Jump to content
Science Forums

Building A Supermassive Black Hole Dyson Sphere Continued


Recommended Posts

You really put great effort and intellect into this thread. As you can tell by my name, I embrace Kardashev scale possibilities. I think my personal limit is 6. 1=local star. 2=local galaxy. 3=multiple galaxies simultaneous (my opinion of 3, as well as the following), 4=entire universe of galaxies. 5=multiple universes and finally 6=Top Dog, end of the line.

 

I sometimes ponder all the great voids out in the Cosmos. Wondering if perhaps a higher level Kardashev found an abundance of antimatter and then harvested the stars/galaxies within any particular void. I understand there is no observation evidence of antimatter/matter energy bursts from voids as we see them. Still, over billions of years of harvesting, perhaps the evidence has deteriorated beyond detection.

 

Anyway, great thread and GJ with all the supporting documentation and pics!

I doubt there has been a alien civilization that has reached Kardashev scale 2 much less the higher ones. I would assume most species's go extinct before that or don't expand enough to actually get that far. To say there is no evidence that within our volume of the universe we can see clearly of any mega-structures, but then again you wouldn't be able to see the star if there was something such as a dyson's sphere containing it. To say the Kardashev scale has big leaps in it of thousands and millions of years between different levels.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt there has been a alien civilization that has reached Kardashev scale 2 much less the higher ones. I would assume most species's go extinction before that or don't expand enough to actually get that far. To say there is no evidence that within our volume of the universe we can see clearly of any mega-structures.

I tend to agree with low odds of high level Kardashev...until...I start thinking of the enormous amount of time that has lapsed in our universe. I also understand your, "Great Filter" inference. Again, I simply believe so much time has lapsed that the odds become greater.

 

I also believe the Great Filter has prevented many rise and falls of civilizations but...I try to factor in multiple attempts. That is, if a civilization failed, my view is they rise again (after time and either biogenesis or abiogenesis). So, given the vast amount of stars...vast amount of time...multiple attempts (within a single planet)...I start raising my odds for higher level Kardashev's out there.

 

On your topic of Dyson Spheres directly. If they exist out there. Do you think multiple ones could be connected (daisy chained) somehow in theory? Or is the vast distance between stars to large and the material required for a connection would be non-feasible (not enough resources available locally)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with low odds of high level Kardashev...until...I start thinking of the enormous amount of time that has lapsed in our universe. I also understand your, "Great Filter" inference. Again, I simply believe so much time has lapsed that the odds become greater.

 

I also believe the Great Filter has prevented many rise and falls of civilizations but...I try to factor in multiple attempts. That is, if a civilization failed, my view is they rise again (after time and either biogenesis or abiogenesis). So, given the vast amount of stars...vast amount of time...multiple attempts (within a single planet)...I start raising my odds for higher level Kardashev's out there.

 

On your topic of Dyson Spheres directly. If they exist out there. Do you think multiple ones could be connected (daisy chained) somehow in theory? Or is the vast distance between stars to large and the material required for a connection would be non-feasible (not enough resources available locally)?

 

There is enough material in the universe to daisy chain them but I doubt that anyone would take the time to do so as there would be no purpose in daisy chaining stars over that distance, but if we assume a trinary or binary system possibly.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is enough material in the universe to daisy chain them but I doubt that anyone would take the time to do so as there would be no purpose in daisy chaining stars over that distance, but if we assume a trinary or binary system possibly.

Ok, I think you nailed that one 100%. From a practical point of view, my daisy chain concept is silly with the exception of local binary, or larger, systems. A practical benefit may exist on that scale size.

TX

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...
Posted (edited)

Today I am relatively unhappy, as my Beautiful Mega-structure has been coined a name without my permission a "Birch Planet" I just recently found this video on youtube that was created after my video on the subject that describes a Supermassive black hole dyson sphere as a "Birch Planet", This has pissed me off a bit, I don't like my creations being named something else as it is a "Super Massive Black Hole Death Star" not "Birch Planet". Paul Birch didn't do **** to make this device this was purely a creation by me, I wanted to clear this up.

 

Video in Question

https://youtu.be/ioKidcpkZN0?t=1416

 

 

The Accepted Name for such a Dyson sphere is now a "Shellworld" to step away from it being named after a crackpot named Paul Birch.

 

Approved Name = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellworld

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I am relatively unhappy, as my Beautiful Mega-structure has been coined a name without my permission a "Birch Planet" I just recently found this video on youtube that was created after my video on the subject that describes a Supermassive black hole dyson sphere as a "Birch Planet", This has pissed me off a bit, I don't like my creations being named something else as it is a "Super Massive Black Hole Death Star" not "Birch Planet". Paul Birch didn't do **** to make this device this was purely a creation by me, I wanted to clear this up.

 

Video in Question

https://youtu.be/ioKidcpkZN0?t=1416

 

 

The Accepted Name for such a Dyson sphere is now a "Shellworld" to step away from it being named after a crackpot named Paul Birch.

 

Approved Name = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellworld

Don't be so entitled. You went to a worldbuilding site just to kick up a fuss because Penrose spheres and Birch planets, which have next to nought to do with your stuff, weren't called SMBH Death Stars. Trust me, when you enter your teenage and adult years and look back on your old website accounts, these moments will come back to haunt you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Don't be so entitled. You went to a worldbuilding site just to kick up a fuss because Penrose spheres and Birch planets, which have next to nought to do with your stuff, weren't called SMBH Death Stars. Trust me, when you enter your teenage and adult years and look back on your old website accounts, these moments will come back to haunt you.

Well no it's just look at this forum and look really deep at the crank threads, we have a serious crank problem. I think that Birch was a crank and I don't want to give any of these cranks any thoughts that they are correct with their false beliefs. If you were on science forums you would understand this is a huge problem the problem of cranks, and I want to make a distinction between crank and non-crank. I have more technologies than Birch he was a crank with one technology being orbital rings in his entire life he only had one technology that makes him a crank on the grand scheme of things unlike Tesla. Personally, I don't care I don't want the classification of my beautiful SMBH Dyson Sphere weapon to be a Birch Planet. I am stopping this at the source before it becomes a issue.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well no it's just look at this forum and look really deep at the crank threads, we have a serious crank problem. I think that Birch was a crank and I don't want to give any of these cranks any thoughts that they are correct with their false beliefs. If you were on science forums you would understand this is a huge problem the problem of cranks, and I want to make a distinction between crank and non-crank. I have more technologies than Birch he was a crank with one technology being orbital rings in his entire life he only had one technology that makes him a crank on the grand scheme of things unlike Tesla. Personally, I don't care I don't want the classification of my beautiful SMBH Dyson Sphere weapon to be a Birch Planet. I am stopping this at the source before it becomes a issue.

You're going to look back at this discussion and you're going to cringe. How can you say this without smirking? Birch invented something completely different and you're here calling him a crank because his invention goes around a black hole and is roughly spherical. Just stop and delete your comments because otherwise they will probably be embarrassing your future self.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You're going to look back at this discussion and you're going to cringe. How can you say this without smirking? Birch invented something completely different and you're here calling him a crank because his invention goes around a black hole and is roughly spherical. Just stop and delete your comments because otherwise they will probably be embarrassing your future self.

That's where you are wrong Birch didn't invent anything to do with a SMBH, he invented orbital rings for planets. 

 

"Paul Birch published a series of three articles in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society in 1982 that laid out the mathematical basis of ring systems.[4][5][6]

In the simplest design of an orbital ring system, a rotating cable or possibly an inflatable space structure is placed in a low Earth orbit above the equator. Not in orbit, but riding on this ring, supported electromagnetically on superconducting magnets, are ring stations that stay in one place above some designated point on Earth. Hanging down from these ring stations are short elevator cables made from materials with high-tensile-strength-to-mass-ratio.

Although this simple model would work best above the equator, Paul Birch calculated that since the ring station can be used to accelerate the orbital ring eastwards as well as hold the tether, it is therefore possible to deliberately cause the orbital ring to precess around the Earth instead of staying fixed in space while the Earth rotates beneath it. By precessing the ring once every 24 hours, the Orbital Ring will hover above any meridian selected on the surface of the Earth. The cables which dangle from the ring are now geostationary without having to reach geostationary altitude or without having to be placed into the equatorial plane. This means that using the Orbital Ring concept, one or many pairs of Stations can be positioned above any points on Earth desired or can be moved everywhere on the globe. Thus, any point on Earth can be served by a space elevator. Also a whole network of orbital rings can be built, which, by crossing over the poles, could cover the whole planet and be capable of taking over most of freight and passenger transport. By an array of elevators and several geostationary ring stations, asteroid or Moon material can be received and gently put down where land fills are needed. The electric energy generated in the process would pay for the system expansion and ultimately could pave the way for a solar-system-wide terraforming- and astroengineering-activity on a sound economical basis."

 

See that is the fallacy you people keep preaching that he had any idea for the application of such around SMBH, thus saying that Birch Invented any structure that went around a SMBH is a fallacy too. Birch was talking about orbital structures around planets just as Dyson was talking about orbital structures around Stars. Just as George Lucas was talking about Artificial space stations. This was not the original idea of Birch as you make it out to be.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I told you this the same thing can be done on a much smaller and manufacturable scale by running beams through arrays of magnifying glass until they blueshift into a quickly evaporating black hole which produces light and magnetic fields and centrifugal force on the surrounding material allowing the process to be repeated. 

 

Yes Polymath Indeed you did however I wanted a much more powerful design that wouldn't be destroyed, They are trying to coin a name for my device that I disagree with, This isn't a Penrose Sphere, and I won't stand by and let them coin all Mega-structures around SMBH a Birch Planet. Birch didn't come up with this idea... nor does anything Birch talked about deal with SMBH. Someone named Isaac Arthur named these a Birch Planet in a Youtube video and Birch didn't do anything besides come up with planetary orbital rings.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Death Star fallacy. You're like Palpatine and a miniature version of this is the X wing that destroyed the death star. For one they are smaller so you can hurl a lot of them at a larger stagnant object at relativistic speed. A single proton for instance the OMG particle had the impact of a professionally thrown baseball because it was moving at .99999999999999999999% the speed of light, these little things can pop into another timeline. 

 

That isn't the issue here the issue is over a name, they are trying to name all structures around a SMBH a Birch Planet and I don't want my beautiful Megastructure associated with that name. I came up with device 3 months before Isaac Arthur made that stupid name.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

That isn't the issue here the issue is over a name, they are trying to name all structures around a SMBH a Birch Planet and I don't want my beautiful Megastructure associated with that name. I came up with device 3 months before Isaac Arthur made that stupid name.

It's the other way around; you're going to innocent communities to kick up a fuss on every article related to objects that go around black holes. Besides, I don't think Isaac Arthur will take you seriously with how you're handling everything, calling everyone crackpots and confusing Penrose spheres with Birch planets and "SMBH Death Stars".

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's where you are wrong Birch didn't invent anything to do with a SMBH, he invented orbital rings for planets. 

 

"Paul Birch published a series of three articles in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society in 1982 that laid out the mathematical basis of ring systems.[4][5][6]

In the simplest design of an orbital ring system, a rotating cable or possibly an inflatable space structure is placed in a low Earth orbit above the equator. Not in orbit, but riding on this ring, supported electromagnetically on superconducting magnets, are ring stations that stay in one place above some designated point on Earth. Hanging down from these ring stations are short elevator cables made from materials with high-tensile-strength-to-mass-ratio.

Although this simple model would work best above the equator, Paul Birch calculated that since the ring station can be used to accelerate the orbital ring eastwards as well as hold the tether, it is therefore possible to deliberately cause the orbital ring to precess around the Earth instead of staying fixed in space while the Earth rotates beneath it. By precessing the ring once every 24 hours, the Orbital Ring will hover above any meridian selected on the surface of the Earth. The cables which dangle from the ring are now geostationary without having to reach geostationary altitude or without having to be placed into the equatorial plane. This means that using the Orbital Ring concept, one or many pairs of Stations can be positioned above any points on Earth desired or can be moved everywhere on the globe. Thus, any point on Earth can be served by a space elevator. Also a whole network of orbital rings can be built, which, by crossing over the poles, could cover the whole planet and be capable of taking over most of freight and passenger transport. By an array of elevators and several geostationary ring stations, asteroid or Moon material can be received and gently put down where land fills are needed. The electric energy generated in the process would pay for the system expansion and ultimately could pave the way for a solar-system-wide terraforming- and astroengineering-activity on a sound economical basis."

 

See that is the fallacy you people keep preaching that he had any idea for the application of such around SMBH, thus saying that Birch Invented any structure that went around a SMBH is a fallacy too. Birch was talking about orbital structures around planets just as Dyson was talking about orbital structures around Stars. Just as George Lucas was talking about Artificial space stations. This was not the original idea of Birch as you make it out to be.

Then what's the problem? Just stay away from our worldbuilding site if the thought of us saying the name "Paul Birch" pisses you off so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Then what's the problem? Just stay away from our worldbuilding site if the thought of us saying the name "Paul Birch" pisses you off so much.

It isn't the fact that you are saying "Paul Birch" it is that you are falsely attributing the design of such a device to Paul Birch.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then what's the problem? Just stay away from our worldbuilding site if the thought of us saying the name "Paul Birch" pisses you off so much.

It seems you guys were right I just was reading one of Paul Birch's papers and he does mention orbital habitats around black holes in his Abstract. I was incorrect on this(https://space-engine.fandom.com/wiki/Birch_Planet).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...