Talk:X-Seed 4000

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the X-Seed 4000 article.
Article policies
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 19 May 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Good gosh! How much would this cost??? --Shultz 03:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

"Because it has already been fully designed using materials available today, the structure could, in principle, be built, although it would likely cost several hundred billion dollars, if not more." [1] --Darklegions 05:20, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for answering. If the US wanted to build it, they would have to shut down their entire military for 1-2 years! How, feasibly, would one or several nations afford it? --Shultz IV 09:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, new, faster, and cheaper ways to build will be invented, along with building materials that are stronger and faster to make. That ought to make it cheaper to build later on. --Shultz IV 09:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Picture?

Does anyone have a picture of the X-SEED? I really want to see what it looks like! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moped (talk • contribs)

Aside from the picture featured in the article, there is this: Emporis Just another romanticized artistic conception, though. --Mitglied von die Elektronischenzyklopädie Schriftleitung 04:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


Who designed this or conceptualized this thing in any case ? Its an truly a MOUNT of a job to get this going. Crazy costs for sure. But looking at the population of the World and the habitable land available projects such as these should be initialized quickly. Surely enough probably will not see this for at least another 30-50 years or maybe more but we need to start some place.

That picture is so photoshopped. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.20.97.220 (talk) 01:43, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wow..

Wow... are there any plans to start construction? Any years? Annihilatenow 12:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully not! What has humanity become? We're gonna end up like Coruscant from Star Wars! KFan II 16:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
How is that a bad thing? Structures like this are the answer to overpopulation, and serve as a landmark for human technology and strength. 64.236.245.243 15:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Japan won't need this anytime soon. The country's population is expected to decrease by something like 30% over the next several decades. 76.29.2.23 02:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
It's science fiction. Skinnyweed 23:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
No this will never be built. It's not even a real proposal.
Yes it is, it was designed and proposed by Taisei Construction Corporation.
This will never be created, It's fake and stupid. (Silly) CN Tower will be the only best tall tower out there ever. Laisinteresting 13:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion discussion

This article survived a nomination for deletion. The discussion can be found here. Flowerparty☀ 01:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The X-Seed 4000 is the tallest building ever fully envisioned

Well, I drew lots of pictures of one twice as tall... and I'm sure someone else drew some twice as tall as mine... and I'm sure someone else...

Seriously, this is not something that can be shown. Even by saying "fully envisioned"... no, this is not a statement that can be honestly made. Cool as this building would be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.138.193 (talk) 00:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I would disagree. The tallest buildings ever fully envisioned would be the skytowers and skyhook/beanstalks. The skytowers would be free-standing towers stretching into low-earth orbit. The physics really fall apart when you look into the details. Skyhooks are a little bit more feasible, using orbital energy to help support the weight of the structure. Right now the material needed to construct the tower is unobtanium but the consensus is that the likely solution will be some variation on carbon nanotubes. We are rapidly approaching the point where a skyhook would become technologically feasible. Political and financial concerns, unfortunately, would remain far more difficult to address than the technical ones. Then again, comparing a building like this with a skyhook is sort of apples and oranges since they serve entirely different purposes. Gmuir 14:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expected?

The template in front of the article seems to indicate that is is expected. However, in the article itself, it was made clear that it was not meant to be built at all. I'm confused. --Freiberg, Let's talk!, contribs 22:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing that it was not meant to be built at first, but vision has made it to a potential reality. Singularity 05:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Construction Length

How long would this take to build?27Azerbaijan (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)