If only I’d said so in post #8! 
That’s not true. The last place I worked at had a Dyson, and it sucked, badly.
[Bart]
I didn’t think it was possible, but this both sucks and blows.
[/Bart]
Yes. A tree should be thought of as more of a sponge than a pipeline in terms of how it delivers water to the upper branches and, ultimately, leaves. In addition, trees and most other plants transport water in a thick sappy colloid (i.e. sap) which increases the viscosity of the fluid.
The hosepipe to space notion is a crackhead idea per the explanation that Malacandra provides. Aside from that, a hose would not have the tensile strength to support itself in orbit, and unless extended to and anchored at the geostationary would have to be under continuous thrust to maintain station.
Stranger
But what if we stuck the other end of the hose near Jupiter and let’s it’s gravity fight our gravity for the water?
I think if we had the technology for such a superb hosepipe, we would easily be able to fix global warming and rising sea levels using more elegant means than littering interstellar space with half a billion kilometres of hosepipe and sacrificing key elements of the biosphere to the jovian gravity well.
But you gotta admit, it would be cool.
Even if the physics of the hose could be worked out, wouldn’t reducing the mass of the earth be a sketchy idea?
Well, Jupiter isn’t sucking out Earth’s oceans right now, why would a giant siphon allow it to do so?
Well once the annoying trivialities of such things as the fact it would take a hose of absurd length, unbelivable strength-to-mass in all structural dimensions and damn ridiculous insulation. It would actually work.
The downward force(created by extreme jovian gravity toward the planet), would create a suction vacuum that would pull the water off the Earth. The reason that it doesn’t happen now is that that there is nothing directing and localizing the negative pressure at an equaly localized area toward the Earth like my Unobtanium hose does.
I solved the theoretical problems, let the boring number crunchers and engineers solve the practical ones. 
well I may be full of shit all in all. I’m trying to figure out if a vacuum suck presure can be greater than gravitational force and I keep realizing I’m drunk.
Okay one more try to askwhat I can’t figure out. Supose my unobtanium hose had an effective hydroelectic generator, would the power gererated by the falling water in Jupiter’s Gravity well be enough power to move an equivilent ammout of water out of Earth’s Gravtational pull past the place where it will tend toward Jupiter and create a continuous cycle?
No it wouldn’t. There’s already a vacuum around Earth! And it’s not pulling anything off the surface of the Earth because the Earth’s gravity keeps everything down.
There’s no such thing as “negative pressure.” (Except when you’re talking about pressure relative to some non-zero ambient pressure, but the ambient pressure around Earth is zero.)
Osmosis* is a big part of it.
- I’m not sure what you mean by a cycle. You move water from Earth to Jupiter in the hose, then you use the enrgy of that to move more water from Earth to Jupiter. There is no return path in what you describe, and hence no cycle.
Assuming you meant "enough power to move an equivilent amout of water out of Jupiter’s Gravitational pull past the place where it will tend toward Earth, that would be a cycle. And the answer is no.
It’s that damn conservation of energy again. By the time you take into account friction losses in the hose, friction losses in the pump and loss of electrical power due to resistance in the line you will be moving a lot less water with the hydroelctric generator than you are moving with the hose.
There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine. The energy in this system exists because the water on Earth is effectively sitiing higher than water on Jupiter and your pipe lets it run downhill for you to harvest that energy. But you can’t get enough energy out do work and pump the water back uphill.
On the other hand, why do it? Even if it worked, what would be gained by hosing the oceans out into space? Apart from a huge but unobtainable supply of freeze-dried sashimi, of course.
NO it is not.
I have explained this to you before, with references. I wish you would stop repeating this false information.
Osmosis plays a role in getting wtaer into the roots form the soil. Osmosis plays a role in getting water into newly created vessel elements, ie it primes the pump. After that osmosis plays essentially no role whatsoever.
FFS if you won’t listen to the facts from reputable third parties I have presented to you then at least stop and think for a second. If osmosis played a major role then how does the system work when the osmotic potential of the cells is far higher than the potential of the vessel elements. You are proposing a system where the pressure in the pipe must be lower than the both the source and the outlet. How the hell could that work?
Perpetual motion and free energy. Put a turbine in the pipe and you can generate electricity. At only 75 miles above sea level the water relased will promptly fall back to Earth and find its way back to the oceans. Limitless free energy.
No, because ‘past’ here means ‘up again’.
Right, exactly as I said: (from the wiki link provided right there) "Also, osmosis is responsible for the ability of plant roots to suck up water from the soil. Since there are many fine roots, they have a large surface area, water enters the roots by osmosis." No osmosis, no water to take further up. Thus “Osmosis is a big part of it.” *I even provided the link. *
Nor have we ever discussed this as far as I can remember (and I don’t give a rats ass if we did, anyway 
). And- *please *keep personal comments out of GQ, eh? Whether or not we have debated a point before is a matter for the PIT, not GQ. Thanks.
Just in case you don’t like wiki:
"http://www.springerlink.com/content/p6072581j2068231/
Abstract The present state of modelling of water transport across plant tissue is reviewed. A mathematical model is presented which incorporates the cell-to-cell (protoplastic) and the parallel apoplastic path. It is shown that hydraulic and osmotic properties of the apoplast may contribute substantially to the overall hydraulic conductivity of tissues (Lpr) and reflection coefficients (67-1). The model shows how water and solutes interact with each other during their passage across tissues which are considered as a network of hydraulic resistors and capacitances (lsquocomposite transport modelrsquo). Emphasis is on the fact that hydraulic properties of tissues depend on the nature of the driving force. Osmotic gradients cause a much smaller tissue Lpr than hydrostatic. Depending on the conditions, this results in variable hydraulic resistances of tissues and plant organs. For the root, the model readily explains the well-known phenomenon of variable hydraulic resistance for the uptake of water and non-linear force/flow relations. Along the cell-to-cell (protoplastic) path, water flow may be regulated by the opening and closing of selective water channels (aquaporins) which have been shown to be affected by different environmental factors.