I got to know the wonderful word "retrofuturism" and even read this article already during the active existence of the habroblog, when, under my last January post, a discussion about the feasibility and expediency of erecting the Dyson sphere unfolded. A little disappointed with the reaction to that post, I put on the back burner a review article on the technology and application of the space elevator, but now it has waited in the wings. In many ways, I found the right thoughts and words, preparing material about fullerenes and, accordingly, refreshing my knowledge about carbon nanotubes. Therefore, a post that is categorically not related to science fiction is waiting for you.
Introduction
The author of the idea of the space elevator is Konstantin Eduardovich Tsiolkovsky. In 1895, while examining the brand new Eiffel Tower in Paris, Tsiolkovsky thought about how realistic it would be to build a tower up to geostationary orbit in order to deliver cargo directly into space. The design turned out to be practically impracticable: not only would its base on the ground be comparable in area to the whole of Paris, so even the strongest steel would not withstand such a load. However, the idea of a tower or mast going directly into orbit can be classified as a " first class impossibility " in accordance with Michio Kaku's paradigm: creating such a structure does not contradict the laws of physics, we simply do not own the materials and technologies to carry out the project.
The next, quite applied attempt to approach the idea of a space elevator was made already in the USSR in 1960. On July 31, in the Sunday supplement to Komsomolskaya Pravda, the article “Into space - on an electric locomotive", Written by Yuri Nikolaevich Artsutanov (1929 - 2019), who at that time was a postgraduate student at the Leningrad Technological Institute. Then (for the third year, space launches continue, but a person has not yet been in orbit) Yuri Nikolaevich rightly noted that a space flight on a rocket cannot become a mass phenomenon, since it exerts exorbitant loads on the human body, and also requires spending an unacceptable amount of resources and energy to overcome gravity. Therefore, Artsutanov suggested, the launch of rockets should be carried out from orbit, where they can easily acquire a second cosmic speed and go in the right direction. For this purpose, “an entire city with greenhouses, observatories, solar power plants, workshops,fuel depots and takeoff and landing devices for interplanetary rockets. The delivery of people and cargo to such an orbital station should be carried out along a vertical route 50-60 thousand kilometers long, since for a metal structure of this size at an altitude of about 42 thousand kilometers, the centrifugal force (due to the orbital rotation of the Earth) will be approximately equal to the force of gravity under which the structure could have crashed to the ground. Accordingly, such a structure would have to be composed of a "ground" bearing part, which has a variable, increasing thickness on the way to geosynchronous orbit, and a counterweight, which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the gravity force by its own centrifugal force.The delivery of people and goods to such an orbital station should be carried out along a vertical route 50-60 thousand kilometers long, since for a metal structure of this size at an altitude of about 42 thousand kilometers, the centrifugal force (due to the orbital rotation of the Earth) will be approximately equal to the force of gravity under which the structure could have crashed to the ground. Accordingly, such a structure would have to be composed of a "ground" bearing part, which has a variable, increasing thickness on the way to geosynchronous orbit, and a counterweight, which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the gravitational force with its own centrifugal force.The delivery of people and cargo to such an orbital station should be carried out along a vertical route 50-60 thousand kilometers long, since for a metal structure of this size at an altitude of about 42 thousand kilometers, the centrifugal force (due to the orbital rotation of the Earth) will be approximately equal to the force of gravity under which the structure could have crashed to the ground. Accordingly, such a structure would have to be composed of a "ground" bearing part, which has a variable, increasing thickness on the way to geosynchronous orbit, and a counterweight, which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the gravitational force with its own centrifugal force.since for a metal structure of this size, at an altitude of 42 thousand kilometers, the centrifugal force (due to the orbital rotation of the Earth) will become approximately equal to the force of gravity under which the structure could collapse to the ground. Accordingly, such a structure would have to be composed of a "ground" bearing part, which has a variable, increasing thickness on the way to geosynchronous orbit, and a counterweight, which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the gravity force by its own centrifugal force.since for a metal structure of this size at an altitude of 42 thousand kilometers, the centrifugal force (due to the orbital rotation of the Earth) will become approximately equal to the force of gravity under which the structure could collapse to the ground. Accordingly, such a structure would have to be composed of a "ground" bearing part, which has a variable, increasing thickness on the way to geosynchronous orbit, and a counterweight, which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the gravitational force with its own centrifugal force.which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the force of gravity with its own centrifugal force.which starts at an altitude of about 42,000 kilometers and balances the force of gravity with its own centrifugal force.
, . – , , . , , , , - . , , — . , . , , , . , – . .
1960-. «» , , , , : , – . . , , – . , .
«» (, , ). , -, , , – . 2021 . . , , . -, , , - . -, , , – . , (), , . , , (, ) . , . , , , , , . , , ( ). , , .
, . - – 50 000- , , , , ( ) . , , , – . , – .
, . , 50 . , (70 1,5 ) . , 40 , 100 , , 10 1 2. : 0,4 ( 0,34 ), – 1,3 , – 350 . , 2019 , 28 94 .
, .
, , . 1772 , , , . , , , 5. L1, L2, L3, L4 L5. , , , () . – , -, .
. , , , .
, . , , -3, . , , , , « – ». gagarin.ru, , «».
, .
-, -, . .
-, , .
, ( ) . «», , , , , - . , , . « » , . , - . , , . , , . .
. , ( , ) – , - . .
, , . , . , , , , – . , . , 2010 , 2012 – . , , , . , , . , , , , , . , 3D-.
, – . , , . – 20 000 () 500 ; « » , « ». , « ?», 2015 , .