SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal
-
@travisdh1 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@aidan_walsh Already gave the proof of how silly the original article is in the first place.
Journalistsmedia and scientists should never mix!FTFY.
A journalist, would do research.
-
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
So a Kardashev Type II civilization as theorized "can harness the energy of the entire star (the most popular hypothetical concept being the Dyson sphere—a device which would encompass the entire star and transfer its energy to the planet)."
A Dyson sphere encompasses the entire sun for the purposes of using that power to send a beacon into space...
Okay but if you can encompass an entire sun for the purposes of broadcasting a signal into every direction of space, wouldn't you be capable of doing more than that.
That by it's self is a huge undertaking. Wouldn't planetary exploration be a tiny project in comparison?
I'm more curious where they would get the raw materials to encompass and entire star.
Well the obvious answer is from harvesting materials from other planets, moons and asteroids. But the concept of doing this is as bad as the concept of creating a death planet which harvests the energy from the star in a solar system to blow up another planet. (Starwars most recent movie).
They had the ability to make the "deathstar" before, why now do you need an entire planet.
OK We'll go on this tangent - the new "deathstar" from the new movie doesn't move. It stays where it is, it just shoots an energy beam across light years and destroys other planets. Frankly that whole thing was just DUMB! and with that I must walk away before I just cry over how bad things like this were in the new movie.. and why? for the love of star wars? why did we need another deathstar for a super weapon? and why this crazy impossible thing.
As for the spinning an no atmosphere - I don't think that's right. We'll still have gravity even without rotating (look at the moon), but we wouldn't have the magnetic protective field that saves us from solar radiation, so the planet would be a lot warmer, and the atmosphere would boil off, maybe that's what you mean?
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
So a Kardashev Type II civilization as theorized "can harness the energy of the entire star (the most popular hypothetical concept being the Dyson sphere—a device which would encompass the entire star and transfer its energy to the planet)."
A Dyson sphere encompasses the entire sun for the purposes of using that power to send a beacon into space...
Okay but if you can encompass an entire sun for the purposes of broadcasting a signal into every direction of space, wouldn't you be capable of doing more than that.
That by it's self is a huge undertaking. Wouldn't planetary exploration be a tiny project in comparison?
I'm more curious where they would get the raw materials to encompass and entire star.
Well the obvious answer is from harvesting materials from other planets, moons and asteroids. But the concept of doing this is as bad as the concept of creating a death planet which harvests the energy from the star in a solar system to blow up another planet. (Starwars most recent movie).
They had the ability to make the "deathstar" before, why now do you need an entire planet.
OK We'll go on this tangent - the new "deathstar" from the new movie doesn't move. It stays where it is, it just shoots an energy beam across light years and destroys other planets. Frankly that whole thing was just DUMB! and with that I must walk away before I just cry over how bad things like this were in the new movie.. and why? for the love of star wars? why did we need another deathstar for a super weapon? and why this crazy impossible thing.
Because this is the Disneyification of the franchise. Although really, Lucas hated it so much that it couldn't get any worse than what he did.
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
As for the spinning an no atmosphere - I don't think that's right. We'll still have gravity even without rotating (look at the moon), but we wouldn't have the magnetic protective field that saves us from solar radiation, so the planet would be a lot warmer, and the atmosphere would boil off, maybe that's what you mean?
A planets spin creates a magnetic force around a planet, that magnetic force keeps solar winds away from the planet which allow the atmosphere to stay on the planet.
Gravity isn't capable of keeping an atmosphere to a planet by it's self.
-
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
As for the spinning an no atmosphere - I don't think that's right. We'll still have gravity even without rotating (look at the moon), but we wouldn't have the magnetic protective field that saves us from solar radiation, so the planet would be a lot warmer, and the atmosphere would boil off, maybe that's what you mean?
A planets spin creates a magnetic force around a planet, that magnetic force keeps solar winds away from the planet which allow the atmosphere to stay on the planet.
Gravity isn't capable of keeping an atmosphere to a planet by it's self.
It's spin plus a certain type of core.
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
So a Kardashev Type II civilization as theorized "can harness the energy of the entire star (the most popular hypothetical concept being the Dyson sphere—a device which would encompass the entire star and transfer its energy to the planet)."
A Dyson sphere encompasses the entire sun for the purposes of using that power to send a beacon into space...
Okay but if you can encompass an entire sun for the purposes of broadcasting a signal into every direction of space, wouldn't you be capable of doing more than that.
That by it's self is a huge undertaking. Wouldn't planetary exploration be a tiny project in comparison?
I'm more curious where they would get the raw materials to encompass and entire star.
From nearby planets. Although more likely they would build Dyson swarm (solar panels and mirrors in orbit around the sun) rather than sphere, sphere is almost impossible from engineering point of view. Gravity forces are just to strong for any material to withstand, and even a slightest nudge towards the star, from being hit by an asteroid for example, would create even more tension and break the sphere apart.
We actually could build Dyson swarm by harvesting Mercury, Venus and Mars, but what would we use all that energy for?
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
So a Kardashev Type II civilization as theorized "can harness the energy of the entire star (the most popular hypothetical concept being the Dyson sphere—a device which would encompass the entire star and transfer its energy to the planet)."
A Dyson sphere encompasses the entire sun for the purposes of using that power to send a beacon into space...
Okay but if you can encompass an entire sun for the purposes of broadcasting a signal into every direction of space, wouldn't you be capable of doing more than that.
That by it's self is a huge undertaking. Wouldn't planetary exploration be a tiny project in comparison?
I'm more curious where they would get the raw materials to encompass and entire star.
Well the obvious answer is from harvesting materials from other planets, moons and asteroids. But the concept of doing this is as bad as the concept of creating a death planet which harvests the energy from the star in a solar system to blow up another planet. (Starwars most recent movie).
They had the ability to make the "deathstar" before, why now do you need an entire planet.
OK We'll go on this tangent - the new "deathstar" from the new movie doesn't move. It stays where it is, it just shoots an energy beam across light years and destroys other planets. Frankly that whole thing was just DUMB! and with that I must walk away before I just cry over how bad things like this were in the new movie.. and why? for the love of star wars? why did we need another deathstar for a super weapon? and why this crazy impossible thing.
As for the spinning an no atmosphere - I don't think that's right. We'll still have gravity even without rotating (look at the moon), but we wouldn't have the magnetic protective field that saves us from solar radiation, so the planet would be a lot warmer, and the atmosphere would boil off, maybe that's what you mean?
Just a point of clarity the moon does rotate/spin on its axis. It just takes ~27 earth days.
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
We'll still have gravity even without rotating (look at the moon),
The moon rotates. If it did not, we would not see the same face all the time. Basic physics man.
Gravity is a function of mass and has nothing to do with rotation directly. Our perceived 1G on earth involves rotation since the earth is rotating and trying to throw us off the surface while gravity is attracting us "down".
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
OK We'll go on this tangent - the new "deathstar" from the new movie doesn't move. It stays where it is, it just shoots an energy beam across light years and destroys other planets. Frankly that whole thing was just DUMB! and with that I must walk away before I just cry over how bad things like this were in the new movie.. and why? for the love of star wars? why did we need another deathstar for a super weapon? and why this crazy impossible thing.
The movie's plot was so horrible in that the concept of "a planet can't be blown up from a well placed torpedo" But when you suck the energy out of a star and kill the star, you've killed the planet.
The star would likely go super nova and blow away the entire solar system.
-
@coliver said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
Just a point of clarity the moon does rotate/spin on its axis. It just takes ~27 earth days.
Aww thanks, That I didn't know - I've always hear that the moon was spin locked with the earth.
-
I really wish they had just made the Thrawn trilogy into movies instead of making A New Hope 2.0.
-
@coliver said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
I really wish they had just made the Thrawn trilogy into movies instead of making A New Hope 2.0.
Here Here! There was almost nothing new in the new movie - seriously Hollywood has run out of ideas.
-
@scottalanmiller said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
Well the obvious answer is from harvesting materials from other planets, moons and asteroids.
Yeah, like millions of them.
To go on this subtopic. To be able to even get so much material to harvest planets for the raw materials in them, you'd need to be able to travel extremely vast distances in unbelievable large and capable ship. Scale would be required here, as you'd have to store the materials harvested somewhere on board.
But before you even get to this point, you'd have to build this vessel in space, outside of the orbit and gravitational pull (far enough away to not crash back into the planet), which actually leads to the next problem. The ship (or ships) would have to be the size of the planet or larger. With extremely vast management crews or automation systems (AI).
These ships would have to be able to self repair, along with self replicate (almost breeding) as sending more ships from the home planet would take forever. Literally millions of light years to get to wherever the "original" ship is now at.
Being able to produce new planetary mining ships in space would be an absolute necessity for anything like this. Which if you can do this, and travel the vastness of your galaxy to harvest the raw materials to be able to make a Dyson Sphere, you'd be better off just building a ton of ultra fast ships that get sent out in ever direction searching for life.
-
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
OK We'll go on this tangent - the new "deathstar" from the new movie doesn't move. It stays where it is, it just shoots an energy beam across light years and destroys other planets. Frankly that whole thing was just DUMB! and with that I must walk away before I just cry over how bad things like this were in the new movie.. and why? for the love of star wars? why did we need another deathstar for a super weapon? and why this crazy impossible thing.
The movie's plot was so horrible in that the concept of "a planet can't be blown up from a well placed torpedo" But when you suck the energy out of a star and kill the star, you've killed the planet.
The star would likely go super nova and blow away the entire solar system.
So many problems with this movie - but since we assume that the planet doesn't move - and they used the weapon to destroy the planets of the New Republic (how the hell did an energy beam split mid flight with no prism?), and the sun was glowing when we visited the planet - the crazyness I read is that Starkiller base only took the outer layer of the sun - OMG I just have to stop..
-
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@scottalanmiller said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
Well the obvious answer is from harvesting materials from other planets, moons and asteroids.
Yeah, like millions of them.
To go on this subtopic. To be able to even get so much material to harvest planets for the raw materials in them, you'd need to be able to travel extremely vast distances in unbelievable large and capable ship. Scale would be required here, as you'd have to store the materials harvested somewhere on board.
But before you even get to this point, you'd have to build this vessel in space, outside of the orbit and gravitational pull (far enough away to not crash back into the planet), which actually leads to the next problem. The ship (or ships) would have to be the size of the planet or larger. With extremely vast management crews or automation systems (AI).
These ships would have to be able to self repair, along with self replicate (almost breeding) as sending more ships from the home planet would take forever. Literally millions of light years to get to wherever the "original" ship is now at.
Being able to produce new planetary mining ships in space would be an absolute necessity for anything like this. Which if you can do this, and travel the vastness of your galaxy to harvest the raw materials to be able to make a Dyson Sphere, you'd be better off just building a ton of ultra fast ships that get sent out in ever direction searching for life.
Not exactly. All you have to do is to jump-start the whole process by sending robots and mining equipment to a small planet. Getting raw materials to orbit would be relatively easy, because of lower gravity force, and initial harvested energy would be delivered to mining equipment on the planet, greatly increasing output over time, as more and more energy collectors orbit the sun. Once you're done with one planet, move to another. Rinse and repeat.
-
@coliver said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
I really wish they had just made the Thrawn trilogy into movies instead of making A New Hope 2.0.
Exactly. I don't even consider the new one to BE Star Wars. It's Disney Wars.
-
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@Dashrender said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
OK We'll go on this tangent - the new "deathstar" from the new movie doesn't move. It stays where it is, it just shoots an energy beam across light years and destroys other planets. Frankly that whole thing was just DUMB! and with that I must walk away before I just cry over how bad things like this were in the new movie.. and why? for the love of star wars? why did we need another deathstar for a super weapon? and why this crazy impossible thing.
The movie's plot was so horrible in that the concept of "a planet can't be blown up from a well placed torpedo" But when you suck the energy out of a star and kill the star, you've killed the planet.
The star would likely go super nova and blow away the entire solar system.
So many problems with this movie - but since we assume that the planet doesn't move - and they used the weapon to destroy the planets of the New Republic (how the hell did an energy beam split mid flight with no prism?), and the sun was glowing when we visited the planet - the crazyness I read is that Starkiller base only took the outer layer of the sun - OMG I just have to stop..
The split, from what I read, was done at the emitter. The angle of deflection over those vast distances would be fractions of a degree at the point of origin. The biggest issue I have is that they would see this coming and would have hundreds of thousands of years (it's for all intents and purposes just light) to evacuate the planet.
-
@marcinozga said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
Not exactly. All you have to do is to jump-start the whole process by sending robots and mining equipment to a small planet. Getting raw materials to orbit would be relatively easy, because of lower gravity force, and initial harvested energy would be delivered to mining equipment on the planet, greatly increasing output over time, as more and more energy collectors orbit the sun. Once you're done with one planet, move to another. Rinse and repeat.
The harvesting of the raw materials is easy in comparison, but you still need power to do it (an unbelievable amount of power). You can't be spending centuries chewing through a planet.
It would have to be done in a scale of a few years (worst case). Longer than that and you get into the "fix it stage" where your equipment is breaking down so often that you can't possibly replace it fast enough to keep a forward going pace.
-
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@marcinozga said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
Not exactly. All you have to do is to jump-start the whole process by sending robots and mining equipment to a small planet. Getting raw materials to orbit would be relatively easy, because of lower gravity force, and initial harvested energy would be delivered to mining equipment on the planet, greatly increasing output over time, as more and more energy collectors orbit the sun. Once you're done with one planet, move to another. Rinse and repeat.
The harvesting of the raw materials is easy in comparison, but you still need power to do it (an unbelievable amount of power). You can't be spending centuries chewing through a planet.
It would have to be done in a scale of a few years (worst case). Longer than that and you get into the "fix it stage" where your equipment is breaking down so often that you can't possibly replace it fast enough to keep a forward going pace.
The hand waving here. Just start blowing chunks off the planet and using ion engines to push it toward the home planet (or wherever you are doing processing) it could take millions of years but if you start closer you could have a constant stream of these coming in.
-
@DustinB3403 said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
@marcinozga said in SETI Investigating Deep Space Signal:
Not exactly. All you have to do is to jump-start the whole process by sending robots and mining equipment to a small planet. Getting raw materials to orbit would be relatively easy, because of lower gravity force, and initial harvested energy would be delivered to mining equipment on the planet, greatly increasing output over time, as more and more energy collectors orbit the sun. Once you're done with one planet, move to another. Rinse and repeat.
The harvesting of the raw materials is easy in comparison, but you still need power to do it (an unbelievable amount of power). You can't be spending centuries chewing through a planet.
It would have to be done in a scale of a few years (worst case). Longer than that and you get into the "fix it stage" where your equipment is breaking down so often that you can't possibly replace it fast enough to keep a forward going pace.
Not possible in a few years right now, but closer to a century. If things break, that's what you have robots for. And once we have the capability to actually send robotic mining crew to a different planet, I think we would be capable of building them to last a few decades.
You have all the power available already, from nearby star.
