effective than shall we use, so no one may pay for it. WHy construct so extreme and placed such countless human beings into it? to construct higher may be unnecessary.
2016-11-26 23:40:22 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well mount everest, which is after all only a (rather big) pile of rocks, is six miles high, but I don't think buildings are going to go much higher than that unless they are held up from space. aka the space elevator.
For the record I am slightly miffed about the space elevator. I thought of the idea myself. Only to find that others had already thought of the same idea themselves beforehand.
2007-02-10 22:26:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a limit to the strength of any material.
Even the future will not be able to manufacture materials beyond a certain strength.
This will always be a limiting factor in height and mass.
No doubt they will continue to build up and the pace will have to decelerate.
Even carbon nanotubes would eventually go kaboom!
2007-02-11 00:29:38 · answer #9 · answered by Billy Butthead 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋