Talk:Shimizu Mega-City Pyramid

Man, this has to be one of the coolest ideas I've heard in a long time

Man and woman, this has to be one of the coolest ideas I've heard in a long time, combining the most sturdy base structure ever designed in history--the pyramid--with the technology and architecture of the present and the future. The 21st Century has finally arrived! I sat hypnotized in awe watching the Discovery Channel special. The fact that it actually improves travel across the city for the individual, while eliminating the risks of human drivers was intriguing. Whether or not the structure can be created securely enough to avoid attack from natural AND man-made disaster (from inside or out) is the biggest question on my mind; well, that and the question of a sustainable and efficient power supply (the Discovery Channel program noted it's energy being hydro- and wind-generated). I mean, given the actual geometry of the structure--if this IS in fact an idea that proves practical and functional--other structures could be built next to it, and then in the future, new structures could be built on top of those higher and higher, using the original structures as the base of the larger new pyramid! This could solve many many problems that we face as a human race. I'll be waiting in anticipation for new developments on this project! --David Shaeffer, Chicago IL

Indeed that would be awsome, anyhow who ever expanded this article thanks alot, I'm glad this article got the attention it needed. XSpaceyx 10:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

It does seem pretty awesome, I hope it works out. For any other country, I'd say this is a huge waste of time and resources, but Japan's population density is crazy high. This is just so cool.

Another Person Remarks

I personal think it would be incredible thing to live in, at least to see. Anyway i would not set foot in it until it has been there for at lease ten years because i wouldn't know how the sea floor would take the support beams. But when they get that structure completely built I would like to see before I die. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.128.125 (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

But would it 'answer the problem'

I think it's a stretch to claim that it would answer Tokyo's space problems. Tokyo has a population of 12+ million and the metropolitan area of 30 million. Adding less than one million living spaces would only help alleviate the problem. I suggest that a more feasible way would be to simply make more efficient use of existing space by building higher (which is now possible). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryanmackinnon (talk • contribs) 13:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

shimizu pyrimad

6,575 feet tall? carbon nano tubes super strong and light weight, will be able to hold 750,000 people. people on moving walk way will travell about 3 - 6 MPH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.32.167 (talk) 14:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

This article seems to me to be presenting the subject as though it is a project that has a good chance of being attempted. As this is really just a cool idea and not a project the Japanese government will actually plausibly be working on, the article should probably be rewritten to reflect this and make it clear to the reader. --OGoncho (talk) 10:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

That and the 'Construction' section sounds like some sort of advertisement.--83.136.195.130 (talk) 11:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

And who exactly proposed this fanciful idea?

Nowhere in the article does it say who came up with this dream. Shameful. The Masked Booby (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Height

14 times higher than the Great Pyramid at Giza [...] The structure would be 730 meters above mean sea level Well, as the Giza pyramid is well over 100 metres, where does this 14 times higher come from? Fomalhaut76 (talk) 12:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

This is not the kind of subject where we can expect consistent numbers from reliable sources, because it's a fairy-tale rather than an actual building. It's probably better to either remove contradictory claims, or to put them in context ("According to Discovery Channel..." etc). bobrayner (talk) 11:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Pretty much all the math in the article is terrible. A square with 2000m perimeter has 500m sides and therefore 0.25km^2 area, not 8km^2. I'd remove the wrong parts, but considering that entire section is unsourced I can't tell which parts those are. --99.42.90.37 (talk) 10:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Japan uses the metric system, so does TRY 2004 mean that it's 2004 meters tall? 209.188.131.206 (talk) 21:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Perimeter and Area

Perimeter of the foundation above ground would be 2,000 metres. Which means that one side is 500 meters. Then the area should be 500 m x 500 m = 250,000 square meters. However, the article continues that the area of the foundation is 8 sq kilometers. Can somebody explain this. I think the figures are totally wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yanbugay (talk • contribs) 07:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Shimizu Mega-City Pyramid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090420134301/http://www.binisystems.com:80/try.html to http://www.binisystems.com/try.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120825041721/http://www.shimz.co.jp:80/english/theme/dream/try.html to http://www.shimz.co.jp/english/theme/dream/try.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

construction timeline

Is there any source confirming start of construction in 2030 and finishing it in 2110? --178.183.178.72 (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

'Construction started 1996' is simply not true

Please remove this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16B8:FEB:C200:955F:353F:2244:8C8A (talk) 01:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

New citations added

I have added some more reliable news sources for the sake of helping this page become more notable. Hopefully this might help get its multiple issues tag removed sooner or later. User:Sidney Stencil 20:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)