We don’t need it. Today’s nuclear reactors only use 4% of their fuel and leave a very long life “waste”. Molten salt can burn that waste. BUT they can also “burn” depleted uranium which we have a huge amounts of. Then there’s the nuke bomb cores. Moltex can burn those and the process completely denatures the metal so it can never again go into bombs.
For the record Freeman Dyson's original concept of a Dyson's Sphere was a swarm, the Dyson Shell was based on a misinterpretation of his words and people ran with it. Dyson himself said a solid shell is impossible.
@MENTAL: It literally says in the video a Dyson swarm, that's You Tube commenters, making pithy responses before actually paying attention to the material. Same goes for you Rayfire.
Confused viewer here. Please help. I’m looking for a powerful cordless vacuum that can clean big messes and hard-to-reach places. Should I get the Dyson Sphere, or the Dyson Swarm?
Sudish amatya, depends which side of the wall you are on. The wall on the east side of your house probably has the same problem. Haematite mirrors bounce light around. So you could see thousands of sunrises all one time. This might be fatal.
Man, your school sucked. I first learned about Dyson spheres in mine, about the same time I was learning how to make elemental chlorine and that Shakespeare is as dirty as all hell.
Gareth Dean I think I failed to mention I'm only a junior in high school and I've taken all of the AP Physics classes my school can give but I know how E fields work! lol I just wish we spent like a couple weeks talking about complex things like this
Lever You live in America? I live in an island nation and we got about a page worth of this in our textbooks and an afternoon trying to figure out if you can build one.(How thick a shell, how much volume, forces on it... basic exam stuff applied to an interesting scenario.) American schools have always struck me as rather too exam focused, but then I've never been to one.
The Dyson Sphere was always meant to be a swarm, the idea of a solid sphere is just a misunderstanding of what Dyson meant. Also, calling it "partial" or "complete" is kind of arbitrary, it doesn't have to be dense. It's our energy needs that will dictate its density, not having to fully enclose the sun just for the sake of it. Plus if "complete" means collecting all of the energy, before that we'll reach a point of diminishing returns, so we may never complete it.
No, it was a complete sphere that Dyson envisioned. In Dyson's own words. fermatslibrary.com/s/search-for-artificial-stellar-sources-of-infrared-radiation
@@lordgarion514 No, it wasn't. Also in Dyson's own words, directly responding to this notion: "A solid shell or ring surrounding a star is mechanically impossible. The form of 'biosphere' which I envisaged consists of a loose collection or swarm of objects traveling on independent orbits around the star." That's from _"Letters and Response, Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared Radiation"_ science.sciencemag.org/content/132/3421/252.2
@@Mugenmush Maybe, just maybe, you could have actually read the link, instead of just saying something stupid..... As I said, in his own words. So, since you're too lazy to click a link, read his words here. "Third, the mass of Jupiter, if distributed in a spherical shell revolving around the sun at twice the Earth's distance from it, would have a thickness such that the mass is 200 grams per square centimeter of surface area (2 to 3 meters, depending on the density). A shell of this thickness could be made comfortably habitable," Now, piss off you lazy ass .
@@Mugenmush And yes, I'm full aware that the stresses would overcome the forces holding the atoms together. Doesn't change the fact that he described a complete sphere....... *in detail* . I can only assume he didn't realize how great the forces would be when he wrote that.l, and figured it out later.
@@lordgarion514 Hello, random angry person. I notice you insulted the other dude because he did not read your link. Did you read his? If his quote is also valid, that implies Dyson updated his opinion and you would lose this little argument. I don't give a damn about Dyson but I'm enjoying watching your temper tantrum and am curious to see if you can recover from the hole you're in
2:31 "Dyson's original idea" was not a rigid sphere! He knew damn well that a rigid structure was impossible and never even put the idea forth that it should or could be built that way. Ffs!
I feel like achieving type II status is enough reason to build this. It's important to show our type I alien neighbors how much cooler we are compared to them.
Fairly sure the 'evil' attribute awarded to species destroying planets only comes into play if the planet in question is harboring life. Without life on board it's hard to view other planets as anything but big mineral deposits.
This is what the Vogon Construction Fleet was up to in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy... devouring planets to make Dyson Swarms to power their intergalactic bypass construction...
@@sausagequeen nah definitely less than 10k years. Once you get going it takes decades to finish. Just gotta get the infrastructure and have smart enough robots. We have come astoundingly far in just the past 100 years where the unimaginable became possible several times over
Evan Nickerson not a few million years. in a few centuries. or if were lucky. a few decades. a million years is a longer time than you think. if we go progressively on civilization for a MILLION years, we would probably have fully colonized our solar system along with a few stars as well or maybe more!!
12:12 FINALLY. THANK YOU! I could NEVER find ANYBODY who could explain WHY we couldn't use quantum entanglement as FTL communication; they would ALWAYS default to, "Well, it's just against the rules of information going faster than light!" You ACTUALLY explained that we cannot know which photons are entangled because it's impossible to figure out which photons have the right interference patterns until we compare information from the two screens, which requires separate communication. THANK YOU!
The problem I have with both this idea and Issac Arthur's (Love his channel) plan for the disassembly of planets, is the tiny problem of gravitational resonance..If Mercury were the only planet in the Solar System, its path around the Sun would stay fixed in space, but according to Newtonian physics, and the fact the Mercury isn’t alone. Not to mention, gravitational interactions with the other Jupiter has it shifting its orbit by 0.15 degrees per century already! This alone may cause the complete loss of, or sterilisation of the Earth, prior to the sun going red giant and consuming the Earth!. In addition, when Einstein famously predicted with his theory of general relativity, the Sun-Mercury attraction also adds another 0.01 degrees per century to Mercury's orbital procession as well. In any case, dismantling Mercury all together could/would cause serious issues for our fragile blue spaceship. 1000's of simulations have been run on various super computers to predict the current movement of Mercury, and the outlook is grim. We may be flung into the sun or into deep space becoming a rouge planet, or we may even switch our orbit with Venus and have our oceans boil off or have Mercury slam into the Earth! Gravitational resonance, is a fickle bitch. This is the reason the Kepler space telescope found so many "hot Jupiter's" so close to their star and has changed the way we think about how solar systems are formed and how rare the one we live in is. In fact, Jupiter's own theoretical migration towards the inner solar system may have been the cause of the late heavy bombardment (bringing water, amino acids and the collision of the planet Thea to glance off the Earth, creating the moon) and maybe just maybe, the only reason life developed on the Earth in the first place. We may have just been a solar system with another hot Jupiter. We were just lucky enough that Saturn followed behind Jupiter, gaining mass as they migrated together toward the inner solar system. Then, when Saturn was just massive enough, it caused what is known as the "grand tack", reversing the direction of the two gas giants and perhaps flipping the orbit of Uranus and Neptune, as well as perturbing Neptune's rotation onto its side. It also put Jupiter in the perfect place to eat up asteroids/comets, giving the earth enough time to allow multi-celled creatures to evolve in the first place. Anyways. I digress. The point I am trying to make is, if we start dismantling planets, the Earth is going to be fucked!!! 99% of the species that have ever existed in earth's history are extinct already. Let's not become a statistic. Perhaps, we should figure out how to stop the current mass extinction event and the warming of our planet we are causing (we are an outbreak species) prior to destroying the only habitual planet we know of by in the observable universe prior to dismantling others...Or maybe I'll just put my tinfoil hat back on.
You can probably easily answer this with occams razor by using material the furthest away from civilization, so the Kuiper Belt. I feel like you assume too many things that sound reasonable, but I doubt that makes it impossible. And if you really want to it take it an extreme, do it in another solar system, fashion the panels on the way and just bring them to place. Maybe? But a painless solution to solve theoretically and I am not a physicist. It is probably harder to induce fusion by making a star then to dismantle planets where you might make some panels to get even just 1 percent of the sun's energy. It is also perfectly scalable too but that is another issue entirely.
@jmorrison Don't worry, you've made a fine point. (Although next time, kindly break it up into more easily-digestable paragraphs, pls and thanks) Would you be equally worried about exhaustively mining the Mars / Jupiter asteroid belt? You've got me worried! I don't know how uniform its distribution is, so extracting and redistributing could have a nonzero impact.
It's a reasonable thing to worry about, but fortunately Mercury has a very low mass. Most of the mass of the solar system, excluding the Sun, is in Jupiter, and Earth is about as massive as all the rocky planets, their moons, and asteroids combined. Mercury is part of the system of gravitational resonance, but it isn't driving it, it's dancing to the tune. Besides, once you have a K2 civilization, if you need to move a planet, you can!
@@znotch The problem with Isaac Arthur is that he isn't clear, speaks quickly, and switches between points very rapidly. It isn't very enjoyable to watch
I heard that if you can get all the people on the Earth to pray to God for one week, you will earn enough favour for Him to grant us one Kugelblitz for free. This could get us started, I'll contact the Pope to see if we can get this thing organized. Praise Google!
If God wanted to have a co-dependent relationship with us It wouldn't have given us free will. It wasn't prayers that got Neil Armstrong to the moon. It was science.
Yup that's really what the priests are passing down to the little boys. How else could one truly consumer Jesus' body? You are what you eat, right? And they get sanctioned for providing the real sacrament! Not an easy job doing the spiritual work to be sure.
+ John LaBrie I won't grant you any Kugelblitz for free, no matter what the guy in the funny clothes says. If you want a Kugelblitz, work and earn money so that you can afford one. bum
What Dyson proposed was not a shell. It was a swarm made up of asteroid sized space habitats. The shell was a later misunderstanding. In fact he so hated the idea of a solid Dyson Shell that later in life he wished he hadn't written his original paper and thus had such a stupid idea pinned to his name. Also, we wouldn't need to leave earth intact were we to tackle Dyson's original idea because we'd have billions of times more living space available in the space habitats orbiting the sun.
Earth will be left intact for historical purposes until people forget about it and somebody offers the government enough money to chop it up for raw materials.
@Mr Penguin Reimbursement ?! You can't reimburse a home ! It's not something that you can give a clear monetary value, it possess a subjective sentimental value. You can't put a price on a home.
@Mr Penguin >Sentimental value does not have monetary value That's what I'm saying smartass. And nothing objectively have value, it's something that is totally subjective and depends from one another.
Matt, wouldn't cannibalizing Mercury completely change the gravitational dynamics of the solar system? I mean you can't just pluck out planets from the solar system and have no impact on the orbits of the other planets can you? And what would the implications of that be?
@cinder_fall okay, perhaps, I don't actually know, I just intuitively feel that tiny adjustments can have big ramifications when they play out over big complex systems and the solar system is a big complex system. Every orbit is an intricate dance with the sun and every other planet within the sun's gravitational well. Mercury is tiny but that doesn't necessarily mean it's insignificant. Would be nice to see an accurate simulation of what would happen if mercury was removed from the solar system altogether just to benchmark the consequences of a full planet cannibalization.
Amoroso Gombe when dealing with gravitationql pulls on a solar level, the mass of the inner planets is negligible. The mass of the sun plus the mass of the earth is indistinguishable from the mass of the sun. That aside, tearing mercury apart wouldn't detract from the total mass, just spread it out.
if anything we would just end up slightly pushing all the planets outwards, but probably not enough to be noticeable, maybe like a dip in temperatures by 1 degree, but 1 degree would highly be correlation and not causation.
+ricande i think 'just' is the wrong word used here... there are a lot of stuff happening around black holes and dont forget singularity itself is rupture of space and time..
A Type-IIi civilization is the one capable of harnessing the energy of an entire GALAXY. It would take millenia for humanity to be at that level of development
millennia? it takes LIGHT 100,000 years to cross the milky way. humans would need hundreds of millions of years to probably more likely billions of years to get to that level
@@Entreprenoob maybe he doesnt realize what millennia means? Maybe he means its like millions and millions of years. Perhaps idk. Just looking for any excuse for him becoz i really having a hard time accepting the fact that most ppl on this planet r dumb as a rock lol simple meatbags nothing more
Rusty Shakleford well technological progress accelerates, and it would really take off if humans invented a n artificial superintelligence that obeyed its creators or if humans augment their own intelligence.
Rusty Shakleford That only assumes that ftl is impossible, but people mischaracterize this all the time. Every time you hear about people making predictions like this it's from the point of view of modern physics. It's all modern terminology and modern technological understanding. This doesn't mean it's a literal interpretation of how things will work out. It's a linear projection of our current understanding, nothing more. I think people are just uncomfortable with the idea that they aren't the pinnacle of civilization. That the dumbest people from the distant future will take for granted things we can't even fathom yet. They will look at us as primitive savages most likely.
+Rafael Adamy you actually have a 66% of chance seeing this: 1, there is some sort of after life in which you'll see what's going on 2, nothing happens and you'll miss out 3, you'll get reincarnated maybe as a human or animal but wouldn't feel that excited about it
Wysession’s a professor at WashU, where I just finished my undergrad. I never took any classes with him, but he taught other sections of lectures I did. Really cool that you’ve got access to the same cool people I do from somewhere else! Technology’s wild, dude
Well, he also made jokes about Game of Thrones and how much more important it is to refuel your car every day instead of brooding about space and time! XD
As small nitpick: You make it sound as if Dyson himself originally thought about a solid shell enclosing a star, when he knew from the beginning that a swarm of orbiting single objects was far more plausible. The idea of a solid structure developed in Sci-Fi literature.
Yeah, that was my one nitpick with the video. His original idea was for the swarm, however people misinterpreted what he said and thought it was a solid object. He did however go on record to clarify it but people still think he meant a solid ball.
There's no doubt that Dyson was aware of the issues with a solid sphere, however his first article on the subject DID suggest a solid sphere, and the emphasis was on it being a biosphere as well as an energy collector. Dyson 1960, Science News Letter, reproduced here: www.islandone.org/LEOBiblio/SETI1.HTM
Huh. Thanks for clearing that up. I could always swear blind I'd read that it was meant in a more swarm like way. One thing I have seen commented before would be the possibility of thousands of small hexagonal solar panels all joined together with some kind of tether between each one, it'd be the closest we could get to forming a ball without the issues of the sphere itself. Plus you could use the tether to transfer power to a singe laser/maser point for every x amount of collectors before transferring it to earth or some big station that collects it all and sends it to relevant places.
I believe if you tethered all of them together you re-introduce all the problems of the sphere. Even if they're not "rigid" they're still forming a static sphere.
@@dragonflame8157 except the Dunning-Kruger Effect is literally the opposite of what Mazzeha said Think you be more right calling it a philosophical thing, as it was Plato that said "All I know is that, I know nothing"
Freedom Phoenix Goat The Dunning-Kruger Effect is how people who know little about a topic tend to think they know a lot and people who know a lot about a topic tend to think they don’t know much.
By the way Matt, you said that adding up a sine and cosine wave would give a flat distribution. That will only occur if you change one of the waves' phases; for example, advance the sine wave by 90 degrees forward. Just a small point.
Big problem: if you delete our moon from a solar system simulation, Venus either falls into the sun or gets kicked out of the solar system after around 15,000 years (or so) depending on where the moon was when it was deleted. The solar system is a chaotic system and even a small change like this can have dire consequences. You can't rearrange the masses like this (putting the mass of Venus where Mercury is) without introducing instabilities into the solar system that may, in the long run, destroy the Earth or the entire planetary system. This makes even a Dyson shell less realistic, let alone a Dyson sphere, if you intend to keep the Earth around.
This!^. I want to know why physicists take this kind of theory seriously. Taking the mass of mercury and moving it will have wild consequences on Venus's orbit and will very likely cause a domino effect of destruction throughout the solar system.
Are you basing your assumption that Venus does this based on solid, provable mathematics, or are you basing it on some quick simulation you did late at night using one of those solar system emulators that are all the rage?
tscoffey1 I'm talking about supercomputer-level astrophysical simulations. This particular result is one I got at a lecture on solar system dynamics at the Max Planck institute for solar system research (MPS) in Bavaria.
if we can power facilities all around the solar system why assume most people will be on Earth? if the Kugelblitz is there you can just power whole cities on Jupiter's Moons.
Energy used building a solar panel exceeds energy collected in lifetime. I looked at the UK solar power energy produced today, during winter there contribution falls to almost nothing. Yelling that everyone should put one on their roof may make people feel better but won't fix our energy needs
you need indium to make photovoltaic panels, and since it's rare and not recycled the price gets higher and higher since a decade (no thanks to the rise of capacitive touch screens used to create our fragile and quickly obsolete smartphones) The best option should be solar thermal power plants like they did in Morocco with the Noor CSP that use lenses to converge infrared to hardly heat a big amount of matter and produce electricity with a turbine in a fluid loop like in fission power plants. No need for batteries or supercapacitors to store energy for the night consumption.
Just FYI, if anyone is interested in these types of concepts like Dyson's sphers, you've gotta check out the channel of 'Isaac Arthur'. That guy has loads of stuff like this on his channel which is presented in a very nice way. Btw. I'm in no way affiliated with the channel aside from being a big fan.
Not quite sure if anyone has asked or mentioned this but, Has anyone considered the repercussions of mining a planet out of existence would have on Our solar system? Each planet found its orbit from the gravity of the sun and the other planets around it. Take one away and I’m almost positive that will make for some serious realignment. And whether a Dyson sphere or swarm, We’re talking about interrupting the life bringing sunlight of the Sun to the Earth. That to comes with serious repercussions. Sounds like we’re getting way ahead of ourselves way too quick. Let’s master stage one civilization before we jump to stage three dreaming.
I don't think that Mercury will totally be annihilated, just severely modified. From what I know, Mercury itself don't have much impact on the other celestial body of our system.
@@NIHIL_EGO no , Mercury will be totally ceased. But he's not relevant for the solar system's gravity. But Venus would be relevant for the gravity of the sun- Earth system.
Just ran a simulation going for several decades about removing Mercury from the solar system. No appreciable difference in the orbital paths of any of the remaining Inner planets, certainly no effect on Earth or Venus. Will run some more iterations with some variable tweaking to make sure. Side note; I love Universal Sandbox 2.
Also, there’s no reason for this cloud of solar collectors to block any of the sunlight that would reach Earth. There’s so much space around the sun we could put quadrillions of them around the sun in a space smaller than Earth’s orbit without putting a single one on the ecliptic.
Check out a video on the size and distances of our planets in the Solar System. Universal sandbox Simulator 2 can also help you see those worries are unfounded
A crazy thought crossed my mind. A Dyson ring with an electromagnetic field to direct solar wind plasma to create directional thrust slowly making the whole solar system a space ship.
Now, human built LCH, biggest scientific equipment ever. 100 years later, human will build the 1st Dyson swarm satellite by excavating Mercury. 200 years later, human will build the 1st Kugelblitzes around Jupiter's orbit, starting of type 3 civilization. 300 years later, Star Wars was a story.
LEE Yyy has the right idea, though I think her timeline is a little optimistic. A full Dyson swarm is likely to take many hundreds of years. Kugleblitzes (artificial black holes formed from concentrated photons) would be generated & possibly utilized as propulsion during this time period. They would still only provide sub-light travel, but the stars are not going anywhere, so whats the hurry???
While that is "mostly" true, we still have visionaries like Richard Branson, Jiang Mianheng and even Elon Musk who consider the distant future as important as the quarterly profit report, and NOT mutually exclusive. Mankind will progress, the rich will get richer and the gap will most likely widen. Even so, the poor also get wealthier, with access to education, medicine, clean water and technology. Mankind will be dragged kicking and screaming (taking selfies & twittering their entres) into the future, whether they want to or not.
One request: I'm a visual person....also, even if I'm not a visually oriented person, many people need visual objects to keep track of. Ok, that last 3min of explaining why and why not of sending messages back into time was.......not as effective as it could be. This may be more costly than "in studio, green screen"; but, I think an actual short movie of someone Playing the Lotto, Sending Numbers back in time, would be the most effective in explaining how this work and doesn't work. Thanks for the videos, they're great! Day is incomplete unless one's mind is blown.
Well, this is a trip down memory lane to all those hours spent watching Star Trek: the Next Generation. There's an entire episode about a Dyson sphere and they explain the Romulans' engines as working with singularities.
A Dyson Swarm sounds much much more realistic than expecting a civilization to be able to focus 10% of a star's output into a space 100 times smaller than an atomic nucleus.
No it does not sound possible. Who is gonna build it? The USA? russia? china? Humans cannot even work there with in their own boarders. Humans will ~never work together on the scale needed to accomplish anything talked about here. Sorry but Mary Poppins will rule before any cohesion of this scale happens.
@@250txc There will probably be a State that just crushes all other and gain absolute power, probably asserting its dominance over the conquered areas with genocide, genetic engineering and robotics. This, this is a very likely future, it just requires some super powers to collapse under their own weight (historically a frequent occurance) for another one to seize the opportunity If humans ever become a galactic civilisation, it will probably be under a way more absolutist regime that we have ever known so far
If my civilization was approaching Type K-II, I'd be terrified of any potential Type III's out there, quietly watching me from the dark, waiting to snuff me out for fear of encroaching competition. And so I wouldn't want any bratty Type-I's making noise in my direction, giving away my position. So, I'd probably try to find another means of generating energy, rather than giving out a giant IR-but-no-vis signal.
Matt, even though having a swarm of giant-arse mazers would be friggin _awesome_ ... i gotta say that the start of the video you are right on: *we don't know how the energy needs of advanced civs evolve* . My bet is that exponential growth and energy consumption is a long term _problem_ and must be dealt with/curbed naturally, if the civ is to last on, say, geologic scales. If we go digital and microscopic/nanotech, and our population growth stops being exponential (as developed world models imply may happen naturally anyway), our energy needs may even be substantially _lower_ in the future. The Kardashev scale is a product of colonial, expansionist thinking of the industrial era of the 19-20th centuries. It may not be a thing for those ET who found a way to coexist with their environments on cosmic scales. Perhaps we might be better off pursuing those avenues of progress.
IIRC there is a variant of the kardashev scale that sort of covers what you are on about. It goes to -1 and so forth and covers micro-management of the universe rather than macro-management. The further you go down the more capable of controlling the matter around you, Thus when you get to the lowest point you are capable of turning any waste or unneeded resources into different atoms that are useful to you and also capable of altering space-time.
I'm assuming you're referring to the variant proposed by John D. Barrow, who said that advancement would be marked by control of smaller and smaller units of matter and energy. Type I-minus can manipulate objects on the macro-level. Type II-minus can alter genes, read their genome, and are capable of replacing parts of themselves. Type III-minus can manipulate molecules and bonds. Type IV-minus can manipulate atomic structures like protons. Type V-minus can manipulate subatomic structures like quarks. Type Omega-minus can manipulate the fabric of space and time itself.
I totally agree that we shouldn't be so quick to extrapolate our current trends when we try to guess the motives and needs of advanced civilizations. There's one very good reason to think that exponential expansion is not an MO of a milliennia-old technological civilization - We don't see them! That said, it's also unrealistic to assume that every advanced civilization ends up with the same motive. Some may be expansionist (apparently not too many though), and those may well find a use for K2 levels of energy. Kugelblitzes, warp drives, cosmic mega-structures... none of these can be done without insane amounts of energy.
PBS Space Time Agreed - we just don't know what happens, if there is even a trend. And i suppose it is an optimist in me that thinks the solution to the Fermi paradox is not the lack of intelligent ETs, but that they don't venture far from their host stars, observing the Cosmos rather than colonizing it. But you are right, there is no evidence either way. So far. :) Perhaps time will tell.
Yes, you are completely right. It is impossible. The engine is a machine that converts energy into mechanical work (motion). I am sure, that he has misused that word. He should use rather "reactor" instead, like a nuclear reactor, because he talked about changing the mass into a energy. Sun by the fusion is able to convert only about 1% of its mass into the energy, because the two atoms of Hydrogen are merged together, and form Helium atom, that is lighter than sum of two H mass. This mass difference is changed into the energy, according to E=mc2. But 99% of former hydrogen mass (helium) is left (it is simplification). The black hole is completely different. It is changing its whole mass into a energy by ie. Hawking radiation, and in the time it disappears into thin air.
Well in a vacuum system, all the tables, chairs, sandwiches, and nuclear waste used in fuel is contained within the reactor. Maintaining energy integrity by mechanically retaining the reactor.
Dont want to be a naysayer, but thats not ENTIRELY accurate. In the fission process... the equation is NOT balanced 100%. Carnot efficiency would be the goal, not infinite energy.
What he was saying wasn't that the generator would be 100% efficient, but the conversion from matter to energy would be 100% efficient, that energy would still need to be collected and used, which is where the efficiency would drop.
5:58 - 6:00 I just graduated from DeVry University. One thing that we talked a lot about throughout my time there was nano-tech. Currently we are building and testing them. Overall it's the most beneficial to us. This along with DNA security scans, are 2 of the projects we are working on.
Genuine question: even though Mercury is small, removing it (or sufficiently reducing its mass)=> wouldn't that risk changing the orbits of the planets including a planet known as... Earth?
The gravitational attractive force between Mercury and Earth at their closest to each other produces an acceleration of ~ 0.000000004 m/s². Not too much to worry about.
@@JSi6 Actually over time that will add up to a lot, the slight tug Mercury exerts on Jupiter is the bigger concern. Super computer simulations have shown time and time again that without Mercury Jupiter will begin move towards the inner solar system. Also Venus and Earths orbit was shown to become more and more elliptical having the two planets swap place back and forth until they are either ejected from the solar system or flung into the sun, Jupiter always becomes a hot Jupiter.
That would be a great sci fi plot. Humans destroy Mercury to create powerful dyson swarm, then realize it causes the Earth to have a catastrophic change in orbit, humans have to use all power of dyson swarm to power a life saving correction. Spoiler alert: It doesn’t produce enough power to correct and Earth will die. Role credits.
+Marcus Aseth Well, where would you get the energy to get to the nearest habitable planet? Can you suggest an alternative energy source that would allow us to leave the solar system and colonise another star system?
+Marcus Aseth How do you propose to get to other star systems with our current level of technology? You do understand that it takes a fuckload of energy to move large craft from our star system to another star system... right?
I think it depends on your technological level, the higher, the closer you can get. One can imagine a future civilization of digital beings living on computronic substrate, that floating right above the sun, maybe even inside it.
You know, I just had a flash of trailing the outside perimeter of Earth's orbit around the sun with satellite marker solar cells as a starting point that could be used as a framework because it would be logistically efficient to minimize our supply lines to the structure and prevent interfering with our current relation to the sun's energy. Although, I could also see the benefit of a closer defense structure to shield from solar flares as an added safety measure as well.
So lets say if we were to use all the material in Venus and Mercury would the absence of the 2 planes possibly destabilize or desynchronize our planetary orbit?
Not on any reasonable timescale. You'll notice the planets don't raise tides, nor are Mercury and Venus in neat 'lockstep' orbit with us, they wander all over the sky. Given enough time subtle effects will add up, but that would be on the order of millennia.
Earth still has considerable kinetic energy from the speed it travels around the sun. We will stay in a very stable ellipse orbit because it takes a lot of change in energy/angular momentum to reduce the average radius of our orbit.
No not really. Maybe slightly. The Sun pretty much does all the work. However if you were to push one out across the solar system. Then that would mess everything up. Disassembled in orbit around the Sun would be fine though.
So, we are right to do it to eliminate them from threating the future of the other planets and moons then. I feel like we have to do it now. For the Solar System!!!
Benji how can you know for sure? humans never did such a thing if we could even do it i think it would be better to experiment with one of the smaller moons arround jupiter
Have we found any nearby star cluster inaccessible by standard FTL for us to isolate them in just in case of Gray Tempest issues? Or should we just hope Gray comes out of such a mess?
Yeah, my thoughts when they said about the kugelblitz was, "Uh, what if some dumb twit accidentally feeds it too much or some stray debris gets sucked in." Surely its got to be a very fine balance to keep it from destroying stuff.
I guess its not even stupidity, It could be some simple mistake that isn't realised. Even leaving it to an computer could make it go all wrong. An AI would be even worse if it develops bad intentions.
The real problem is actually feeding it too much. He touches on it but doesn't go in depth about feeding it enough to balance it's hawking radiation. Micro black holes do get created by CERN but they vanish almost instantly as they can't ever feed enough (due to how small they are) to counteract the radiation loss. So you could say create one inside an asteroid and in a natural process it would just fizzle out because it's radiation would still outweigh it's mass consumption. While they would be a highly interesting power source they are like orchids....amazingly fickle to keep alive.
I don't think it's a concern. Remember that, comparatively, we're talking about a RIDICULOUSLY SMALL black hole- half of the apparatus is to keep it from evaporating almost instantaneously. You'd have to accidentally drop a planet into it before that happened for it to gain enough mass to be dangerous to anything.
Thanks! It's never aliens, until every other explanation has been exhausted - and then it's *_still_* not aliens. Not until we shake their hands (or whatever they've got...) :o) tavi.
I mean aside from keeping our planetary orbit stable I guess not a whole lot. I mean get rid of them and I can guarantee you within a few years Earths orbit would have gone wonky causing all multi-cellular life on earth to go extinct for the extreme climate change.
Hmm...mischaracterizing the Dyson "swarm" as your idea when it was actually Dysons original idea is a bit disingenuous. The Dyson sphere was never his idea.
We should absolutely build one. A dyson swarm is such a versatile megastructure, you can do a lot more with it than just generate stupid amounts of power. You can also use them for star lifting, the process of extracting material directly from a star and using various nuclear processes to convert the collective material into more useful elements.
If you have all those reflectors harvesting the suns output, would that freeze some of the planets (like our own) as not as much sunlight will be escaping to warm us up?
it could. on the other side, you can redirect the energy however you see fit. In fact, you can illuminate individual planets in a way that they all become habitable.
Well, heating up uninhabitable planets is a waste of power isn't it? We're trying to have as much usable power as we can, so...who cares if Neptune or Saturn become colder :) Or, as it was said - we can beam power to Mars, and with help of terraforming making it habitable again. So once Sun will become too hot to live on Earth(and it will) we have a new home.
+MrCorvusC In your proposed instance the earth would never get too hot because we would be harvesting the sun's energy anyway to be able to make Mars habitable.
It seems like a Dyson sphere wouldn't be that useful considering that you have to transmit the energy to a specific point. If you have the materials to build it, wouldn't you also have very good space travel and therefore would want to travel around? Like the video says it seems to me like building only a few solar orbiters before moving to a new power source would be more efficient.
You'd beam the power wherever you need it via lasers or microwave beams, or by converting it into antimatter and carrying that antimatter where you need it.
why would you have to transmit energy, or to a specific point? Are you thinking that a "sphere" is a large ball around the star transmitting power somewhere? It is meant as a way of collecting all that energy to be used by the trillions of people that live there.
Yeah the video was a bit confusing on that, I think he meant a local station would be beaming energy to somewhere needed, not the whole Dyson Sphere. As mentionned, most of the energy would probably be used on site, though the sphere could be beaming some of the energy to solar sails and distant colonies (around Jupiter for example). Also a Dyson sphere doesn't need very good space travel, you're in the inner solar system, pretty much right next to Earth on an astronomic scale. In fact, you don't need any super-advanced technology, it just takes time. We could begin building one right now.
Doesn't matter. It's about getting the most power in the smallest volume. For a spaceship it doesn't matter how much energy it takes to make its fuel, it's how much power can it get from that fuel.
Dyson rings can be used to trap entire energy of the star. Tilt the collector to an angle to collect light or photons as it sweeps through in the orbit. Now, instead of building self replicating robots, use the energy collected to increase the rotational speed of the Dyson ring so that it always sweeps through the photos emitted by the star. This idea is similar to a car cutting through rain so tht the back of the car remains dry. Hope you get the idea. This way we can collect all the energy and trap it within the sphere. Well... this is my contribution to mankind for type 2 civilization. cheers...
I have reading logs from elementary school where I clearly wrote "Berenstain Bears". I think this is just an episode of mass hysteria. Especially due to the amount of E's in Berenstain and the fact the two spellings are homophones of each other (at least in the way I read it). Things such as priming might also play an effect, where people do not remember how it is spelled after the years, are exposed to the "ein", which they brains subconsciously use to update their memories, and then contradicts reality, similarly to deja vu. Let's be honest here, brains not working is more likely than the universe not working. :P
False, that is just an imaginative idea with no evidence backing it. In reality, there is no question as to "why" this "phenomenon" occurs. It matches exactly what we know about human memory.
+eye of amber Uh, yeah, memory is notoriously unreliable. Just because you - or a lot of people - misremember something doesn't mean that you're Sliders.
Funny. I am currently working on a music project creating a song for each of the planets and various other objects in the solar system. Each song is accompanied by a science fiction short story, all playing in the year 2134 at the same time. The idea for Mercury was indeed using it as resource base for the creation of dyson swarm panels. This will certainly help with the details, thanks.
"What we do with all that energy is another matter." I see what you did there!
MadMaxBLD Still not sure he knows he did that.
It's clever but it hink it's on of those 'I totally ment it like that' situations
We don’t need it. Today’s nuclear reactors only use 4% of their fuel and leave a very long life “waste”.
Molten salt can burn that waste. BUT they can also “burn” depleted uranium which we have a huge amounts of. Then there’s the nuke bomb cores. Moltex can burn those and the process completely denatures the metal so it can never again go into bombs.
All the possible I do this Energy
I think it was on purpose he kinda smiles and cuts the tape right there:)
The solid sphere wasn't his idea. The Sphere idea if his IS the swarm. The Shell was a misinterpretation.
everyone upvote this
Seriously. This guy made my face twitch when he said that . . .
Dyson sphere around earth?
3:15 we can get started right away.
I got no plans for Saturday, you guys want to go grab us some Molten Iron from mercury?
I think there's quite a few people who would have some spare time at the moment.
However, we should each fly there in separate spaceships...
Sounds good to me, how does 2pm sound
@@aurias42 I already went, in my Tesla....
i’ll just pop in to the outer core of earth and bring back some molten iron
For the record Freeman Dyson's original concept of a Dyson's Sphere was a swarm, the Dyson Shell was based on a misinterpretation of his words and people ran with it. Dyson himself said a solid shell is impossible.
sauce?
@MENTAL I don't think that's the case
@MENTAL: It literally says in the video a Dyson swarm, that's You Tube commenters, making pithy responses before actually paying attention to the material. Same goes for you Rayfire.
Who cares? It's ALL impossible.
Could you imagine if we explored the Kuiper belt only to find out that it's the remnants of ancient Dyson sphere?
Wow !!! Brilliant imagination. I liked it :)
oh, like it's old and broken, the remnants of ancient glory... I like it.
I should start a screen play.
Sean Tripp I'd watch.
Please, please make this!
Confused viewer here. Please help. I’m looking for a powerful cordless vacuum that can clean big messes and hard-to-reach places. Should I get the Dyson Sphere, or the Dyson Swarm?
It's the same thing actually, Dyson never meant it to be a solid sphere. So take the original, true and tested Dyson Sphere, not those cheap rip-offs!
Well you could use the giant maid in Spaceballs.
Don't be silly. It takes both a Dyson Sphere and a Dyson Swarm to power the Dyson Ball. I know, it sucks.
swarm fits under coffee table better. :P
Tiger H. Lore Get the more powerful rival, the Quasar Blackhole.
We will build a wall around the sun and the sun will pay for it! Vote Dyson 2020
Mr Nice. If we built a wall around sun, then we will never see a clear sun rise..
Sudish amatya, depends which side of the wall you are on. The wall on the east side of your house probably has the same problem.
Haematite mirrors bounce light around. So you could see thousands of sunrises all one time. This might be fatal.
Haha best comment on UA-cam!!
Thanks for existing
Mr Nice great comment! Loved that!
Destroy planets for resources and energy?
*Galactus would like to know your location*
Good one
I've learned more from this channel in 1 day than the past 3 years of school...
Because learning about technology so far in the future that your grandchildren's grandchildren wont live to see is faaaar more important than math!
But have you taken several exams to prove it?
Man, your school sucked. I first learned about Dyson spheres in mine, about the same time I was learning how to make elemental chlorine and that Shakespeare is as dirty as all hell.
Gareth Dean I think I failed to mention I'm only a junior in high school and I've taken all of the AP Physics classes my school can give but I know how E fields work! lol I just wish we spent like a couple weeks talking about complex things like this
Lever
You live in America? I live in an island nation and we got about a page worth of this in our textbooks and an afternoon trying to figure out if you can build one.(How thick a shell, how much volume, forces on it... basic exam stuff applied to an interesting scenario.) American schools have always struck me as rather too exam focused, but then I've never been to one.
The Dyson Sphere was always meant to be a swarm, the idea of a solid sphere is just a misunderstanding of what Dyson meant. Also, calling it "partial" or "complete" is kind of arbitrary, it doesn't have to be dense. It's our energy needs that will dictate its density, not having to fully enclose the sun just for the sake of it. Plus if "complete" means collecting all of the energy, before that we'll reach a point of diminishing returns, so we may never complete it.
No, it was a complete sphere that Dyson envisioned.
In Dyson's own words.
fermatslibrary.com/s/search-for-artificial-stellar-sources-of-infrared-radiation
@@lordgarion514 No, it wasn't. Also in Dyson's own words, directly responding to this notion: "A solid shell or ring surrounding a star is mechanically impossible. The form of 'biosphere' which I envisaged consists of a loose collection or swarm of objects traveling on independent orbits around the star."
That's from _"Letters and Response, Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared Radiation"_
science.sciencemag.org/content/132/3421/252.2
@@Mugenmush
Maybe, just maybe, you could have actually read the link, instead of just saying something stupid.....
As I said, in his own words. So, since you're too lazy to click a link, read his words here.
"Third, the mass of Jupiter, if distributed in a spherical shell revolving around the sun at twice the Earth's distance from it, would have a thickness such that the mass is 200 grams per square centimeter of surface area (2 to 3 meters, depending on the density). A shell of this thickness could be made comfortably habitable,"
Now, piss off you lazy ass .
@@Mugenmush
And yes, I'm full aware that the stresses would overcome the forces holding the atoms together.
Doesn't change the fact that he described a complete sphere....... *in detail* .
I can only assume he didn't realize how great the forces would be when he wrote that.l, and figured it out later.
@@lordgarion514 Hello, random angry person. I notice you insulted the other dude because he did not read your link. Did you read his? If his quote is also valid, that implies Dyson updated his opinion and you would lose this little argument. I don't give a damn about Dyson but I'm enjoying watching your temper tantrum and am curious to see if you can recover from the hole you're in
We should cannibalize mercury
Mercury: *I dont wanna die, sometimes I wish I'd never been born at all*
O. M. G.
😆😆
Well done
Took me a second, but well done!
nothing really matters
Every time I hear “self replicating” I get terrifying StarGate flashbacks
And it all started with a gift to an alien girl. Funny that. I wish they would reboot Stargate though, such fond memories.
Just finished Horizon Zero Dawn and watched this episode like “do NOT”
Stargate was stupid. SG-U though... that was awesome.
Yeah, what's to stop the swarm from becoming an emerging intelligence?
@@whatsupbudbud wish they would reboot SGU
2:31
"Dyson's original idea" was not a rigid sphere! He knew damn well that a rigid structure was impossible and never even put the idea forth that it should or could be built that way.
Ffs!
I feel like achieving type II status is enough reason to build this. It's important to show our type I alien neighbors how much cooler we are compared to them.
competing with your imaginary friends be like
And suddenly, future humans are sounding like the evil, planet-destroying, aliens that we are afraid of.
Fairly sure the 'evil' attribute awarded to species destroying planets only comes into play if the planet in question is harboring life.
Without life on board it's hard to view other planets as anything but big mineral deposits.
Holy shit
yes but we're not 'destroying' anything. we're creating more useful and efficient structures that can be used to harbour life exponentially
This is what the Vogon Construction Fleet was up to in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy... devouring planets to make Dyson Swarms to power their intergalactic bypass construction...
+Scott Little yes but that was only 'evil' because people lived there
PBS Spacetime video title 10K years in the future ... “Should we destroy our Dyson sphere?”
Much less than 10K years, by far!
@@pierfrancescopeperoni no, i don’t think so
@@sausagequeen Ok
@@sausagequeen nah definitely less than 10k years. Once you get going it takes decades to finish. Just gotta get the infrastructure and have smart enough robots. We have come astoundingly far in just the past 100 years where the unimaginable became possible several times over
@@danielhicks1824 you sorta need the materials too
Set up a Dyson swarm of mirrors, point them all at a solar sail. You can all thank me in a few million years.
Evan Nickerson If you point them all at the sail it will heat up too much.
Shady B!tch are you dumb
Jordan Lacey Why would I be? If you reflect too much sunlight to a solar sail, it will heat up, perhaps too much.
Evan Nickerson
not a few million years. in a few centuries. or if were lucky. a few decades.
a million years is a longer time than you think. if we go progressively on civilization for a MILLION years, we would probably have fully colonized our solar system along with a few stars as well
or maybe more!!
Fake Account If you look at what we have done in the last century, we will be very fast.
12:12 FINALLY. THANK YOU! I could NEVER find ANYBODY who could explain WHY we couldn't use quantum entanglement as FTL communication; they would ALWAYS default to, "Well, it's just against the rules of information going faster than light!" You ACTUALLY explained that we cannot know which photons are entangled because it's impossible to figure out which photons have the right interference patterns until we compare information from the two screens, which requires separate communication. THANK YOU!
It's nearly 5 am here, why are you good channels kept me up for whole night?
6am here. damn education keeping us awake.
+Kenji Wardenclyffe 1:30 am here this channel is so good..
dafuq country are you in
+Sourav Jaiswal same! R u in India?
+Sloth Of Rivia india 5:30gmt
The problem I have with both this idea and Issac Arthur's (Love his channel) plan for the disassembly of planets, is the tiny problem of gravitational resonance..If Mercury were the only planet in the Solar System, its path around the Sun would stay fixed in space, but according to Newtonian physics, and the fact the Mercury isn’t alone. Not to mention, gravitational interactions with the other Jupiter has it shifting its orbit by 0.15 degrees per century already! This alone may cause the complete loss of, or sterilisation of the Earth, prior to the sun going red giant and consuming the Earth!. In addition, when Einstein famously predicted with his theory of general relativity, the Sun-Mercury attraction also adds another 0.01 degrees per century to Mercury's orbital procession as well. In any case, dismantling Mercury all together could/would cause serious issues for our fragile blue spaceship. 1000's of simulations have been run on various super computers to predict the current movement of Mercury, and the outlook is grim. We may be flung into the sun or into deep space becoming a rouge planet, or we may even switch our orbit with Venus and have our oceans boil off or have Mercury slam into the Earth! Gravitational resonance, is a fickle bitch. This is the reason the Kepler space telescope found so many "hot Jupiter's" so close to their star and has changed the way we think about how solar systems are formed and how rare the one we live in is. In fact, Jupiter's own theoretical migration towards the inner solar system may have been the cause of the late heavy bombardment (bringing water, amino acids and the collision of the planet Thea to glance off the Earth, creating the moon) and maybe just maybe, the only reason life developed on the Earth in the first place. We may have just been a solar system with another hot Jupiter. We were just lucky enough that Saturn followed behind Jupiter, gaining mass as they migrated together toward the inner solar system. Then, when Saturn was just massive enough, it caused what is known as the "grand tack", reversing the direction of the two gas giants and perhaps flipping the orbit of Uranus and Neptune, as well as perturbing Neptune's rotation onto its side. It also put Jupiter in the perfect place to eat up asteroids/comets, giving the earth enough time to allow multi-celled creatures to evolve in the first place. Anyways. I digress. The point I am trying to make is, if we start dismantling planets, the Earth is going to be fucked!!! 99% of the species that have ever existed in earth's history are extinct already. Let's not become a statistic. Perhaps, we should figure out how to stop the current mass extinction event and the warming of our planet we are causing (we are an outbreak species) prior to destroying the only habitual planet we know of by in the observable universe prior to dismantling others...Or maybe I'll just put my tinfoil hat back on.
You can probably easily answer this with occams razor by using material the furthest away from civilization, so the Kuiper Belt. I feel like you assume too many things that sound reasonable, but I doubt that makes it impossible.
And if you really want to it take it an extreme, do it in another solar system, fashion the panels on the way and just bring them to place.
Maybe? But a painless solution to solve theoretically and I am not a physicist. It is probably harder to induce fusion by making a star then to dismantle planets where you might make some panels to get even just 1 percent of the sun's energy.
It is also perfectly scalable too but that is another issue entirely.
*Mucho texto*
@jmorrison
Don't worry, you've made a fine point.
(Although next time, kindly break it up into more easily-digestable paragraphs, pls and thanks)
Would you be equally worried about exhaustively mining the Mars / Jupiter asteroid belt? You've got me worried! I don't know how uniform its distribution is, so extracting and redistributing could have a nonzero impact.
It's a reasonable thing to worry about, but fortunately Mercury has a very low mass. Most of the mass of the solar system, excluding the Sun, is in Jupiter, and Earth is about as massive as all the rocky planets, their moons, and asteroids combined. Mercury is part of the system of gravitational resonance, but it isn't driving it, it's dancing to the tune.
Besides, once you have a K2 civilization, if you need to move a planet, you can!
I wouldn't worry. If Earth somehow gets thrown out of whack, the Dyson Sphere would have more than enough power to throw it back.
Isaac Arthur is amazing he's done a series on Dyson Sphere and humans in space futurism
Very interesting video's, and a very nice voice, but vewy hawd to undewstand.
@@znotch
The problem with Isaac Arthur is that he isn't clear, speaks quickly, and switches between points very rapidly. It isn't very enjoyable to watch
Professor Shekelstein Well I’m able to keep up and it’s a blast.
@@trevorrogers95 good for you!
@@wowfrosted13 I can't think of many that can explain complicated things more clearly than Issac Arthur.
I heard that if you can get all the people on the Earth to pray to God for one week, you will earn enough favour for Him to grant us one Kugelblitz for free. This could get us started, I'll contact the Pope to see if we can get this thing organized. Praise Google!
...or we could run a contest. The first one to create a Kugelblitz will get a free T-shirt from PBS Space Time.
If God wanted to have a co-dependent relationship with us It wouldn't have given us free will. It wasn't prayers that got Neil Armstrong to the moon. It was science.
But many people also prayed that Neil Armstrong would be safe. I also heard that he took with him a small vial of Jesus' jizz for good luck.
Yup that's really what the priests are passing down to the little boys. How else could one truly consumer Jesus' body? You are what you eat, right? And they get sanctioned for providing the real sacrament! Not an easy job doing the spiritual work to be sure.
+ John LaBrie
I won't grant you any Kugelblitz for free, no matter what the guy in the funny clothes says. If you want a Kugelblitz, work and earn money so that you can afford one. bum
Did you just justify Building the Death Star
Hey, its only for "defensive purposes"
And for black hole production for "non-weaponized reasons".
He just justified justification for justifying justice from the justice league...just saying
death star has already been built one should listen to "the adromada message 2013" just listen to it all the way through and compare it to today
Andromada?
3:29 Well... Mercury is right there.
It will cost more than a million schmeckles to build a kugelblitz..
Marco Tulio mortyyyyyyy
Is that a lot??
Unless you pay for it with a fappingham....then you'd be just fine.
Damn I spent all mine playing RON so I can’t help sorry
BUCKLE UUUUUP
"What we do with that energy, is another matter"
I see what you did there ;)
What Dyson proposed was not a shell. It was a swarm made up of asteroid sized space habitats. The shell was a later misunderstanding. In fact he so hated the idea of a solid Dyson Shell that later in life he wished he hadn't written his original paper and thus had such a stupid idea pinned to his name.
Also, we wouldn't need to leave earth intact were we to tackle Dyson's original idea because we'd have billions of times more living space available in the space habitats orbiting the sun.
Earth will be left intact for historical purposes until people forget about it and somebody offers the government enough money to chop it up for raw materials.
@Mr Penguin >Remove all humans who won;t leave.
Would you like to be forced to leave your home place so that some twats can makes a tourist resort ?
@Mr Penguin You don't care about your home place ? It don't hold any importance whatsoever ?
@Mr Penguin Reimbursement ?! You can't reimburse a home ! It's not something that you can give a clear monetary value, it possess a subjective sentimental value. You can't put a price on a home.
@Mr Penguin >Sentimental value does not have monetary value
That's what I'm saying smartass. And nothing objectively have value, it's something that is totally subjective and depends from one another.
So we have 3 victims
Mars: who
Venus: idk
Mercury: its us bro im gonna be the first
Matt, wouldn't cannibalizing Mercury completely change the gravitational dynamics of the solar system? I mean you can't just pluck out planets from the solar system and have no impact on the orbits of the other planets can you? And what would the implications of that be?
Amoroso Gombe well Mercury is very tinny and very close to the sun soooo..... not shure
@cinder_fall okay, perhaps, I don't actually know, I just intuitively feel that tiny adjustments can have big ramifications when they play out over big complex systems and the solar system is a big complex system. Every orbit is an intricate dance with the sun and every other planet within the sun's gravitational well. Mercury is tiny but that doesn't necessarily mean it's insignificant. Would be nice to see an accurate simulation of what would happen if mercury was removed from the solar system altogether just to benchmark the consequences of a full planet cannibalization.
Amoroso Gombe when dealing with gravitationql pulls on a solar level, the mass of the inner planets is negligible. The mass of the sun plus the mass of the earth is indistinguishable from the mass of the sun. That aside, tearing mercury apart wouldn't detract from the total mass, just spread it out.
if anything we would just end up slightly pushing all the planets outwards, but probably not enough to be noticeable, maybe like a dip in temperatures by 1 degree, but 1 degree would highly be correlation and not causation.
All the bullshit Astrologers would be on suicide watch!
Do a video about singularity! What it might be, what it could be, etc. The physics behind it. Please!
Isn't that just a black hole?
+ricande Yes, but I think he's referring to the Big Bang.
+ricande the "black" part of a black hole is only the event horizon, but beneath that is the "hole" part, which is the singularity
+ricande i think 'just' is the wrong word used here... there are a lot of stuff happening around black holes and dont forget singularity itself is rupture of space and time..
+ricande Technological Singularity
*"Fermi paradox solved"* is my next t-shirt
it's not solved!!! :D
mission accomplished.
you just called yourself an alien?
I am the paradoxical T-shirt of Orion!
i am jack's complete lack of surprise
A Type-IIi civilization is the one capable of harnessing the energy of an entire GALAXY. It would take millenia for humanity to be at that level of development
millennia? it takes LIGHT 100,000 years to cross the milky way. humans would need hundreds of millions of years to probably more likely billions of years to get to that level
@@Entreprenoob maybe he doesnt realize what millennia means? Maybe he means its like millions and millions of years. Perhaps idk. Just looking for any excuse for him becoz i really having a hard time accepting the fact that most ppl on this planet r dumb as a rock lol simple meatbags nothing more
Rusty Shakleford well technological progress accelerates, and it would really take off if humans invented a n artificial superintelligence that obeyed its creators or if humans augment their own intelligence.
K O B A but human beings are far, far more intelligent than any other life form on the planet.
Rusty Shakleford That only assumes that ftl is impossible, but people mischaracterize this all the time. Every time you hear about people making predictions like this it's from the point of view of modern physics. It's all modern terminology and modern technological understanding. This doesn't mean it's a literal interpretation of how things will work out. It's a linear projection of our current understanding, nothing more.
I think people are just uncomfortable with the idea that they aren't the pinnacle of civilization. That the dumbest people from the distant future will take for granted things we can't even fathom yet. They will look at us as primitive savages most likely.
"It's never aliens"
Love it.
this is just so totally freaking awesome. I wish I would live to see this happening.
Maybe vast expansions in medical research in our generation will allow for that wish to come true.
All this will exist right after you die
Dante S
Will* suck
+Rafael Adamy you actually have a 66% of chance seeing this:
1, there is some sort of after life in which you'll see what's going on
2, nothing happens and you'll miss out
3, you'll get reincarnated maybe as a human or animal but wouldn't feel that excited about it
Already being done but banned for ethical reasons the transfer of the head to new body was a success
Lets build a death star
down. let's go fam we got this
Totally agree
nahh to mainstream , better make a planet become one.
+jen sen good one
...and we shall name it "SkyNet."
Wysession’s a professor at WashU, where I just finished my undergrad. I never took any classes with him, but he taught other sections of lectures I did. Really cool that you’ve got access to the same cool people I do from somewhere else! Technology’s wild, dude
ah he made a "Achievement Unlocked" joke! He finally said something down at my level!
You can, now, have your own "achievement unlocked" moment.
I know right xD? I like watching these videos but there's no way I can fully understand them.
***** Yup. Idiocracy entered with your comment.
I laughed my ass off at the achievement thing.
Well, he also made jokes about Game of Thrones and how much more important it is to refuel your car every day instead of brooding about space and time! XD
You had me at "galactic empire" I'm in! :D
As small nitpick: You make it sound as if Dyson himself originally thought about a solid shell enclosing a star, when he knew from the beginning that a swarm of orbiting single objects was far more plausible. The idea of a solid structure developed in Sci-Fi literature.
Yeah, that was my one nitpick with the video. His original idea was for the swarm, however people misinterpreted what he said and thought it was a solid object. He did however go on record to clarify it but people still think he meant a solid ball.
There's no doubt that Dyson was aware of the issues with a solid sphere, however his first article on the subject DID suggest a solid sphere, and the emphasis was on it being a biosphere as well as an energy collector.
Dyson 1960, Science News Letter, reproduced here: www.islandone.org/LEOBiblio/SETI1.HTM
Huh. Thanks for clearing that up. I could always swear blind I'd read that it was meant in a more swarm like way.
One thing I have seen commented before would be the possibility of thousands of small hexagonal solar panels all joined together with some kind of tether between each one, it'd be the closest we could get to forming a ball without the issues of the sphere itself. Plus you could use the tether to transfer power to a singe laser/maser point for every x amount of collectors before transferring it to earth or some big station that collects it all and sends it to relevant places.
PBS Space Time
Interesting, thanks for posting that.
I believe if you tethered all of them together you re-introduce all the problems of the sphere. Even if they're not "rigid" they're still forming a static sphere.
the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know
Such is the foundation of true wisdom.
This is actually an entire psychological thing. It’s known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Welcome to the game.
Means you past the "Dunning-Kruger horizon"
@@dragonflame8157 except the Dunning-Kruger Effect is literally the opposite of what Mazzeha
said
Think you be more right calling it a philosophical thing, as it was Plato that said "All I know is that, I know nothing"
Freedom Phoenix Goat The Dunning-Kruger Effect is how people who know little about a topic tend to think they know a lot and people who know a lot about a topic tend to think they don’t know much.
Stop squinting your eyes at me..
It's scary.
SwiftyLovesYou that's what I say to Asian people.
He must have the most intense sex-face
I would add about 10% to 20% more squinting. Love the squints! 🍄💋🍄💋
someone name Swifty scared of squints...bout time u change ur name mr/s "Unknown"
If you're scared that easily, you'd best stay at home.
By the way Matt, you said that adding up a sine and cosine wave would give a flat distribution. That will only occur if you change one of the waves' phases; for example, advance the sine wave by 90 degrees forward. Just a small point.
Yup, well spotted. You ... er ... passed our test! Annotation added.
That's very perceptive... it took me a moment to realize that at x = 0, cos is 1 but sin is not -1, it's 0.
Yeah I caught that too. Sometimes it's hard being a mathematician listening to physicists :P
Big problem: if you delete our moon from a solar system simulation, Venus either falls into the sun or gets kicked out of the solar system after around 15,000 years (or so) depending on where the moon was when it was deleted. The solar system is a chaotic system and even a small change like this can have dire consequences. You can't rearrange the masses like this (putting the mass of Venus where Mercury is) without introducing instabilities into the solar system that may, in the long run, destroy the Earth or the entire planetary system. This makes even a Dyson shell less realistic, let alone a Dyson sphere, if you intend to keep the Earth around.
This!^. I want to know why physicists take this kind of theory seriously. Taking the mass of mercury and moving it will have wild consequences on Venus's orbit and will very likely cause a domino effect of destruction throughout the solar system.
Are you basing your assumption that Venus does this based on solid, provable mathematics, or are you basing it on some quick simulation you did late at night using one of those solar system emulators that are all the rage?
tscoffey1 I'm talking about supercomputer-level astrophysical simulations. This particular result is one I got at a lecture on solar system dynamics at the Max Planck institute for solar system research (MPS) in Bavaria.
Of course you did....
tscoffey1 I hope you do realize this channel is teeming with scientists. We're not playing around in this place.
Love these futurism videos. You should do more.
How do you keep a kugelblitz from falling into the core of the planets they are on?
In the video, he suggested having it orbit Jupiter.
Not much use there if you need energy on earth, is it?
If the kugelblitz goes out of control it'll just evaporate anyway at the size we're talking about.
Jupiter is a red herring: the key is putting it in orbit, anywhere. In orbit its motion is as predictable as any satellite or moon.
if we can power facilities all around the solar system why assume most people will be on Earth? if the Kugelblitz is there you can just power whole cities on Jupiter's Moons.
got a lot of trees to punch before I can unlock that achievement.
Logical person in me screaming "put a solar panel on ur goddamn roof" before talking about dyson sphere.Lets clear lvl zero first.
hari haran suddenly clouds.
Energy used building a solar panel exceeds energy collected in lifetime. I looked at the UK solar power energy produced today, during winter there contribution falls to almost nothing. Yelling that everyone should put one on their roof may make people feel better but won't fix our energy needs
you need indium to make photovoltaic panels, and since it's rare and not recycled the price gets higher and higher since a decade (no thanks to the rise of capacitive touch screens used to create our fragile and quickly obsolete smartphones)
The best option should be solar thermal power plants like they did in Morocco with the Noor CSP that use lenses to converge infrared to hardly heat a big amount of matter and produce electricity with a turbine in a fluid loop like in fission power plants. No need for batteries or supercapacitors to store energy for the night consumption.
I fully agree
The true solution would be:
Deserts: solar pp
Sea shores, cliffs, mountains: Wind pp
Vulcano: Geotermic pp
River: Water pp
Extra energy: Nuclear pp
We can make a smaller one starting with a positive monopole magnetic sphere in the center with a negative monopole shell and so forth
if this subject interests you I strongly suggest that you visit Isaac Arthur's channel.. well worth giving a listen too
Just FYI, if anyone is interested in these types of concepts like Dyson's sphers, you've gotta check out the channel of 'Isaac Arthur'. That guy has loads of stuff like this on his channel which is presented in a very nice way.
Btw. I'm in no way affiliated with the channel aside from being a big fan.
Not quite sure if anyone has asked or mentioned this but,
Has anyone considered the repercussions of mining a planet out of existence would have on Our solar system? Each planet found its orbit from the gravity of the sun and the other planets around it. Take one away and I’m almost positive that will make for some serious realignment.
And whether a Dyson sphere or swarm, We’re talking about interrupting the life bringing sunlight of the Sun to the Earth. That to comes with serious repercussions.
Sounds like we’re getting way ahead of ourselves way too quick. Let’s master stage one civilization before we jump to stage three dreaming.
I don't think that Mercury will totally be annihilated, just severely modified. From what I know, Mercury itself don't have much impact on the other celestial body of our system.
@@NIHIL_EGO no , Mercury will be totally ceased. But he's not relevant for the solar system's gravity. But Venus would be relevant for the gravity of the sun- Earth system.
Just ran a simulation going for several decades about removing Mercury from the solar system. No appreciable difference in the orbital paths of any of the remaining Inner planets, certainly no effect on Earth or Venus. Will run some more iterations with some variable tweaking to make sure.
Side note; I love Universal Sandbox 2.
Also, there’s no reason for this cloud of solar collectors to block any of the sunlight that would reach Earth. There’s so much space around the sun we could put quadrillions of them around the sun in a space smaller than Earth’s orbit without putting a single one on the ecliptic.
Check out a video on the size and distances of our planets in the Solar System. Universal sandbox Simulator 2 can also help you see those worries are unfounded
A crazy thought crossed my mind. A Dyson ring with an electromagnetic field to direct solar wind plasma to create directional thrust slowly making the whole solar system a space ship.
Theres a starship, cityship(stargate atlantis), planetship (wandering earth), and now a systemship?!! :)
@@jmyl18ify Andromeda, Magog World Ship. 😉
I watched Stargate! Self-replicating robots are never a good idea! :P
Every time we see something in sci-fi involving self-replicating robots, it gets BAD
You ARE self replicating robot actually
Now, human built LCH, biggest scientific equipment ever.
100 years later, human will build the 1st Dyson swarm satellite by excavating Mercury.
200 years later, human will build the 1st Kugelblitzes around Jupiter's orbit, starting of type 3 civilization.
300 years later, Star Wars was a story.
LEE Yyy has the right idea, though I think her timeline is a little optimistic. A full Dyson swarm is likely to take many hundreds of years. Kugleblitzes (artificial black holes formed from concentrated photons) would be generated & possibly utilized as propulsion during this time period. They would still only provide sub-light travel, but the stars are not going anywhere, so whats the hurry???
LHC*
While that is "mostly" true, we still have visionaries like Richard Branson, Jiang Mianheng and even Elon Musk who consider the distant future as important as the quarterly profit report, and NOT mutually exclusive. Mankind will progress, the rich will get richer and the gap will most likely widen.
Even so, the poor also get wealthier, with access to education, medicine, clean water and technology. Mankind will be dragged kicking and screaming (taking selfies & twittering their entres) into the future, whether they want to or not.
i would just like to see the need for a monetary system/money itself abolished. the world a utopia. no needs. no wants. plenty for all.
One request: I'm a visual person....also, even if I'm not a visually oriented person, many people need visual objects to keep track of. Ok, that last 3min of explaining why and why not of sending messages back into time was.......not as effective as it could be.
This may be more costly than "in studio, green screen"; but, I think an actual short movie of someone Playing the Lotto, Sending Numbers back in time, would be the most effective in explaining how this work and doesn't work.
Thanks for the videos, they're great! Day is incomplete unless one's mind is blown.
Don't worry, we have plenty of visuals in the actual challenge answer episode in two weeks.
Im with peter we need more and more visuals
+PBS Space Time dope
rgeehff
sonic... l
I dont know what is more entrancing. That guys voice or his beard, truly majestic
Well, this is a trip down memory lane to all those hours spent watching Star Trek: the Next Generation. There's an entire episode about a Dyson sphere and they explain the Romulans' engines as working with singularities.
It's a long time away. People like money too mucc
much* ffs
Gewel We will build stuff like that PRECISELY because we are greedy. And that's great.
Gewel Why should it be mutually exclusive?
All the energy can be used to create space habitats to house more people. Not just for profits.
A Dyson Swarm sounds much much more realistic than expecting a civilization to be able to focus 10% of a star's output into a space 100 times smaller than an atomic nucleus.
SpazzyMcGee1337 It certainly is more realistic for any civilization still working toward the former.
No it does not sound possible. Who is gonna build it? The USA? russia? china? Humans cannot even work there with in their own boarders. Humans will ~never work together on the scale needed to accomplish anything talked about here. Sorry but Mary Poppins will rule before any cohesion of this scale happens.
@@250txcBaby steps... International Space Station.
@@250txc There will probably be a State that just crushes all other and gain absolute power, probably asserting its dominance over the conquered areas with genocide, genetic engineering and robotics.
This, this is a very likely future, it just requires some super powers to collapse under their own weight (historically a frequent occurance) for another one to seize the opportunity
If humans ever become a galactic civilisation, it will probably be under a way more absolutist regime that we have ever known so far
@@sephikong8323 And this 'state' is whom? There is nothing that points to your words in our history, Mr BOT.
If my civilization was approaching Type K-II, I'd be terrified of any potential Type III's out there, quietly watching me from the dark, waiting to snuff me out for fear of encroaching competition.
And so I wouldn't want any bratty Type-I's making noise in my direction, giving away my position.
So, I'd probably try to find another means of generating energy, rather than giving out a giant IR-but-no-vis signal.
"industry standard" had me laughing
Matt, even though having a swarm of giant-arse mazers would be friggin _awesome_ ... i gotta say that the start of the video you are right on: *we don't know how the energy needs of advanced civs evolve* .
My bet is that exponential growth and energy consumption is a long term _problem_ and must be dealt with/curbed naturally, if the civ is to last on, say, geologic scales. If we go digital and microscopic/nanotech, and our population growth stops being exponential (as developed world models imply may happen naturally anyway), our energy needs may even be substantially _lower_ in the future.
The Kardashev scale is a product of colonial, expansionist thinking of the industrial era of the 19-20th centuries. It may not be a thing for those ET who found a way to coexist with their environments on cosmic scales. Perhaps we might be better off pursuing those avenues of progress.
IIRC there is a variant of the kardashev scale that sort of covers what you are on about. It goes to -1 and so forth and covers micro-management of the universe rather than macro-management. The further you go down the more capable of controlling the matter around you, Thus when you get to the lowest point you are capable of turning any waste or unneeded resources into different atoms that are useful to you and also capable of altering space-time.
I'm assuming you're referring to the variant proposed by John D. Barrow, who said that advancement would be marked by control of smaller and smaller units of matter and energy. Type I-minus can manipulate objects on the macro-level. Type II-minus can alter genes, read their genome, and are capable of replacing parts of themselves. Type III-minus can manipulate molecules and bonds. Type IV-minus can manipulate atomic structures like protons. Type V-minus can manipulate subatomic structures like quarks. Type Omega-minus can manipulate the fabric of space and time itself.
That should be the one. Personally I think humans are going and will continue to go in that direction.
I totally agree that we shouldn't be so quick to extrapolate our current trends when we try to guess the motives and needs of advanced civilizations. There's one very good reason to think that exponential expansion is not an MO of a milliennia-old technological civilization - We don't see them!
That said, it's also unrealistic to assume that every advanced civilization ends up with the same motive. Some may be expansionist (apparently not too many though), and those may well find a use for K2 levels of energy. Kugelblitzes, warp drives, cosmic mega-structures... none of these can be done without insane amounts of energy.
PBS Space Time
Agreed - we just don't know what happens, if there is even a trend. And i suppose it is an optimist in me that thinks the solution to the Fermi paradox is not the lack of intelligent ETs, but that they don't venture far from their host stars, observing the Cosmos rather than colonizing it. But you are right, there is no evidence either way. So far. :) Perhaps time will tell.
Isn't a 100% efficient engine impossible on thermodynamic grounds?
Yes, you are completely right. It is impossible. The engine is a machine that converts energy into mechanical work (motion). I am sure, that he has misused that word. He should use rather "reactor" instead, like a nuclear reactor, because he talked about changing the mass into a energy. Sun by the fusion is able to convert only about 1% of its mass into the energy, because the two atoms of Hydrogen are merged together, and form Helium atom, that is lighter than sum of two H mass. This mass difference is changed into the energy, according to E=mc2. But 99% of former hydrogen mass (helium) is left (it is simplification).
The black hole is completely different. It is changing its whole mass into a energy by ie. Hawking radiation, and in the time it disappears into thin air.
Well in a vacuum system, all the tables, chairs, sandwiches, and nuclear waste used in fuel is contained within the reactor. Maintaining energy integrity by mechanically retaining the reactor.
Dont want to be a naysayer, but thats not ENTIRELY accurate. In the fission process... the equation is NOT balanced 100%. Carnot efficiency would be the goal, not infinite energy.
What he was saying wasn't that the generator would be 100% efficient, but the conversion from matter to energy would be 100% efficient, that energy would still need to be collected and used, which is where the efficiency would drop.
Thats erroneous, and conversion of matter to energy being 100% efficient is still impossible.
5:58 - 6:00 I just graduated from DeVry University. One thing that we talked a lot about throughout my time there was nano-tech. Currently we are building and testing them. Overall it's the most beneficial to us. This along with DNA security scans, are 2 of the projects we are working on.
Did u ever perhaps read Silo by Hugh Howey? When I read ur comment I got serious bad vibes lol
Genuine question: even though Mercury is small, removing it (or sufficiently reducing its mass)=> wouldn't that risk changing the orbits of the planets including a planet known as... Earth?
The gravitational attractive force between Mercury and Earth at their closest to each other produces an acceleration of ~ 0.000000004 m/s². Not too much to worry about.
If it changes Earth's orbit, we can just use a Dyson Sphere powered rocket to change it back.
@@JSi6 Actually over time that will add up to a lot, the slight tug Mercury exerts on Jupiter is the bigger concern. Super computer simulations have shown time and time again that without Mercury Jupiter will begin move towards the inner solar system. Also Venus and Earths orbit was shown to become more and more elliptical having the two planets swap place back and forth until they are either ejected from the solar system or flung into the sun, Jupiter always becomes a hot Jupiter.
Tyson and Greene are clowns compared to me.
That would be a great sci fi plot. Humans destroy Mercury to create powerful dyson swarm, then realize it causes the Earth to have a catastrophic change in orbit, humans have to use all power of dyson swarm to power a life saving correction. Spoiler alert: It doesn’t produce enough power to correct and Earth will die. Role credits.
I've been thinking about the Dyson Sphere after seeing one on the Star Trek TNG episode Relics
Cannibalizing planets before we succesfully colonize on another star system to me seems an awfully bad idea...
Well, nobody said anything about not going to other stars first. We can always try both.
What are u gunna fuckin do live on that shit? Nah nigga
Donald Trump why are you so interested into cannibalizing planets?! Need raw materials to build the wall?
+Marcus Aseth Well, where would you get the energy to get to the nearest habitable planet? Can you suggest an alternative energy source that would allow us to leave the solar system and colonise another star system?
+Marcus Aseth How do you propose to get to other star systems with our current level of technology? You do understand that it takes a fuckload of energy to move large craft from our star system to another star system... right?
The best Fermi paradox dilemma explanation - EVER!
sin+cos would still be an interference pattern, but I get what you mean.
Good catch. Thanks. Annotation added.
What would be the optimal distance between the Dyson's Swarm and a star and why?
Blood Angel point of not melting, cuz ptherwise IT would melt
Whichever point you could feasibly put the collectors while not harming efficiency, which is only like 33% in our best tech.
Geometry and thermodynamics is why. Do some math, and that is how.
I think it depends on your technological level, the higher, the closer you can get. One can imagine a future civilization of digital beings living on computronic substrate, that floating right above the sun, maybe even inside it.
You know, I just had a flash of trailing the outside perimeter of Earth's orbit around the sun with satellite marker solar cells as a starting point that could be used as a framework because it would be logistically efficient to minimize our supply lines to the structure and prevent interfering with our current relation to the sun's energy. Although, I could also see the benefit of a closer defense structure to shield from solar flares as an added safety measure as well.
My goal in life is to build it
But I'm probably just gonna procrastinate till I die
"We can cannibalize Mercury."
Mercury: "Oh God please No!"
It was a shame to hear of Freeman Dyson passing. I felt on Cloud 9, when he replied to my e-mail (will be saving that one).
So lets say if we were to use all the material in Venus and Mercury would the absence of the 2 planes possibly destabilize or desynchronize our planetary orbit?
Not on any reasonable timescale. You'll notice the planets don't raise tides, nor are Mercury and Venus in neat 'lockstep' orbit with us, they wander all over the sky. Given enough time subtle effects will add up, but that would be on the order of millennia.
Earth still has considerable kinetic energy from the speed it travels around the sun. We will stay in a very stable ellipse orbit because it takes a lot of change in energy/angular momentum to reduce the average radius of our orbit.
No not really. Maybe slightly.
The Sun pretty much does all the work.
However if you were to push one out across the solar system. Then that would mess everything up. Disassembled in orbit around the Sun would be fine though.
So, we are right to do it to eliminate them from threating the future of the other planets and moons then. I feel like we have to do it now. For the Solar System!!!
Benji how can you know for sure?
humans never did such a thing if we could even do it i think it would be better to experiment with one of the smaller moons arround jupiter
Self replicating mining bots, so basically the beginning of the gray goo.
Actually, quantum mechanics forbids this.
How?
Have we found any nearby star cluster inaccessible by standard FTL for us to isolate them in just in case of Gray Tempest issues? Or should we just hope Gray comes out of such a mess?
@@brainnuke5450 Yes how so? i have seen no evidence that suggest gray goo is impossible, nor that quantum mechanics forbids it.
@@MouseGoat bruh its a meme
Always great to watch these clips
Who here from Kurzgesagt?
What do you mean "from"? Kurtzgesagt is a UA-cam channel, not a foreign nation, you can't emigrate from it.
Shawn Elliott, WTF I meant the UA-cam channel DUH
I meant FROM their channel
Me
And I bet both of u came from there
I totally did
I definitely did.
Me 🤦♂️
"It's never aliens"
Sadder, yet truer words were never spoken. Turns out, that dimming star was due to space-dust...
Any one not comfortable with building a power source that has the potential to destroy our solar system?
Yeah, my thoughts when they said about the kugelblitz was, "Uh, what if some dumb twit accidentally feeds it too much or some stray debris gets sucked in." Surely its got to be a very fine balance to keep it from destroying stuff.
bardghost And If the internet is any reflection of human stupidity... We are not ready yet.
I guess its not even stupidity, It could be some simple mistake that isn't realised. Even leaving it to an computer could make it go all wrong. An AI would be even worse if it develops bad intentions.
The real problem is actually feeding it too much. He touches on it but doesn't go in depth about feeding it enough to balance it's hawking radiation. Micro black holes do get created by CERN but they vanish almost instantly as they can't ever feed enough (due to how small they are) to counteract the radiation loss. So you could say create one inside an asteroid and in a natural process it would just fizzle out because it's radiation would still outweigh it's mass consumption. While they would be a highly interesting power source they are like orchids....amazingly fickle to keep alive.
I don't think it's a concern. Remember that, comparatively, we're talking about a RIDICULOUSLY SMALL black hole- half of the apparatus is to keep it from evaporating almost instantaneously. You'd have to accidentally drop a planet into it before that happened for it to gain enough mass to be dangerous to anything.
Hello from the deep town)
Its a progress in the game
Thanks! It's never aliens, until every other explanation has been exhausted - and then it's *_still_* not aliens. Not until we shake their hands (or whatever they've got...) :o) tavi.
PBS SpaceTime: "Today we discuss the Dyson Swarm".
Isaac Arthur's Audience: "That's cute".
Damnit I thought this was about a super efficient vacuum cleaner. 🤨
R N 😂😂😂😂
Lol
This is actually interesting, not many things in life interest me anymore so this was cool/awesome great work on that explanation mate!
Screw Venus and Mars. What did they ever do for us?
Besides being our potential first home planet?
+Dai_Veed Meh. What have you done for me lately?
[thinking of writing a long "besides" list. failed. friggin planetary orbitting circus]
Roll the astrodozers! There's money to be made.
I mean aside from keeping our planetary orbit stable I guess not a whole lot. I mean get rid of them and I can guarantee you within a few years Earths orbit would have gone wonky causing all multi-cellular life on earth to go extinct for the extreme climate change.
This would be a good segue to matryoshka brains, a much more compelling reason to pursue something like a Dyson swarm.
EarthKnight Or Matrioshka Hypernodes! That would last many orders of magnitude longer than any star.
Hmm...mischaracterizing the Dyson "swarm" as your idea when it was actually Dysons original idea is a bit disingenuous. The Dyson sphere was never his idea.
We should absolutely build one. A dyson swarm is such a versatile megastructure, you can do a lot more with it than just generate stupid amounts of power. You can also use them for star lifting, the process of extracting material directly from a star and using various nuclear processes to convert the collective material into more useful elements.
This guys charisma though
It's nothing to rave about. What are you talking about? He's just a standard issue dude.
This guy gets excellent nasal ventilation
If you have all those reflectors harvesting the suns output, would that freeze some of the planets (like our own) as not as much sunlight will be escaping to warm us up?
it could. on the other side, you can redirect the energy however you see fit. In fact, you can illuminate individual planets in a way that they all become habitable.
Well, heating up uninhabitable planets is a waste of power isn't it? We're trying to have as much usable power as we can, so...who cares if Neptune or Saturn become colder :)
Or, as it was said - we can beam power to Mars, and with help of terraforming making it habitable again. So once Sun will become too hot to live on Earth(and it will) we have a new home.
nah i doubt it were only creating a swarm so their'll still be space's in between them so sun light would still get though
Yep. Earth's habitability being outsourced to a remotely-controlled autonomous drone swarm. Sounds great to me!
+MrCorvusC In your proposed instance the earth would never get too hot because we would be harvesting the sun's energy anyway to be able to make Mars habitable.
James Dyson is already working on it you will be able to buy one in Argos soon. It will hoover your carpet's a treat.
Isaac Arthur!
It seems like a Dyson sphere wouldn't be that useful considering that you have to transmit the energy to a specific point. If you have the materials to build it, wouldn't you also have very good space travel and therefore would want to travel around?
Like the video says it seems to me like building only a few solar orbiters before moving to a new power source would be more efficient.
ThePyrosirys they reflect light to different solar satellites which transmit they're energy through lasers
You'd beam the power wherever you need it via lasers or microwave beams, or by converting it into antimatter and carrying that antimatter where you need it.
Have you not heard of energy storage? Heck, we ALREADY transmission for current power plants, its just that this would be... much bigger.
why would you have to transmit energy, or to a specific point? Are you thinking that a "sphere" is a large ball around the star transmitting power somewhere? It is meant as a way of collecting all that energy to be used by the trillions of people that live there.
Yeah the video was a bit confusing on that, I think he meant a local station would be beaming energy to somewhere needed, not the whole Dyson Sphere. As mentionned, most of the energy would probably be used on site, though the sphere could be beaming some of the energy to solar sails and distant colonies (around Jupiter for example).
Also a Dyson sphere doesn't need very good space travel, you're in the inner solar system, pretty much right next to Earth on an astronomic scale. In fact, you don't need any super-advanced technology, it just takes time. We could begin building one right now.
I mean making anti matter will always use more energy than it can give back
Doesn't matter.
It's about getting the most power in the smallest volume. For a spaceship it doesn't matter how much energy it takes to make its fuel, it's how much power can it get from that fuel.
Dyson rings can be used to trap entire energy of the star. Tilt the collector to an angle to collect light or photons as it sweeps through in the orbit. Now, instead of building self replicating robots, use the energy collected to increase the rotational speed of the Dyson ring so that it always sweeps through the photos emitted by the star. This idea is similar to a car cutting through rain so tht the back of the car remains dry. Hope you get the idea. This way we can collect all the energy and trap it within the sphere. Well... this is my contribution to mankind for type 2 civilization. cheers...
If we invesret as much in space exploration as we did in the militery we could have one in the centery
Lmao
i know . war is so dumb . doesn't matter in the long run of humanity
I you love futurism stuff like this then go to Isaac Arthur's channel, he does TON'S of stuff like this and goes right into the tiny details.
THE FOX tons*
When all nation unite that’s when god come
Am I missing something with the Berenstein Bears joke?
I have reading logs from elementary school where I clearly wrote "Berenstain Bears". I think this is just an episode of mass hysteria. Especially due to the amount of E's in Berenstain and the fact the two spellings are homophones of each other (at least in the way I read it). Things such as priming might also play an effect, where people do not remember how it is spelled after the years, are exposed to the "ein", which they brains subconsciously use to update their memories, and then contradicts reality, similarly to deja vu.
Let's be honest here, brains not working is more likely than the universe not working. :P
in simple terms its called the Mandela effect
Berenstain*
False, that is just an imaginative idea with no evidence backing it.
In reality, there is no question as to "why" this "phenomenon" occurs. It matches exactly what we know about human memory.
+eye of amber Uh, yeah, memory is notoriously unreliable. Just because you - or a lot of people - misremember something doesn't mean that you're Sliders.
Funny. I am currently working on a music project creating a song for each of the planets and various other objects in the solar system. Each song is accompanied by a science fiction short story, all playing in the year 2134 at the same time. The idea for Mercury was indeed using it as resource base for the creation of dyson swarm panels. This will certainly help with the details, thanks.