Preferred Means of Supernatural Rapid Transit


zil
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

not supernatural, but just wanted to leave the fictional, perhaps some day reality of a space elevator;) Sorry, all I've got besides a Stargate.

Space_elevator_structural_diagram--corrected_for_scale+CM+etc.svg.png

I read the story as well, but the tether need not be at the Equator. True, it will be more effective there, but even at ~45° North or South, it will still be effective. It won't be at 90° to the earth: it'll always be parallel to one on the Equator and radial to the earth's axis, i.e., 45° south- or northward.

Further north or south than 45°, the Earth's spin might not be adequate to keep the tether stable.

If we only had the technology to create a fiber strong and light enough to make it so.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

If we only had the technology to create a fiber strong and light enough to make it so.

Lehi

I'm in the process of trying to solve world hunger, so I'll have to leave the construction of this fiber to someone else.;) I was left with the impression from a past employee (the one who brought this idea up) that Carbon nanotubes could/might do the trick??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

I'm in the process of trying to solve world hunger, so I'll have to leave the construction of this fiber to someone else.;) I was left with the impression from a past employee (the one who brought this idea up) that Carbon nanotubes could/might do the trick??

Carbon nanotubes are th most promising material yet, but we would still need something stronger and more tensile..... Even if we could make CNs long enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LeSellers said:

I read the story as well, but the tether need not be at the Equator. True, it will be more effective there, but even at ~45° North or South, it will still be effective. It won't be at 90° to the earth: it'll always be parallel to one on the Equator and radial to the earth's axis, i.e., 45° south- or northward.

Further north or south than 45°, the Earth's spin might not be adequate to keep the tether stable.

If we only had the technology to create a fiber strong and light enough to make it so.

Lehi

guess we could also go for a gravity train too.... Take the hyperloop idea and instead of running it along earths surface you run it through the core or near the core to th opposite side of the world and let gravity povide something like 90-99% of the movement energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LeSellers said:

I read the story as well, but the tether need not be at the Equator. True, it will be more effective there, but even at ~45° North or South, it will still be effective. It won't be at 90° to the earth: it'll always be parallel to one on the Equator and radial to the earth's axis, i.e., 45° south- or northward.

Further north or south than 45°, the Earth's spin might not be adequate to keep the tether stable.

If we only had the technology to create a fiber strong and light enough to make it so.

Lehi

 

2 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

I'm in the process of trying to solve world hunger, so I'll have to leave the construction of this fiber to someone else.;) I was left with the impression from a past employee (the one who brought this idea up) that Carbon nanotubes could/might do the trick??

Yes, CN are capable of supporting their own weight under these cirucmstances.  But such a structure would also have to hold additional weight as well.  That's where it falls apart.

Also, the 45 deg  spin would be problematic.  In fact the space elevator at the equator is more problematic than one might think.  The mass is constant (which directly affects the resistance to rotation about the earth's axis.  But the weight is inversely proportional to the distance from the center of the earth.  Then you have the flexibility of such a tall skinny structure which is proportional to the moment of inertia (to the third power of the depth) of shaft structure.  But the ability for the shaft to push the space station is directly proportional to the section modulus (proportional to the square of the depth).

The rotation about the earth is proportional to the polar moment of inertia of a tall skinny section going around the earth at such an excessively disproportionate aspect ratio.  Then you want to add to it the angular centripetal forces of placing it at a 45deg tilt?  Uhm... that would not be advisable.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blackmarch said:

guess we could also go for a gravity train too.... Take the hyperloop idea and instead of running it along earths surface you run it through the core or near the core to th opposite side of the world and let gravity povide something like 90-99% of the movement energy.

Or one could go at a shallower angle too, for less distance.... Basically a similar sort of idea that is behind how most rollercoasters are powered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

 

Yes, CN are capable of supporting their own weight under these cirucmstances.  But such a structure would also have to hold additional weight as well.  That's where it falls apart.

Also, the 45 deg  spin would be problematic.  In fact the space elevator at the equator is more problematic than one might think.  The mass is constant (which directly affects the resistance to rotation about the earth's axis.  But the weight is inversely proportional to the distance from the center of the earth.  Then you have the flexibility of such a tall skinny structure which is proportional to the moment of inertia (to the third power of the depth) of shaft structure.  But the ability for the shaft to push the space station is directly proportional to the section modulus (proportional to the square of the depth).

The rotation about the earth is proportional to the polar moment of inertia of a tall skinny section going around the earth at such an excessively disproportionate aspect ration.  Then you want to add to it the angular centripetal forces of placing it at a 45deg tilt?  Uhm... that would not be advisable.

Ever played around with the idea of an unconnected elevator?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

 

Yes, CN are capable of supporting their own weight under these cirucmstances.  But such a structure would also have to hold additional weight as well.  That's where it falls apart.

Also, the 45 deg  spin would be problematic.  In fact the space elevator at the equator is more problematic than one might think.  The mass is constant (which directly affects the resistance to rotation about the earth's axis.  But the weight is inversely proportional to the distance from the center of the earth.  Then you have the flexibility of such a tall skinny structure which is proportional to the moment of inertia (to the third power of the depth) of shaft structure.  But the ability for the shaft to push the space station is directly proportional to the section modulus (proportional to the square of the depth).

The rotation about the earth is proportional to the polar moment of inertia of a tall skinny section going around the earth at such an excessively disproportionate aspect ratio.  Then you want to add to it the angular centripetal forces of placing it at a 45deg tilt?  Uhm... that would not be advisable.

I didn't understand most of this, okay 99% of it, but sounded like there are multiple problems unsolved still. 

My tiny brain will excuse itself now. 

Edited by NeedleinA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

I didn't understand and if this but sounded like there are multiple problems unsolved still. 

My tiny brain will excuse itself now. 

Hey, everyone has their element.  And it's difficult to be out of it.  Engineering happens to be mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Blackmarch said:

Ever played around with the idea of an unconnected elevator?

Depending on what you mean by it, no.

But the reason I was able to put together the problems in my previous post was when a friend pointed out to me the idea that we'd start building up and down from the geostationary orbit elevation.  It sounds fine at first.  But the farther you build out from that point was where problems began to surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Depending on what you mean by it, no.

But the reason I was able to put together the problems in my previous post was when a friend pointed out to me the idea that we'd start building up and down from the geostationary orbit elevation.  It sounds fine at first.  But the farther you build out from that point was where problems began to surface.

As in not connected to the ground. The longer you make it, the more pronounced the different forces acting on it will become, one that isnt connected to the ground can have the benefit not needing to be as long/big, but on the other hand it complicates using it. Still would need something quite a bit stronger than CNs tho, at least for any length that would help save on fuel to put things in a high orbit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Blackmarch said:

As in not connected to the ground. The longer you make it, the more pronounced the different forces acting on it will become, one that isnt connected to the ground can have the benefit not needing to be as long/big, but on the other hand it complicates using it. Still would need something quite a bit stronger than CNs tho, at least for any length that would help save on fuel to put things in a high orbit

One of the problems with that is the stability.  Imagine how the simple act of moving the elevator capsule up and down the shaft would change the center of gravity enough to cause it to fall or spin out of orbit.  This also came up during the construction portion of the project.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

One of the problems with that is the stability.  Imagine how the simple act of moving the elevator capsule up and down the shaft would change the center of gravity enough to cause it to fall or spin out of orbit.  This also came up during the construction portion of the project.

Wouldnt you be using a counterweight elevator at the same time at the other end to reduce the effect? If we are talking Feasible Sci Fi, you'd  have some sort of engine also rigged at both ends and in the middle, probably something that requires little to no fuel-say for the space end a collapsible solar sail, and if the other end is in atmosphere that is dense enough, some reallly good powerful fans.... Althat setup would be more for the end of construction. For initial construction it would have to be more conventional fuel based, but even then youd want to get all the supplies youll need at the anchorpoint so the amount of transferrence and ferrying would be minimized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

One of the problems with that is the stability.  Imagine how the simple act of moving the elevator capsule up and down the shaft would change the center of gravity enough to cause it to fall or spin out of orbit.  This also came up during the construction portion of the project.

The problem is, we're not talking about a "shaft" (at least I'm not). We're talking about a cable held aloft by the inertia of the Earth's spin, with a mass at the extreme end to give it tension. The elevator rides up and down this cable by friction on the cable itself, not a counterweight and drive mechanism.

I wish I could recall which story this is. The technology used is pseudo-one dimensional fiber (that cut off the hero's finger, which he planned to have regrown). With cable made of these one-dimensional fibers in a big bundle and the elevator car (a toroid) surrounding it, the car goes ever faster in ascent and slower in descent.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

The problem is, we're not talking about a "shaft" (at least I'm not). We're talking about a cable held aloft by the inertia of the Earth's spin, with a mass at the extreme end to give it tension. The elevator rides up and down this cable by friction on the cable itself, not a counterweight and drive mechanism.

I wish I could recall which story this is. The technology used is pseudo-one dimensional fiber (that cut off the hero's finger, which he planned to have regrown). With cable made of these one-dimensional fibers in a big bundle and the elevator car (a toroid) surrounding it, the car goes ever faster in ascent and slower in descent.

Lehi

Ou still run into the same problems either way,mthe cable just cuts down on the mass which makes for a more usable scenario. What carb was replying to there was if that cable or shaft was not connected to the earth itself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In any case once you overcome thevproblems of gravity, inertia, and rotation.... You still have to deal with atmospheric forces on the planetside portion of the equation.... Having a monoatomic, or monomoecular super cable would help a lot with that problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

The problem is, we're not talking about a "shaft" (at least I'm not). We're talking about a cable held aloft by the inertia of the Earth's spin, with a mass at the extreme end to give it tension. The elevator rides up and down this cable by friction on the cable itself, not a counterweight and drive mechanism.

I wish I could recall which story this is. The technology used is pseudo-one dimensional fiber (that cut off the hero's finger, which he planned to have regrown). With cable made of these one-dimensional fibers in a big bundle and the elevator car (a toroid) surrounding it, the car goes ever faster in ascent and slower in descent.

Lehi

 

48 minutes ago, Blackmarch said:

Wouldnt you be using a counterweight elevator at the same time at the other end to reduce the effect? If we are talking Feasible Sci Fi, you'd  have some sort of engine also rigged at both ends and in the middle, probably something that requires little to no fuel-say for the space end a collapsible solar sail, and if the other end is in atmosphere that is dense enough, some reallly good powerful fans.... Althat setup would be more for the end of construction. For initial construction it would have to be more conventional fuel based, but even then youd want to get all the supplies youll need at the anchorpoint so the amount of transferrence and ferrying would be minimized.

Yes, it is conceivable that there would be designs around it.  But it is not as simple as building something on earth -- and not just for the logistical difficulties of building it.  The design issues are manifold.  And everything has such tight tolerances that the construction and overall design are not a walk in the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

 

Yes, it is conceivable that there would be designs around it.  But it is not as simple as building something on earth -- and not just for the logistical difficulties of building it.  The design issues are manifold.  And everything has such tight tolerances that the construction and overall design are not a walk in the park.

Hence why it is paranormal ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Yes, it is conceivable that there would be designs around it.  But it is not as simple as building something on earth -- and not just for the logistical difficulties of building it.  The design issues are manifold.  And everything has such tight tolerances that the construction and overall design are not a walk in the park.

The only "science" involved is science fiction.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2016 at 8:56 PM, zil said:

The teleportation article is about enough to make me rule out wormholes - way too much energy required!

That's why I prefer the concept of flows or conduits that exist in nature (albeit maybe in subspace slash some sort of other dimension).

In the below episode they enter a conduit completely by accident and get sent quite far away very quickly (like getting caught in the current of a river that you can't see).

But it doesn't have to be that easy. There could be some magic or knowhow involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon's_Teeth_(Star_Trek:_Voyager)

Anyway, sounds like you've found some inspiration in quantum entanglement so, have fun with that :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not make up something that emulates something in the real universe? Why not make up some law or some physical laws of your own for your own universe but make it plausible because it resembles how things appear in our universe or behave in our universe?

For example, I thought of something I would call the"unseen fabric of the universe." This unseen fabric exists everywhere where solid physical objects aren't. You can travel/teleport anywhere that the fabric exists or isn't torn. The fabric is torn when "physical" objects pass through it. The fabric, after it's been torn, repairs itself in about 2 to 5 minutes.

The fabric in its purest most unblemished form exists in places of oxygen or the closest to pure oxygen would make the tightest weave of the fabric, if that makes sense.. Things such as water, smoke, any other flying or floating things, or impurities in the air, would tear the fabric ever-so-slightly or in the case of an ocean or a large weather system, greatly.

So, based on these assumptions, your teleportation abilities are greatly limited in certain circumstances. For example, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to teleport into a massive battle, or a large herd of animals. The tears in the fabric would be great and so the places you could still teleport to would be very limited.

The safest possible method of traveling the fabric of the universe is to travel around or next to known, relatively-static, physical objects like the ground, trees, large boulders, buildings, things like that. For example, you could teleport yourself onto the roof of a building by following the fabric on the ground then up the wall then onto the roof

The nature of traveling the fabric is that you travel by touch.. not by sight. You "feel" or sense what you were traveling over and around. You can travel as quickly as you can perceive/touch/feel the physical objects. You aren't limited by walking or running speeds. The difficulty lies in detecting what are physical objects versus tears in the fabric.

I haven't decided whether, while traveling the fabric, you'd be invisible or visible. It might be interesting if you were still visible and certainly still physical. So, if you were still physical, for example not in some other dimension, but still actually physically present, for safety sake that would also limit your ability of how fast you might travel. Being still physical you could crash into objects if you weren't careful to slow down before reaching them.  

So, as you can see, I'm sort of making these things up as I go. So, if you feel like using any, all or some variation of the ideas that's your choice. I've had fun conceptualizing them.
 

Edited by theSQUIDSTER
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@theSQUIDSTER - you're very creative!  That feels like the basis of establishing a new universe - one of its foundations from which you can build other rules.  The back of my brain is already pondering what could be done with it. :) Thanks!

@rpframe - I'm actually not sure the entanglement is going to be useful, I just like the idea.  But the limitation of finding matching particles which happen to be where you are and (near) where you need to be is a bit too restrictive - and always finding such pairs (when we need them most) would strain credibility.

Right now, teleportation and an alternate dimension seem like the most useful methods for my world.  And the idea that it's OK to have multiple methods may be the best idea yet.  I plan to experiment (mentally) with your conduits in another dimension idea, because it gives that method of travel more detail, which is better than vague "another dimension" explanations.  I need to see if those conduits always being able to take you where you want to go (perhaps sometimes not directly) would work for the story - I think it might.

One restriction for me is that my characters need to go to relatively specific places - traveling supernaturally is just a tool and not really core to the adventure.  In other words, rather than a story about someone who discovers their ability to travel like this and explores that ability; or even one about someone who is constantly traveling like this and the traveling is key to the plot; my story is about something entirely different, where we happen to need to traverse long distances quickly on occasion (and the long distances are key - I cannot shorten them).  The main character's need to figure this out so she can do it intensifies as the story goes on (because the bad guys can already do it).  The alternate is that no one can traverse large distances quickly, but the minute I take that out, I start having lots of problems, so for now, it's in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share