To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#1

Post by mariorz » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 4:24 AM UTC

To Everywhere in 42 Minutes
time.com

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#2

Post by te_platt » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 5:05 AM UTC

Fun idea, but didn't everyone here have to work this out in their college physics class?

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#3

Post by scorxn » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 5:23 AM UTC

te_platt wrote: post #2

Fun idea, but didn't everyone here have to work this out in their college physics class?

Since Friday, Feb. 11, 1966 maybe ;)

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#4

Post by jws » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 5:24 AM UTC

This and atmosphere hopping space planes both have the same drawback: a significant number of people vomit on their first weightless trips. Do you really want to ride packed into coach in that kind of environment?

I guess with enough frequent zero-g points you could upgrade to the "no hurling" section.

(The not-quite-straight-through tunnels wouldn't be fully weightless, maybe we should concentrate on those. Then we just have to solve the insurmountable temperature, pressure, and vacuum problems.)

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#5

Post by anigbrowl » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 5:35 AM UTC

It sounds like great fun until your rapid transit pod plunges into a bath of superheated magma. Vomitous fellow passengers would not be my primary anxiety about this mode of travel.

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#6

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 6:20 AM UTC

[deleted]

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#7

Post by lewis » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 6:22 AM UTC

I appreciate the concern which is been rose. The things need to be sorted out because it’s not about the individual but it can be with everyone.

http://www.fastrealestate.net

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#8

Post by ramchip » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 6:30 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #5

It sounds like great fun until your rapid transit pod plunges into a bath of superheated magma. Vomitous fellow passengers would not be my primary anxiety about this mode of travel.

If you read the article carefully, he also talks about shorter tunnels which would only go a few miles below the surface. Not necessarily through the core, although I believe the journalist got a little confused himself with the Moscow-Washington bit (716 miles depth != Earth core).

Anyway, it's nice to see he solved the pathfinding, but it's probably not the most challenging part of the problem!

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#9

Post by d1rge » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 6:55 AM UTC

Putting practical considerations aside, what might the effect on society be if we could be at any other place on earth in less than an hour?

Would tourism explode? What would that mean for the environment?

What about international business?

Would it be the end of remote workers? Or would it encourage even more distributed workplace?

Re: To Everywhere in 42 Minutes

#10

Post by lisper » Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 7:25 AM UTC

There's no such thing as a free lunch. Most of the energy required to go from A to B is needed to overcome friction, not provide kinetic energy. That remains true whether you are above or below the surface. So burrowing down buys you virtually nothing. The amount of energy you'd need to pull yourself up the other side of the tunnel would be almost exactly the same as you would need to make the same trip at (almost) the same speed on the surface.