The Dome over Manhattan was a proposal by the architects Buckminster
Fuller and Shoji Sadao to build a 2-mile diameter geodesic dome over mid-Manhattan, New York (1960)
In 1960, architects Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao envisioned a futuristic and ambitious project-ua massive geodesic dome over
Manhattan, stretching two miles in diameter. This bold concept aimed
to regulate the city-As climate, providing temperature control and
pollution reduction under its glass structure. Although never
realized, the proposal reflected the forward-thinking optimism of the
era, seeking to transform the cityscape and enhance urban living. The
dome became a symbol of the boundless imagination of mid-century
architects, blending innovation with utopian ideals.
What if there have been enough technical know how and budget to build
this thing would it still be standing today and would it have had any significant effect on the history of New York up until the present
day?
View the attachments for this post at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=675918762#675918762
The Dome over Manhattan was a proposal by the architects Buckminster
Fuller and Shoji Sadao to build a 2-mile diameter geodesic dome over mid-Manhattan, New York (1960)
In 1960, architects Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao envisioned a futuristic and ambitious project?a massive geodesic dome over
Manhattan, stretching two miles in diameter. This bold concept aimed
to regulate the city?s climate, providing temperature control and
pollution reduction under its glass structure. Although never
realized, the proposal reflected the forward-thinking optimism of the
era, seeking to transform the cityscape and enhance urban living. The
dome became a symbol of the boundless imagination of mid-century
architects, blending innovation with utopian ideals.
What if there have been enough technical know how and budget to build
this thing would it still be standing today and would it have had any significant effect on the history of New York up until the present
day?
View the attachments for this post at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=675918762#675918762
MummyChunk wrote:Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao to build a 2-mile diameter geodesic
The Dome over Manhattan was a proposal by the architects
In 1960, architects Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao envisioned afuturistic and ambitious projectua massive geodesic dome over
What if there have been enough technical know how and budget tobuild this thing would it still be standing today and would it have
MummyChunk <mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote:
The Dome over Manhattan was a proposal by the architects Buckminster
Fuller and Shoji Sadao to build a 2-mile diameter geodesic dome over
mid-Manhattan, New York (1960)
In 1960, architects Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao envisioned a
futuristic and ambitious project?a massive geodesic dome over
Manhattan, stretching two miles in diameter. This bold concept aimed
to regulate the city?s climate, providing temperature control and
pollution reduction under its glass structure. Although never
realized, the proposal reflected the forward-thinking optimism of the
era, seeking to transform the cityscape and enhance urban living. The
dome became a symbol of the boundless imagination of mid-century
architects, blending innovation with utopian ideals.
What if there have been enough technical know how and budget to build
this thing would it still be standing today and would it have had any
significant effect on the history of New York up until the present
day?
View the attachments for this post at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=675918762#675918762
Did the technology to build it actually exist then?
I wonder how maintainable it would have proved and if
it would be more viable to build now.
2 miles is actually a fraction of Manhattan's 21 square miles,
the margins would be daunting.
MummyChunk <mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote:
The Dome over Manhattan was a proposal by the architects Buckminster
Fuller and Shoji Sadao to build a 2-mile diameter geodesic dome over
mid-Manhattan, New York (1960)
In 1960, architects Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao envisioned a
futuristic and ambitious project?a massive geodesic dome over
Manhattan, stretching two miles in diameter. This bold concept aimed
to regulate the city?s climate, providing temperature control and
pollution reduction under its glass structure. Although never
realized, the proposal reflected the forward-thinking optimism of the
era, seeking to transform the cityscape and enhance urban living. The
dome became a symbol of the boundless imagination of mid-century
architects, blending innovation with utopian ideals.
What if there have been enough technical know how and budget to build
this thing would it still be standing today and would it have had any
significant effect on the history of New York up until the present
day?
View the attachments for this post at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=675918762#675918762
Did the technology to build it actually exist then?
I wonder how maintainable it would have proved and if
it would be more viable to build now.
Louis Epstein <le@main.lekno.ws> on Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:20:45 -0000
(UTC) typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
MummyChunk <mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote:
The Dome over Manhattan was a proposal by the architects Buckminster
Fuller and Shoji Sadao to build a 2-mile diameter geodesic dome over
mid-Manhattan, New York (1960)
In 1960, architects Buckminster Fuller and Shoji Sadao envisioned a
futuristic and ambitious project?a massive geodesic dome over
Manhattan, stretching two miles in diameter. This bold concept aimed
to regulate the city?s climate, providing temperature control and
pollution reduction under its glass structure. Although never
realized, the proposal reflected the forward-thinking optimism of the
era, seeking to transform the cityscape and enhance urban living. The
dome became a symbol of the boundless imagination of mid-century
architects, blending innovation with utopian ideals.
What if there have been enough technical know how and budget to build
this thing would it still be standing today and would it have had any
significant effect on the history of New York up until the present
day?
View the attachments for this post at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=675918762#675918762
Did the technology to build it actually exist then?
I wonder how maintainable it would have proved and if
it would be more viable to build now.
Good questions. But engineers and such have had all sorts of mega projects in mind, "The idea is feasible, the rest is just
engineering." (IOW: "just money".)
My grandfather in the fifties said that the idea of building a
bridge to the moon was feasible, although anchoring it would no doubt
prove "interesting" (engineer speak for "expensive"). Allowing for
the variations of the orbital distance could be handled by expansion
joints. Each one doesn't have to be "big" - but with enough they will
allow for the miles of difference. Getting the design worked out and
the on-ramps approved would be the tricky part. The rest would just
be plain old engineering.
Good questions. But engineers and such have had all sorts of megaAnd the lack of tidal locking of the moon to a geosynch orbit wasn't >considered a significant problem? o_O
projects in mind, "The idea is feasible, the rest is just
engineering." (IOW: "just money".)
My grandfather in the fifties said that the idea of building a
bridge to the moon was feasible, although anchoring it would no doubt
prove "interesting" (engineer speak for "expensive"). Allowing for
the variations of the orbital distance could be handled by expansion
joints. Each one doesn't have to be "big" - but with enough they will
allow for the miles of difference. Getting the design worked out and
the on-ramps approved would be the tricky part. The rest would just
be plain old engineering.
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> on Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:54:06
-0800 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
Good questions. But engineers and such have had all sorts of megaAnd the lack of tidal locking of the moon to a geosynch orbit wasn't
projects in mind, "The idea is feasible, the rest is just
engineering." (IOW: "just money".)
My grandfather in the fifties said that the idea of building a
bridge to the moon was feasible, although anchoring it would no doubt
prove "interesting" (engineer speak for "expensive"). Allowing for
the variations of the orbital distance could be handled by expansion
joints. Each one doesn't have to be "big" - but with enough they will
allow for the miles of difference. Getting the design worked out and
the on-ramps approved would be the tricky part. The rest would just
be plain old engineering.
considered a significant problem? o_O
Oh it would pose some "engineering challenges".
Let's just say that there were a number of "interesting" aspects
of a project of this size which would require some forward thinking
and innovative engineering (read that as "even more expensive that you imagined.")
Remember, technically feasible does not mean practically feasible. Option one is on ramps at the poles, option two is onramp's at the
equator on a world girdling bridge. Now making the transition from
the bridge to an onramp or off ramp traveling at ~1000 mph does pose
some technical challenges, but like the Turboencabulator, I'm sure the Government will be able to fund it.
Remember, technically feasible does not mean practically feasible.
Option one is on ramps at the poles, option two is onramp's at the
equator on a world girdling bridge. Now making the transition from
the bridge to an onramp or off ramp traveling at ~1000 mph does pose
some technical challenges, but like the Turboencabulator, I'm sure the
Government will be able to fund it.
That's where I walk out of the room, quickly, so whatever they are
smoking doesn't rot my brain thru second-hand smoke.
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 22:15:53
-0800 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
Remember, technically feasible does not mean practically feasible.
Option one is on ramps at the poles, option two is onramp's at the
equator on a world girdling bridge. Now making the transition from
the bridge to an onramp or off ramp traveling at ~1000 mph does pose
some technical challenges, but like the Turboencabulator, I'm sure the
Government will be able to fund it.
That's where I walk out of the room, quickly, so whatever they are
smoking doesn't rot my brain thru second-hand smoke.
A lot of things start out as blue-sky wild ideas and sketches on cocktail napkins. Some of them may not be practical with current
technology, but without some nut thinking he could transmit voices
over a telegraph wire, or by radio, we'd have no interwebs and wifi.
Walking out of that smoker, you would miss out on steam power
trains rocketing along at 10 miles per hour, heavier than air powered
flight traveling at more than 100 miles an hour, automatically opening
door, rockets in space, space elevators, and other far out
"impractical Ideas".
As I said, "technically feasible does not mean practically
feasible". I contemplated as a boy an excellent marketing project, to
damn the strait of Gibraltar using a frame work of Bic Pens covered in
Saran Wrap.
While those might not work, with different materials the concept could be implemented. However, there does remain the problem of
cooperation between Spain and Morocco regarding location, not to
mention the practicality of all the nations which 'border' the Med
(including Romania and Russia via the Dardanelle) agreeing. And
getting the Egyptians to block off the Suez Canal. Like I said,
feasible, but not practical.
For a pilot project, we could try damming the Golden Gate in California.
I mean, with enough nukes we could excavate a sea-level canal from the Pacific to the Atlantic through Nicaragua, or Columbia even.
There are a lot of technically feasible ideas, but the
practicalities currently get in the way. Connecting the Quatrra
Depression in Egypt to the Med for power, salt and possibly increased rainfall is feasible. There remains this issue of 40 km of tunnel or
canal needed for the connection.
Similar proposals have been made for the Dead Sea.
There are a lot of technically feasible ideas, but the
practicalities currently get in the way. Connecting the Quatrra
Depression in Egypt to the Med for power, salt and possibly increased
rainfall is feasible. There remains this issue of 40 km of tunnel or
canal needed for the connection.
Similar proposals have been made for the Dead Sea.
Meh,I want to polish one of the larger craters on the moon
to a parabolic arc so it can serve as a reflecting telescope,
with a station-keeping satellite above it as the eyepiece.
Louis Epstein <le@main.lekno.ws> on Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:59:48 -0000
(UTC) typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
There are a lot of technically feasible ideas, but the
practicalities currently get in the way. Connecting the Quatrra
Depression in Egypt to the Med for power, salt and possibly increased
rainfall is feasible. There remains this issue of 40 km of tunnel or
canal needed for the connection.
Similar proposals have been made for the Dead Sea.
Meh,I want to polish one of the larger craters on the moon
to a parabolic arc so it can serve as a reflecting telescope,
with a station-keeping satellite above it as the eyepiece.
Cool! And also do one to use as a radio telescope.
On Farside of course.
Louis Epstein <le@main.lekno.ws> on Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:59:48 -0000
(UTC) typed in alt.history.what-if the following:
There are a lot of technically feasible ideas, but the
practicalities currently get in the way. Connecting the Quatrra
Depression in Egypt to the Med for power, salt and possibly increased
rainfall is feasible. There remains this issue of 40 km of tunnel or
canal needed for the connection.
Similar proposals have been made for the Dead Sea.
Meh,I want to polish one of the larger craters on the moon
to a parabolic arc so it can serve as a reflecting telescope,
with a station-keeping satellite above it as the eyepiece.
Cool! And also do one to use as a radio telescope.
On Farside of course.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 14:05:03 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
8 files (13,162K bytes) |
| Messages: | 265,525 |