3 ms·
I don't think that (1) is really such an issue. Two things to consider. First, the energy required to keep the ... err... toppiece? stable is significantly les
by skj 13y ago
I don't think that (1) is really such an issue. Two things to consider.
First, the energy required to keep the ... err... toppiece? stable is significantly less than the energy required to launch something into the same orbit.
Second, I think that the metaphorical centrifugal force will bring the toppiece back to where it began. That is, there is a stable equilibrium with the toppiece at its highest point, and bringing it out of that equilibrium will be resisted.
Edit: Certainly the total energy required, from the train and toppiece stabilization, is the same as the energy required to get something into orbit, but to stabilize would require thrusters, while climbing can be done electronically against the chain.
- ithkuil 13y agototal amount if energy won't be the same as to get something into orbit with rockets, first because rockets have to carry their own fuel, second because it's far more efficient to move by displacing a very heavy reaction mass (the earth) rather than displacing a light reaction mass (which the rocket is carrying)