We must keep this a secret from the mormons..Aedrial said:Yes, how do magnets work?Quiet Stranger said:I've always wondered how this works anyways, is it gravity or something? Maybe magnets, how does that work?
We must keep this a secret from the mormons..Aedrial said:Yes, how do magnets work?Quiet Stranger said:I've always wondered how this works anyways, is it gravity or something? Maybe magnets, how does that work?
I see what you did there...Quiet Stranger said:I've always wondered how this works anyways, is it gravity or something? Maybe magnets, how does that work?
In traditional physics yes, but there was no indication of any kind of force being exerted on the emitter. Could very well be that the emitter may be drawn to to the object, but we would have to wait for a large scale version to be built.thaluikhain said:Could be, but then any new method of moving things "could be" cheaper than current methods for all we know.008Zulu said:This is like in Red Alert 3 how the Soviets use a sattelite to pick up tanks then drop them on the enemy.
This could be a cheap means of getting stuff in to space.
One problem that is never addressed, though, is conservation of momentum. You pull something towards you, it pulls you towards it.
The Space Elevator is a pipe dream. The initial cost of a sattelite may be more expensive, but the constant maintenance the elevator would need makes it too expensive long term.Halceon said:Definitely not. A satellite that can generate the necessary strength of the beam will be a lot less cost-effective than a space elevator.008Zulu said:This is like in Red Alert 3 how the Soviets use a sattelite to pick up tanks then drop them on the enemy.
This could be a cheap means of getting stuff in to space.
If conservation of momentum doesn't hold true in this case, then an awful lot about our science would have to be wrong. Not impossible, of course, but given that our science is pretty consistent at the moment, it seems unlikely.008Zulu said:In traditional physics yes, but there was no indication of any kind of force being exerted on the emitter. Could very well be that the emitter may be drawn to to the object, but we would have to wait for a large scale version to be built.
that, and nanoassembly. which one day might cease to be the same thing.GLo Jones said:Casual Spaceballs references ftw!
OT: I can't see this being useful for anything other than physics experiments.
If they ever get around to perfecting Carbon Nanotube technology enough to actually be able to build a space elevator....why would it need constant maintenance? Aren't Nanotubes supposed to be ludicrously tough?008Zulu said:The Space Elevator is a pipe dream. The initial cost of a sattelite may be more expensive, but the constant maintenance the elevator would need makes it too expensive long term.
Unfortunately if the object is heavy enough to be useful (i.e heavier than the satellite) in space the tractor beam will actually pull the satellite towards the object and the earth rather than the other way round.008Zulu said:This is like in Red Alert 3 how the Soviets use a sattelite to pick up tanks then drop them on the enemy.
This could be a cheap means of getting stuff in to space.