Re: Space Elevator was> RE: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-07 Thread Erik Reuter
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:16:49AM -0700, Chad Cooper wrote: > I a currently collecting data to suggest the total output of Carbon > Nanotube (fullerenes) raw material worldwide in the next decade to > be in excess of 3000 tons. The proposed space elevator (from my past > post) only requires 20 to

Space Elevator was> RE: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-07 Thread Chad Cooper
>-Original Message- >From: Richard Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 11:18 AM >To: Killer Bs Discussion >Subject: Re: US-based missiles to have global reach > > >Erik said: > >> I'd even be willing to bet that no s

Re: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-02 Thread Erik Reuter
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:07:07AM -0700, Chad Cooper wrote: > Perhaps if you have in mind Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars > Space Elevator I would agree with you. It is unrealistic, and > unnecessary. Who needs a big fat cable, when you can build a nanotube > ribbon a few feet wide and only micro

Re: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-02 Thread Richard Baker
Erik said: > I'd even be willing to bet that no serious agency in the world has > even STARTED actual construction of a space elevator by 2023. I'd be willing to bet that too. The construction of a space elevator would require the manufacture of many, many orders of magnitude more carbon nanotube

RE: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-02 Thread Chad Cooper
>-Original Message- >From: Erik Reuter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:04 AM >To: Killer Bs Discussion >Subject: Re: US-based missiles to have global reach > > >On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 09:29:03AM -0700, Chad Cooper wrote: > >&

Re: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-02 Thread Erik Reuter
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 09:29:03AM -0700, Chad Cooper wrote: > We may very well have a Space Elevator by then. Then it would be cheap If by "then" you mean we are likely to have a space elevator by 2023, then you are mistaken. I will bet you any amount of money you care to name that we won't. The

RE: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-02 Thread Chad Cooper
>-Original Message- >From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 7:30 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: US-based missiles to have global reach > > >http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,988612,00.html > >Allies to become less important as new gen

Re: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-01 Thread Ronn!Blankenship
I think I prefer your subject line to the one under which the same article was posted on another list I'm on: "America to build super weapons, To Rule the World" At 09:29 PM 7/1/03 -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,988612,00.html Allies to become less

Re: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-01 Thread Ronn!Blankenship
At 04:31 AM 7/2/03 +0100, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 1 Jul 2003 at 21:29, Robert Seeberger wrote: > http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,988612,00.html > > Allies to become less important as new generation of weapons enables > America to strike anywhere from its own territory I'd point out t

Re: US-based missiles to have global reach

2003-07-01 Thread Andrew Crystall
On 1 Jul 2003 at 21:29, Robert Seeberger wrote: > http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,988612,00.html > > Allies to become less important as new generation of weapons enables > America to strike anywhere from its own territory I'd point out that technically speaking, it's possible for the