Seems to me, that Hyperloop is not only the future, it will benefit all of us and save us a lot of time.

[mtcn77]

Save the Earth... means less people.

That is the Darwinist dogma. We need more life on the planet, not less. Animals, fungi and plants form complete ecosystems. You cannot generate soil and - eventually die from soil erosion - if you don't time the rainy season with ploughed plant matter and animal fertilizer all at the same time(all done by using nature) to activate fungi to break all organic matter down to new soil. Open ground oxidation is greenhouse inducing. Fungi can incorporate the carbon we are so actively scared of unlike our pessimistic predictions go. They are pretty good at what they do, it is our interventions of ecosystems that make the land barren. When is the last time herbivores trampled vegetation at the start of the rainy season, or a forest is considered a soil bank?

People are not polluters, the lifestyle is pollution oriented. Nobody needs to have new stuff, we just don't have a service economy.

 

[Vayra86]

That is the Darwinist dogma. We need more life on the planet, not less. Animals, fungi and plants form complete ecosystems. You cannot generate soil and - eventually die from soil erosion - if you don't time the rainy season with ploughed plant matter and animal fertilizer all at the same time(all done by using nature) to activate fungi to break all organic matter down to new soil. Open ground oxidation is greenhouse inducing. Fungi can incorporate the carbon we are so actively scared of unlike our pessimistic predictions go. They are pretty good at what they do, it is our interventions of ecosystems that make the land barren. When is the last time herbivores trampled vegetation at the start of the rainy season?

People are not polluters, the lifestyle is pollution oriented. Nobody needs to have new stuff, we just don't have a service economy.

More life - I said less people Unless you see us trampling that vegetation with bare feet.

As for the lifestyle, sure. But you still need less people, even in a service economy. Services won't change a thing, they'll just reduce our means of freedom and control, something humans cope very badly with in a general sense. But let's not drift too far away from those hyperloops

 

[Steevo]

Maybe they should build this under the solar roadways that were a farce. Or give the passengers the solar refilling water bottle. Or any of the hundreds of ideas that don’t match up


The economy of scale makes this a non-starter, the millions of tons of concrete, steel, energy to produce the infrastructure outweighs the benefit. The safety issues aren’t just something you can easily engineer around, and remember that Musk had a rocket blow up too, and can anyone name a rocket that has been reused yet? Only one Falcon 9 has been reused AFAIK so again, good idea but most companies pay the premium for new when launching hundreds of millions of dollars to space. Imagine 100 people dying due to a faulty seal that will have the same force as a blowout at 42,000ft in a jet, meaning it will tear itself apart.

I believe in the free market, so let it do its job without forcing my tax dollars to pay for their ideas. If it’s feasible and marketable it will work, and the inventors can be rich.

 

[mtcn77]

Unless you see us trampling that vegetation with bare feet.

That is the job of herbivores. If we are to enter into carbon economy, each "straw" of decaying plantlife needs to matter: it can either become carbon emission, or new soil. It is our decisions that make the difference. Decaying organic matter needs to meet the ground where fungi can turn that into economy. All I'm saying is - as with your example also depicts - we aren't herbivores, we aren't fungi. What we are is higher intellectual creatures who can take them for what they are: parts of the ecosystem.
Each stick, each dead animal can be recycled to make soil - if only we let earth saprophytes break them down. Not bugs - just fungi.

Animal fertilizer - trampled dead plant matter - rain - fungi all needs to be at the same place at the same time. It is so simple, we just need to have herbivore parades before the rains fall...

 

[Ripcord]

this is just a maglev train in a vacuum tunnel it should be possible with current technology

 

[mtcn77]

this is just a maglev train in a vacuum tunnel it should be possible with current technology

You mean like maglevs are economic with current technology?

 

[Shrek]

it is inevitable to me that due to climate change, we will all be on like a hyperloop system in around 100-150 years, or automated cars at 100%.

World population is doubling about every 50 years, so in 150, if the trend continues, we will have 8 times as many people as we have now.

 

[mtcn77]

World population is doubling about every 50 years, so in 150, if the trend continues, we will have 8 times as many people as we have now.

Slippery slope argument.

 

[Shrek]

All extrapolation has its dangers.

 

[mtcn77]

All extrapolation has its dangers.

Not if they are exaggerated on false premises. Common sense isn't exaggerated.

 

[Shrek]

Doubling every 50 years is false?

 

[mtcn77]

Doubling every 50 years is false?

Apocalyptic prophecies is wrong. We are running into issues because of deforestation, not because of population growth. While I know you will make a false dichotomy out of the two, population may be stopped while deforestation continues. That is prevailing the issue. In other news, we may activate ocean algea with iron as fertilizer and make more carbon sequestration than all forests can provide. It is only the will and care missing to account for the backbones of organic life.

PS: @Remeca yes that is what I have been trying to say. Also, comparing concrete to a forest is inherently wrong. A forest can recycle itself. Concrete will release all carbon it sequestered from the atmosphere when it runs out of calcium hydroxite to turn into calcium carbonate which is due in the next 75 years - and because concrete has terrible recycling options.

 

[Remeca]

The population argument is a red herring. The claims being made by these companies are false. This isn't a new technology, it isn't zero emission, it isn't green in any way shape or form just because some 3d renderings have solar panels, it isn't faster than anything we have now, it's inherently unsafe and impractical, and there are monumental engineering obstacles that are just being ignored.

 

[Frick]

Maybe they should build this under the solar roadways that were a farce. Or give the passengers the solar refilling water bottle. Or any of the hundreds of ideas that don’t match up


The economy of scale makes this a non-starter, the millions of tons of concrete, steel, energy to produce the infrastructure outweighs the benefit. The safety issues aren’t just something you can easily engineer around, and remember that Musk had a rocket blow up too, and can anyone name a rocket that has been reused yet? Only one Falcon 9 has been reused AFAIK so again, good idea but most companies pay the premium for new when launching hundreds of millions of dollars to space. Imagine 100 people dying due to a faulty seal that will have the same force as a blowout at 42,000ft in a jet, meaning it will tear itself apart.

I believe in the free market, so let it do its job without forcing my tax dollars to pay for their ideas. If it’s feasible and marketable it will work, and the inventors can be rich.

The first stage boosters have been reused a whole bunch of times. Reusing entire rockets is a whole other deal and is what Starship is about. I mean Musk is an asshat who shouldn't be allowed on Twitter or in public spaces, but SpaceX is transforming the launch industry before our very eyes, and they save metric butt-tons of tax dollars.

 

[Remeca]

The first stage boosters have been reused a whole bunch of times. Reusing entire rockets is a whole other deal and is what Starship is about. I mean Musk is an asshat who shouldn't be allowed on Twitter or in public spaces, but SpaceX is transforming the launch industry before our very eyes, and they save metric butt-tons of tax dollars.

When has spaceX been on/under budget? I'm not finding any such contracts. In fact, most of Musk's public contracts have been overpromised, under delivered, and never for the vast savings claimed in the sales pitches that everyone believes.

 

[Space Lynx]

and they save metric butt-tons of tax dollars.

true, but isn't NASA still pursuing SLS even though its not reusable and everyone and their mom knows Starship is the future.

When has spaceX been on/under budget? I'm not finding any such contracts. In fact, most of Musk's public contracts have been overpromised, under delivered, and never for the vast savings claimed in the sales pitches that everyone believes.

I bet you are a fun one at parties.

 

[P4-630]

Watch this video in full before commenting please. Keep in mind, even in the pandemic like now, hyperloop would still be better than all other modes of public transport (the pods are more sanitary since only small number of people for each one, versus air being exchanged on an entire train, etc.

it is inevitable to me that due to climate change, we will all be on like a hyperloop system in around 100-150 years, or automated cars at 100%. but to me it seems like Hyperloop is the future. logically speaking it makes a lot of sense. it has almost no maintenance, doesn't cost much to build (don't have to barrel through hills like a railroad track, just build your columns higher or lower for various terrain, etc.

there is a working hyperloop in middle east (I might have the location wrong, I don't know) somewhere Richard Branson's company made, so yeah it's not just hypothetical.

this is an awesome video and it is very much the future imo, it makes a lot of sense, 0 emissions, way faster than normal transport or even bullet trains, easier to build and faster than bullet trains (hyperloop will go 670mph in some sections), etc:

What happened with Elon Musk his hyperloop dream?

 

[Remeca]

true, but isn't NASA still pursuing SLS even though its not reusable and everyone and their mom knows Starship is the future.



I bet you are a fun one at parties.

Yes, facts and reality suck, don't they.

 

[Space Lynx]

What happened with Elon Musk his hyperloop dream?

he hit it and quit it cause Mars got some big distracting ta ta's.

 

[Frick]

When has spaceX been on/under budget? I'm not finding any such contracts. In fact, most of Musk's public contracts have been overpromised, under delivered, and never for the vast savings claimed in the sales pitches that everyone believes.

The Space Shuttle was about $1.5 billion per launch. A Falcon 9 can be about $62 million.

Again, I'll never defend Musk for anything, but SpaceX (which is more than one asshat, most notably they have Gwynne Shotwell) has achieved remarkable things.

 

[Vayra86]

World population is doubling about every 50 years, so in 150, if the trend continues, we will have 8 times as many people as we have now.

Well, I wasn't trying to say it would double every 50 years into infinity but the past curve is showing that, indeed. Its unlikely to keep curving that way though. But... we have several big 'surges' of population growth to go, that is why I gave the example of China. Nobody can predict the future, but we have strong indicators.

@mtcn77 As for 'apocalyptic' and how some don't like uncomfortable truths... I actually think its rather arrogant to think we can just technology our way out of extinction and that we have the measures of control some people think we do. We really don't. Shit has hit the fan many times in our rather short history of existence, and when it does, its quite an event. We make mistakes to learn. Big ones, and the number of mistakes you can make is finite, not infinite. Every mistake is less time, resources and opportunity to find a correct solution towards something that is sustainable, and not looking at big red numbers and accompanying erosion of public trust and health.

This hyperloop idea is an extension of our arrogance. To even consider the technology with all of its caveats speaks of greed before trying to improve anything. "Its new, its sexy, build it and make me rich, while I put illusions in your head this will somehow make lives better" - that's what I'm reading here, and with all/most of those other new things that are going to fix everything. Without a system of checks and balances, and sustainability of that system, all you have is hot air and more potential waste. And of course, all the emotions accompanying the purchase or use of something new 'the other guy' doesn't have. We're sheep.

The mention of a service economy is another example of grasping at straws. Services are hot these days aren't they. An economy of 'sharing and efficiency' sounds cool, and holds a promise of saving things here and there because you can only use it when you want to, no devices are made for you specifically. Really? Do we have ANY solid numbers on a working 'service economy' that is somehow more efficient than one where people fend for themselves as much as they can? If I recall correctly, the carbon footprint of our so called green ideas is in fact a few orders of magnitude bigger than those who still grow their own crops and write on paper instead of phones.

 

[Caring1]

So many questions, but I'll stick to the first to mind.
How does a train operating in a vacuum, stop at a station to let passengers on and off without being in a vacuum at that time?

 

[Remeca]

So many questions, but I'll stick to the first to mind.
How does a train operating in a vacuum, stop at a station to let passengers on and off without being in a vacuum at that time?

They use giant valves to create an airlock at every station entrance and exit. Ridiculous.

 

[Blue4130]

Well, I wasn't trying to say it would double every 50 years into infinity but the past curve is showing that, indeed. Its unlikely to keep curving that way though. But... we have several big 'surges' of population growth to go, that is why I gave the example of China. Nobody can predict the future, but we have strong indicators.

Have you seen the birth rate in china? The one Child policy was changed in 2015 to allow 2 children. Result? A small temporary bump that has since fell. Allow 3 is not going to do much if the majority don't even want one.

 

[glsn]

That isn't true.

it depends on the rail
some trains do have a double engine which concert fossil fuels to electric energy and then it uses that go
some other are only via fossil, other full electronical (but they are rare)

That isn't true.

anyway musks bullshits such as other companies shouldn't be taken literally, their only interest is to make money, they are less ethical/green that they would like you make think, but if you do think so, they can bail out taxpayers money over false promises while at the same time sponsor their apparance/pay less taxes or none if they set up things as beneficiary