04-22-2018, 09:08 PM
(04-22-2018, 04:47 AM)selden Wrote: In a quick glance at the blog, I didn't see any mention of Larry Niven's Ringworld. Did I overlook it?No, no mention of pretty much anything similar. I do know about Niven's ring, but thought it was different enough concept not to merit mentioning, relying on spin gravity and materials of great tensile strength. (Well, actually I recall erasing a sentence along the lines of "an unholy union of a torus planet and Niven's ring", but probably trying just to tone down wise-assery.)
[...]One problem in particular is that a hoop (or torroidal) world doesn't have a stable orbit with reference to a central sun: there's no net radial restoring force.[...]
The thing about orbital transverse instability is news to me. I've only thought of this as analogous to a long string of separate planets. Does it make any difference that the structure is not rigid but flexible/fluid-like, or is it just a question of the parts of the hoop attracting each other?
(04-22-2018, 04:47 AM)Drashner1 Wrote: 1) Re day and night - Is it really necessary to spin the hoop to get day and night?"No" and "no", but then it would be a traditional hoopworld or whatever and I wouldn't have had a reason to make a blog post
[...]
2) Re issues with orbiting a star and stability - If you can build something like this in the first place, is it really necessary to put it in orbit around a star?

A minimum amount of active technology needed to make it work would be preferable to me personally, but at least you'd need some sort of active stabilization.