Skyhooks

Discussion in 'General Science' started by piratepaul, May 22, 2013.

  1. piratepaul

    Thread Starter Member

    May 20, 2013
    35
    2
    What about a graphene baloon round the equator how high would it need to be to take off and land spaceships in 0 gravity... how many and how thick would the roaps need to be to hold it still... what would its volume be?... sky hooks are in!
    What happens if you spin it?

    The earth is very hot and a magnet has a max temp.
     
  2. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,764
    2,534
    Gravity goes a heck of a lot further than you think. The moon is held in place by our mutual attractions, if not for its momentum it would fall right in.

    Skyhooks use the rotational energy of the earth to create orbits released from them. Geosynchronous orbits make the sweet spot where the orbit is greater than a day or less than a day.

    Since this is basically off topic of the original thread, Oh...just a silly question , I'm splitting it off and giving it its own thread. Hijacking is not allowed here.
     
  3. piratepaul

    Thread Starter Member

    May 20, 2013
    35
    2
    Seems on topic to me... it is conductor which goes round the globe.

    A long (several miles long) pole at the pole((north or south) pointing up) ... a long string which goes through the pole with a motor at the bottom... the string hangs down on the outside of the pole to which is attached a space ship... might be off topic.
     
  4. LDC3

    Active Member

    Apr 27, 2013
    920
    160
    The minimum distance for a skyhook would be about 36000 miles (the orbit of a geostationary satellite). Unfortunately, you could never establish the skyhook with only that distance. First you would place a satellite in geostationary orbit on the equator (if it was north or south, it would wander north and south of the equator the same distance). Then you would need to extend your cable in both directions to keep your satellite in orbit. When the cable encounters air resistance, it will be difficult to keep the satellite in orbit. Also the cable will whip about and may cause damage to structures on the ground. When you finally have the cable secure, it will be about 72000 miles long.
     
  5. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,764
    2,534
    A skyhook is straight up and down, which is not the same thing. It would also not work on the poles, it has to be on the equator, that rotational energy of the earth provides the other anchor point. Making a tower that supports all its own weight would be quite a bit more major as projects go.

    Gravity goes a bit further than I suspect you think it does. Things several thousand miles up will still feel its effects, it doesn't just float.
     
  6. piratepaul

    Thread Starter Member

    May 20, 2013
    35
    2
    The sky hook hangs from a donut shaped pos helium filled ballon ... the baloon goes round the equator ... the prob is holding it still in the wind ... this is my idea.

    The pole or tower is a launch system for space ships... if the tower is one mile high and the motor driving the roap/cable is one mile long, frequency is 10Hz speed is ... 10 times 2 pye miles per second...
    How long would the pole need to be... what would the frequency need to be to put the space ship into orbit.
    This is a NASA idea.
    I herd it on the radio a few years ago.
     
  7. THE_RB

    AAC Fanatic!

    Feb 11, 2008
    5,435
    1,305
    Why make the balloon go all the way around the planet?

    That increases the cost and problems enormously, BUT the only part of the balloon that provides benefit on a sky lift is the local part. Parts of the balloon hundreds of miles away can't help with any lift you are doing right here, unless the balloon is solid and has no flex (which again gets ludicrous).

    Personally I like the idea of a huge coil-gun shooting payloads up to orbit, even smaller payloads can be assembled up there. The gun could be electric and have the ability for very fast re-usability. As a project it's not much harder than the big particle accelerators they are already building.
     
  8. piratepaul

    Thread Starter Member

    May 20, 2013
    35
    2
    The balloon is pressureised and helium filled perhaps it has structure in its own right, the weight of roap to hold it still would be great... perhaps too much to get it off the ground... once high enough it could be rotated ... suck in ozone expell what ever... its a bit far fetched, well beond my budget... planning permits etc a prob... NASA have not built the tower yet! The balloon is a bit more expensive.

    Interesting forum... some great topics... perhaps turn it into a CFL, fly or skate in the balloon ... perhaps two paralel tunnels/ballons with wind behind the boards, ships, pods etc.

    I dont own the globe ... els thats what I would do!
     
  9. THE_RB

    AAC Fanatic!

    Feb 11, 2008
    5,435
    1,305
    :D
    The "my budget" bit really made me chuckle.

    Do you need a donation? Maybe we could all kickstart a few bucks for a rigid graphene balloon that goes right around the planet? ;)
     
  10. piratepaul

    Thread Starter Member

    May 20, 2013
    35
    2
    Hi, THE_RB the thread started on the ''just a silly question'' thread, but was moved by the KGB (or who ever they think they are(how d y put these smiley things in, Oh look there is an Ohm... )
    to here... So here it, it has changed ... its def off thread now.

    I was kinda thinking ...you know those air bed things... an inflatable rectangle a few inches thick... suppose you had a giant one and rolled it into a cylinder... then bend it into a toroid... high pressure helium provides structure, we now have a toroid ballon, from which we can remove gas from the inside... not the helium bit but the air in the core so as to create as close to vacuum as poss... partical accelerator or what.

    (As far as donations are concerned, I have a hread ''app idea how do I get paid'' I need the cash ... dont we all ... it seems to me a good idea to design a few apps, money goes to my account... I can get on with this.
    World wide patent costs a lot of £ money and when you have finnished some one changes a bit and makes it anyway, if I sue and win they go bust ... I pay costs... if I lose ...I lose, heads you win ... tails I lose.
    Patent is for big companies with big bucks and lawyers.)

    Thanks for the comments, any more ideas feel free to reply, its a big project get your bit in to go down in history!
     
  11. GopherT

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 23, 2012
    5,979
    3,694
    PiratePaul,

    If your App idea is based on any of the logic used in your past two posts, "just a silly question" and "skyhook", the world will have nothing to lose if it doesn't get developed. Your posts are better reserved for the real thinkers at a SciFi forum. Those of us much less innovative than you will only hold you back as we cast doubts on your ideas by referencing scientific principles and high school level physics.

    Ten years from now, when Bill Gates congratulates you for becoming the richest man in the world, I am sure all of us at AAC will quickly realize your screen name must have been "PiratePaul." Until then, I think you should keep your patent pending ideas to yourself. If you post them here or in any other media, they become "public knowledge" and you will no longer be able to patent them.

    Good luck with your ventures,
    GT