Discuss:Technology, Humanity, Industry:World Development - The MAGLEV 2000
From da Vinci Concept
World Development: The MAGLEV 2000
What is the idea of development based upon? What is technology? How does an economy function?
The magnetically levitating transcontinental railway defines exactly that which we as human beings create to uplift living standards through technological advances and discoveries creating a just economic system that in effect can spread worldwide and help in a huge way, to develope the world, and even other planets within our lifetime.
The MAGLEV 2000 can transport millions of tons of water all over the world, quick, cheap, and safely, enabling other countries with drought and such, to progress where they would otherwise become poverty strucken. In the next 20 years, there are many areas that will otherwise errupt into wars over water sources and such, because of the lack of fresh water. Decelinizaiton works, but is still much to expensive for the kind of development needed. Pipelines transporting water work as well, but are difficult to build in many areas, and there are many complications when along up and down terrain. MAGLEV can easily and affordably transport the needed water supply, and much quicker too, across any terrain. As well, the same transportation railway for water can be used for transport of trucking goods, hundreds of thousands of people, cars, ect. MAGLEV is the transportation of the future.
The first MAGLEV system was proposed in 1966. Since then we have come a long way in our technological advances in this specific area. Not only is it not affordable for construction, but the abilities are almost limitless as a science driver for a growing economy worldwide.
Right now Florida is building there first MAGLEV 2000 railway, but we hope to see this gets others attention quickly, so we can begin construction on a continental railway, so by the year 2040-2050 we can have a wordwide working MAGLEV railsystem, including super MAGLEV systems, reaching speeds easily of over 2000 mph in underground and surface depressurized tunnels. New York to Los Angeles in 1 hour. This, is the future in transportation.
What about space? The startram, as a means to achieve space flight easily and affordably is already available with our current technology. Unlike the elevator project which needs metals 100 times stronger than what is now available.
Anyway, if you have any questions on what this is, or where to get information on it, just e-mail me, or try your luch at www.21stcenturysciencetech.com
--joryea Mon Aug 16 11:01:22 2004
charmed_quark Wed Aug 18 20:39:46 2004
How is going to be cheap? According to this
The estimated capital cost of a 163-mile intermediate system connecting Las Vegas with Barstow is approximately $4.5 billion, including the cost of the initial segment.
And the Chunnel cost $15 billion to build 31 miles. A depressurized Maglev would effectively combine the two projects for a conservative estimate of $500 million per miles of construction. Shipping water on the space shuttle sounds cheap by comparison.
I haven't previously heard of startram so I checked out startram.com. If I understand this correctly, the launch tube itself will extend to an altitute of 70,000 feet. That 40x Taipei 101, the tallest building in the world. I'm not a structural engineer, but I'm pretty sure that would exceed the material strength of most comercial building supplies. I kind of like the idea, but I still think space elevator is the way to go.
Maglev are a neat idea, but as economical way to transport water to drought areas, I think they fail.
[ Edited Thu Aug 19 2004, 07:36AM ]
--charmed_quark Wed Aug 18 20:39:46 2004
joryea Fri Aug 27 1:07:35 2004
Well, I don't know where you got your information on the costs of the railway, but I know differently. Yes, initially, the government, as it always has in the past, will put forth federal credit to build the construction of the MAGLEV, and with this being a science driver, we can hopefully get private organizations to contribute to its development like what we are seeing today in Florida.
The cost for Japan's railway is around 50-60 million per mile of track. The cost for Germany's is around 40 million per mile of track. We though, have advancement greatly in the process of the construction of the MAGLEV railway, and can effectively produce the parts needed for the assembly and building of this massive project at the low cost of 12 million per mile of track. For the construction of such things as the underwater tunnel under the Berring Strait, yes, it would cost much more, but the lifetime of this kind of railway, and the no friction, low maintanance of such a railway, as well as its fast, efficient traveling capacity, producing the ability of transportation of water from the pipelines of today costing about $5 per 1000 gallons to $1 per 1000 gallons, and the transportation of trucking to around 1-5% of the current cost, is completely astounding. The average ticket per passenger per mile would as well, be greatly decreased. The profits and economic corridors this would develope are astonishing and unquestionably a science driver ridding the world of its current chaoctic frenzy of madness and lack of infrastructure. Oh... hehe.. and it doesn't make any noise.. it hovers quietly and smoothly.. and in depressurized tunnels, you don't even feel it move as it cruises at 25 hundred miles per hour to your destination somewhere accross the world of man. Oh.. and did I mention affordable transportation, with your car, from city to city or country to country.
About the star-tram: I think you fail to see the power of the human mind.. and of course.. magnetic superconductors and the mass of tonage they can easily and affordably lift. Your talking about thousands of tons per meter of tunneling that will be easily lifted in a very precise and controlled manner as to create little or no wind friction upon the tunnel by the use of levies and such that would reach miles into the sky. The srar-tram is much longer than is it tall =) 800 miles long in all. 175 miles of this are in the air =) crazy you say? most definitely. But wasn't going to the moon crazy too. Oh.. and of course, your talking about increasing the speed of a traveling craft to the maximume speed we know as tolerable upon the Earths surface while still holding the human being in one piece. Thats about.. umm.. I think around 8,000 miles per hour.. but I'll have to double check on that. This is why the 800 miles of tunnel is needed. hehe.. the cool thing. is that this craft will be traveling so very fast, that the amount of time it will be traveling through the 175 mile above ground stretch of tunnel is simply fundamentally .... well.. I can't come up with the words for such a feat. I absolutely love this stuff though.
If you still question the means by which this is ever possible, then the idea of what an economy is, being that in our lifetimes we have never seen such a thing as an actual growing economy, is most definitely a confusing issue. I will open up another thread on this very soon (the issue of what a real economy is, and how it functions).
[ Edited Fri Aug 27 2004, 01:17AM ]
--joryea Fri Aug 27 1:07:35 2004
Truc_Ha Sun Sep 12 8:18:23 2004
As moderator, I recommend to you, Joryea, that you pay charmed_quark the courtesy that he paid you, by also taking his thoughtful and researched response seriously and then citing the sources of your figures.
--Truc_Ha Sun Sep 12 8:18:23 2004
joryea Mon Sep 20 9:04:08 2004
yes, it is good to acknowledge that the information is somewhat reliable. What you have before you is what it would cost under our current manufacturing capability under our unjust economic order. What I proposed was a MAGLEV, the newest most efficient model, built in the only manner allowed, under a new just worldwide economic order, that would in effect allow for renewed manufacturing to the extent that the parts for the MAGLEV could be mass produced which in effect would allow the costs to be greatly reduced, even from the current cost for the Japan railway or the German railway.
The best site for these ideas would probably be under MAGLEV 2000. I've done research into fusion magazine and 21 century science and technology... umm.. other sources would be.. look into the Eurasian Landbridge. I get my info from sources such as Sun Yet Sin.. in China.. who proposed this in the early 1900's.. also Mendelayav in Russia.. he also proposed this.. as well as.. yes.. LaRouche today. Good luch on your research. I hope I spelt the names right. If I find out differently on the spelling of these names, I will edit immediately to compensate.
Thank you for your continued interest in ideas and the sharing of them.
--joryea Mon Sep 20 9:04:08 2004
charmed_quark Mon Sep 20 10:34:47 2004
What was initially proposed was an vacuum tube Maglev. The primary cost of such as system would be either digging the tunnel (thus Chunnel comparison) or digging a trench and enlosing it. Other trench projects would be ReTRAC ~282 million for 2 miles of trench or or the abandoned SSC which completed 14 miles of tunnelling for 2 billion.
Any comparison to a real comstruction project estimates the cost of a vacuum tunnel MAGLEV at hundreds of millions per mile. Unenclosed, aboveground systems like in Japan or Europe are much cheaper and have their uses but do not achieve the speeds you are citing.
Like I said, I like the MAGLEV idea, but for there is not currently a demand for supersonic transport. If we want to transport large amounts of water, why not use a normal pipeline, like those used for oil?
As for star tram, I'm still considering the idea, but have questions. The ideal location for this, or any other launch platform, is equitorial. So where +-15 degrees from the equator are you going to build a 800 miles ramp? I don't see any place on the globe in South America or Africa that would be remotely suitable. Also, a key component of superconductors is yttrium which has a natural abundance of 30 parts per billion compared to gold's 50 ppb. Is there even enough material to build this?
[ Edited Mon Sep 20 2004, 07:54PM ]
--charmed_quark Mon Sep 20 10:34:47 2004
grefrath Fri Sep 24 21:57:55 2004
Thanks to Joryea and charmedQuark for the thoughtful and analytic discussion. I'd like if I could though to perhaps send the discussion in a different direction. I was listening to Lester Brown give a lecture on the future of energy resources
http://wmass.indymedia.org/media/all/display/1129
and was curious about something he mentioned in relation to this discussion, water recycling. Normally this thought of drinking 'tainted water' gives city counsels and state legislatures the shivers, but if we are serious about the diminishing water table, and if we do trust our scientists to treat our water to a drinkable standard (nothing comes straight out of the river anymore) does this not seem like at least a possible alternative to shipping water over hundreds of miles at a cost of several times recycling?
Thanks again for your thoughts, and look forward to your response,
[ Edited Fri Sep 24 2004, 10:00PM ]
--grefrath Fri Sep 24 21:57:55 2004
sunny Wed Oct 6 19:28:13 2004
Interesting thoughts on potential future transportation systems. I agree with charmed_quark in that it is not a feasible approach to water transportation. I also think that grefrath has a very keen point in sighting that it is our use and re-use of water that needs improvement. I would like better citations for numerical figures, especially when these are so crucial to the discussion. charmed_quark seems to have a reasonable handle on citing his sources, but joryea seems to think that loosely waving at some group or journal somewhere is enough.
joryea: Please make an effort to cite your sources properly.
My thoughts on water transportation:
How about rivers, lakes, and streams? We've been using them for millions of years and if preserved, don't cost anything. As grefrath alluded, we need to preserve and protect our existing water resources and ensure that we properly manage our natural resources. For areas where natural water is not as abundant, alternative solutions should be sought. I think that putting greater resources into desalinization technology would be more sucessful than shipping water via train. One might even be able to combine water desalinization with electricity production. Steam powered generators still produce most of the world's electrical energy.
The global MagLev concept used to ship water seems about as practical as increasing the amount of carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere to cause global warming in order to free up more fresh water.
[ Edited Sun Nov 28 2004, 07:48PM ]
--sunny Wed Oct 6 19:28:13 2004
joryea Wed Oct 6 22:56:17 2004
charmed_quark,
Yes, it is much more expensive for underground depressurized, or even surface tunnels, although Iím sure this can be remedied as well, sometime in the future ahead of us.
You were mistaken however about the original intention. The water transportation for a normal MAGLEV 2000 monorail costs 20% as much as water-pipes do today, i.e. $1 for every $5 we spend per 1,000 gallons (reference: www.21stcentureysciencetech.com ).
To answer the question of the 800 miles of track, 625 miles are underground. This can be done hypothetically, although I am currently still in-depth on the research of superconductors. I have yet to experiment with them personally.
Grefrath,
Thank you for your interest in these ideas. I most definitely agree with the idea of using a more effective method for water distribution and irrigation. I personally would recommend the MAGLEV for special needful tasks where you could not immediately transport the needed amount of water resources to continue a functioning economy (this includes enabling such transportation of water to nations all across the world in any manner of need of such resources so as to prevent droughts from overtaking prospering sovereign nations).
About the scientists: personally, I think we should educate the youth, and not dumb them down. This would adequately allow for the future to be formed with a sense of actuality when it comes to certain needs for a people to function prosperingly. Scientists are always needed. We simply need a futuristic outlook to become part of the individualís daily life. This should help with the idea of trust, as well as an investment to future generations.
Sunny,
I agree, and am sorry that most of the books I read are not read directly from internet sites, and the research is done in libraries for the most part, and not on internet sources, not enabling for such accurate sources as you might have for such investigations into current technologies. This is something I cannot help, so you will have to pardon me for my lack of rigor in such cases.
I whole-heartedly agree undistinguishingly with your ideas of new technologies being used for the most effective water management systems for distribution of such a needed resource across this nation, and the world. I will personally create another thread dealing with this specifically, in detail, with sources of such understandings of these systems as hopefully may seem redeemable to your senses of rigorous intellectual workings of our most cherished and beloved human mind.
Thank you
[ Edited Wed Oct 06 2004, 10:57PM ]
--joryea Wed Oct 6 22:56:17 2004
charmed_quark Fri Oct 8 16:30:06 2004
I've been doing some more looking around about star tram and found this paper by someone who actually demonstrates some math, although I haven't done anything to check it. Dr. Hall's plan would only require 300-km of track, vertically elevated (no ramp) to 100-km. Being at an elevation of 100-km means that depressurition is no longer necessary and LEO altitude (though not speed) is already achieved. I also seem to be incorrect about this being structurely possible. If it were built of commercial diamond, it would be feasible, though expensive. This plan doesn't require the depleting world's ytrrium.
Joryea: citing sources does not require any hyperlinks, MLA would be great. Citation is the mark of scholarship.
[ Edited Fri Oct 08 2004, 04:42PM ]
--charmed_quark Fri Oct 8 16:30:06 2004
joryea Fri Oct 8 17:49:41 2004
hmm. Where did you get your information on ytrrium? From my understanding, you can't deplete the world of something that is practically everywhere in the sands of our earth. That my friend, I deem an'impossibility'. Here is a website that goes over an element called yttrium though. I'm not sure if it's the same one your speaking of, yet it was the only name close enough under the periodic table of elements.
http://pearl1.lanl.gov/periodic/elements/39.html
to find out something of superconductors, this site seems descent.
http://superconductors.org/
About the MAGLEV 2000: (some websites I researched into so I could allow for easy access to further reading of such)
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/magnetrain.html
I think this article is even better: http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/Summer03/maglev2.html
HEHE.. a maglev site: http://www.maglev2000.com/
There about to build a MAGLEV in Florida: http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/ammaglev.htm
p.s. what do you mean by 'ditation is the mark of scholarship'?
--joryea Fri Oct 8 17:49:41 2004
charmed_quark Sat Oct 9 10:42:48 2004
Got my numbers abundance from CRC Handbook,2003-2004, 24th Edition. Sorry for leaving that out. I'm pretty familiar with superconductors having baked (they are ceramics) my own for what proved to be a failed ion drive.
The Los Alamos site only gives percentages in certain minerals. this has abundance by mass as well. While not impossibly rare, it is a finite resource and is certainly possible to deplete, or at least consume until prohibitly expensive.
Thank you for the links. From the 21st Century SciTech webpages the cost of transporting material would be $.07 per ton per mile. A gallon of water is about 8 pounds so a ton of water would be ~240 gallons. Most of the fresh water on Earth is in Canada so let's make Calgary, Alberta our starting point. Phoenix, AZ, is a city that is going to desparately need water in the next 40 years and is wealthy enough that they might consider such a system. At a distance of 1600 miles it will cost a little over $2 per gallon to transport water from Calgary to Phoenix. This might be feasible for drinking water. It doesn't cover sanitary needs or agriculture (plants take a lot more water than people and oranges don't grow in Canada) and it certainly would be inconcievable for a such a system to help any one in Africa or India which are farther and poorer.
To summarize (IMHO):
Maglev
-cool for urban communters and Disneyworld/Las Vegas tourists
-bad for transporting water
-still interesting for getting into space, merits further discussion, would anybody care to comment on my previous post?
grefrath had a good point about tainted water. This deserves more discussion, but perhaps on another thread.
joryea: 'Citation is the mark of scholarship' - what I mean is that it is important to demonstrate exactly why you think that something is true, so that your audience can verify your claims. There was an important reason why all those teachers made us write bibliographies and have sources for papers.
--charmed_quark Sat Oct 9 10:42:48 2004
joryea Mon Nov 8 23:48:59 2004
The water trasportation is simply for immediate needs. If I didn't make this clear, I appologize. For the more long term investment in water management, I'll refer to the NAWAPA Water Project. With this, you can irrigate the entire North American continent. Of course, to even accomplish such a task reasonably, it would be a necessity to take the financial system through a bankruptcy reorganization like F.D.R. did in the 1930's after we began to eat away at the life source of our economy which constituted us becoming a world power in the first place.
A good place to look into these ideas more closely, would be the TVA Project, Alexander Hamilton's writtings on Public Credit, and Public Debt. Lincoln's writtings, and others.
The MAGLEV is the future of trasportation worldwide. I'm not sure if your information is true or not, but I'm deffinitely not convinced that we could ever concievably deplete the worlds sand of a naturally reoccuring process of the creation of yttrium from existence. Supply and demand is over, capitalism has had it's sad and pathetic reign; the world needs development, and the only method towards that kind of solution, everywhere in the world, including Africa, begins with the implementation of the American System of Political Economy, followed by massive credit towards large-scale long-term and medium-term infrastucture projects worldwide. Of course, this must come from the future generations of youth, today, constituting each and every one of us, as individuals within the whole of humanity.
We are not seperate from the worlds future existence. The universe is a beautiful place, but the maximal beauty comes from leadership defined by those of our past that uplifted and fought for the general welfare of all indivisible individuals living and not yet born into the world awaiting their very birth so as to increase the magnitude of anti-entropy within and over the unvierse, being that our nature consists of living within nature, as well as the governance over that nature.
Is this reason enough to seek the understanding of the sublime?
[ Edited Mon Nov 08 2004, 11:53PM ]
--joryea Mon Nov 8 23:48:59 2004
