Or how about putting it on the International Space Station? Think about how much easier and more rapidly space construction could be. You would no longer need a planet-based launch for ships.
Here’s a question. If we have one end in a vacuum and the other end in Earth’s atmosphere, will the air go rushing out through it into space? Or will Earth’s gravity be enough to keep the air on the ground?
Follow up question. If one end is moving and the other end is still, do you keep your momentum as you pass through? That might be a problem with putting one in orbit. If you’re up in the ISS and pass through it, suddenly you’re skidding across the ground at 20,000 mph.
Actually, Earth’s gravity–or the atmospheric pressure that results from gravity’s effect on air–is what would be causing the air to rush out through the hole. It’s equivalent to (presumed fellow XKCD fan) Projammer’s pressure washer scenario–you sink one end into a high-pressure region, and a powerful jet of material shoots out of the other.
I think you have to assume that you’re using the wormhole’s frame of reference for momentum translation. That is, you will come out the other side with the same speed relative to the wormhole that you entered it. Otherwise, this would present extremely strict limitations on where you could place the ends of the hole, even on the ground.
I’VE GOT IT!!!
One end at a Talban headquarters, the other at The Price Is Right CBS studios!!
Film at 11:00! 
So we want the Earth-based wormhole behind an airlock, and the other end in geostationary orbit. (Or the top end in an airlock, or both.) Even with a comparatively small access, that’s getting close to a space elevator.
Put one inside the other. Let’s see what happens.
Gravity goes through wormholes, too. If one end is higher than the other, then you’d have to expend the corresponding amount of energy to push anything through. You still have to go uphill to get up.
Putting one end in orbit might still be worthwhile, though, since you could reach orbit far more efficiently without having to make a slow ascent through atmosphere. It probably wouldn’t be survivable for humans, but you could shove most of the heavy supplies through with no problem.
My ass and my bosses mouth. It actually works in both directions. He can kiss my butt or eat my shit for a change!
You’re the wise-ass that would put the bag of holding into the bag of devouring just to see what would happen, aren’t you?
Isn’t synchrotron radiation the limiting factor in building larger and larger particle colliders? Plus having to have large enough magnets to keep particles traveling at nearly light speed in a circular path.
I’d bet you could build a linear collider, effectively infinitely long with the wormholes at each end, that would put the LHC to shame.
What else could it be? There is no objective frame of reference; everything everywhere is moving incredibly fast relative to something.
Why would you want to do that? That garbage is natural resources to be mined in the future.
Likewise, “powerwashing North Korea off the map” is a bit harsh on the millions of innocent people who just happen to have been born in the wrong country.
No, the obvious answer is “my house” and “my office”. I could cut my commuting time from 90 minutes to half a second and have an extra hour and a half in bed.
It doesn’t matter as long as I have my companion cube and I can get my cake.
Send one end in orbit around the sun and dump all the nuclear waste.
Yumblie appeared to have an Earth-surface frame in mind in the question I was responding to. His hypothetical jumper was approaching the ISS-based end of the hole at very low speeds, but was moving at ~20,000 mph relative to the Earth-surface end.
Of the wormhole is orbit around the sun, anything that travels through the wormhole will also be orbiting around the sun. It takes much less energy to send nuclear waste into interstellar space than it does to send it into the sun.
If the wormhole is orbiting next to the sun it has to be traveling very fast, and so anything exiting the wormhole will also be traveling very fast. To actually hit the sun you have to deorbit the material, which means some sort of rocket. Throwing a rock at the sun doesn’t mean the rock hits the sun, because you’re already in orbit around the sun when you throw the rock, the rock is also in orbit around the sun. So when you throw the rock the rock just goes into a very slightly different orbit around the sun.
As for the placement of the wormhole ends, probably most efficient would be one end in Asia and the other end in Europe. So…Shanghai or Beijing or Tokyo on one end, the Ruhr valley on the other end. Or maybe Asia to New York. New York to Europe would be a waste because they’re too close.
Given the size of the wormhole we’d need to devise a new standard shipping container for the wormhole–run traffic one way constantly for 12 hours, then reverse and run traffic the other way. No walking or driving through–you’d queue up containers and run them through as fast as possible on rails or maglev. Passengers would board special passenger containers that would be lined up and shoved through for maximum throughput.
The Hyperion series had a guy who lived in a mansion with wormholes going to different “rooms” on different planets. IIRC his bathroom was on a raft on an endless ocean.
My thought on seeing the thread title: you could save money of the special effects for [del]Human Centipede 3[/del] Human Ouroboros/Hoop Snake.
[quote=“thelurkinghorror, post:37, topic:652615”]
The Hyperion series had a guy who lived in a mansion with wormholes going to different “rooms” on different planets. IIRC his bathroom was on a raft on an endless oceanQUOTE]
Horrifying. Imagine groggily stumbling to the restroom in the middle of the night and misjudging the dimensions of the raft. Puts all the “You left the seat up!” complaints in perspective.
Anyone who didn’t try that once lacked imagination!
[sub]Anyone who tried it twice lacked prudence.[/sub]