h a l f b a k e r y"Put it on a plate, son. You'll enjoy it more."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
For use on a calm day with no jetstream overhead. It's that windsock to heaven thing that people seem to re-invent in various forms from time to time.
This particular model's made out of either kevlar or nosuchthingium (I haven't done the math yet) with electrical wires woven in through which an
electrical current is run to add heat to the already very hot air you pump into it. So yea, it's basically a hot air balloon several miles tall.
Another way you might be able to keep that column of hot air hot would be to have a tube going up the inside, pumping hydrogen into it with little burner nozzles every however many feet. The hydrogen should carry it's own weight and with a little push you might be able to get enough up there to burn and make this thing a little taller.
This wouldn't get into space (not that those other ones would) but it might get you pretty close to the edge of the atmosphere where you could wave at the penquins as they fly by or whatever. You would probably even be able to climb up and down if if you were crazy enough.
Not sure what you'd do with it. Look at it I guess.
Boomershine and Doctorremulac3 getting ready to build the Sensible Space Tube
http://www.youtube....watch?v=JU9Uwhjlog8
...a montage [doctorremulac3, Sep 27 2010, last modified Dec 25 2010]
[link]
|
| |
You might also be able to float hydrogen balloons up the middle that carry liquid fuel and an igniter that burns when the balloon pops at a certain altitude. Have an array of balloons that pop at different heights to evenly heat the air column and keep pushing them in. |
|
| |
I don't know, sounds like there's enough interest in these things to at least make for a pretty cool competition. See who can make the longest space tube. Call it the M-Prize maybe. |
|
| |
Militant feminists could get all pissy about the male's phallic competition implications. Might be worth it just for that. |
|
| |
//either kevlar or nosuchthingium (I haven't done the math
yet)// I suggest a gleepsite/unobtainium composite. |
|
| |
//could get all pissy// Hardly. Think of the humourous
moments when various entrants collapse or explode. |
|
| |
Make your tube from industrial black plastic, and solar will be all the energy you'll need.
Any wind at all though and you might be waving at penguins for real. |
|
| |
I've been doing some experiments in my free time using various objects of different materials and have discovered something startling that many who have previously considered this idea may not have realized. At first I thought it might have been an optical illusion caused by the television from watching space launches, but I have concluded that what I had been witnessing was in fact a real phenomena: objects that are accelerated vertically away from the Earth do indeed become smaller! I have observed this repeatedly with no exceptions. This means that a potential space tube could be tapered accordingly which greatly increases its feasibility. |
|
| |
[rcarty] if the thing gets smaller, does that not mean it has to go further to get to the penquins? Or are the far away things actually quite small and close by? If this was an anisotropic effect, could it be adapted by the railway companies, by making the rails converge rather than parallel? Could dramatically decrease journey times. |
|
| |
// by making the rails converge rather than parallel? Could dramatically decrease journey times. // |
|
| |
Prior Art. Network Rail already tried that in the UK. As you postulate, it did indeed "dramatically decrease journey times", the journey in question being from the cradle to the grave, and the resultant lawsuits from survivors and dependants are still ongoing. |
|
| |
Hang on - isn't bouyancy dependent on a heavier fluid being able to get under the bouyant object? |
|
| |
Yea, it would. I see what you're saying though. If you put a rubber ducky in a tube under water and didn't let the water get under it it wouldn't float.
Not sure how much this would be effected by being exactly vertical but it probably wouldn't be. |
|
| |
At any rate, you're going to have better luck pumping light hot air into a long vertical tube than heavy cold air. Even if you had a solid metal tube the atmospheric pressure differential at the bottom would push the hot air up at the point you pump it in like with a smoke stack. |
|
| |
I picture this thing being about 20 degrees off vertical like a column of smoke on a non-windy day and columns of smoke can get pretty high up there with heat alone. Add a little push from a fan and heat at points along the path with burning hydrogen that lifts itself and this could get pretty long I'd think. |
|
| |
Hmm, maybe I need to change the "Crazy Space Tube" title. |
|
| |
// I have observed this repeatedly with no exceptions// |
|
| |
I take it, then, that you have not yet attempted the classic, entirely non-toxic, "leaning over a firework" experiment? It's in the standard textbooks right after "peering down the barrel of a gun to determine why it hasn't fired". |
|
| |
Hey[doc]...this idea just might be crazy enough to
work! Here's what we need to do [mumble, mumble,
mumble...and fade to next scene.]. |
|
| |
Yes! A montage! Why didn't I think of that? (I guess I
did, sort of...). |
|
| |
A lot of semi-great ideas at the HalfBakery (is that
redundant?) could be improved with montages, don't
you think, [doc]? |
|
| |
(Thanks for the credit, btw.) |
|
| |
I think 90% of movies out there would be greatly improved by having 5 minute montage versions available. Complete with 80s style rock song narratives. |
|
| |
"The Thin Red Line" (Montage version, sung to the tune of "Montage") |
|
| |
"Well we went to war, with the Japanese.
Because we thought they were too strong. |
|
| |
But us intellectuals from Hollywood,
know we were the ones who were wrong, |
|
| |
Thin Red Line in mon-tage (montage)
This is the Thin Red Line in mon-tage (montage)" |
|
| |
//Ok, scratch that idea.// |
|
| |
Not the one about the Sensible Space Tube, shirley?!? |
|
| |
// //either kevlar or nosuchthingium (I haven't done
the math yet)// I suggest a gleepsite/unobtainium
composite.// |
|
| |
Has everyone forgotten upsidaisium? It seems a rather
obvious choice in this instance (as well as many
others). |
|
| |
Upsidasium: Noun- A strategic material that was the center of a Cold War struggle between Soviet agent Borris Badenov and United States counter agents Rocket J. Squirrel and his mentally impaired moose sidekick Blowhole McCreamcheese, whose name was later changed to Bullwinkle. |
|
| |
Fun fact: As many might have suspected, Rocky and Bullwinkle actually were lovers in real life. The voice over actors were married. |
|
| |
One can only hope they never made love in character. |
|
| |
[doctorremulac3] I will never forgive you for putting that
image in my head. |
|
| |
Also, Pottsylvania was only about 70% USSR; the rest was
Nazi Germany. Fearless Leader was unmistakably Prussian. |
|
| |
That's right, the bad guys were a vague amalgamation of America's enemies past and present. The Kaiser meets the Gestapo meets the KGB. |
|
| |
Nothing an effeminate squirrel and brain dead moose couldn't take care of. |
|
| |
Bun for pictures of puppies. (I was out of town when this first posted, just saw it.) |
|
| |