Talk:Bishop Ring (habitat)

Ringworld

Should this article be merged with Ringworld? The concept - in the original source - is a light reworking of the earlier Ringworld concept. I don't think it warrants a new name, Bishop Ring, and its own page given that there's just one source for the concept, and that's a single web page that reads like it comes from a forum and has five references. Xenoarchaeology (talk) 00:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Its a literary idea more than hard science concept. In reality open side ring worlds don't seem practical using centripetal force alone to force air or even water to the bottom of the ring world eco-trough. Start with a mega version of the Earth's "prevailing westerly winds". Gases don't like to keep up with rotation speeds of solid bodies producing winds (and greatly reducing the fraction of centripetal force exerted on the gases - air leak!!!). Remember water in a bucket or centrifuges throw in very close barrier walls to keep pushing fluids along in directions other than the floor pushing up. Water in a spinning unmounted tire is a better model of open wall ringworld. Sure water can be made to stay of floor of tire but there tends to be a strong current. Now add barriers attached to the ring floor like buildings and trees...turbulence in a very confined system could create some really rough weather. One mistake in calculating the effects of a new structure or demolition (including accidental) could be far reaching disaster. Pretty sure regular wind barriers would be needed on ring floor perpendicular to rotation direction (higher than side walls and possibly scoop shaped to retain air "sloshing" at sudden stop).

With respect to common variations off pure centrifugal ringworlds... if you got other sources of 'artificial gravity' - why stick with inside ring surface? (both sides of coin-spinning flat circle is more material efficient). Overall ringworlds seem like an idea with more artistic appeal than practical benefit.

However the practical issue of retaining atmosphere between open walls could possibly be solved by something as thin and transparent as plastic food wrap panels covering a very thin spiderweb of carbon fiber at wall top. Wouldn't solve the extreme weather issues of fast rotating fluid mass. Even the top of the walls might be relatively insubstantial (just match lateral air pressure plus peak wind pressures). Of course calculating the worse case wind forces at top of atmosphere would probably be "non-trivial" once normal ring rotation wind weather is combined with effects of stellar fluctuations and flares on the atmospheric air mass (volume expansion and contraction). Probably there is a limit to the size of ring where speed of ring floor movement is not so high as to make weather out of control - 70.114.147.5 (talk) 11:11, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

It would be nice if the article briefly addresses such scientific issues with references. Maybe with a simplistic equation or two setting upper or lower boundaries on such key problems.

Although I'm a computer scientist prof, my undergraduate degree was in physics and such equations are second nature for me. In particular I've thought a lot about centrifugal gravity at scale, for example calculating the largest ring possible for a given material such as carbon nanotubes at a given safety factor. But wouldn't I be likely to encounter OR objections? After more than 6000 Wikipedia edits made during 1/6 of a century I'm well aware of what's possible on Wikipedia (and I got away with more in 2006 than is possible today). Vaughan Pratt (talk) 01:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

It's not the same as a Ringworld, I'd say, but I think this article would usefully be merged with Orbital (The Culture), since it basically the same concept, on a slightly smaller scale. Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

alignment

The habitat would be oriented with its axis of rotation perpendicular to the plane of its orbit

Why? Does the inside need more shielding from UV or something than from cosmic rays? If it's tilted it can do without mirrors, at the cost of a semiannual eclipse – and a short day cycle; okay, maybe not such a good idea. (For one gee at 24 h, the radius is six light-seconds.) —Tamfang (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2015 (UTC)