Re: Solar Shell


Williamknowsbest wrote:
scottlowtherATixDOTnetcomDOTcom wrote:
Williamknowsbest wrote:
scottlowtherAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
jsavard@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

This is still an incredibly vast undertaking, for the far distant
future, but at least it doesn't involve re-engineering the Sun.


The biggest problem with imagining far-future giga-engineering projects
is that far too often they seem to require a utopian fascism that
completely controls all sentient life. By the time mankind figures out
how to dial down the sun so that it'll last ten trillion years, we'll
also have figured out how to make the thing blow up on command. War
will make many of these projects moot.

I envision this being done by an individual in their lifetime, not all
of humanity for aeons.

What, blowing up the sun? That's one of those "you only get to do it
once" things.

Still, as with anything, it can be approached step-wise. One can model
what one does certainly. Then, one can do laboratory experiments.
Then, one can do small experiments in the solar environment. Then,
progress to larger experiments. By the time you're ready to divide the
sun into smaller parts, you've got a background of experience.

Such as the cinder that used to be the sun and the smokign ruins of the
former solar system, after the disasterous Solar Subdivision
Mini-Experiment of 2412, where Hillary's Holy Martyr Brigade invaded
the test facility with a quantum computer virus and caused things to
run a little funny.



The amazing thing as I think about this is that this project might be
capable of just that.

All that's needed is a chemical laser, intelilgently designed, and
dropped into the sun with a structured fabric floating in the sunlight
above. Something on the scale of say a latter day clementine mission.

Sure. Why not.

Yes, the more one looks at the solar environment the clearer the
approach to use becomes.

Indeed! Leave suns far behind before people gain the ability to blwo
them straight to hell. Those inhabitting the Oort cloud might survive.


What rights do they have over their creation?

"In the Necromonger faith, you keep what you kill."


But we're not killing anything here, we're making stuff.

Uh-huh. What technology has man created that we *haven't* used for war,
or at least weaponized? The ability to destroy the sun will become
available well before the abuility to neatly slice it up into dwarfs,
just as the ability to blow things to smithereens with the H-bomb came
along well before nuclear fusion rockets.


Success along the lines I envision totally outclasses anything else
humanity could do prior to success. And very quickly too. The ability
to eject from the sun in a controlled way, planetary system sized
masses of raw material and shape and form them into operating finished
products by scattering structured photons off them - is just
mind-boggling.

Indeed. And imagine the fun one could have hacking into the control
computers and making the system go nova rather than just calving off
calmly.

Who would do that and what would be their motivation? Especially since
the perps would get killed in the process.

Ever hear of a suicide bomber?

For ***'s sake, Bill. Take things to a ridiculous extreme: imagine
giving a package to every human on Earth today. Inside the package was
a vial of "Instant Extinction" brand super-Ebola, genetically modified
to wipe out humanity. Also included in the package was *very* clearly
written and recorded verbal instructions: you push the red button, the
virus is released. You push the green button, the virus is incinerated
and a hundred-dollar bill pops out. Do you honestly believe that
*nobody* would push the red button?

Humanity is *not* populated exclusively by what modern Western culture
woudl consider to be enlightened, sane people who care for all of
humanity. There are a *lot* of peopel who think that humans are a
blight (ever hear of the "Human extinction Movement?"), or that an
apocolypse would help bring the Second Coming of Jesus or the Hidden
Imam or Big Bird or whatever. And there is more than a share of people
who are just plain evil or nuts.


Long time ago we had Right of Conquest. The right of conquest is the
purported right of a conqueror to territory taken by force of arms.

We still have that right.

I figured you'd say that.

Because it's correct. The land you're living on: was it taken from some
group of Injuns a century or three back? Are you going to return it?
Are the Anglo-Saxons of England going to give the land back to the
Celts? Are the Israelies going to just roll over and let the Arabs wipe
them out for their land?

"Ownership" is defined as "that which I can keep someone else from
taking."

Today we recognize the Right of Patent. If someone creates or
discovers a process - they have something they have rights to use it to
make money and attain power.

Until the Democrats gain full power. Then "make money" will be banned
as being antisocial and against the Public Good.Then the Equalization
of Opportunity Bill will be passed.

You don't know many conservative democrats do you?

Not who actually gain positions of power in the Dem party, no.



If
someone unveils the power to destroy the world, or build vast new ones,
the demand won't be that this someone become a benevolent dictator. It
will be that he turn over that power to some Respected Authority.

Two points - the Respected Authority doesn't understand the process and
could very well in their ignorance bring about the demise of humanity,
and more importantly the demise of those who created the process.

Yes, and? That's hardly stopped mobs from makign such demands before.
or even today. A lot of peopel actually want to turn a lot of power
over to the UN, *despite* the fact that it's run by incompetant
criminals.


Also, people would generally respect those who created the process and
understand they're the authority regarding it.

You've GOT to be fucking kidding me.



Hmm.. I'm trying to vissualize this. After working for over a decade
in obscurity, an affable, aging, Bonoesque scientist and his team of
loveable misfits gets an intelligent process working on the sun,
capable of doing all I say. People have a hard time understanding that
the tiny ill defined jet of material flrowing from the sun is larger
than the Earth. Not much is said publicly, and not a whole lot of
interest in the press conference. A press conference is held as the
first metal aeroshell falls to Earth, and the team announces a joint
deal with Alcoa, BHP Billiton, Phelps Dodge that will transform the
industrial economies of Earth generate untold jobs, new wealth, and
create the conditions that will create vast new markets for industrial
metals.

Now, what would motivate there to be a call to take control of this
obscure footnote and remove it from private control? Nothing.


Ever hear of "fear," Bill? How about "greed?" "Ignorance?"

"Holy ***, they're fucking with the sun" will be one hell of a
motivator.

Christ unmighty, have you never heard of "eminant domain?"


Alternatively, that he should "turn the power over to
*me.*" Or that the power should be abandoned entirely.

Who is best suited to control a thing? Someone who creates that thing
and uses it productively, or someone who knows nothing about it and
knows nothing of its value? Hmm...

When has that ever stopped anyone demanding that power be turned over
to someone else? Consider if I built an actual, honest-to-Odin nuclear
bomb in my back yard. Do you think that the universal consensus would
be that, since I developed it, it shoudl remain under my control?

.

Quantcast