12 Mar '15 14:57>
If you are at geo altitude, about 36K up, you will by definition have a velocity around 11,000 Km/hr. Isn't that already above escape velocity at that altitude? Isn't escape velocity at that altitude about 7000 km/hr?
Originally posted by sonhouseWhat forces are we talking about here? If we for example are thinking about a x-y-z coordinate system. Note, there was a long time since my university course in elementary mechanics.
If you are at geo altitude, about 36K up, you will by definition have a velocity around 11,000 Km/hr. Isn't that already above escape velocity at that altitude? Isn't escape velocity at that altitude about 7000 km/hr?
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI just did a back of the envelope calculation of the escape velocity at geo orbit height, inverse square law and all that, 9.8 M/S^2 at the surface and using (2GM/r)^0.5 come up with 11,117 and change meters per second at the surface and 4687 M/Sec at geo.
Relativity is not going to produce significant corrections to the Newtonian picture for this problem. Escape velocity at a given distance from the earth's centre is the radial velocity required to just escape the earth's gravitational pull. The orbital velocity is tangential to the orbit. In other words at right angles to the direction of the f ...[text shortened]... tationary object. So the two velocities you are considering are at right angles to one another.
Originally posted by twhiteheadNo, that's not correct, although it's an enticing assumption.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit
No need to do any calculations. Its all on Wikipedia. Geostationary orbit is at 35,786 kilometres. If you are geostationary higher than that, you are above escape velocity.
Originally posted by googlefudgeI see. So essentially you will get transferred to a higher orbit that is no longer geostationary.
No, that's not correct, although it's an enticing assumption.
Originally posted by twhitehead
I see. So essentially you will get transferred to a higher orbit that is no longer geostationary.
Although with a space elevator it doesn't matter that much whether or not you have obtained escape velocity unless your aim is to be able to send objects off its end into interplanetary space. For getting objects into orbit, which will most likely be its m ...[text shortened]... self up. Interplanetary vehicles can carry extra boosters to get them selves to escape velocity.
Interplanetary vehicles can carry extra boosters to get them selves to escape velocity
Originally posted by googlefudgeYour link went to a comic strip. Was that intentional? Kebal is not free, costs $30 US.
Basically everyone here should go spend a few [hundred 😉 ] hours playing Kerbal Space Program.
After which they will all intuitively understand orbital dynamics...
Or will have gone insane.
http://xkcd.com/1356/
Originally posted by googlefudgeYes, a nice ad for Kebal! BTW, I found the formula for figuring geo synch orbits:
Yes it was intentional... Did you read the comic in question?
Originally posted by sonhouseDo the moon.
So I did Mars and it came out there to 16,687 km above the surface
and Jupiter, 475,100 km above surface.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI already did the train thing, about ten years ago. I envisioned a train going round the lunar equator with the idea it would be about a mile long and 50 odd feet wide where the top would be plastered with solar cells. The idea there would be to generate energy, feed it to the tracks, and colonies would be able so suck off the energy given to the tracks anywhere round the system. The train would want to maintain itself in local noon all the time and would therefore need to be traveling about 10 miles per hour, 16 km per hour or so. That puts it at local noon forever.
Do the moon.
Is a space elevator even viable on the moon given its slow rotation?
If we put a railway all the way around the equator, and ran a train with the space elevator attached to it such that it went twice as fast as the earth spins, could we have a shorter tether?
How fast would the train have to go?
Originally posted by twhiteheadYour space elevator would have to cope with the fairly crazy orbit the moon has. Supermoons are caused when the moon is closer to the earth than normal. It's average orbital distance increases by a centimetre per year. The orbit is perturbed by the sun, and all the other planets, although obviously Jupiter is the most important. A space elevator to the moon isn't a practical proposition. Although a space elevator from the moon to lunar orbit has a lot fewer practical difficulties than one from the earth to earth orbit.
Do the moon.
Is a space elevator even viable on the moon given its slow rotation?
If we put a railway all the way around the equator, and ran a train with the space elevator attached to it such that it went twice as fast as the earth spins, could we have a shorter tether?
How fast would the train have to go?