SpaceElevatorBookRevision: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[FreeFormats]] | [[FreeFormats]] | ||
'''This is Keith's opinions on Brad's next book.''' | |||
Keep pushing the boundaries between good ideas and bad. The purpose of | Keep pushing the boundaries between good ideas and bad. The purpose of the Bible is a non-fiction back of the envelope proof. | ||
''Leaving the planet'' has new data and stories, better pictures and better editing, but it is not a | ''Leaving the planet'' has new data and stories, better pictures and better editing, but it is not a proof. | ||
Making your book 2x better will make you sell 4x more copies. I meet so many geeks who know about the space elevator who would read your book. I think they could read it as-is, and your primary challenge might be marketing, but you should make a book so good that friends demand their friends read it, and one that Oprah could read. Your 2003 book is very close to that level! | Making your book 2x better will make you sell 4x more copies. I meet so many geeks who know about the space elevator who would read your book. I think they could read it as-is, and your primary challenge might be marketing, but you should make a book so good that friends demand their friends read it, and one that Oprah could read. Your 2003 book is very close to that level! | ||
| Line 11: | Line 10: | ||
== Nontechnical suggestions == | == Nontechnical suggestions == | ||
''''I believe these are important for market success''' | ''''I believe these are important for market success''' | ||
Anyone who goes to the trouble to read such a book will want a proof. It needs things like adaptic optics. You can make such a book readable by everyone and I am doing it with my book. | |||
Your 2003 book is almost there, but it sometimes has too much math inline: | Your 2003 book is almost there, but it sometimes has too much math inline: | ||
| Line 21: | Line 22: | ||
'''I'm not the expert, but these are my considered opinions''' | '''I'm not the expert, but these are my considered opinions''' | ||
I propose a 100 ton daily payload elevator. 10 tons a day is not worth it | I propose a 100 ton daily payload elevator. 10 tons a day is not worth it. Focus on powers of 10: 1, 10, 100. | ||
We should build the two ribbons 100% in parallel. We could even build 3 in case one of them doesn't make it. | |||
You need to solve the 200 mph situation, or have a solution for humans. | |||
What about the space station and the moon station? Also, we need something that takes 1 week to 1 month to go to Mars. | |||
You need to think about whether we really need atoms from other asteroids in the form of knives. Are we really running out of atoms here | You need to think about whether we really need atoms from other asteroids in the form of knives. Are we really running out of atoms here? With carbon nanotubes replacing steel, that will free up lots of iron. | ||
You need something near land, a big electricity grid, etc. Pick as close to land as possible | You need something near land, a big electricity grid, etc. Pick as close to land as possible. | ||
Some of these things are hard to get right. I might say no laser power beaming to earth, but it would provide energy for the moonbase. It might end up being the reverse. Don't go to deep on things that aren't core to your case. | Some of these things are hard to get right. I might say no laser power beaming to earth, but it would provide energy for the moonbase. It might end up being the reverse. Don't go to deep on things that aren't core to your case. | ||
Revision as of 01:53, 22 June 2008
FreeFormats This is Keith's opinions on Brad's next book.
Keep pushing the boundaries between good ideas and bad. The purpose of the Bible is a non-fiction back of the envelope proof.
Leaving the planet has new data and stories, better pictures and better editing, but it is not a proof.
Making your book 2x better will make you sell 4x more copies. I meet so many geeks who know about the space elevator who would read your book. I think they could read it as-is, and your primary challenge might be marketing, but you should make a book so good that friends demand their friends read it, and one that Oprah could read. Your 2003 book is very close to that level!
Nontechnical suggestions
'I believe these are important for market success
Anyone who goes to the trouble to read such a book will want a proof. It needs things like adaptic optics. You can make such a book readable by everyone and I am doing it with my book.
Your 2003 book is almost there, but it sometimes has too much math inline:
"We could have the shipping capacity for space ships from 46 tons to the 200 ton ribbon to the 116 ships on the 500 ton ribbon if we stay within the FLP traffic size climbers; and up to 350 ton ships using max ribbon limit"
Two problems with above: 1. That sentence has no new information. 2. The idea of using the max ribbon limit instead of using FLP is bad and you shouldn't advocate it throughout the book. You should discuss this idea in your book as it is an interesting concept, then assume it will be implemented as you suggest throughout the rest.
Technical suggestions
I'm not the expert, but these are my considered opinions
I propose a 100 ton daily payload elevator. 10 tons a day is not worth it. Focus on powers of 10: 1, 10, 100.
We should build the two ribbons 100% in parallel. We could even build 3 in case one of them doesn't make it.
You need to solve the 200 mph situation, or have a solution for humans.
What about the space station and the moon station? Also, we need something that takes 1 week to 1 month to go to Mars.
You need to think about whether we really need atoms from other asteroids in the form of knives. Are we really running out of atoms here? With carbon nanotubes replacing steel, that will free up lots of iron.
You need something near land, a big electricity grid, etc. Pick as close to land as possible.
Some of these things are hard to get right. I might say no laser power beaming to earth, but it would provide energy for the moonbase. It might end up being the reverse. Don't go to deep on things that aren't core to your case.
