Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Building A Supermassive Black Hole Dyson Sphere Continued


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 08 September 2019 - 11:39 PM

This is about the construction of a Dyson's sphere around the Super-massive Black hole in the middle of the galaxy located Sagittarius A. The original work about dyson's sphere was done around stars being that it is 2019 I would like to step it up a level and construct this device around Sagittarius A, thus it will take some time to explain all the details I don't imagine this will be a one post thread. First I will start with the original video about the Death Star but this will be much more detailed outlining the finer details of every piece required much like the spaceship thread(http://www.sciencefo...e-solar-system/) the major parts will be answered completely for building this mega-structure.

 

 

First to put this device into perspective you must understand the Kardashev scale(https://en.wikipedia...Kardashev_scale), this Super Massive Black Hole Death Star would likely be the crowning achievement of a Type III civilization(https://futurism.com...ilization-types). When I tell you the manufacturing methods for such a feat are not a even close to the level required to complete this project I really mean it, the human civilization will not probably be a type III civilization for ten thousand or one hundred thousand years, but as technology follows the same basic principals of physics that are known, we can find ways to design such a object, thus this will be a exploration into what would be required for such a feat of engineering and how to achieve control over our Galaxy's Super-massive Black hole. 

 

M87 (Close Up of Super Massive Black Hole)

Untitled.png

 

Sagittarius A(Galactic Center of Milky Way)

PIA16214nustar900.jpg

 

Closer Image of Galactic Core

sgr-a-label.jpg

 

First I would suggest a Survey of the stars surrounding and within Sgr A after travel to the Sgr A area in a faster than light traveling spacecraft.


Edited by VictorMedvil, 09 September 2019 - 12:03 AM.


#2 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 09 September 2019 - 07:16 AM

Victor if nothing gets out of a black hole how are you going to collect energy from it? The concept of Dyson spheres was developed around suns, which have an output due to fusion reactions.

 

Maybe you would be better of building a fusion reactor  :innocent:  

 

Edit https://en.wikipedia...ki/Dyson_sphere


Edited by Flummoxed, 09 September 2019 - 07:19 AM.


#3 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2773 posts

Posted 09 September 2019 - 07:40 AM

Victor if nothing gets out of a black hole how are you going to collect energy from it? The concept of Dyson spheres was developed around suns, which have an output due to fusion reactions.

 

Maybe you would be better of building a fusion reactor  :innocent:  

 

Edit https://en.wikipedia...ki/Dyson_sphere

But surely Hawking radiation, if it exists, predicts that black holes do radiate and gradually shrink away to nothing, doesn't it?



#4 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 09 September 2019 - 09:49 AM

But surely Hawking radiation, if it exists, predicts that black holes do radiate and gradually shrink away to nothing, doesn't it?

 

Yes IF it exists; in umpty trillion years a BH will apparently evaporate, by giving up its gravitational energy to virtual particles. They need to be starved of anything else to eat like a Dyson spheres other black holes etc.  The last stages of a black holes evaporation could be very explosive according to some theories. 

 

Hawking radiation is very low energy. I think a fusion reactor could be smaller than trying to use the fusion reactions in a small sun. Also it might be more economical, in the long run. https://en.wikipedia...ki/Fusion_power



#5 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 09 September 2019 - 12:11 PM

Victor if nothing gets out of a black hole how are you going to collect energy from it? The concept of Dyson spheres was developed around suns, which have an output due to fusion reactions.

 

Maybe you would be better of building a fusion reactor  :innocent:  

 

Edit https://en.wikipedia...ki/Dyson_sphere

 

The key to this that you are both missing is Black holes can be used to create a Relativistic jet after plasma is put around the black hole especially super-massive black holes do this when they consume mass, I am trying to make another instrument of destruction. However, Exchemist is correct I was going to harness hawking radiation to power the actual structure , The point is it has never been done before theoretically thus I must create this Dyson's sphere death star. You would be surprised  how much energy an actual (4.31±0.38)× 106M  or ‭8.5703057‬ x 1036 kg Super massive black hole radiates in energy as hawking radiation even if it is a few Yottawatts that is still more energy that we have ever been able to create on earth in our species's history in a second even considering Fusion Power and Fission Power being that for 2013, estimated world energy consumption was 5.67 × 1020 joules then consider we maybe have created that much for 60 years and you come to less than 1% of the energy this would put out in a second is how much our civilization has used thus far in its entire history, but I haven't done the math exactly yet but I will. Then there is the point that if you built this structure you would have a literal infinite source of energy from any mass in the cosmos for trillions of years sustaining that energy level of a few yottawatts for that long even after the stars burn dry, but I would consider that, that estimate of a few yottawatts is incorrect as I have not done that calculation yet for super-massive black hole luminosity.

 

123520553-J7emi-INp-M87jet08042010.jpg


Edited by VictorMedvil, 09 September 2019 - 03:11 PM.


#6 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 10 September 2019 - 02:06 AM

Relativistic jets and hawking radiation are explained well by ethan https://medium.com/s...le-b7a4ef7d9bdf

 

Not related but amused me this morning https://en.wikipedia...acuum_thruster 



#7 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 11:58 PM

First to begin with is the hawking radiation collection grid which can just be solar panels around the internal area of the Dyson's sphere which this technology is well known but hawking radiation is just light. The Luminosity and Energy produced by a Black hole follows the equation below.

 

Untitled.png

which makes the Luminosity in hawking radiation of Sgr A , L or (Watts)  = ‭1.7494342699889852561152624123067*10-39‬  J/s , which is much less than I would have thought but it so happens that larger black hole actually has less hawking radiation escape it. So, the Idea of gathering energy from the black hole via hawking radiation is senseless, making collecting the hawking radiation to power the structure pointless, which is why the design doesn't actually have this component, we must harness the gravity of the super-massive black hole that is where all the energy is stored. So, Flummoxed was actually correct about the hawking radiation release being less than spectacular. This is why the Relativistic jet must be harnessed in large black holes. I suppose it was a incorrect assumption that hawking radiation would be a large producer of energy in super-massive black holes unlike smaller ones. In contrasts to the relativistic jet which is Trillion-Billion yottawatts which is where the real energy is gained from a super-massive black hole being E = 1/2 M ω2 which translates to ESMBH Jet = 1/2 MPlasma .7CRotational Velocity, let's say you put a star around a Super-massive black hole of 1M  then the energy sling shot total would be  E = ‭6.26535 *1046‬ J , putting out 62 Yotta-Zetta Joules Total over the Jet's lifetime after consuming a star, after having tapped into the rotation of one of these Super-massive black holes, which is why Super-massive black hole make the perfect death star laser emitter. This amount of energy would easily Helium Flash a star or destroy a planet which the next video explains which shows the awesome power of a Super-Massive Black hole reactor, unlike the hawking radiation which is so small it is not measurable the power is in the gravity of the super massive black hole, the Super-massive black hole reactor can easily react the entire mass of a star within days, for trillions of years without exhausting its energy source by hawking radiation meaning in terms of watts the devices produces around ‭7.1759259 * 1041  Watts or 717 Yotta-Peta Watts if it takes days to cannibalize a star of 1M.

 

 

 

images.jpg


Edited by VictorMedvil, 20 September 2019 - 01:22 AM.


#8 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 20 September 2019 - 09:38 PM

The next thing you must realize is the Relativistic jet only will fire from the rotational poles of the super massive black hole, thus you must turn the Super Massive black hole of (4.31±0.38)× 106M or 8.5703057‬ x 1036 kg on its axis to target the location you want to destroy such as a star or planet, now Super Massive black holes have a very strong magnetic field due to the rotational velocity of the super-massive black hole, thus to internal layer of this device is suggested to be Iron Superconductors which per meter emit a magnetic field of 110 Teslas, the thickness of such a superconducting torus would be determined by the strength of the magnetic field, Now if we were to cover the entire internal surface of the black hole which has a 13.67 million mi Radius, then that would make a magnetic field strength of ‭1.47106304494591498906604784832*1034‬  Teslas of a ‭2.347073384‬ billion miles Squared Iron superconductor sphere 1 meter thick. If the Strength of the Sgr A's magnetic field was merely 1 Tesla then this would exert of force of  ‭1.47106304494591498906604784832*1034‬  Newtons easily turning the black hole on its axis in days, so the maximum alignment time of the relativistic jet is a couple of days before fire. The Direction of alignment could be changed by changing the direction of current flow from Left to Right or Right to Left through the superconducting sphere.

 

Shape of Superconducting Shell around the Sgr A

download.jpg

Example around a Star of the Torus

images.jpg

 

Molecular Structure of several iron Superconductors.(Nano-materials)

e28-1.png


Edited by VictorMedvil, 20 September 2019 - 09:52 PM.


#9 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 21 September 2019 - 03:12 AM

Are you sure BH's exist !  :shocked:

 

Why not try and create a MEKO instead. https://arxiv.org/pd...-ph/0602453.pdf It might be easier.

 

Or maybe you could re write the BB theory based on MEKO's instead of singularities like this guy has done http://journalofcosm...sation JofC.pdf Its all about looking at things differently.



#10 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 12:10 AM

Are you sure BH's exist !  :shocked:

 

Why not try and create a MEKO instead. https://arxiv.org/pd...-ph/0602453.pdf It might be easier.

 

Or maybe you could re write the BB theory based on MEKO's instead of singularities like this guy has done http://journalofcosm...sation JofC.pdf Its all about looking at things differently.

 

Because MEKO's don't exist unlike SMBH, remember I am a huge standard model person to me theories like these are crackpot theories. All my theories are within the confines of known standard model physics or expansions upon the standard model. The only other model that I ever use is String Theory which is the further-est I go. This isn't to say I haven't made Toy Models or Expansions upon physics but this is meaning that I assume that other models are incorrect. The Wormhole Metric (http://www.sciencefo...tric-continued/) is actually a alternate upon the Standard Model if you never noticed that. My point being that these theories are less crackpot than most people think anyone that pays attention to the solutions will realize that the solutions are the same as the standard model. I have never been banned from any forum for crackpottery only getting into fights with members and thread hijacking, even on the physicsforums.com the Vmedvil account was banned for fighting with a admin over science, which no offense but honestly that MEKO stuff is crackpottery I don't know how that got peer reviewed, but saying that I don't know how alot of stuff that is peer reviewed passes as science as much of the works in physics I see are clearly wrong to this point there is only one right answer and it is the one with the most evidence towards its existence.

 

400px-Standard-Model-of-Elementary-Parti


Edited by VictorMedvil, 22 September 2019 - 12:41 AM.


#11 Flummoxed

Flummoxed

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 02:41 AM

I thought I had read a correspondence between your self and 006 ref your preference for the origins of the universe being a black hole. I may be wrong or perhaps 006 was wrong on his point. The paper I posted had the origins with MEKO's which are black hole ish and have the similar characteristics. 

 

Its often amusing to pick fight with moderators especially when you know they are wrong or being assholes. 

 

Ref physics I do not believe the standard model to be completely correct, its just a best guess, and looking at different models, gives a wider view of what might be. One or two things ref mekos that is appealing. I am not so sure about the pear reviewed paper I posted, I only had time to glance down the paper. I still need to find time to read it before discarding it. 



#12 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 03:52 AM

I thought I had read a correspondence between your self and 006 ref your preference for the origins of the universe being a black hole. I may be wrong or perhaps 006 was wrong on his point. The paper I posted had the origins with MEKO's which are black hole ish and have the similar characteristics. 

 

Its often amusing to pick fight with moderators especially when you know they are wrong or being assholes. 

 

Ref physics I do not believe the standard model to be completely correct, its just a best guess, and looking at different models, gives a wider view of what might be. One or two things ref mekos that is appealing. I am not so sure about the pear reviewed paper I posted, I only had time to glance down the paper. I still need to find time to read it before discarding it. 

 

You only were reading one of the correspondences between me and dubbel, we have been debating this stuff for like almost 3 years now. Sometimes I win the debate other times dubbel wins the debate Dubbel's modeling skills are insane that man can physics model really well though sometimes he gets carried away into tangents on theoretical stuff and you gotta knock him back to reality, but myself I usually try to make sure that my devices are based on known physics though on occasion i have been known to actually use Dubbel's equations when he makes a really good one. On the MEKO thing, I just don't see that these objects are collapsing or the radius would gradually get smaller without hawking radiation.


Edited by VictorMedvil, 22 September 2019 - 04:10 AM.