Yes: education focuses on science as a body of knowledge (what science can do for us) rather than science as a process of discovery (what we can do to make more science, and when science is not really science). This was true of my education too; I'm not sorry I learned the Laws of Thermodynamics, but what I am sorry about is that the discovery aspect came mostly from books I read outside school.

Not to belabor the obvious: most people don't need to know the Law of Thermodynamics, and wouldn't be able to apply them correctly if they did know them. I can't quite remember them myself. But most people do need to know, and I do remember, why scientific discoveries are reliable (and when they're not, and why not).

Conclusion: science teachers should be forced kicking and screaming to read Popper and Kuhn. (Good luck!) I have given my sons some books on the history of science, though not yet the philosophy thereof, and so far, so good.

Oops, replied to the wrong reply. Sorry.

What you're missing is that they don't (yet ...) plan to go to orbit. Getting to the upper atmosphere and popping up above 100km (as SpaceShipOne did) is much easier; you need a speed of only about 1000 m/s versus 8000 m/s. I'm sure Carmack would love to blast into orbit, but he is being realistic.

If I'm code review is taking forever, it's because I haven't documented I'm code. So in a culture of constant code reviews, I remember to document. Adding comments no longer wastes time; it *saves* time in the pretty near future. I also write fewer lazy hacks than I used to, because of the fear of having to explain them. And my code gets better for other reasons mentioned on this thread.

The OP didn't explicitly say that they were reviewing code months after it had been written, but no, archaeology and programming don't mix any too well. OTOH in a company where Hitting The Release Date is all-important, there is certainly a temptation to postpone until after that Date everything that can possibly be postponed, and pointy-haired types do think code review (and documentation) can be postponed.

What would you say to a teenage boy who thought putting on the condom could be postponed until after the ... release?

Spacex' Falcon 1 has a thrust about 1.25 times its lift-off weight. The old Saturn V had much the same. You don't need, and in fact don't want, engines much bigger than that if you plan to go to orbit; they'd just be dead weight for most of the trip.

Disclaimer: I am not a rocket scientist. I just know how to do arithmetic.

For the past year or two I buy music from indie sites *only*. The quality of the best music I can find there is not discernibly different from the best music on the big labels, and the variety is amazing. Oh, and it's slightly cheaper.

I'm old enough that I don't give a RIAA whether I listen to the same music everyone else listens to, so what do I need big labels for? The price difference doesn't pay for better music; it funds their advertising agencies (and their lawyers).

Some things you should consider:

1. you'll need either high amplitude or high frequency to get up to a useful speed

2. the design of a space elevator is already constrained by tension in the cable, and this scheme will lead to more tension, plus risk of fatigue fracture

3. how to power more than one vehicle at a time

4. what to do about the person who confuses vibration with jerking