tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post8939385239487106223..comments2024-03-19T07:10:27.303-07:00Comments on Quark Soup by David Appell: Space Elevator ArticleDavid Appellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-90967257437892186722017-02-06T03:39:04.441-08:002017-02-06T03:39:04.441-08:00I like the inverted pyramid model of a space eleva...I like the inverted pyramid model of a space elevator. A single carbon nanotube does not seem to be the most elegant solution. By tethering counter rotating rings the centrifugal forces allows for mass to be distributed in orbit. The rotation speed of the rings helping to provide active tension control of the system. The rings form an inverted pyramid that makes the distance to Earth for a single nano-tube strand effectively shorter. The majority of the weight is in the upper atmosphere. Active solar sails providing both energy for counter rotation of the masses, and the side forces needed to counter the gravitational pull of the Moon.<br /><br />Basically, a large mass in the upper atmosphere is floating in relation to a larger stationed orbiting mass. Mass being rotated are on very long cables. When rotated the are closer to Earth, and when slowed, farther from Earth. The rotation in a vacuum is very low friction, so if there is a motor or energy failure it just keeps doing what was doing before; stable.<br /><br />This floating mass in the upper atmosphere is only 50 miles or less from Earth, and so one or more space elevator individual cables can potentially connect to that much shorter distance.<br /><br />As loads are heavier, the counter rotating rings slow down to compensate for the load. And speed up for light loads. To keep the strain on the cable within tolerances.<br /><br />This requires much more nanotube cable, but I believe it makes the system more feasible.<br /><br />Just a thought,<br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16931577195454717970noreply@blogger.com