On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 08:13:39AM -0400, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:30 PM Tomasz Rola <rto...@ceti.pl> wrote: > > > > >> The radiant electromagnetic energy output of a star with a Dyson > >> >> Sphere around it would be exactly the same as it was before the Dyson > >> >> Sphere was built, the only difference is the energy would have been > >> put to > >> >> work and thus the low entropy visible and ultraviolet photons would > >> have > >> > been converted to high entropy infrared photons that contain a equal > >> amount > >> > >of energy. > > > > > > >*This is how theory describes it.* > > > That is how the Second Law Of Thermodynamics describes it, and this is how > Arthur Eddington described the second law: > > *“The law that entropy always increases holds, I think, the supreme > position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your > pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - > then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be > contradicted by observation - well, these experimentalists do bungle things > sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the Second Law of > Thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it to collapse > in deepest humiliation.”*
Yeah. If you ever try to boil water on a gas stove, then you probably will observe that a lot of hot air goes around the pot and out the roof. The book will allow you to calculate how much gas needs to be burned in order to boil this much water. The book may or may not mention that when using real gas stove in real life kitchen you would need about twice as much gas (caveat: I have not measured, but I have made some observations in my kitchen). Heat transfer is tricky because pesky heat does not go when an engineer wants it to go. Ask people who build steam engines, battle tanks, or who try to remove heat from inside of supercomputer and they will probably agree. Dyson sphere is purely theoretical concept. Was there even a small model built and tried? Something like ten meters in diameter, for example? Was there any material proposed for building the big one around the Sun? I understand that nope and nope. I expect there will be bigger than expected heat accumulation. Maybe enough to boil eggs left inside. Maybe not. If I had to assume, I would assume eggs boiled hard. And oh yes, the sphere will also glow in infrared. > > Why in hell would they want to destroy a brain on another star?! > > > > > I noticed that you never answered my question even though it's central to > your proposed solution to the Fermi Paradox. I think I have already given this answer. I may try to be more explicit. The dispute about Fermi Paradox is, in my opinion, a bit flawed, because many people assume that space faring civilization has to do it in certain way. So far, the results are this: 1. There was no observation of Type3 and Type2 civilization. Type3 is, for me, better called as Expansionist Exponential Locusts (EEL). It is very good none had been observed, because they would want to screw us and eat our future. They would have to eat us, being exponential - eat and procreate at our cost. I would also say, it is very rude to send von Neumann probe into somebody's backyard. Of course impoliteness will be met with equal and adverse impoliteness, or at least this is what I expect when I try to emulate adult. 2. There was no observation of Dyson Sphere or other megastructures. This might mean that nobody needs such constructs. Or that those who might want will have no means to built it. Like humans - we have very slim chance to make it to the point when building DS becomes engineering possibility. In my opinion we are right now eating from our own future. The whole talk about us sending vN probes or building DSpheres is just EEL dreams. So, EELs are not going to make it into Type2 territory, because they misuse the resources while they have them. After that, collapse. After collapse, maybe some small scale exploration of planets like Mars. You should know about it, because this is simple ecological model - rabbits on the island, eating all grass and collapsing. Rabbits too stupid, grass never regrows to precollapse levels. Thus EELs cannot be observed - they never come to the point of producing signature big enough. They never come to the point of sending vN probes, either. If they did, we would know. Or rather, there would be no "us". So much about Fermi Paradox, for now. Chance is, I might think some more conclusions from the obs data collected. Maybe later. Of course, there might be neighbours who do not go the way of EEL - I understand obs data does not contradict the idea. Now, what is required to observe them? > > * >The total luminosity of Sun is estimated as 3.828*10^26 watts. If we > > divide it among ten billion people, this gives ca. 4*10^16 watts, or 40000 > > terawatts per head, or ca. 4000 times whole Earth energy production for > > every and each single human.* > > > As I explained in a previous post I would not expect there to be 10 billion > individual minds being powered by a star, but only 1 million or less, so > the energy consumption per mind would be about 10 million times greater > than the numbers you mentioned. But there's something I don't understand, > if you're correct (and I don't think you are) and one civilization already > has access to more energy than it will ever need then what reason would it > have for attacking another civilization around a different star that is > hundreds or thousands or millions of light years away? What would a distant > civilization have that they lack that they couldn't obtain someplace much > closer? I think that overgrown apes have it very hard when their every wish gets fulfilled. They will at the same time feel like demigods and animal. Unsure of their own place on the ladder. Some may escape madness, but with equal probability, some will descend into madness. Mad people do mad things. Shooting nearby stars - why not. I am sure they will come up with much more idiotic idea, I just am not idiot enough to simulate that. If there are going to be only a million of thinking creatures - the number I have hinted out on this list few weeks ago - then they might be supported with resources of good old Earth. No need to build DSphere. No need for growing their minds exponentially either. Since they can live for few billion years, they can as well not hurry up. Slowing themselves down should help with achieving longer time before their mind goes quack, just in case there is a wall for the mind and speeding up could results in smashing it (i.e. becoming crazy). > > *>This is pornographic level of consumption.* > > > Why? The gargantuan amounts of energy for single ape reminded me of a movie "La Grande Bouffe" (https en.wikipedia.org wiki La_Grande_Bouffe). It was scandalic for a while, nowadays is more or less forgotten. Somehow the title was never translated into English like it should, i.e. "Huge obnoxious eating". > *> In my worldview, those who want such things are already a bit insane.* > > > Then your worldview and mine are very different. I can live with that as long as I do not have to defend against being forced into whatever pleasure domes, dyson spheres and similar concoctions humanity wants to place itself in. I might join in at my own discretion, or I might choose to live outside it. In case you wonder why I want to have exit doors, it is because there is no fun to being locked in the crank house with number of guys yelling how they are gods and creators of life and what not. [...] > > * >Novelty seeking, you say.* > > > Yes I do say that. > > > > * > I can imagine it as you, Nero and Caligula discussing the next novelty > > to be tried.* > > > I'm not talking about finding new sexual perversions as you seem to be No? [...] > > >> Once we enter the age of Nanotechnology the lessons from history will > >> be of > >> > little value, that's why it's called a Singularity. > > > > > > * > Well, nanogrifters will welcome the future when people refuse to learn > > from the past.* > > > People won't refuse to learn from the past, they will simply be incapable > of learning from it. The fundamental reason why Nanotechnology will produce > a singularity is that it will produce an exponential growth in intelligence, > and human beings are lousy at predicting the outcome of exponential growth > even for something as simple as a virus, much less for intelligence. [...] I understand there will be people who can grasp enough to make a scam and there will be people who will buy into it, because they cannot understand. The real Singularity might come or not. Even if it comes, I am sure grifters will not change themselves. People who talk a lot about Singularity this or that seem to think that humans will change upon seeing "oooh singularity oooh". I do not make such assumptions, but will wait and see. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com ** -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ZFXDVS9NIwThMPoW%40tau1.ceti.pl.
