Why not build a space elevator at the moon?

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Why not build a space elevator at the moon?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2848
Credit: 1,215,344
RAC: 206
United States
Message 1786714 - Posted: 11 May 2016, 14:38:38 UTC

Instead of trying to deal with all the problems associated with constructing a space elevator here on earth. The moon would be an excellent testing ground for building future space elevators on earth or at Mars. It would also make getting to and from the surface of the moon very cheap in the long run.
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1786714 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1786920 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 5:59:29 UTC

Wouldn't it cost more to be able to have oxygen on the moon as to be able to build the elevator?
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1786920 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1786923 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 6:49:18 UTC - in response to Message 1786920.  

Wouldn't it cost more to be able to have oxygen on the moon as to be able to build the elevator?

I'm taking a liberty here but...
Do you mean that there is no reason to have a space elevator since the Moon has no Atmosphere?
With no Atmosphere, Hi-Speed rail on the Moon has no-Speed-limit.
Far easier to build a Super-Hi-Speed Rail system, linear-accelerator, to launch
stuff into space from the Moon. Escape Velocity is only about 5300 mph.
Heck if you built a Super-Hi-Speed rail system that circumnavigated the Moon,
with variable speed and release you could send stuff almost anywhere pretty fast.
I'm guessing that Tera-forming the Moon would cost a lot more than us yokels could ever afford.
ID: 1786923 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1786929 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 7:03:59 UTC - in response to Message 1786923.  
Last modified: 12 May 2016, 7:05:43 UTC

Wouldn't it cost more to be able to have oxygen on the moon as to be able to build the elevator?

I'm taking a liberty here but...
Do you mean that there is no reason to have a space elevator since the Moon has no Atmosphere?


I'm just saying the construction site on the moon would cost more than on earth because of the lack of oxygen on the moon to be able to build the elevator.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1786929 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1786932 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 7:17:38 UTC - in response to Message 1786929.  

Wouldn't it cost more to be able to have oxygen on the moon as to be able to build the elevator?

I'm taking a liberty here but...
Do you mean that there is no reason to have a space elevator since the Moon has no Atmosphere?


I'm just saying the construction on the moon would cost more than on earth because of the lack of oxygen on the moon.

OK.
As i understand it, we don't at present have a way of producing materials strong enough to build an elevator on Earth.
Carbon nanotubes may be strong enough, but we don't know how to bond them, or make them into long enough strands.
Because of the Moon's low gravity it might be possible to design a Moon elevator that doesn't fail using materials we have.
ID: 1786932 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1786933 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 7:31:44 UTC - in response to Message 1786932.  

Wouldn't it cost more to be able to have oxygen on the moon as to be able to build the elevator?

I'm taking a liberty here but...
Do you mean that there is no reason to have a space elevator since the Moon has no Atmosphere?


I'm just saying the construction on the moon would cost more than on earth because of the lack of oxygen on the moon.

OK.
As i understand it, we don't at present have a way of producing materials strong enough to build an elevator on Earth.
Carbon nanotubes may be strong enough, but we don't know how to bond them, or make them into long enough strands.
Because of the Moon's low gravity it might be possible to design a Moon elevator that doesn't fail using materials we have.


Good point.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1786933 · Report as offensive
Nick: ID 666
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 11216
Credit: 31,469,023
RAC: 1,522
United Kingdom
Message 1786946 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 8:26:20 UTC

Wouldn't there be problems due to the Moon being Tidal Locked, not being a true sphere and that the Moon's equatorial plane does not match that of the Earth.

So that the "Object" the elevator would go to would never be in a stable position.
ID: 1786946 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1786955 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 9:06:00 UTC - in response to Message 1786946.  

Wouldn't there be problems due to the Moon being Tidal Locked, not being a true sphere and that the Moon's equatorial plane does not match that of the Earth.

So that the "Object" the elevator would go to would never be in a stable position.

A Space-Elevator, in theory, relies on a stabilizing counter-mass, beyond the
Stationary-Orbit, to maintain tension in the cable.
The simplest solution is a very strong cable that tethers a very large mass
close to Earth, anchored on the Moon.
I suspect that this is over-engineering a problem.
Anything you send up the Elevator still needs to go somewhere, which would need
propulsion to achieve vectors that could have been imparted by a linear-accelerator on the Moon.
ID: 1786955 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1786960 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 9:12:07 UTC - in response to Message 1786955.  

Wouldn't there be problems due to the Moon being Tidal Locked, not being a true sphere and that the Moon's equatorial plane does not match that of the Earth.

So that the "Object" the elevator would go to would never be in a stable position.

A Space-Elevator, in theory, relies on a stabilizing counter-mass, beyond the
Stationary-Orbit, to maintain tension in the cable.
The simplest solution is a very strong cable that tethers a very large mass
close to Earth, anchored on the Moon.
I suspect that this is over-engineering a problem.
Anything you send up the Elevator still needs to go somewhere, which would need
propulsion to achieve vectors that could have been imparted by a linear-accelerator on the Moon.


Ionized propulsion would be a good solution to that.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1786960 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1786963 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 9:25:28 UTC - in response to Message 1786960.  

Ionized propulsion would be a good solution to that.

i prefer anti-matter catalyzed conversion of garbage to Energy as a method of propulsion.
1 part Anti-Matter to 50-100 parts garbage, through a magnetic annihilation chamber/nozzle has always worked for me.
ID: 1786963 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1786978 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 11:42:28 UTC - in response to Message 1786963.  

Ionized propulsion would be a good solution to that.

i prefer anti-matter catalyzed conversion of garbage to Energy as a method of propulsion.
1 part Anti-Matter to 50-100 parts garbage, through a magnetic annihilation chamber/nozzle has always worked for me.


Sounds like a good idea for recycling as well IMO.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1786978 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1786988 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 12:57:00 UTC - in response to Message 1786978.  
Last modified: 12 May 2016, 12:59:48 UTC

Ionized propulsion would be a good solution to that.

i prefer anti-matter catalyzed conversion of garbage to Energy as a method of propulsion.
1 part Anti-Matter to 50-100 parts garbage, through a magnetic annihilation chamber/nozzle has always worked for me.


Sounds like a good idea for recycling as well IMO.

Do you think that anyone has tried to patent this idea yet?
I could try sourcing some Anti-matter?
ha. ha ha. ha ha ha. O
they're coming to take me away away.
ID: 1786988 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1787002 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 13:30:20 UTC - in response to Message 1786988.  


Do you think that anyone has tried to patent this idea yet?


Not to my recollection..
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1787002 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1787009 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 13:38:26 UTC - in response to Message 1787002.  


Do you think that anyone has tried to patent this idea yet?


Not to my recollection..

Do you work at the Patent Office?
ID: 1787009 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1787010 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 13:43:04 UTC - in response to Message 1787009.  
Last modified: 12 May 2016, 13:43:25 UTC


Do you think that anyone has tried to patent this idea yet?


Not to my recollection..

Do you work at the Patent Office?

No, at an energy provider :D
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1787010 · Report as offensive
account
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1573
Credit: 6,046,561
RAC: 1,686
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Message 1787015 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 14:03:05 UTC - in response to Message 1787010.  

Do you think that anyone has tried to patent this idea yet?
Not to my recollection..
Do you work at the Patent Office?
No, at an energy provider :D
Coke, Pepsi, or Cadbury?
ID: 1787015 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1787034 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 14:56:19 UTC - in response to Message 1787015.  
Last modified: 12 May 2016, 14:56:29 UTC

Do you think that anyone has tried to patent this idea yet?
Not to my recollection..
Do you work at the Patent Office?
No, at an energy provider :D
Coke, Pepsi, or Cadbury?


Electricity and gas.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1787034 · Report as offensive
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2848
Credit: 1,215,344
RAC: 206
United States
Message 1787110 - Posted: 12 May 2016, 21:39:55 UTC

Answering the question about oxygen. It is pretty well established that on or near the surface of the moon water exists in the form of ice. Oxygen can easily be extracted from water. The moon does spin, the rotational period just coincides with its orbital period around the earth. There are suggestion that an elevator could be located near one of the poles.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_space_elevator
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1787110 · Report as offensive
Profile betregerProject Donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 6428
Credit: 15,518,450
RAC: 10,046
United States
Message 1787154 - Posted: 13 May 2016, 0:51:59 UTC - in response to Message 1787110.  

I can easily see how one would work on the equator but I don't see how it would work at the poles.
ID: 1787154 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 33496
Credit: 12,343,169
RAC: 10,700
Belgium
Message 1787475 - Posted: 14 May 2016, 10:27:08 UTC - in response to Message 1787110.  
Last modified: 14 May 2016, 10:27:27 UTC

Answering the question about oxygen. It is pretty well established that on or near the surface of the moon water exists in the form of ice. Oxygen can easily be extracted from water. The moon does spin, the rotational period just coincides with its orbital period around the earth. There are suggestion that an elevator could be located near one of the poles.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_space_elevator


Which costs money. We wouldn't have to perform that procedure on earth.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1787475 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Why not build a space elevator at the moon?


 
©2017 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.