this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2025
328 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

60624 readers
3107 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Space elevator companies seem to think that materials exist that are strong enough, just that they are not long enough.

https://www.isec.org/space-elevator-tether-materials

Very much layman conjecture, but my assumption is that this material is stronger than carbon nanotubes and graphene.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 5 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Any company will market that its ideas are possible. The article you linked is promising, but take it with a huge grain of salt. They are moving the goalposts the whole article. Flat graphene is a great material for space elevators, but it can't currently be created without defects. Polycrystaline means the graphene created includes defects sort of. It means the graphene they created that is km's long has shitloads of places where cycle loading will cause it to fail way under (like 10%) of its expected load carrying capacity.

Edit: I want this technology to exist. My MS in mechanical engineering focused in materials science tells me we are quite far from it happening.