Could Rapture Be Built?

[mhays]

Light wouldn't travel far enough for great views.

Regarding a city build on land then flooded...those buildings wouldn't be sound in any way, or more specifically they wouldn't be trustable, even if you could get the lights to work.

[FREKI]

Originally Posted by mhays

Light wouldn't travel far enough for great views.

Artificial light for the win

[mhays]

Which you'd be able to see for tens or perhaps hundreds of feet. Not the long views in the images.

[Krases]

Yeah. I think it would be cool if built on land. But under the sea it wouldn't be that visually appealing seeing as you wouldn't actually see anything.

[vandelay]

It is being built. It's called Dubai.

[JSsocal]

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork

the world should get all the money together and build either the floating city of the underwater metropolis,im sure we'd put aside our differences for that

We can barely put together a space station...

[The North One]

We simply do not have the technology yet, and a city underwater would not be economically logical. the city would be tacking alot more then it would ever give and take even thousands of years to build not to mention how are you going to get your oxygen? I could get into all the factors but right now I don't feel like it.
The answer to your question is no. even if it was possible it would be ignorant and a waste of humanities time to do so.

I do play the game though, I love it!

[The North One]

Originally Posted by JSsocal

We can barely put together a space station...

HA!, you mean that tube junk? thats not a space station at all...

[scalziand]

Originally Posted by JHoward88

You can't just make a skyscraper and then plop it down to the ocean floor like a paperweight...

To be fair, that is essentially how off shore oil rigs are built.

[JohnMarko]

Interesting idea.

First: Who says it has to be at the deepest portion underwater? I can see something that is "offshore" or in a few hundred feet to a thousand feet of water - the light in a few hundred feet would be just fine - think tropical waters.

Second: The tropical waters would be "warm" enough. Even Arctic locations would be OK - we already have submarines that survive in extreme temperatures.

Third: Submarines and space stations have already solved the the breathable atmosphere part as well as the pressures involved.

Fourth: While familiar rectangular shaped would probably not be feasable right now due to the pressure at extreme depths, like I said above, if it's not at extreme depths, there should be no problem.

Fifth: Even if at a particular location/depth the surrounding waters were dark, there could always be external lighting to achieve "views".

Last" A few firms are already exploring this idea - have been for a few decades now - all though so far most of them are locating them in tropical waters just off shore in the continental/island "shelves". Very initeresting stuff.

(And FYI - you wouldn't bellieve what major engineering/architectural firms have already developed for Moon and Mars based colonies - that stuff is more than three decaded old now and forever improving - I saw some really neat shit a while back. And these are serious proposals/presentations.

[DecoJim]

Originally Posted by JohnMarko

First: Who says it has to be at the deepest portion underwater? I can see something that is "offshore" or in a few hundred feet to a thousand feet of water - the light in a few hundred feet would be just fine - think tropical waters.

Second: The tropical waters would be "warm" enough. Even Arctic locations would be OK - we already have submarines that survive in extreme temperatures.

Third: Submarines and space stations have already solved the the breathable atmosphere part as well as the pressures involved.

Continental shelves can be up to about 500 feet (150 meters). If you sunk a supertall (how tall are the buildings in Bioshock anyway?) skyscraper at the outer edge of a continental shelf, only about 30-50 stories would be underwater.

Operators of military submarines do not have to worry about economics.

Spacecraft and space stations only have to worry about the pressure differential between (0 psi outside) and the internal atmosphere (presumably 14 psi). Only a few special submarines with spherical titanium pressure hulls can go down to the abyssal plains of the ocean floor. Military submarines can presumably dive at least a couple of thousand feet (the maximum depth is probably classified).

If you put the Burj Khalifa in water that was just deep enough for its tip to be at the surface of the water (2719 feet deep), the water pressure at ground floor would be about equivalent to 83 times atmospheric pressure at sea level or 1,220 psi (almost 2/3 ton per square inch)!

[Krases]

I still say it should just be freaking built on land.

Also, the floating city of Columbia could have been built on a mountain instead of actually flying (which I am pretty sure is basically impossible). It reminds me of the proposed America Summer Palace for the president that was rejected by Woodrow Wilson for being too over the top balls-crazy.

[Roadcruiser1]

You can actually build a city like this in a shallow water lake. Maybe the lake can be artificial and you can turn it into a tourist attraction as well.

[Illithid Dude]

"It's not that it was impossible to built Rapture underwater, it's that it was impossible to built it anywhere else."

Fuck, I love that game. Easily in my top five, right under MGS4.

[JohnMarko]

Originally Posted by DecoJim

Continental shelves can be up to about 500 feet (150 meters). If you sunk a supertall (how tall are the buildings in Bioshock anyway?) skyscraper at the outer edge of a continental shelf, only about 30-50 stories would be underwater.

Operators of military submarines do not have to worry about economics.

Spacecraft and space stations only have to worry about the pressure differential between (0 psi outside) and the internal atmosphere (presumably 14 psi). Only a few special submarines with spherical titanium pressure hulls can go down to the abyssal plains of the ocean floor. Military submarines can presumably dive at least a couple of thousand feet (the maximum depth is probably classified).

If you put the Burj Khalifa in water that was just deep enough for its tip to be at the surface of the water (2719 feet deep), the water pressure at ground floor would be about equivalent to 83 times atmospheric pressure at sea level or 1,220 psi (almost 2/3 ton per square inch)!

The question was can it be done. It can be done.

Is it cost effective? Is the private space flights for rich "space tourists" cost effective? Some think it is - because it's already happening. And private space launch companies are already being constructed.

Economics, pressure, etc. is not a problem. Only the timing hasn't been right so far.

[DecoJim]

Originally Posted by JohnMarko

The question was can it be done. It can be done.

Is it cost effective? Is the private space flights for rich "space tourists" cost effective? Some think it is - because it's already happening. And private space launch companies are already being constructed.

Economics, pressure, etc. is not a problem. Only the timing hasn't been right so far.

I think pointing out what it theoretically possible given unlimited funds and no need to make a profit is easy. I would like to see someone actually propose a scenario in which it make economic sense to build an enormous underwater metropolis as depicted here. Any actually underwater communities will most likely have a completely different form to match the challenges of sea.

As far as Virgin Galactic's space tourism goes, that company has made a calculation that they can eventually make a profit by charging customers $200K per person for suborbital flights (or that even if they do not profit, later developments will lead to a profit).

If you can build an underwater city that can contain 500-1000 foot towers and house a million people or so and show that they will be able to afford to live there, then my hat is off to you!

[You Need A Thneed]

Possible, yes. Would it look like the rendering? No.

If you built a skyscraper intended for land, and had it completely sealed so that water could not enter, and then sunk it 1000 feet down in the ocean, the water pressure would crush the whole thing. To make comfortable living space for even one family to live in would cost countless millions of dollars, and that's just for the structure itself. There's a reason why submarines are really cramped for the sailors on board. Not to mention all of the specialized mechanical systems that would be required when there isn't access to a nearly unlimited amount of fresh air.

Anything under a large amount of water must either be solid all the way through (no air pockets), or be built ridiculously strong.

[JohnMarko]

Originally Posted by DecoJim

I think pointing out what it theoretically possible given unlimited funds and no need to make a profit is easy. I would like to see someone actually propose a scenario in which it make economic sense to build an enormous underwater metropolis as depicted here. Any actually underwater communities will most likely have a completely different form to match the challenges of sea.

As far as Virgin Galactic's space tourism goes, that company has made a calculation that they can eventually make a profit by charging customers $200K per person for suborbital flights (or that even if they do not profit, later developments will lead to a profit).

If you can build an underwater city that can contain 500-1000 foot towers and house a million people or so and show that they will be able to afford to live there, then my hat is off to you!

I never said "I" could - and I never said anything about any heights or population - I was only responding to the original question - nice moving of the goalposts, there!

If it can be imagined, then it CAN be built - whether it WILL or is PRACTIBLE or ECONOMIC are entirely different questions.

Does it make economic sense - and to build a whole city - I agree - NO WAY IN ANY CONSEAVABLE SENSE! I was speaking of a single complex. And I also agree, that it would take a vastly different shape/appearance.

Maybe we'll see it on one of the outer planet's moons that are totally covered in water - long after we're dead, naturally...

[ozone]

Since saltwater is extremely corrosive you have question the viability of these structures.