A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Technology
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Starpower?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 8th 04, 02:22 PM
william mook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

The ultimate in solar collectors must be the deposition of solar
collectors onto the solar surface. The sun puts out 3.86x10^26 watts
of power. Distributed over a sphere whose radius is equal to the
radius of Earth's orbit this falls to a little less than 1,400 watts
per square meter. But on the solar surface this energy density
exceeds 60 megawatts per square meter! Clearly, if we could figure
out how to build useful devices that operate under the extreme
conditions of the solar surface, we could collect solar energy 40,000x
more efficiently than we can on Earth!

Any ideas?

The business model would be as follows;

(1) build a factory that makes the equipment that operates on the
solar surface.

(2) Launch the equipment in a rocket to Jupiter.

(3) Execute a gravity assist from Jupiter to cancel all orbital
motion, allowing the equipment to fall toward the sun.

(4) Somehow slow the equipment to survive its 'landing' on the solar
surface - perhaps using solar sails.

(5) Unfold the equipment on the solar surface, and beam 60 megawatts
per square meter to anyplace in the solar system (or beyond) you need
it.


Interesting things to keep in mind;

About the sun;
http://blueox.uoregon.edu/~jimbrau/a...r16.html#facts

About optics;
http://www.licha.de/AstroWeb/article...php3?iHowTo=16
http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~oliver/ast...copeoptics.htm

About astrodynamics;
http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/~larry/orb.../gravasst.html

(you can cancel orbital speed as well as add to it!)

A thin film system capable of operating on the solar surface could
process quite a bit of power. A square kilometer for instance has a
million square meters and could process over 60 trillion watts of
power. At a few grams per meter a 'sheet' this size could weigh only
a few tons. Something people could build today.

Using conjugate optics
http://www.futureworld.dk/tech/ether...n/phasecon.htm

It is possible to energize a thin film laser medium and then
interrogate that system with another laser, extracting a large portion
of the energy contained in that medium and delivering it to where its
required.

The accuracy which things can be delivered large distances are limited
by Rayleigh's limit;

Theta = 1.22 Lambda / Diameter

GREEN LANTERN OPTICS:

So, if lambda is 500 nm and diameter is 1 km then theta is;

Theta = 1.22 * 500e-9 / 1e3 = 5e-10 radians

Multiply this angle by 150 million km (1.5e9 m) and we can see that a
1 km diameter optically active film producing laser beams efficiently
on the surface of the sun could create a spot that's 0.75 meters
across on the surface of the Earth (capable of putting over 60
trillion watts into that space too - depending on laser and optical
efficiencies! But even an overall efficiency of 1% yeilds 600 billion
watts per square kilometer)

This is more energy than humanity currently uses. With the ability to
produce multiple beams we can deliver this energy to billions of users
simultaneously and power any manner of industrial or transportation
processes. Including space transportation systems.

A quadrillion watts - 1e15 watts - enough to power a starship
-requires 16 square kilometers. A circle 4.5 kilometers across on the
solar surface processes this much power.


Stretching our beam out to 1,000 AU from 1 AU, and noting the increase
in diameter, we can see that we can deliver this beam to a 'spot' 250
meters across 1000 AU from the sun. At this point, we can reflect the
beam around the sun and use the sun's own gravity to focus it reliably
any distance we like from the sun, to be used by owners of laser light
sails anywhere in the galaxy.

But of course, we need to figure out how to make something work
reliably on the solar surface. Which I haven't done.

Again, any suggestions?
  #2  
Old April 9th 04, 08:44 AM
Hermit
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

"william mook" wrote in message
om...
The ultimate in solar collectors must be the deposition of solar
collectors onto the solar surface. The sun puts out 3.86x10^26 watts
of power. Distributed over a sphere whose radius is equal to the
radius of Earth's orbit this falls to a little less than 1,400 watts
per square meter. But on the solar surface this energy density
exceeds 60 megawatts per square meter! Clearly, if we could figure
out how to build useful devices that operate under the extreme
conditions of the solar surface, we could collect solar energy 40,000x
more efficiently than we can on Earth!

Any ideas?

The business model would be as follows;

(1) build a factory that makes the equipment that operates on the
solar surface.

(2) Launch the equipment in a rocket to Jupiter.

(3) Execute a gravity assist from Jupiter to cancel all orbital
motion, allowing the equipment to fall toward the sun.

(4) Somehow slow the equipment to survive its 'landing' on the solar
surface - perhaps using solar sails.

(5) Unfold the equipment on the solar surface, and beam 60 megawatts
per square meter to anyplace in the solar system (or beyond) you need
it.


Interesting things to keep in mind;

About the sun;
http://blueox.uoregon.edu/~jimbrau/a...r16.html#facts

About optics;
http://www.licha.de/AstroWeb/article...php3?iHowTo=16

http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~oliver/ast...copeoptics.htm

About astrodynamics;
http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/~larry/orb.../gravasst.html

(you can cancel orbital speed as well as add to it!)

A thin film system capable of operating on the solar surface could
process quite a bit of power. A square kilometer for instance has a
million square meters and could process over 60 trillion watts of
power. At a few grams per meter a 'sheet' this size could weigh only
a few tons. Something people could build today.

Using conjugate optics
http://www.futureworld.dk/tech/ether...n/phasecon.htm

It is possible to energize a thin film laser medium and then
interrogate that system with another laser, extracting a large portion
of the energy contained in that medium and delivering it to where its
required.

The accuracy which things can be delivered large distances are limited
by Rayleigh's limit;

Theta = 1.22 Lambda / Diameter

GREEN LANTERN OPTICS:

So, if lambda is 500 nm and diameter is 1 km then theta is;

Theta = 1.22 * 500e-9 / 1e3 = 5e-10 radians

Multiply this angle by 150 million km (1.5e9 m) and we can see that a
1 km diameter optically active film producing laser beams efficiently
on the surface of the sun could create a spot that's 0.75 meters
across on the surface of the Earth (capable of putting over 60
trillion watts into that space too - depending on laser and optical
efficiencies! But even an overall efficiency of 1% yeilds 600 billion
watts per square kilometer)

This is more energy than humanity currently uses. With the ability to
produce multiple beams we can deliver this energy to billions of users
simultaneously and power any manner of industrial or transportation
processes. Including space transportation systems.

A quadrillion watts - 1e15 watts - enough to power a starship
-requires 16 square kilometers. A circle 4.5 kilometers across on the
solar surface processes this much power.


Stretching our beam out to 1,000 AU from 1 AU, and noting the increase
in diameter, we can see that we can deliver this beam to a 'spot' 250
meters across 1000 AU from the sun. At this point, we can reflect the
beam around the sun and use the sun's own gravity to focus it reliably
any distance we like from the sun, to be used by owners of laser light
sails anywhere in the galaxy.

But of course, we need to figure out how to make something work
reliably on the solar surface. Which I haven't done.

Again, any suggestions?


Keep taking the pills.



  #3  
Old April 9th 04, 04:12 PM
Ian Stirling
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

william mook wrote:
The ultimate in solar collectors must be the deposition of solar
collectors onto the solar surface. The sun puts out 3.86x10^26 watts
of power. Distributed over a sphere whose radius is equal to the
radius of Earth's orbit this falls to a little less than 1,400 watts
per square meter. But on the solar surface this energy density
exceeds 60 megawatts per square meter! Clearly, if we could figure

snip
But of course, we need to figure out how to make something work
reliably on the solar surface. Which I haven't done.


Trivial matter of engineering...
60Mw/m^2 is not a big problem.
A millimeter of copper will only have about 140C across it at 60Mw/m^2.

The problem is the cooling.
You can only radiate to the sky, no convection is possible.
It may be possible to get a hair under solar temperatures by using
coatings that are more efficiant radiators than the solar atmosphere
(no absorbtion bands) but you'r still looking at well over 5000K.

This is a problem, as everything melts at this temperature.

It's probably easier to move out a bit, as you'r not charged by
the square meter for solar surface.
  #4  
Old April 17th 04, 06:57 AM
william mook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

Ian Stirling wrote in message ...
william mook wrote:
The ultimate in solar collectors must be the deposition of solar
collectors onto the solar surface. The sun puts out 3.86x10^26 watts
of power. Distributed over a sphere whose radius is equal to the
radius of Earth's orbit this falls to a little less than 1,400 watts
per square meter. But on the solar surface this energy density
exceeds 60 megawatts per square meter! Clearly, if we could figure

snip
But of course, we need to figure out how to make something work
reliably on the solar surface. Which I haven't done.


Trivial matter of engineering...
60Mw/m^2 is not a big problem.
A millimeter of copper will only have about 140C across it at 60Mw/m^2.

The problem is the cooling.
You can only radiate to the sky, no convection is possible.
It may be possible to get a hair under solar temperatures by using
coatings that are more efficiant radiators than the solar atmosphere
(no absorbtion bands) but you'r still looking at well over 5000K.

This is a problem, as everything melts at this temperature.

It's probably easier to move out a bit, as you'r not charged by
the square meter for solar surface.


Well, following up on this idea.

The melting point of Copper is 1,357K the melting point of W is 3695K.
This translates to;

Solar Surface: 5770K 64 MW/m2 - Surface (400,000 km from center)
MP Carbon: 3800K 12 MW/m2 - 522,000 km (922,000 km from
center)
MP Tungsten: 3695K 10 MW/m2 - 610,000 km (1,010,000km from
center)
MP Copper: 1357K 195 KW/m2 - 6,830,000 km (7,230,000)

Still 50 million miles inside of Mercury's orbit..

Peak radiation color is;

Solar Surface: 5770K 502 nm Blue/Green
MP Carbon: 3800K 763 nm Dark Red
MP Tungsten: 3695K 785 nm Deep Red
MP Copper: 1357K 2,137 nm Infrared

A carbon film 1,000,000 km in radius and 1 micron thick would have a
volume of 12,566,370,614,359,172,953 cubic meters and weigh
28,487,962,182,752,245,086 metric tons.

A solid ball of carbon this size would have a diameter of 145 km.

A fancy carbon nanotube structure composed of lots of empty space
encompassing the sun might mass 1 quintillion tons which would be 48
km in diameter before deployment. Think of a wire mesh reduced to the
scale of carbon tubes.

Could we concievably process a ball of carbon 50 km across, and unfold
it to embrace the entire output of the sun?

Why not?

There is sufficient resources in the asteroid belt to do this -
carbonaceous chondrites would do nicely.

GaAs lasers would radiate at this wavelength. Carbon nanotubes could
be structured to emit laser light at any wavelength when energized.
Combined with conjugate optical techniques the bulk of this energy
could be made to radiate at any color or mix of colors anywhere.

And we could make use of the entire output of the sun!

Of course, we'd have to take care to keep the Earth and other planets
illuminated as they are now.

This is also a technique that could manage the increasing brightness
of the sun over the aeons - by controlling the output falling on Earth
and the other planets - its possible to maintain present conditions
for astronomical time periods.
  #5  
Old April 27th 04, 01:00 AM
william mook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

(Mike Miller) wrote in message . com...
(william mook) wrote in message om...

A carbon film 1,000,000 km in radius and 1 micron thick would have a
volume of 12,566,370,614,359,172,953 cubic meters and weigh
28,487,962,182,752,245,086 metric tons.


Are you sure of that mass?

I get the following volume for a 1-micron thick, 2 million kilometer
diameter disk:

Volume = (1,000,000,000 meters) x (1,000,000,000 meters) x Pi x
(.000001 meters)

Volume = 3,140,000,000,000 cubic meters.

With a density of 2000 kilograms per cubic meter (2 metric tons per
cubic meter), the mass is

Mass = 6,282,000,000,000 metric tons.

In a spherical form, that volume of carbon would have a diameter of
about 18km.

A micron is 1 millionth of a meter, right?

Mike Miller, Materials Engineer


Well, lessee, we all make mistakes...

Okay, I'm talking about a hollow sphere totally encompassing the sun
with a 1 million km (1e9m) radius. The area of a sphere that big is;

A = 4 * pi * r^2
= 12.566 * (1e9 m )^2
= 1.2566e19 m2

and 1 micron thick, (1e-6 m)

V = A * t = 1.2566e19 * 1e-6 = 1.2566e13 m3

That's 12 trillion cubic meters.

http://hypertextbook.com/physics/matter/density/

2,250 kg/m3 so, total mass is;


2.8274e16 kg or 2.8274e13 tonnes

which is what I think I calculated earlier. The diameter of a solid
sphere equal to 1.2566e13 m3 is;

V = 4/3 * pi * r^3 -- r = ( 0.75 * V / pi )^(1/3)

r = (0.75 * 1.2566e13 m3 / 3.14159)^.33333
= 14,422 m

Diameter of 30 km. Which is not what I got before, so that's
troubling. I think I slipped a digit last time.
  #6  
Old April 28th 04, 12:00 AM
Cameron Dorrough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

"william mook" wrote in message
om...

Well, lessee, we all make mistakes...

Okay, I'm talking about a hollow sphere totally encompassing the sun
with a 1 million km (1e9m) radius. The area of a sphere that big is;

{snip}


Just a sec... If your sphere contained solar cells of some kind that
absorbed even a tiny fraction of the stellar radiation, wouldn't it get kind
of *dark* back here on Earth?

..Perhaps even "life as we know it would cease to exist" kind of dark??

Cameron:-)


  #7  
Old April 28th 04, 11:19 AM
william mook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

Karl,

A 'structure' composed of trillions of mass produced 'cells' does have
an advantage, as long as all the 'cells' operate together optically.
Discrete structures separated by millions of meters can operate
together optically via conjugate optics, as described here;

http://ol.osa.org/abstract.cfm?id=7073

Not only can light be reflected from an array of discrete components
as if the entire array of components were operating as a single
optical element, but the reflected light can be amplified via laser
action;

http://ol.osa.org/abstract.cfm?id=8347

So, for these reasons I have assumed that the entire 'structure' -
regardless of how its assembled, acts as a single optical element 2
million kilometers - or 2 billion meters - in diameter.

So, the limits of resolution of a 2 billion meter diameter optical
element is easily computed.

http://www.mellesgriot.com/products/optics/gb_2_3.htm

The diameter of the airy disk is;

sin(theta-r) = 2.44 * lambda / r

and

r = 1e9 m
lambda = 1e-6 m

so

sin(theta-r) = 2.44e-15 ~ 2.44e-15 radians ~1.4e-13 degrees

This implies at various distances most of the energy (86.5%) will fall
within a disk of a particular diameter.

A light year is the distance light travels in one year. So, this is;

3e8 * 3600 * 24 * 365.25 = 9.467e15 meters

A spot that is

2.44e-15*9.467e15 = 23.1 meters in diameter

can be reliably illuminated by an optical element 2e9 meters in
diameter at this distance by 1 micron wavelength light. Tighter
resolutions can be achieved at higher wavelengths. Green light for
example would have an airy spot half this size.


Of course, illuminating smaller portions of the sphere reduces the
effective size of the optical element you're dealing with. Anyone in
the solar system requiring power would only need interrogate a small
portion of this 2 million kilometer diameter optical element.

A kilometer diameter sized spot could be formed to power a laser light
sail or laser sustained rocket up to 40 light years from sol at 1
micron and up to 80 light years from sol in green light. Up to 160
light years in UV. Response times could be a problem. Because you
must wait round trip times in one spot for the power to respond to
your request for it. In these instances it may be preferable to set
up automated equipment to deliver 'waves' of power - like a surf on
the beach - that repeat in well defined spaces and patterns. That way
to make use of the energy, all ships must do is communicate with the
automated equipment as to the times dates and places of the next
series of light surf.

Radio telescopes could communicate information great distances
allowing the coordination of deep space travel from star to star.
They could also allow the collection of electronic payment for use of
energy. So, fees could be collected from great distances
automatically over long periods of times. The size, scope and length
of time such economic entities could exist would be unprecedented in
human history. Against these vast economic powerhouses even present
day governments pale by comparison.

Of course, controlling the output of entire stars and reliably
delivering that output anywhere in a volume up to 100 light years from
that star is also unprecedented in human history. Such capacity would
give our species immediate access to the galaxy and would likely end
poverty as we know it. Although I would suspect poverty as we don't
know it now would likely continue.



(Karl Hallowell) wrote in message . com...
(william mook) wrote in message om...
Ian Stirling wrote in message ...
william mook wrote:
The ultimate in solar collectors must be the deposition of solar
collectors onto the solar surface. The sun puts out 3.86x10^26 watts
of power. Distributed over a sphere whose radius is equal to the
radius of Earth's orbit this falls to a little less than 1,400 watts
per square meter. But on the solar surface this energy density
exceeds 60 megawatts per square meter! Clearly, if we could figure

snip
But of course, we need to figure out how to make something work
reliably on the solar surface. Which I haven't done.

Trivial matter of engineering...
60Mw/m^2 is not a big problem.
A millimeter of copper will only have about 140C across it at 60Mw/m^2.

The problem is the cooling.
You can only radiate to the sky, no convection is possible.
It may be possible to get a hair under solar temperatures by using
coatings that are more efficiant radiators than the solar atmosphere
(no absorbtion bands) but you'r still looking at well over 5000K.

This is a problem, as everything melts at this temperature.

It's probably easier to move out a bit, as you'r not charged by
the square meter for solar surface.


Well, following up on this idea.

The melting point of Copper is 1,357K the melting point of W is 3695K.
This translates to;

Solar Surface: 5770K 64 MW/m2 - Surface (400,000 km from center)
MP Carbon: 3800K 12 MW/m2 - 522,000 km (922,000 km from
center)
MP Tungsten: 3695K 10 MW/m2 - 610,000 km (1,010,000km from
center)
MP Copper: 1357K 195 KW/m2 - 6,830,000 km (7,230,000)

Still 50 million miles inside of Mercury's orbit..

Peak radiation color is;

Solar Surface: 5770K 502 nm Blue/Green
MP Carbon: 3800K 763 nm Dark Red
MP Tungsten: 3695K 785 nm Deep Red
MP Copper: 1357K 2,137 nm Infrared

A carbon film 1,000,000 km in radius and 1 micron thick would have a
volume of 12,566,370,614,359,172,953 cubic meters and weigh
28,487,962,182,752,245,086 metric tons.

A solid ball of carbon this size would have a diameter of 145 km.

A fancy carbon nanotube structure composed of lots of empty space
encompassing the sun might mass 1 quintillion tons which would be 48
km in diameter before deployment. Think of a wire mesh reduced to the
scale of carbon tubes.

Could we concievably process a ball of carbon 50 km across, and unfold
it to embrace the entire output of the sun?

Why not?

There is sufficient resources in the asteroid belt to do this -
carbonaceous chondrites would do nicely.

GaAs lasers would radiate at this wavelength. Carbon nanotubes could
be structured to emit laser light at any wavelength when energized.
Combined with conjugate optical techniques the bulk of this energy
could be made to radiate at any color or mix of colors anywhere.

And we could make use of the entire output of the sun!

Of course, we'd have to take care to keep the Earth and other planets
illuminated as they are now.

This is also a technique that could manage the increasing brightness
of the sun over the aeons - by controlling the output falling on Earth
and the other planets - its possible to maintain present conditions
for astronomical time periods.


Rather than a single large structure, this is likely to be achieved by
a host of small structures. It makes it easier to pass light through
since one could orient the structures edgewise to the Sun whenever
they pass through the plane of the Solar system.

Care needs to be taken with Earth since the radiating structure would
still have the heat output of the Sun. That coupled with the
illumination that would be required means that the Earth gets heated
in two ways.

Power transportation is also a problem. Visible (or UV) light lasers
should be able to illuminate efficiently throughout the inner Solar
system, but it'll take significant surface area or higher frequencies
to beam power out to say Uranus (IMHO). Still dissipation appears to
be a problem to me particularly outside the Solar system. You will
need to find a better way to transport power there.


Karl Hallowell

  #9  
Old May 2nd 04, 08:41 PM
william mook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

(Mike Miller) wrote in message . com...
(william mook) wrote in message . com...
Okay, I'm talking about a hollow sphere totally encompassing the sun
with a 1 million km (1e9m) radius. The area of a sphere that big is;


Ah, I thought I read 2-million km diameter *disk,* not a sphere. I see
what you're getting at now.

Mike Miller, MatE


Light pressure can be used to support stationary cellular elements
above the solar surface at any distance. Since the light pressure and
gravitational attraction both scale as the inverse square of distance
from the sun's center, they the acceleration exerted by sunlight will
be the same at any distance.

A particle that absorbs perfectly all light falling on it from the Sun
will feel a force equal to;

f = pA = 3.56e-18 N

At 1 AU.

where, p = 4.53e-6 newtons/m2 at 1 AU

and where, for a 1 micrometer diameter particle projected area is;

A = 7.85e-13 m2

Now, the mass of a 1 micrometer diameter spherical particle with a
density of 1 gram/cc is its volume times its density;

m = 5.24e-16 kg

So, acceleration is equal to;

a= 6.79e-3 m/sec2

at 1 AU.

Now the gravitational acceleration is equal to;

a = f/m = GM/r^2

and at 1 AU this is equal to;

a = 5.92e-3 m/sec2

And the ratio (which is independent of R from the solar center) is;

1.15

Which explains why comet tails point away from the sun. The ice
particles of which they are composed are smaller than 1 um in
diameter.

Particles that are denser than ice, such as carbon particles, must be
smaller than 1 um to be supported by light pressure alone.

Structured carbon particles that interact with light to project
powerful laser energy in response to being illuminated with weaker
laser energy must be smaller than 386 nm in diameter in at least 1
dimension to be supported by light pressure.

A 'laser flake' of structured carbon that absorbs sunlight and
projects powerful laser beams in response to being illuminated by weak
laser beams that is 350 nm thick and perhaps a millimeter in diameter,
would have the capacity to navigate throughout the solar system if it
could control its transparency and reflectiveness.

With the ability to circulate a current around its edge, the 'laser
flake' would have added control by affecting the passage of solar
wind.

These cells would make a mass at 1 million km radius that is about
1/3rd the total mass computed earlier which assumed a shell 1 um in
thickness.

http://www.pcimag.com/CDA/ArticleInf...,76195,00.html

http://ol.osa.org/abstract.cfm?id=7877

Ceramic, rather than carbon, microspheres or micro flakes would likely
make better lasers that operate more efficiently at high temperatures
using less mass overall to encompass the sun.

In this scenario several asteroids of the appropriate composition
would be processed into microspheres and those spheres ejected from
the surface of the asteorid. Once free of the asteroid's gravity, the
microspheres would navigate to their operational radius and begin
operation. As the 'cloud' of 'flakes' accumulated, output of the
system would increase. One of the first uses of the systems output
would be to beam energy to the chosen asteroids so as to increase
their output by increasing the energy available to the automated
manufacturing processes.
  #10  
Old May 5th 04, 09:25 AM
Alex Terrell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starpower?

(william mook) wrote in message . com...
(Alex Terrell) wrote in message . com...
You would also heat up the sun, which would increase the rate of the
fusion, which would heat up the sun, which could go Nova.


Really?

Consider, two spherical surfaces one nested inside the other sharing a
common center. One is 800,000 kilometers across (the surface of the
sun) another 2,000,000 kilometers across (the surface of the power
shell).

Now, if the temperatures of each of the surfaces are such that the
amount of energy radiated from a sphere 2 million kilometers across is
equal to the amount of energy radiated from a sphere 800,000
kilometers across - there is no opportunity for energy to accumulate
in the sun, increasing rate of fusion presumably.

You are correct in the steady state. However, you are effectively
increasing the insulation of the sun. Therefore, to emit the same
amount of radiation, it needs to be hotter. However, if it's hotter,
it will emit more radiation. This will either stabilise at a hotter
sun, or be unstable and go nova.

Another way of looking at it: The spehere will reflect / reemit a
proportion (50%) of the energy it receives in the direction of the
sun. That has the effect of increasing the heat generated by the sun
by more than 50%.


But this begs an interesting question. Could one increase the rate of
fusion? (Nova's are something quite different see
http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/spa...rdeath_4a.html
)

This would brighten the star and increase total output of the sun.
Which could be interesting if more energy is needed. Could this be
done? I don't know. It does seem that if we have a sphere made of
reflectors that return energy to the sun, then the sun would heat up.
This is likely to result in an increase in the solar wind. Which
could be interesting. The solar wind might be harvested for raw
materials like hydrogen, helium, and other elements it contains.

But since it takes on the order of 10,000 years for energy to move
from deep inside the sun to the surface, it is likely to take equally
long for surface changes to affect deep processes like rate of fusion
(if it affects it at all!)

But it would be cool to be able to control illumination levels on each
of the planets while independently controlling stellar output over
some range. But, I'm not smart enough to figure out right now if this
will indeed happen. Maybe a solar astronomer can give us a clue.

One thing is for certain. Theconditions are not right for a nova.

It would shorten the life of the sun, but that life span is
fantastically long to start out with.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.