Another bit of vague musing… ignore the cost or reason why

How high could we build a pyramid using modern technology? Would something like 1000 m be possible, even 2000 m?

The Great Pyramid of Giza is 146m high and was built without cranes, dump trucks, conveyors or forklifts, or even steel hand-tools.

You could build one out of Lego many km high, but you’d need more Lego than has ever been manufactured.

Bubblecar said:

You could build one out of Lego many km high, but you’d need more Lego than has ever been manufactured.

please show working

Put the idea to India.

They seem to have a lot of money for which they really can’t think of any other possible use.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/12/india-build-giant-statue-medieval-king-shivaji-161225143133892.html

Stumpy_seahorse said:

Bubblecar said:

You could build one out of Lego many km high, but you’d need more Lego than has ever been manufactured.

please show working

depend on the crush properties of the material.

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

If you could find a wide enough base probably only limited by the compressibility of the blocks and the stability of the underlying countryside.

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

There was some wild talk a while back about building 300-metre high convection funnel towers somewhere in Australia, to try to increase rainfall.

Bubblecar said:

You could build one out of Lego many km high, but you’d need more Lego than has ever been manufactured.

Use Duplo and we’re halfway there.

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

Easier you would think to build a dam where water was and pipe it across, or build a desalination plant.

If you really wanted to get into geoengineering you could identify a low area and build a trench to flood it. That should increase local rainfall. You would want a bit of a tidal system though to stop salination.

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

Easier you would think to build a dam where water was and pipe it across, or build a desalination plant.

Possibly. But once it is built there would be no ongoing costs.

AwesomeO said:

If you really wanted to get into geoengineering you could identify a low area and build a trench to flood it. That should increase local rainfall. You would want a bit of a tidal system though to stop salination.

That was being floated in the 1880’s. The idea never really gained momentum.

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

Easier you would think to build a dam where water was and pipe it across, or build a desalination plant.

Possibly. But once it is built there would be no ongoing costs.

what about the cost of rescuing all those planes that crash into this unexpected new mountain range?…

AwesomeO said:

If you really wanted to get into geoengineering you could identify a low area and build a trench to flood it. That should increase local rainfall. You would want a bit of a tidal system though to stop salination.

I don’t think that would work. Take lake Eyre for example, when it fills it does not seem to increase rainfall in the area, it just evaporates. Unless there are the right conditions to trigger precipitation the moisture will just be carried away on the wind, to fall somewhere else far away where conditions are right.

party_pants said:

Another bit of vague musing… ignore the cost or reason why

How high could we build a pyramid using modern technology? Would something like 1000 m be possible, even 2000 m?

The Great Pyramid of Giza is 146m high and was built without cranes, dump trucks, conveyors or forklifts, or even steel hand-tools.

A bit less vague please. “Pyramid” can mean several things. Solid pyramid or hollow? Wide base or narrow base? Do you allow an Eiffel Tower type of truss to be called a pyramid? Do you allow Burj Khalifa in Dubai to be called a pyramid? Do you allow new and possibly expensive materials such as carbon fibre?

I’ve already done a computation for a tower as an alternative to a space elevator, using advanced material fabrication (extruded composite) comparing double shell system like an aircraft fuselage to a truss system like the Eiffel Tower. Not sure if I can find the original. But if you want something more traditional in shape or materials then I’d have to start from scratch.

need to pick your latitude. you won’t get rain where the circulation on moist air in the atmosphere doesn’t reach the ground. just look at where the planets deserts are.

JudgeMental said:

need to pick your latitude. you won’t get rain where the circulation on moist air in the atmosphere doesn’t reach the ground. just look at where the planets deserts are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_cell

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

If you really wanted to get into geoengineering you could identify a low area and build a trench to flood it. That should increase local rainfall. You would want a bit of a tidal system though to stop salination.

I don’t think that would work. Take lake Eyre for example, when it fills it does not seem to increase rainfall in the area, it just evaporates. Unless there are the right conditions to trigger precipitation the moisture will just be carried away on the wind, to fall somewhere else far away where conditions are right.

A three km wide belt of asphalt that creates a rising curtain of hot air to force the moisture laden air up. I seem to recall something about that sort of stuff.

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

If you really wanted to get into geoengineering you could identify a low area and build a trench to flood it. That should increase local rainfall. You would want a bit of a tidal system though to stop salination.

That was being floated in the 1880’s. The idea never really gained momentum.

Pump all of Europe’s sewage to the Sahara.

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

This was proposed for central Australia more than 100 years ago. It’s still a good idea.

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

This was proposed for central Australia more than 100 years ago. It’s still a good idea.

Why? If it was workable we would have done it by now.

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

Another bit of vague musing… ignore the cost or reason why

How high could we build a pyramid using modern technology? Would something like 1000 m be possible, even 2000 m?

The Great Pyramid of Giza is 146m high and was built without cranes, dump trucks, conveyors or forklifts, or even steel hand-tools.

A bit less vague please. “Pyramid” can mean several things. Solid pyramid or hollow? Wide base or narrow base? Do you allow an Eiffel Tower type of truss to be called a pyramid? Do you allow Burj Khalifa in Dubai to be called a pyramid? Do you allow new and possibly expensive materials such as carbon fibre?

I’ve already done a computation for a tower as an alternative to a space elevator, using advanced material fabrication (extruded composite) comparing double shell system like an aircraft fuselage to a truss system like the Eiffel Tower. Not sure if I can find the original. But if you want something more traditional in shape or materials then I’d have to start from scratch.

I was thinking an outer layer of rock or concrete, with dirt infill.

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

This was proposed for central Australia more than 100 years ago. It’s still a good idea.

Why? If it was workable we would have done it by now.

Being workable is not the only factor in any project. It’s probably the least important.

JudgeMental said:

JudgeMental said:

need to pick your latitude. you won’t get rain where the circulation on moist air in the atmosphere doesn’t reach the ground. just look at where the planets deserts are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_cell

So not most of Australia :)

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

This was proposed for central Australia more than 100 years ago. It’s still a good idea.

Why? If it was workable we would have done it by now.

Being workable is not the only factor in any project. It’s probably the least important.

They did some such work way back then, They made the anabranch on the Darling and there was trenching done in South Australia but it wasn’t really cost effective.

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

There was some wild talk a while back about building 300-metre high convection funnel towers somewhere in Australia, to try to increase rainfall.

Solar updraft towers? They were for electricity.

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

JudgeMental said:

need to pick your latitude. you won’t get rain where the circulation on moist air in the atmosphere doesn’t reach the ground. just look at where the planets deserts are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_cell

So not most of Australia :)

well, flooding lake eyre wont help rainfall and neither will building a mountain range there. this was discussed at length on the original sssf and steve went into detail as to why it wont work.

buffy said:

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

There was some wild talk a while back about building 300-metre high convection funnel towers somewhere in Australia, to try to increase rainfall.

Solar updraft towers? They were for electricity.

No, this was rain-related, as i recall.

buffy said:

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

I wonder if you could build a whole mountain range, enough to make it rain locally. So you could gather the water.

There was some wild talk a while back about building 300-metre high convection funnel towers somewhere in Australia, to try to increase rainfall.

Solar updraft towers? They were for electricity.

No, this was rain-related, as i recall.

JudgeMental said:

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_cell

So not most of Australia :)

well, flooding lake eyre wont help rainfall and neither will building a mountain range there. this was discussed at length on the original sssf and steve went into detail as to why it wont work.

What we really need to do is put the top half of WA and all of the NT under the sea.

Not only will this shut up the Sandgropers about their inflated ideas of their own importance, it’ll rid us entirely of the tiresome NT, and put us that much farther away from Asia.

Is this what you were thinking of?

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/the-dust-bowl-skyscrapers-that-were-supposed-to-make-it-rain/

buffy said:

Is this what you were thinking of?

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/the-dust-bowl-skyscrapers-that-were-supposed-to-make-it-rain/

Summat lahk thet.

This was just a few years ago 10, maybe 15 yrs.

Anyway, to summon the spirit of Zarkov, don’t pyramids somehow mysteriously produce water (as well as sharpen your razor blades)?

> I’ve already done a computation for a tower as an alternative to a space elevator

By that I mean a tower 35,786,000 metres high. It could be done, but would cost of the order of 10 to 100 times as much.

For a pyramid of classical shape, composition and density, let’s see 4.5*4.5*1.2/3 = 8.1 cubic kilometres is a classical pyramid of what height? 1,850 metres high.

captain_spalding said:

Anyway, to summon the spirit of Zarkov, don’t pyramids somehow mysteriously produce water (as well as sharpen your razor blades)?

Yes, all you need is a water powered landrover and a pyramid and you can tell Big Oil to get rogered and burnt.

mollwollfumble said:

By that I mean a tower 35,786,000 metres high.

I bet i could see my house from there.

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

Another bit of vague musing… ignore the cost or reason why

How high could we build a pyramid using modern technology? Would something like 1000 m be possible, even 2000 m?

The Great Pyramid of Giza is 146m high and was built without cranes, dump trucks, conveyors or forklifts, or even steel hand-tools.

A bit less vague please. “Pyramid” can mean several things. Solid pyramid or hollow? Wide base or narrow base? Do you allow an Eiffel Tower type of truss to be called a pyramid? Do you allow Burj Khalifa in Dubai to be called a pyramid? Do you allow new and possibly expensive materials such as carbon fibre?

I’ve already done a computation for a tower as an alternative to a space elevator, using advanced material fabrication (extruded composite) comparing double shell system like an aircraft fuselage to a truss system like the Eiffel Tower. Not sure if I can find the original. But if you want something more traditional in shape or materials then I’d have to start from scratch.

I was thinking an outer layer of rock or concrete, with dirt infill.

Maybe a big cistern in the base to hold water, a big hollow void which does not need fill.

Peak Warming Man said:

captain_spalding said:

Anyway, to summon the spirit of Zarkov, don’t pyramids somehow mysteriously produce water (as well as sharpen your razor blades)?

Yes, all you need is a water powered landrover and a pyramid and you can tell Big Oil to get rogered and burnt.

All in vain. I’d already be doomed by my metal poisoning.

Peak Warming Man said:

captain_spalding said:

Anyway, to summon the spirit of Zarkov, don’t pyramids somehow mysteriously produce water (as well as sharpen your razor blades)?

Yes, all you need is a water powered landrover and a pyramid and you can tell Big Oil to get rogered and burnt.

with no hydrocarbon accelerant that’s going to be a hard fire to start.

JudgeMental said:

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_cell

So not most of Australia :)

well, flooding lake eyre wont help rainfall and neither will building a mountain range there. this was discussed at length on the original sssf and steve went into detail as to why it wont work.

Too long ago. I disagree on both counts. Start with flooding Lake Eyre. That weakens the blocking high that forms over the centre of Australia. You can actually see it weaken on the weather charts. Weakening the blocking high allows both the northward penetration of the South Australian cold fronts into the interior and allows the southward penetration of tropical cyclones into the interior. Both bring rain.

party_pants said:

I was thinking an outer layer of rock or concrete, with dirt infill.

In that case, 1,850 metres high would be possible, using conventional techniques already used in open cut mining and dam construction. So well over 1.000 metres but probably a little short of 2.000 metres.

mollwollfumble said:

JudgeMental said:

party_pants said:

So not most of Australia :)

well, flooding lake eyre wont help rainfall and neither will building a mountain range there. this was discussed at length on the original sssf and steve went into detail as to why it wont work.

Too long ago. I disagree on both counts. Start with flooding Lake Eyre. That weakens the blocking high that forms over the centre of Australia. You can actually see it weaken on the weather charts. Weakening the blocking high allows both the northward penetration of the South Australian cold fronts into the interior and allows the southward penetration of tropical cyclones into the interior. Both bring rain.

I’ll go with what steve reckons. this is his area of expertise after all.

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

I was thinking an outer layer of rock or concrete, with dirt infill.

In that case, 1,850 metres high would be possible, using conventional techniques already used in open cut mining and dam construction. So well over 1.000 metres but probably a little short of 2.000 metres.

Actually, for a rain tower, it could be hollow with just a frame and outer skin.

You could build a pyramidal frame out of carbon fibre composites over 300 km high.

dv said:

You could build a pyramidal frame out of carbon fibre composites over 300 km high.

lego could do it

I’ve just taken a closer look at the old rain-funnel article that Buffy quoted earlier:

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/the-dust-bowl-skyscrapers-that-were-supposed-to-make-it-rain/

Apparently, each tower requires a massive multi-jet fountain that’s squirts water at least 25% the height of the Empire State Building.

If you’ve got pumping technology like that, why are you farting around with towers?

Mecanno could do it.

For a rain pyramid, forget the pyramid shape guess. More like a wall.

Some kind of base with a wall to force the wind upwards to the point where clouds start to form. Then a huge mesh curtain of some description to collect condensation and let it drip down below and drain away into a storage area.

A rain maker and catcher doesn’t need to be solid at all. Will be ugly AF though.

party_pants said:

Will be ugly AF though.

And since when has that been a barrier to modern architecture?

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

Will be ugly AF though.

And since when has that been a barrier to modern architecture?

I guess the view from the top might make it a tourist attraction.

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

Will be ugly AF though.

And since when has that been a barrier to modern architecture?

I guess the view from the top might make it a tourist attraction.

That idea has come up before. It was said of the French writer Guy de Maupassant that he ate dinner in the restaurant of the Eiffel Tower every night of the week, and when asked why, replied, “Because it’s the only place in Paris from where you can’t see the Eiffel Tower.”

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

And since when has that been a barrier to modern architecture?

I guess the view from the top might make it a tourist attraction.

That idea has come up before. It was said of the French writer Guy de Maupassant that he ate dinner in the restaurant of the Eiffel Tower every night of the week, and when asked why, replied, “Because it’s the only place in Paris from where you can’t see the Eiffel Tower.”

I was going to post that quote, but I couldn’t recall who said it :)

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

And since when has that been a barrier to modern architecture?

I guess the view from the top might make it a tourist attraction.

That idea has come up before. It was said of the French writer Guy de Maupassant that he ate dinner in the restaurant of the Eiffel Tower every night of the week, and when asked why, replied, “Because it’s the only place in Paris from where you can’t see the Eiffel Tower.”

that’s funny I always read the story as lunch leaning against the foot

party_pants said:

For a rain pyramid, forget the pyramid shape guess. More like a wall.

Some kind of base with a wall to force the wind upwards to the point where clouds start to form. Then a huge mesh curtain of some description to collect condensation and let it drip down below and drain away into a storage area.

A rain maker and catcher doesn’t need to be solid at all. Will be ugly AF though.

This is a tried method used by The United Emirates and is reasonably economical. No doubt it could be improved further.

Ionic Breeze devices are giant ionisers mounted atop tall steel poles and were built by the Swiss company, Metro Systems International. The devices generate massive ionic fields, positively charged ions ground back to the Earth while the negatively charged ions rise into the atmosphere. As they rise, the negative ions (electrons) collect particles of dust on the way up. These flecks act as seeds for ice crystal formation, much as silver iodide does except without the need for clouds. As long as the atmospheric humidity is at least 30 per cent, the system supposedly works even in clear skies.

In the summer of 2010, 100 such emitters were spread over five sites in the Al Ain region. During July and August alone, when the area typically receives zero rainfall, it reportedly rained on 52 separate occasions, often with gusting winds and sometimes hail. The Max Planck Institute for Meteorology monitored the project and backed the study’s findings.

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/07/giz-explains-how-human-beings-control-the-weather/

dv said:

You could build a pyramidal frame out of carbon fibre composites over 300 km high.

That’s interesting. I agree, we could.

party_pants said:

Another bit of vague musing… ignore the cost or reason why

How high could we build a pyramid using modern technology? Would something like 1000 m be possible, even 2000 m?

The Great Pyramid of Giza is 146m high and was built without cranes, dump trucks, conveyors or forklifts, or even steel hand-tools.

Great question.

I’ll need to think about it.

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

You could build a pyramidal frame out of carbon fibre composites over 300 km high.

That’s interesting. I agree, we could.

Would you and dv like to get together and show us your workings?

> As they rise, the negative ions (electrons) collect particles of dust on the way up. These flecks act as seeds for ice crystal formation

That’s not going to work, dust particles are too big, you can’t pick up enough of them.

Better would be either carbon soot microparticles, or salt particles generated by blowing small bubbles through salt water.

…But the country’s arid climate, combined with its soaring demand for fresh water, has led scientists to experiment with even more futuristic technologies. During the summer of 2010, it was reported that Swiss company Meteo Systems had created rainstorms out of blue skies using “ionisation towers” — umbrella-shaped structures that generated plumes of negatively charged particles said to promote cloud formation. The UK’s Daily Mail spoke of “scientists working secretly for the United Arab Emirates,” producing 52 thunderstorms over Abu Dhabi’s Al Ain region. However, the paper could only refer to a company video to substantiate its claims. In 2011, National Geographic News reported that Meteo was using “arrays of 33-foot (10-metre) electric towers” that “supercharged” clouds, much to the disbelief of international weather experts. Fox News added that “secrecy seems to be the hallmark of company, which requires a password merely for access to their site.”

The reality is less sensational. Websites run by Meteo Systems and its owner (Singapore-based clean energy investors Sindicatum) openly provide data, descriptions and photos of the UAE ionisation trials and even name the technology’s investment budget to date — $18 million. “During the summer of 2010, Meteo Systems carried out privately funded trials in the Al Ain region of Abu Dhabi using its WeatherTec system,” a company spokesman, who declined to be named, tells Esquire. “Over the period of the trial there were a total of 61 rain events approximately 300 million cubic metres of water. Independent analysis of data (including radar data provided by the UAE’s National Centre of Meteorology and Seismology NCMS) suggests that the technology influenced at least eight rainfall events that yielded 14 million cubic metres of rain This is not to imply that Meteo caused this rain but only that the conditions were suitable for our system to influence these cloud systems.”

If Meteo Systems’ own assessment is cautious, experts on the ground are downright incredulous. “Despite good amounts of rain that year, we cannot confirm that this technology had anything to do with it,” says Sufian Farrah, a meteorologist at Abu Dhabi’s NMCS. He points to Newton’s second law, which talks about the conservation of energy. “Cloud formation requires enormous amounts of energy, which you cannot generate with a low-power electric cathode. You can’t just plug in some box and expect clouds to appear.” Indeed, Meteo Systems’ own data rates each towers’ output at 500W — around a sixth of an electric kettle.

Farrah says he consulted a number of scientific centres around the world, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, to confirm his assumption. “They all said it would be very difficult to succeed with this technology. Essentially, you’re playing games in the open atmosphere.”…

https://www.esquireme.com/culture/features/how-the-uae-is-making-it-rain

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

You could build a pyramidal frame out of carbon fibre composites over 300 km high.

That’s interesting. I agree, we could.

Would you and dv like to get together and show us your workings?

I’d have to dig up the spreadsheet.

JudgeMental said:

The UK’s Daily Mail spoke of “scientists working secretly for the United Arab Emirates,” producing 52 thunderstorms over Abu Dhabi’s Al Ain region. However, the paper could only refer to a company video to substantiate its claims.

I’m afraid that a statement in the Daily Mail, that even the Daily Mail recognises is probably untrue, has an even lower veracity rating than a Donald Trump tweet.

The Rev Dodgson said:

JudgeMental said:

The UK’s Daily Mail spoke of “scientists working secretly for the United Arab Emirates,” producing 52 thunderstorms over Abu Dhabi’s Al Ain region. However, the paper could only refer to a company video to substantiate its claims.

I’m afraid that a statement in the Daily Mail, that even the Daily Mail recognises is probably untrue, has an even lower veracity rating than a Donald Trump tweet.

the references were pretty scant on the system. you had to take what was on offer. i thought esquire was the best of a poor lot.

:-)

JudgeMental said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

JudgeMental said:

The UK’s Daily Mail spoke of “scientists working secretly for the United Arab Emirates,” producing 52 thunderstorms over Abu Dhabi’s Al Ain region. However, the paper could only refer to a company video to substantiate its claims.

I’m afraid that a statement in the Daily Mail, that even the Daily Mail recognises is probably untrue, has an even lower veracity rating than a Donald Trump tweet.

the references were pretty scant on the system. you had to take what was on offer. i thought esquire was the best of a poor lot.

:-)

If it hasn’t been published in Vanity Fair it probably has a low chance of being true. .

mollwollfumble said:

> As they rise, the negative ions (electrons) collect particles of dust on the way up. These flecks act as seeds for ice crystal formation

That’s not going to work, dust particles are too big, you can’t pick up enough of them.

Better would be either carbon soot microparticles, or salt particles generated by blowing small bubbles through salt water.

Apparently it has worked, 52 times in fact.

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

> As they rise, the negative ions (electrons) collect particles of dust on the way up. These flecks act as seeds for ice crystal formation

That’s not going to work, dust particles are too big, you can’t pick up enough of them.

Better would be either carbon soot microparticles, or salt particles generated by blowing small bubbles through salt water.

Apparently it has worked, 52 times in fact.

apparently there is some doubt about that.

mollwollfumble said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

That’s interesting. I agree, we could.

Would you and dv like to get together and show us your workings?

I’d have to dig up the spreadsheet.

Yeah we worked on this last time. CTTOI… It’s not an according to Hoyle pyramid because the slope increases with altitude, like a trigonal funnel.

JudgeMental said:

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

> As they rise, the negative ions (electrons) collect particles of dust on the way up. These flecks act as seeds for ice crystal formation

That’s not going to work, dust particles are too big, you can’t pick up enough of them.

Better would be either carbon soot microparticles, or salt particles generated by blowing small bubbles through salt water.

Apparently it has worked, 52 times in fact.

apparently there is some doubt about that.

The Max Planck Institute for Meteorology monitored the project and backed the study’s findings.

PermeateFree said:

JudgeMental said:

PermeateFree said:

Apparently it has worked, 52 times in fact.

apparently there is some doubt about that.

The Max Planck Institute for Meteorology monitored the project and backed the study’s findings.

so? that is an appeal to authority. give the reference from the Max Planck Institute. There really isn’t much about this on the internet. most repeat the same puff. i linked to another source that had a Met guy from the QAE saying it was hard to show that the weather incidences were related to this apparatus.

JudgeMental said:

PermeateFree said:

JudgeMental said:

apparently there is some doubt about that.

The Max Planck Institute for Meteorology monitored the project and backed the study’s findings.

so? that is an appeal to authority. give the reference from the Max Planck Institute. There really isn’t much about this on the internet. most repeat the same puff. i linked to another source that had a Met guy from the QAE saying it was hard to show that the weather incidences were related to this apparatus.

If you care to read it, they said: “The Max Planck Institute for Meteorology monitored the project and backed the study’s findings.” Suppose it is whether you trust the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology or not. Presumably you don’t.

some more doubters

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/01/04/meteo-systems-weather-control-rain-deserts.html

and more, plus an extra bit.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/01/110118-abu-dhabi-desert-rain-cloud-seeding-controversy/

The directors of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, who have been erroneously linked to the project via media reports, released a statement expressing “distress” that the scientific organization had been associated in any way with the work of Meteo Systems. They added that rainstorms were part of unusual weather patterns in the Middle East last summer.

“Our institute has no connection whatsoever to this work, nor have we been privy to the underlying evidence that the company is using to support its claims,” the statement said.

dv said:

mollwollfumble said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Would you and dv like to get together and show us your workings?

I’d have to dig up the spreadsheet.

Yeah we worked on this last time. CTTOI… It’s not an according to Hoyle pyramid because the slope increases with altitude, like a trigonal funnel.

Yes. I don’t remember telling it to the forum before and memory is a bit hazy but here is the methodology.

The difference in material cross section between a compression member and a tension member is the need to avoid buckling. If you can get a compression member to avoid buckling then the cross sectional area can be as small as that of a tension member. The best shape to avoid buckling is a cylinder, so I started with that. My loading condition was a 1 tonne load at the top and no other loads beyond those of self weight (I ignored wind load for reasons that will become clearer later).

From the Euler buckling equation I quickly found the height limit for a solid circular cylinder of variable diameter. To improve on that, change the solid circle into a tube. Euler buckling gives the tube diameter and wall thickness required as a function of height. The best material turned out to be carbon fibre composite because of the low self weight and high modulus of elasticity. The limit for a tube then becomes the condition of thin wall buckling.

To improve on the tube, eliminate the wall buckling by replacing the tube wall by a lightweight honeycomb structure similar to the structure used in some aircraft, but optimised to completely avoid wall buckling. Then the design limit is the buckling of individual components of the honeycomb. With me so far?

The question of buildability comes into play here, and one answer is to extrude the composite with all the components of the honeycomb already in place. This allows the complex cross sectional shape without sacrificing strength.

Beyond that height, you can’t overcome the buckling of individual components within the honeycomb by making them into another sequence of honeycombs because then the thickness becomes too small to construct, sub mm, so instead you go with a truss.

Start with a square truss, each vertical component of which is one of these aeroplane-like double-hulled tubes. That gives a further resistance against buckling for a higher tower.

Then combine four square trusses together into a square truss, so that there are in all 16 compression elements going skywards. The use of trusses allows air through reducing wind loads, but beef it up at this stage to include wind loads.

What you get in the end would look startlingly like the Eiffel Tower, because the Eiffel Tower also has 16 compression elements going skywards. But because of the use of tube elements with optimised honeycomb walls of carbon fibre it could be very very much higher.

JudgeMental said:

and more, plus an extra bit.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/01/110118-abu-dhabi-desert-rain-cloud-seeding-controversy/

The directors of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, who have been erroneously linked to the project via media reports, released a statement expressing “distress” that the scientific organization had been associated in any way with the work of Meteo Systems. They added that rainstorms were part of unusual weather patterns in the Middle East last summer.

“Our institute has no connection whatsoever to this work, nor have we been privy to the underlying evidence that the company is using to support its claims,” the statement said.

Seems like some people are telling porkies. Looks like you might have to cross that solution for desert rain off the list.

Build a pyramid of PET bottles

Build a pyramid of PET bottles

36 metre tower of lego built from around 500,000 bricks

http://daily.news.goldwave.com/news/tel-aviv-attempts-plastic-brick-record-with-36metre-tower

Stumpy_seahorse said:

36 metre tower of lego built from around 500,000 bricks

http://daily.news.goldwave.com/news/tel-aviv-attempts-plastic-brick-record-with-36metre-tower

Logo reached its high point with Eddie Izzard’s Darth Vader Death Star canteen.

Don’t like the way that the sleeping quarters are right below the level with all the artillery. Hard to geta good rest with the people upstairs blasting away at all hours.