Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Good news everyone, I've discovered a method of transporting people from LA to NY in 45 minutes   (cnn.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Elon Musk, Los Angeles, magnetic levitation, energy usage, Rand Corporation  
•       •       •

8392 clicks; posted to Geek » on 16 Jul 2013 at 8:57 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



178 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-07-17 07:29:18 AM  

DamnYankees: Doesn't seem all that practical. And what if the tube ruptures?


You slow down as drag increases. Oh the humani...non catastrophic failure mode.
 
2013-07-17 07:47:35 AM  
Bunch of pessimists up in here.
 
2013-07-17 07:53:13 AM  

retarded: Bunch of pessimists up in here.


Armchair engineers.
 
2013-07-17 08:41:28 AM  

DamnYankees: And what if the tube ruptures?


People are mostly responding to this as a safety question, but from a more operational perspective, a rupture will shut down the whole system every time it happens, until someone can get out and repair it.  And can you imagine guarding 3000 miles of tube against intentional attacks?
 
2013-07-17 09:16:17 AM  

Ambitwistor: DamnYankees: And what if the tube ruptures?

People are mostly responding to this as a safety question, but from a more operational perspective, a rupture will shut down the whole system every time it happens, until someone can get out and repair it.  And can you imagine guarding 3000 miles of tube against intentional attacks?


Is this any different really at this point then the amount of time and effort we spend guarding our countless miles of highways, railroads, and oil and gas pipelines?
 
2013-07-17 09:17:47 AM  

Ambitwistor: can you imagine guarding 3000 miles of tube against intentional attacks?


Sensors, drones, and fences go a long way.  Pardoning the easy comparison to the Mexican border, but its not that difficult to defend something if you really want to defend it.

We also don't know the details of what people would be attacking, let alone why they would be attacking the thing.  You could damage a rail system or road pretty easily, but most folks just can't be bothered to mess with chunks of concrete and iron for no reward.

I'd imagine a tube strong enough to contain a 600mph passenger car and hold back several atmospheres of pressure over tens of miles wouldn't be the kind of glass that chips when you simply throw a rock at it.
A terrorist would be going to alot of trouble just to delay a few dozen passengers.
 
2013-07-17 09:24:36 AM  

retarded: Bunch of pessimists up in here.


God, that's for sure.  It seems like the national motto is "that'll never work".  Probably no conincidence that the national activity is whining about how "they" haven't yet provided us with flying cars.
 
2013-07-17 09:30:19 AM  

ceebeecates4: Heat dissipation
Only by radiation
Fails on occasion


Nice fiery death Haiku...
 
2013-07-17 09:44:14 AM  
Musk did great work with Space-X, but every time I see him, it's like he's forgetting the steps in between "concept" and "completion".  Or, more accurately, he's underestimating the engineering problems.  He seemed out of his element when Tesla started running into trouble, and the only thing he knew to do was to sell harder.

I think he got unbelievably lucky with Space-X and either hired the right people himself or knew the right people who could hire the right people.  I'm not saying it's an impossible project.  I'd just like to see a few miles of Proof of Concept first, and see what unexpected construction challenges hit.
 
2013-07-17 09:50:51 AM  

The Green Intern: He seemed out of his element when Tesla started running into trouble, and the only thing he knew to do was to sell harder.


How are things over there in alternate universe land?
 
2013-07-17 10:25:59 AM  
FTFA: it could generate more power than it would consume.

Farking conservation of energy, how does it work?

cdn2-b.examiner.com
 
2013-07-17 10:26:25 AM  

Hollie Maea: The Green Intern: He seemed out of his element when Tesla started running into trouble, and the only thing he knew to do was to sell harder.

How are things over there in alternate universe land?


Apologies.  It's a subjective feeling I got.  My impression is that he gets this deer in the headlights look at anything unknown.  The moment the problem's identified, he's back to calm and in control, but the unknown /really/ rattles him.

Based on interviews I've seen, he's great at concept, he's great at selling, and he's great at talking about known issues, but has always seemed a bit off when something unforeseen happens.  Like... he'll memorize everything about something, and if it breaks in a way that's been mapped out as a possibility, he's fine.  He understands it.  He can explain it.  He's got encyclopedic knowledge of everything related to his current project, but if something goes off the script he looks scared.

Don't get me wrong; I like the guy.  I like his ideas.  I like the "go big" approach to his stuff.  Even if he only gets half of what he was aiming for, he's aimed so high that it's still a huge leap.

Maybe what I saw was an older program being re-run and I missed that part of the presentation. Maybe it was a hatchet piece disguised as a documentary and I fell for it hook, line, and sinker; it was footage of him speaking to investors/customers on backorder and asking for more money at one of the dealerships.  The general attitude in the room seemed like a mix of incredulity and hostility, and a lot of unhappy people walked out when he was vague with his answers to their questions.  In hindsight, I can see how it could have been a hatchet piece... Top Gear certainly did it to Tesla.  But this was on PBS, and I tend to accept their programming as a bit more even-handed.
 
2013-07-17 10:41:28 AM  

Hollie Maea: This actually will be less prone to terrorism than air flight. Since the cars will be just single or double occupancy, there is a limit to how many people a terrorist could kill.  At most him self and a handful of cars behind.


Yeah but you take out one plane and there are thousands still in operation. You take out a tube and you have effectively stopped transportation for quite some time and have created a massive economic strike. There is no way you could effectively protect that much infrastructure which would make sabotaging any part of it really really easy. This would be ripe for lone whackos, domestic terrorists, and terrorists that understand that the fear component and economic damage you deal is far more devastating to a nation than the body count today. China understands this. They are waging a cyber war and economic war, and that is WAY more effective and easier to do. Taking out just a few yards or putting a hole in the tube could render it useless. How long would it take to repair that? What about repairing a quarter mile of it?
 
2013-07-17 10:44:49 AM  
Personal transportation? No. Cargo transportation? Possibly so. Depending on the weight capacity to move and the cost differential, setting up international trading tubes might prove extremely useful. Could you imagine moving goods at that rate of speed from one location to the next without clogging up the pedestrian infrastructure, at a fraction of the operating cost, long distances, without all that pollution? How much pollution comes from 1 Chinese Barge? Imagine removing hundreds if not thousands of those from the seas. Now, you are starting to make an impact.
 
2013-07-17 11:18:09 AM  

justtray: FIRST EVER GREENLIGHT HELL YES


Congratulations!  I heard a snippet of this on NPR and was talking to the mrs about it, nice to have a link at hand.
 
2013-07-17 11:31:16 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: Taking out just a few yards or putting a hole in the tube could render it useless. How long would it take to repair that? What about repairing a quarter mile of it?


Prefabricated sections means easy repair.

In general, I don't buy the common sentiment that "we shouldn't build stuff because people will wreck it".  There are a ton of wide ranging infrastructure systems vulnerable to attack.  Natural Gas pipelines.  The Electrical grid--take out one tower of the Pacific DC Intertie, and Los Angeles county loses 40 percent of their power.  Cascading effects probably would take out most of the western grid.  Bridges on major freeways.  Once the Keystone pipeline is done, you could potentially contaminate billions of gallons of drinking water with a single bomb.

As long as we want to have "nice things" there will always be some vulnerability.  The more important a system is, the more we have to lose if it is brought down.  The best we can do is make things robust and add security.  Will someone bomb the hyperloop at some point?  Probably.  But certainly it wouldn't be something that would be common or easy.
 
2013-07-17 11:32:46 AM  

TelemonianAjax: I heard a snippet of this on NPR and was talking to the mrs about it, nice to have a link at hand.


Careful with this link (and the other news releases) as it contains a lot of misinformation.  Believe it or not, probably your best source of accurate information is the wiki article and the citations thereon.
 
2013-07-17 11:48:48 AM  

Hollie Maea: Pray 4 Mojo: Hollie Maea: /Thankee for TF

Don't thank me. I just destroyed your productivity for the next 30 days. Muahahahaha!!

Yeah, I'm going to have to watch my ass.  It's bad enough as it is...as stupid as I'm sure this sounds, I really am serious about trying to replace my day job with a "Build the Portland Hyperloop" scheme.


I think it's really cool you're getting involved in a world changing project you believe in.  I hope to hear more about this around Fark in the future.  Best of luck.

And thanks for the tip on the link.  We've coasted for the better part of a century on old infrastructure models, and we've learned a lot since Ike's day.  It's time to start using that knowledge.   I'm firmly of the opinion that the only options left to us are to literally rebuild the systems we know we'll need in the next 100 years.
 
2013-07-17 11:55:34 AM  

Macular Degenerate: FTFA: it could generate more power than it would consume.

Farking conservation of energy, how does it work?

[cdn2-b.examiner.com image 600x337]


300 miles of solar panels = net producer
 
2013-07-17 12:02:09 PM  

Hollie Maea: the money is in the banana stand: Taking out just a few yards or putting a hole in the tube could render it useless. How long would it take to repair that? What about repairing a quarter mile of it?

Prefabricated sections means easy repair.

In general, I don't buy the common sentiment that "we shouldn't build stuff because people will wreck it".  There are a ton of wide ranging infrastructure systems vulnerable to attack.  Natural Gas pipelines.  The Electrical grid--take out one tower of the Pacific DC Intertie, and Los Angeles county loses 40 percent of their power.  Cascading effects probably would take out most of the western grid.  Bridges on major freeways.  Once the Keystone pipeline is done, you could potentially contaminate billions of gallons of drinking water with a single bomb.

As long as we want to have "nice things" there will always be some vulnerability.  The more important a system is, the more we have to lose if it is brought down.  The best we can do is make things robust and add security.  Will someone bomb the hyperloop at some point?  Probably.  But certainly it wouldn't be something that would be common or easy.


I don't think we shouldn't build it because people will wreck it, I am saying that that concern needs to be addressed so we have a contingency plan for it should the worst case scenario occur. Personally, I feel that terrorist attacks will become more common as we become more and more global - so naturally, planning for that might be a good idea. Further, I don't understand how it would not be easy to do. Pulling off any minor terrorist attack would be extremely easy on miles and miles of infrastructure. While bombing say the middle of I-10 in a major city and major intersection at any time of day would be difficult, doing so at some odd hour on a stretch in the middle of farking nowhere would not be. It would be just as devastating if not more, disrupting somewhere that would take forever to repair and get materials to versus an easily accessible spot.
 
2013-07-17 12:08:15 PM  

TelemonianAjax: I think it's really cool you're getting involved in a world changing project you believe in.  I hope to hear more about this around Fark in the future.  Best of luck.


Thanks...I know it's a bit of a longshot.  I will have to be able to recruit world class people in several different fields.  But I do know several relevant world class people (including a guy who designed and built the controller for an F1 KERS).  I also have the ear of relevant local politicians through some associations I am a member of.  Once I can build up a "kernel of legitimacy" so people don't think I'm just some dumb kid fantasizing, then recruiting talent and raising money becomes easier.

The good news is that since it is open source, I don't have to beat everyone out.  If some deep pocket types are planning this for California, that doesn't stop us from trying to do a better job here.  Definitely if someone here in Portland had plans for it it would be someone I knew or with whom I had mutual friends.
 
2013-07-17 12:12:46 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: I am saying that that concern needs to be addressed so we have a contingency plan for it should the worst case scenario occur.


Absolutely.  That would need to be a major part of any Environmental Impact Statement.  And we would need to quantify just how easy it would be to do.
 
2013-07-17 03:05:06 PM  

Pray 4 Mojo: NobleHam: Is there a chance the tube could bend?

Not a chance my Hindu friend.


Monorail!
 
2013-07-17 04:03:06 PM  
Much less Derpy article on the subject:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/green-tech/advanced-cars/loopy-no -i ts-hyperloopy

IEEE Spectrum >> Wired >> CNN
 
2013-07-17 06:39:03 PM  

Ambitwistor: DamnYankees: And what if the tube ruptures?

People are mostly responding to this as a safety question, but from a more operational perspective, a rupture will shut down the whole system every time it happens, until someone can get out and repair it.  And can you imagine guarding 3000 miles of tube against intentional attacks?


How is this any different from guarding the thousands of bridges we have in this country?
 
2013-07-17 10:00:53 PM  

Hollie Maea: Hector Remarkable: It's more stupid than crazy.

I love you too.

/It may be crazy, but it isn't stupid.


Alright, alright, let's just say it's equal parts stupid and crazy.

It is nice to be loved though.
 
2013-07-17 11:16:22 PM  

Hector Remarkable: Hollie Maea: Hector Remarkable: It's more stupid than crazy.

I love you too.

/It may be crazy, but it isn't stupid.

Alright, alright, let's just say it's equal parts stupid and crazy.

It is nice to be loved though.


Shouldn't you be in the flying car thread whining about how "they" haven't supplied us with them yet? Run along, now.
 
2013-07-18 10:22:27 AM  

Hollie Maea: retarded: Bunch of pessimists up in here.

God, that's for sure.  It seems like the national motto is "that'll never work".  Probably no conincidence that the national activity is whining about how "they" haven't yet provided us with flying cars.


Yeah, stupid universe and its physical and chemical limits. Just keep trying! We've plucked all the low-hanging fruit, what do you expect? That the extraction of energy and progress will just keep going forever into the future?

TelemonianAjax: And thanks for the tip on the link. We've coasted for the better part of a century on old infrastructure models, and we've learned a lot since Ike's day. It's time to start using that knowledge. I'm firmly of the opinion that the only options left to us are to literally rebuild the systems we know we'll need in the next 100 years.


The answer isn't bigger and better steam engines. We have to change our social model, of what it even means to live in society. Some people never grow up and think that it just means bigger and better cars, planes, trains, what have yous so we can keep working more and more just to eat and have a house.

Giant scale '60s stye mega engineering is all great fun, but the future of massive energy use to shuffle people around is not very bright.

We don't even have the Concorde anymore.

But I guess when you don't even have something physical, not a single bolt, then it's easy to dream about how a certain technology will change the world.

Until the rubber hits the road so to speak.

Only time will tell, but I'm betting on "never" for this particular fever-dream.
 
Displayed 28 of 178 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report