<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>space-elevator at Yahoo! Groups</title>
    <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/</link>
    <description>Space Elevator</description>

    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:05:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Everett L.(Rett) Williams</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8999</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8999</guid>
      <description>You present a false dichotomy. The current projected lift capacity of chemical rockets is a million pounds or better. If you need more, you assemble in space. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:56:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8998</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8998</guid>
      <description>Right now Space is a side issue for both poltical parties. If jobs, economy, and enviroment can be tied to an aggressive space investment(BTW this is not</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:42:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8997</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8997</guid>
      <description>Yes but where do you get the funding to build a new system to replace chemical rockets. If we are talking about 100s of billions then the costs are too large</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:58:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>musthavemorestuff</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8996</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8996</guid>
      <description>I don&#39;t agree. I think it will come down to payload sizes. Back in the Apollo days, we hit the limits of chemical rockets. You could not add much more weight</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:55:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8995</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8995</guid>
      <description>Better yet buy some abandoned oil plateform, and start you own micro nation. The number priorty of this new nation would be to develop cheap access to space </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:50:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Jerry Irvine</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8994</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8994</guid>
      <description>Some investments now are done for largely on-economic reasons.  Farm Aid, Red Cross, etc.  If a space faring company were out there, folks who donate or</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:35:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8993</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8993</guid>
      <description>I think the odds for forming a political party where development of space as it&#39;s main plank has a better chance in succeeding than a publicly traded</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:26:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8992</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8992</guid>
      <description>2OOB to 500B sounds like a goverment funding to me. The world&#39;s largest defense contractor brings in 45B revenues a year. The largest corporation brings in</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:21:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8991</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8991</guid>
      <description>Agree Nano-molecular manufacturing will be a distributive technology. Once Nanotech becomes pratical all the rules change, Cheers, Bert</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:14:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>awnd329</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8990</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8990</guid>
      <description>... Sure it will, along with many other problems such as that of the cost of anything that is manufactured. As one of the least radical of its many benefits,</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: future space junk problem</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:40:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>awnd329</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8989</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8989</guid>
      <description>That would work, but to &quot;slap on&quot; the ribbon you have to get there first. And to take care of more than one piece, you&#39;ll have to keep and use up a large</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: future space junk problem</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:56:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Scott Orshan</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8988</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8988</guid>
      <description>That&#39;s interesting. Now that I&#39;ve looked into it a little more, I see that electromagnetic drag is a real issue with satellites. I&#39;m not sure if GEO satellites</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:25:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Jerry Irvine</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8987</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8987</guid>
      <description>... I disagree. A public stock offering could raise the funds, and the clear value of the venture would provide sufficient prospective value that the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: future space junk problem</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:05:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8986</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8986</guid>
      <description>This sounds like TUI&#39;s nanoTerminator System: http://www.tethers.com/nanoTerminator.html Cheers, Bert</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skeptics</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:44:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bert</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8985</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/space-elevator/message/8985</guid>
      <description>Currently CNTs can be produced with tensile strength of 50 Gpa. QC and a process to tie CNTs into a long thread needs to be work out. This is less of a</description>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
<!-- wr1.grp.sp2.yahoo.com uncompressed/chunked Mon Nov  9 14:10:33 PST 2009 -->
