Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The problem is that according to Science™ (https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20578627) with a tower of 2.17miles you start to get materials failure on the bricks. You might be able to engineer around this, but I suspect that the minifig-scale deathstar would cause the bottom bricks to melt.

Bummer.




That's true if you build the station on the planet, but I think the station is designed to be constructed in orbit in the first place. Its self-gravity should be negligible. Problem solved!


I think we can get support for a 2 mile large Lego Death Star hauled up by NASA and assembled in orbit - write your congressman now !


If I do my math correctly, the mass of the structure should be dominated by the surface, if it is constructed mostly hollow. There will be plenty of room to add individual rooms to play with inside.

The mass of the LEGO would be on the order of 113 tons assuming you build the surface out of 8x16 base plates. This is comfortably within range of a single Starship payload. It is much tougher to say how long LEGO would take to manufacture them, but I think it is safe to say that they could spin up additional manufacturing capacity for such an important national project.

It should pay for itself - you'd have a very long line of LEGO nerds buying tickets to help assemble it.


Whoops, dropped some zeroes. It'd be on the order of 800-900 launches.


even so we should do it ! :-)


We just need 10k votes, right? Or is there more to it than that?


That's no moon...


That’s your mother!


Maybe in this hypothetical we could reduce weight by making it the 2nd Death Star? A lot of that was skeletal superstructure.


The second Death Star was also about 33% bigger in diameter, though.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: