Started By
Message

Hypothetical: Could modern day engineers move the Lower Mississippi River?

Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:31 pm
Posted by Asgard Device
The Daedalus
Member since Apr 2011
11562 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:31 pm
I'm not advocating that such a thing be done, but I'm just curious if it could be done and still have a major navigatable river that begins in Cairo, IL and empties elsewhere in the GOM? What would it take and what would be the most feasible alternate routes?

This post was edited on 5/22/15 at 7:35 pm
Posted by ell_13
Member since Apr 2013
84943 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:33 pm to
Take out a single levee and it will divert down the Morganza spillway
Posted by Freebird11
Baton Rouge
Member since May 2011
142 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:33 pm to
Yes simply by removing the forced diversion at the Old River Control Structure in Morganza. River would flow to the gulf via the basin.
Posted by junkfunky
Member since Jan 2011
33855 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:36 pm to
If you have the time, space and money you can build an elevator to the moon.
Posted by Asgard Device
The Daedalus
Member since Apr 2011
11562 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:37 pm to
quote:

Yes simply by removing the forced diversion at the Old River Control Structure in Morganza. River would flow to the gulf via the basin.



Would that be navigable? Would it help slow down coastal erosion?
Posted by Asgard Device
The Daedalus
Member since Apr 2011
11562 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:38 pm to
quote:

If you have the time, space and money you can build an elevator to the moon.



No, you can't.
Posted by ell_13
Member since Apr 2013
84943 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:39 pm to
No. The basin in still controlled by levees. The issue is the flooding of multiple locations at multiple "mouths" that is not allowed which would normally drop sediment.
Posted by BRgetthenet
Member since Oct 2011
117678 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:40 pm to
How much ya wanna bet I can throw a football over those mountains?
Posted by ell_13
Member since Apr 2013
84943 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:42 pm to
I bet I can throw a baseball further than you can hit a golf ball
Posted by FT
REDACTED
Member since Oct 2003
26925 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:44 pm to
quote:

No, you can't.


LINK

You can. We just don't have a material strong enough for it yet.

quote:

A space elevator is a proposed type of space transportation system.[1] Its main component is a ribbon-like cable (also called a tether) anchored to the surface and extending into space. It is designed to permit vehicle transport along the cable from a planetary surface, such as the Earth's, directly into space or orbit, without the use of large rockets. An Earth-based space elevator would consist of a cable with one end attached to the surface near the equator and the other end in space beyond geostationary orbit (35,800 km altitude). The competing forces of gravity, which is stronger at the lower end, and the outward/upward centrifugal force, which is stronger at the upper end, would result in the cable being held up, under tension, and stationary over a single position on Earth. Once the tether is deployed, climbers would repeatedly climb the tether to space by mechanical means, releasing their cargo to orbit. Climbers would also descend the tether to return cargo to the surface from orbit.[2]
quote:

The concept of a space elevator was first published in 1895 by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky.[3] His proposal was for a free-standing tower reaching from the surface of Earth to the height of geostationary orbit. Like all buildings, Tsiolkovsky's structure would be under compression, supporting its weight from below. Since 1959, most ideas for space elevators have focused on purely tensile structures, with the weight of the system held up from above. In the tensile concepts, a space tether reaches from a large mass (the counterweight) beyond geostationary orbit to the ground. This structure is held in tension between Earth and the counterweight like an upside-down plumb bob. On Earth, with its relatively strong gravity, the required specific strength for the cable material is very high.

Current technology is not capable of manufacturing cable materials that are strong and light enough for a space elevator on Earth. However, in 2000, the recently discovered carbon nanotubes were first identified as possibly being able to meet the specific strength requirements for an Earth space elevator.[2] This sparked a surge of interest and development in space elevators focusing on carbon nanotubes and the similar boron nitride nanotubes. In 2014, diamond nanothreads were first synthesized.[4] Since they have strength properties similar to carbon nanotubes, diamond nanothreads were quickly seen as a candidate material as well.[5] Nanotubes and diamond nanothreads both hold promise as materials to make an Earth-based space elevator possible.
Posted by DustyDinkleman
Here
Member since Feb 2012
18176 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:46 pm to
quote:

Would it help slow down coastal erosion?


Natural Alluviation of the Mississippi by letting it flow naturally would actually help rebuild much of what we've lost.
This post was edited on 5/22/15 at 7:51 pm
Posted by BRgetthenet
Member since Oct 2011
117678 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:50 pm to
I'll take that bet.
Posted by biglego
Ask your mom where I been
Member since Nov 2007
76173 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 7:54 pm to
Wouldn't the space elevator have to be on a track or something?
Posted by Asgard Device
The Daedalus
Member since Apr 2011
11562 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:05 pm to
quote:

No, you can't.


LINK

You can. We just don't have a material strong enough for it yet.


First of all, if we can't engineer material strong enough to do something then we can't do it. Secondly, and most importantly, you stipulated an elevator to the moon which is not fixed relative to Earth. That is the part that I deem impossible with current engineering knowledge and tech.
Posted by Asgard Device
The Daedalus
Member since Apr 2011
11562 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:06 pm to
quote:

Natural Alluviation of the Mississippi by letting it flow naturally would actually help rebuild much of what we've lost.



But we'd lose a shipping channel up through the middle of the country, right?
Posted by ksayetiger
Centenary Gents
Member since Jul 2007
68266 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:06 pm to
quote:

No, you can't.



LINK 

You can. We just don't have a material strong enough for it yet. 



So, you cant.
Posted by ell_13
Member since Apr 2013
84943 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:09 pm to
Most of it can't go beyond BR anyway thanks to the 190 bridge. We smartly build it too low. That's why barges are so important. Nothing big goes beyond new orleans. Also, You could still keep your channel without a majority of the levees anyway.
Posted by crankbait
Member since Feb 2008
11623 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:11 pm to
Of course. Just construct a pre planned route with excavations and levees
Posted by DustyDinkleman
Here
Member since Feb 2012
18176 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:11 pm to
Not necessarily...over time, the natural meandering of the river would help carve a deep enough channel for navigation.

It would have to be routinely dredged though
This post was edited on 5/22/15 at 8:15 pm
Posted by Freebird11
Baton Rouge
Member since May 2011
142 posts
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:14 pm to
Yes go to google earth and look south of Morgan City to see what is being built out in the gulf by only 30% of the MS sediment load.

There wouldn't be a deep incised channel naturally, at least not immediately. But the port cities for big Panama type vessels aren't far inland anyway. Tugboats/barge traffic doesn't require a deep channel.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram