Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Timothy Collinson (16 May 2025 16:40 UTC)
Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Alex Goodwin (17 May 2025 05:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Timothy Collinson (17 May 2025 17:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Alex Goodwin (17 May 2025 17:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Timothy Collinson (18 May 2025 14:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Alex Goodwin (19 May 2025 03:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Timothy Collinson (19 May 2025 11:06 UTC)

Re: [TML] Dyson Spheres (New Scientist 17.5.25) Alex Goodwin 19 May 2025 03:42 UTC

> Oh, have I not shared this?  (or at least this in its current state)
>
> Here's the 6800s of my classification scheme.  You'll see the Kessler
> Cascade newly installed at 6805.9 if that helps.
> I've also added 'technosignatures' from the article at 6801.5 which
> seems like a good place for it.
>
> cheers
>
> tc
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>          6805 Megastructure Engineering Problems
>
> 6805.1 Material Acquisition
>
> 6805.12 Shell Thickness
>
>             6805.15 Materials Technology
>
> 6805.17 Assembly Technology
>
> 6805.2 Impact Protection
>
> 6805.3 Structural Stresses
>
> 6805.4 Radiative Pressure / Radiative Thrust
>
> 6805.5 Heat Dissipation
>
> 6805.6 Orbital Balancing / Gravitational Instability
>
> 6805.62 Stellar Oblateness
>
> 6805.64 Stellar Companions
>
> 6805.66 Stellar Flybys
>
> 6805.7 Active Maintenance
>
> 6805.8 Swarm Collision
>
>             6805.85 Thermalization
>
> 6805.9 Kessler Cascade
>
>          6806 Overpopulation
>
>             (see also Terraforming 6710 Planetary Assessment and
> Selection)
>
>             (see also Terraforming 6752 Long-Term Settlement Planning)
>
> 6806.2 Mortality Rates
>
> 6806.4 Management
>
> 6808.8 Ethical Issues
>
> <snip>
Few queries here:
1.  As a Kessler cascade is (by _definition_) collisional , shouldn't
that be a subpart of 6805.8, as you've got it currently?
2.  What counts as "overpopulation" on a Dyson megastructure?
After all, it would seem the carrying capacity of such a structure to be
somewhat in excess of a planet (see previous emails).
If carrying capacity of a 1 AU Dyson shell is 550 septillion (for
instance), then it would be _under_populated by 400 septillion
blathering yammerheads.
3.  Would ringworlds count as a degenerate form of a Dyson sphere in
your taxonomy, or are they different enough to merit their own type (not
fully enclosing their primary)?
4.  Even though it's definitely not Trav, I'd like to see you restore
6803, perhaps under the new name of "Intelligent Super Objects".  For an
example, https://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4667775c449b2 and its links.

Alex