6 ms·

Dyson spheres can be very low tech. To reiterate, it's a swarm of objects orbiting the star, not a rigid sphere. If you have the time and raw resources, it was

Dyson spheres can be very low tech. To reiterate, it's a swarm of objects orbiting the star, not a rigid sphere. If you have the time and raw resources, it was possible with 1960s technology.

varjag 2y ago
It was not possible at all with 1960s technology, nor it is possible today.
- skirmish 2y ago
  Are you claiming that it is not possible to put a satellite into an orbit around the Sun? Please take a look at how many times this has been done already: [1]. Now just capture Sun's energy on one and do something useful with it: part of Dyson swarm. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_in_heliocentric_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_in_... .
  - TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
    How do you get energy from there? How do you deal with waste heat of satellite which is being heated up by sun from one side and heated up by your mode of energy transfer from the other side? Unless we have some magical solution which can convert waste heat into electricity and thus making such satellite working with 100% effectivity, then such satellite needs to transmit energy with very limited power otherwise it will fry itself up.
    - skirmish 2y ago
      Why 100% now? None of those satellites are exploding right now from overheating. Just add a laser on each pointed at somewhere where the energy can be used, done.
      - TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
        None of those satellites are also trying to collect as much energy on one side and beam them on the other side. Notice how those satellite closer to the Sun are wrapped into reflective and isolating materials and only antenna, solar panels and sensors are sticking out. Additionally high power laser has currently something around 80% of efficiency. So if you have 10kW of input from solar array on one side, then you are transmitting 8kW via laser and 2kW into satellite itself as a heat. And again, we are in vacuum of space, so good luck with radiating 2kW of power into vacuum. The fact, that you can't get rid of waste heat would need whole satellite to work close to 100% effectivity, which we don't have technology today
  - varjag 2y ago
    It is possible to send a singular satellite pretty much anywhere. It is not possible to build and maintain a Dyson Swarm. At the sizes of modern satellites you'll need trillions of those, which is completely unrealistic with Earth-side launches. This is before we get to doing them any actual dyson swarmy work: so far our probes are only good at communicating and observing.
    - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
      A singular satellite which captures any amount of a star's energy is a Dyson swarm satellite. Would millions or billions of them be better? Yes.
      - varjag 2y ago
        Dyson Swarm in particular is a megastructure harvesting much of the star energy to the extent its spectrum is dramatically shifted to infrared. I can't stress enough that a lone satellite is not a swarm, Dyson or otherwise.
        ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        A dyson swarm is just a bunch of satellites, each harnessing energy from a the same star around which they are more or less are situated (what they do with that energy is up to them). They harvest a proportion of the star's energy anywhere on the range between 0 (non-inclusive) and 100% (inclusive). Your description is one possible end state of a Dyson swarm, and itself includes a subjective measure (what you consider dramatic might not be what I consider dramatic). Your description of it as a megastructure might explain some of the confusion: it wouldn't be a structure, but rather a formation of satellites not physically connected to each other. How do you build a swarm of satellites? Well, first you make 1 satellite, then you make another... :)
        varjag 2y ago
        > Your description is one possible end state of a Dyson swarm, and itself includes a subjective measure (what you consider dramatic might not be what I consider dramatic). My description is Freeman Dyson's description. Naturally you are allowed to come up with ImPostingOnHN's Swarm, which includes a case of zero satellites and no effect on the star emission whatsoever. > How do you build a swarm of satellites? Well, first you make 1 satellite, then you make another... :) Sure and the end state of completing Dyson Swarm in Solar system is not achievable with the technology we have. Now let's move on to discuss if one man with a rifle but no vehicle constitutes a Motor Rifles brigade.

Dyson spheres can be very low tech. To reiterate, it's a swarm of objects orbiting the star, not a rigid sphere. If you have the time and raw resources, it was possible with 1960s technology.

varjag 2y ago

It was not possible at all with 1960s technology, nor it is possible today.

skirmish 2y ago
Are you claiming that it is not possible to put a satellite into an orbit around the Sun? Please take a look at how many times this has been done already: [1]. Now just capture Sun's energy on one and do something useful with it: part of Dyson swarm. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_in_heliocentric_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_in_... .
- TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
  How do you get energy from there? How do you deal with waste heat of satellite which is being heated up by sun from one side and heated up by your mode of energy transfer from the other side? Unless we have some magical solution which can convert waste heat into electricity and thus making such satellite working with 100% effectivity, then such satellite needs to transmit energy with very limited power otherwise it will fry itself up.
  - skirmish 2y ago
    Why 100% now? None of those satellites are exploding right now from overheating. Just add a laser on each pointed at somewhere where the energy can be used, done.
    - TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
      None of those satellites are also trying to collect as much energy on one side and beam them on the other side. Notice how those satellite closer to the Sun are wrapped into reflective and isolating materials and only antenna, solar panels and sensors are sticking out. Additionally high power laser has currently something around 80% of efficiency. So if you have 10kW of input from solar array on one side, then you are transmitting 8kW via laser and 2kW into satellite itself as a heat. And again, we are in vacuum of space, so good luck with radiating 2kW of power into vacuum. The fact, that you can't get rid of waste heat would need whole satellite to work close to 100% effectivity, which we don't have technology today
- varjag 2y ago
  It is possible to send a singular satellite pretty much anywhere. It is not possible to build and maintain a Dyson Swarm. At the sizes of modern satellites you'll need trillions of those, which is completely unrealistic with Earth-side launches. This is before we get to doing them any actual dyson swarmy work: so far our probes are only good at communicating and observing.
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    A singular satellite which captures any amount of a star's energy is a Dyson swarm satellite. Would millions or billions of them be better? Yes.
    - varjag 2y ago
      Dyson Swarm in particular is a megastructure harvesting much of the star energy to the extent its spectrum is dramatically shifted to infrared. I can't stress enough that a lone satellite is not a swarm, Dyson or otherwise.
      - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        A dyson swarm is just a bunch of satellites, each harnessing energy from a the same star around which they are more or less are situated (what they do with that energy is up to them). They harvest a proportion of the star's energy anywhere on the range between 0 (non-inclusive) and 100% (inclusive). Your description is one possible end state of a Dyson swarm, and itself includes a subjective measure (what you consider dramatic might not be what I consider dramatic). Your description of it as a megastructure might explain some of the confusion: it wouldn't be a structure, but rather a formation of satellites not physically connected to each other. How do you build a swarm of satellites? Well, first you make 1 satellite, then you make another... :)
        varjag 2y ago
        > Your description is one possible end state of a Dyson swarm, and itself includes a subjective measure (what you consider dramatic might not be what I consider dramatic). My description is Freeman Dyson's description. Naturally you are allowed to come up with ImPostingOnHN's Swarm, which includes a case of zero satellites and no effect on the star emission whatsoever. > How do you build a swarm of satellites? Well, first you make 1 satellite, then you make another... :) Sure and the end state of completing Dyson Swarm in Solar system is not achievable with the technology we have. Now let's move on to discuss if one man with a rifle but no vehicle constitutes a Motor Rifles brigade.