no gravitational pull and also the vaccuum of space would rip it to shreds or just obliterate it
2007-06-16 10:21:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Micky D 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The satellite would need to be in geostationary orbit 36000 km. above the Equator, orbiting west to east, same as the Earth's rotation, so it stayed above the same point on Earth. It would need a counterweight fixed above it to counter the downward pull of the rope's weight. Remember, the only point on the rope which is in orbit is where it's attached to the geostationary satellite. The only substance I know of which could support its own weight is carbon buckytubes. If you made the rope of anything else it would snap. You'd have some minor problems, like bits of orbiting space junk hitting the rope, and if you hauled anything up or down you'd have the coriolis force to worry about. But Arthur C. Clarke first proposed this idea, and if it can be made to work, space travel will become cheap. You could haul a capsule of passengers and their life support up to geostationary orbit for a few dollars per person, compared with about $100 million a person with a rocket.
2007-06-16 13:02:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by zee_prime 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
"The Fountains of Paradise," Arthur C. Clarke
A beanstalk from surface to geosynchronous orbit is not possible,
1) Only the endpoints would be in equilibrium orbit. The minimum energy path is a spiral.
2) The stuff would pass through the van Allen radiation belts. Chemical bondss are up to ~3eV. van Allen radiation is 100-keV to MeV. It would disintegrate. Hard solar UV, too, and atomic oxygen..
3) If the beanstalk were electrically conductive then any time the magnetosphere billowed (solar flare), by Lenz' law, millions of volts would be induced - shorted to ground.
4) Nothing has nearly the necessary tensile strength, even with tapered endpoints.
5) If the stuff averaged only a pound/foot there would be needed 124 million pounds. If carbon nanotubes were massively dropped in price to $50/gram, that would be $2.8 trillion - plus transportation and labor costs.
2007-06-16 11:16:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by Uncle Al 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's called a space elecator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator
http://liftwatch.org/
NASA and several other organistions/companies are currently working together to construct such a thing. They use carbon nanotubes to make cables that are much stronger then any other kind of cable today. Strong enough to connect a platform in the ocean with a geostationary space station. The platform needs to be in the ocean to be easily moveable.
They already invested a lot of money in this project but it will still take a while till the first space elevator is operational. Maybe 20 years or more.
Looking at how many companies are investing into this project it's only a matter of time till they build it.
2007-06-16 10:39:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Voice of Insanity 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
The problem is the rope has to be 26,000 miles long, not 66. It has to reach a satellite in geosynchronous orbit These satellites sit over one spot on the equator such as the GPS satellites and all the communications satellites.. In addition, it would have to be strong enough to support not just its own weight but the weight of a payload moving up it. Still, it's being looked into seriously.
2007-06-16 12:02:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Michael da Man 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
if the thing was orbiting anyway, then why would you need a rope?
and what happens if the rope breaks or somehow gets disconnected from the sattelite? it would fall, all couple miles of it, with a H E L L of a lot of force and where it lands could be disasterous. and besides, the rope would not stay properly straight-- too much air friction in the atmosphere and no air friction outside (the outside part would go faster).
in short, it just wouldn't work.
2007-06-16 13:16:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You just need some good old unatainium fiber. :)
Besides what other have said about the cost, and the van Allen belts, etc., there are the safety problems. What if the cable fails -- during construction or later. Also, it would be a major target for terrorists. And the political effort! It would be easier to have peace on Earth.
2007-06-16 12:56:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by morningfoxnorth 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is exactly what NASA and other organizations are trying to figure out. Currently, no ordinary rope (steel or fabric) would be that strong. Science's best hope is the nanotubes.
Nanotubes are very strong, small, and efficient. Currently scientists are working to perfect the method of creating nanotubes so it can be mass produced.
Go here for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube
2007-06-16 11:27:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by A.R 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
it may be available, and no, it does not wrap around the Earth in case you probably did it appropriate. you ought to erect a post at the two the north or south pole and fasten the rope to it with a loop or swivel so the Earth is unfastened to spin with out winding interior the rope. it would decide to be one long-azz rope, stable adequate to help its very own weight, and since the gap from the Earth to the Moon isn't a relentless, you may decide to bypass away some slack interior the rope to account for a distinction interior the gap of a few 40-50 thousand kilometers between apogee and perigee at distinctive circumstances.
2016-10-09 08:31:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If it was strong enough and you attached it to a satellite it would rapidly wrap itself around the earth and pull the satellite down.
It would have to be attached to a geosynchronous satellite 22,500 miles away.
the extra weight would pull the satellite down unless you could stabilize the satellite some way it may be impractical in any case.
2007-06-16 12:39:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Billy Butthead 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Satellites must orbit our planet to stay on course, i suppose it would be possible to anchor something to earth with the proper materials, but why? It wouldnt make much sense.
2007-06-16 10:21:48
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋