why outer space?

From: Al Globus [mailto:aglobus@...]

Unfortunately, I think rotating cylinders want to precess until they
rotate end-over-end (assuming equal mass distribution, any real
physicist out there, please check). Stability is important, so I think
we'd better stick with Tori.

I've heard this before. I could see that as being an issue if "civilization
fell" in an orbital habitat, although I guess in that case it would be one
of many problems. But is this really a problem in any habitat where there's
an ongoing presence and intelligent control of the structure?

Would it be a problem at all for two connected, counter-rotating cylinders?

As it happens, I would prefer much shorter cylinders, perhaps only about
twice as long as wide. Would that confer greater stability?

If cylinders do turn out to be a problem, I don't know that that necessarily
means we can't have those cloudscapes overhead. I don't see any reason why
a Bernal Sphere couldn't be scaled up until it was the same diameter as an
O'Neill Cylinder (4 mi.).

Regards,

Mike Combs

From:
Al Globus [mailto:aglobus@...]
Unfortunately, I think rotating cylinders want to precess until they
rotate end-over-end (assuming equal mass distribution, any real
physicist out there, please check). Stability is important, so I think
we'd better stick with Tori.

I've heard this before. I could see that as being an issue if "civilization fell" in an orbital habitat, although I guess in that case it would be one of many problems. But is this really a problem in any habitat where there's an ongoing presence and intelligent control of the structure?

Would it be a problem at all for two connected, counter-rotating cylinders?

As it happens, I would prefer much shorter cylinders, perhaps only about twice as long as wide. Would that confer greater stability?

If cylinders do turn out to be a problem, I don't know that that necessarily means we can't have those cloudscapes overhead. I don't see any reason why a Bernal Sphere couldn't be scaled up until it was the same diameter as an O'Neill Cylinder (4 mi.).

Regards,
Mike Combs