Dyson Spheres..

[der_scheme]

Any reaction is an explosion. The definition of an explosion is the sudden expansion of energy.

Sorry, but that is just wrong. Technically, as well as in general linguistic usage.

An explosion is a rapid increase in volume and release of energy in an extreme manner, usually with the generation of high temperatures and the release of gases.

(Source)

The nuclear reaction inside stars doesn't fit that definition, either.

 

[ltmauve]

Aside from the fact that their has to be something reacting as well. This is what they were talking about when they say "solar plasma"

 

[Incap]

An explosion is a rapid increase in volume and release of energy in an extreme manner, usually with the generation of high temperatures and the release of gases.

That is everything a star does...

Jesus Christ. What were stars in SG:U? Fucking big rocks on fire?

 

[Aecetym]

Any reaction is an explosion. The definition of an explosion is the sudden expansion of energy. A star is basically an explosion.

And SG:U was terrible.

I loved all SG series, SG:U was something fresh.

 

[Lecic]

That is everything a star does...

Jesus Christ. What were stars in SG:U? Fucking big rocks on fire?

I believe the point of the star thing in SG:U was to harvest hydrogen to fuel the ship.

 

[Incap]

I believe the point of the star thing in SG:U was to harvest hydrogen to fuel the ship.

Point taken, but they're acting like the very essence of a star is a physical thing. It'd be like trying to grab fire. Or nuclear fire.

Using an appropriate collector, it might, MIGHT be feasible to collect hydrogen particles that have escaped the star's gravitational pull. But then again, this is the technology that allows instantaneous travel between not only star systems, but galaxies as well.

Also, not all stars burn hydrogen as a fuel. Large ones burn Iron.

 

[rece ktore leczo]

Incap To be more scientifically correct, stars do not have solid core, do not increase in volume (until the end of their life), do not release gases upon "burning" and large ones burn iron, but at the end of their life, because fusing iron to heavier elements does not give more energy, instead it's using it.

But yeah, gathering any particles from star's surface could be hard and much easier way is to simply use solar panels or mine asteroid/planets.

 

[Incap]

Incap To be more scientifically correct, stars do not have solid core, do not increase in volume (until the end of their life), do not release gases upon "burning" and large ones burn iron, but at the end of their life, because fusing iron to heavier elements does not give more energy, instead it's using it.

But yeah, gathering any particles from star's surface could be hard and much easier way is to simply use solar panels or mine asteroid/planets.

Understand I'm not arguing about the absolute scientific nature of a star and the technicalities of their chemical makeup. All of that is moot, when the point I'm trying to get across is that it is a giant ball of constantly exploding nuclear fire.

 

[rece ktore leczo]

But Your point is wrong as the stars are not exploding. Except when they're dying.
And i'll leave "nuclear fire", whatever it is supposed to mean


Btw, earlier You were trying to convince others that stars have solid cores and bigger stars are mainly fueled by iron. If You are not sure if what You are saying is true, then please check Your knowledge before arguing.

 

[Incap]

But Your point is wrong as the stars are not exploding. Except when they're dying.
And i'll leave "nuclear fire", whatever it is supposed to mean


Btw, earlier You were trying to convince others that stars have solid cores and bigger stars are mainly fueled by iron. If You are not sure if what You are saying is true, then please check Your knowledge before arguing.

Oh piss off. Never said solid core. And an explosion is one of the main results of a reaction. It's a massive nuclear fusion furnace.

Condescending prat.

 

[der_scheme]

I find it awesome how burning candles are constantly exploding.

 

[Lecic]

Can we stop arguing about the exact chemical and physical make up of stars? The point is that you can't "scoop up" solar plasma like it's a liquid or some sand or something.

 

[Vakna]

What stellar material? A star is not a tangible object that you can just scrape a little off the top and haul it away. It's an enormous nuclear explosion in space, a furnace that burns millions of tonnes of hydrogen a second. The only solid part is the core. The very idea of harvesting a star itself is far beyond our comprehension and I really doubt it'll be something we see humans do for over a thousand years.

That's why we call it science fiction, the idea of building space ships that can cross the inter-stellar void in reasonable amount of time is also nothing more than a distant pipe dream to us - and yet..

There have been numerous sci-fi universes where it's denizens have actually havested solar plasma (the material that is the "ball of fire" we see). Of course, it wouldn't remain in plasma form for very long at all after being detached from the star (see solar flares), but again.. that's why we call it science fiction..

I can give you multiple examples of things that seem normal in popular science fiction universes that are far more ridiculous than simply harvesting the plasma of a star. But we digress...

 

[Vakna]

Oh piss off. Never said solid core. And an explosion is one of the main results of a reaction. It's a massive nuclear fusion furnace.

Condescending prat.

Are there no moderators in this forum? I swear, every thread this guy enters he seems to bring along a tidal wave of negative attitude - but this is just blatant being a jerk and flaming.

 

[Incap]

That's why we call it science fiction, the idea of building space ships that can cross the inter-stellar void in reasonable amount of time is also nothing more than a distant pipe dream to us - and yet..

There have been numerous sci-fi universes where it's denizens have actually havested solar plasma (the material that is the "ball of fire" we see). Of course, it wouldn't remain in plasma form for very long at all after being detached from the star (see solar flares), but again.. that's why we call it science fiction..

I can give you multiple examples of things that seem normal in popular science fiction universes that are far more ridiculous than simply harvesting the plasma of a star. But we digress...

Suuuuuure. Just like building a Dyson sphere is totally a practical thing to do.

Creating the conditions that result in stars and creating our own contained star is far more worthwhile and doable than scooping large chunks off with an ice cream scoop.

I find it awesome how burning candles are constantly exploding.

Are you really comparing something as small as a candle to something like a star...? Wow. Here's one for you. What do you think happens to make an atomic or hydrogen bomb explode?

 

[Lecic]

Are there no moderators in this forum? I swear, every thread this guy enters he seems to bring along a tidal wave of negative attitude - but this is just blatant being a jerk and flaming.

They were getting annoyed at the fact that a person was completely ignoring their actual argument, and instead focusing on smaller, less important details of their argument to try and wear down their argument as less credible.

The point of the matter is, harvesting solar plasma is stupid and pointless in a game with infinitely fueled reactors, and doesn't appear to be changing away form such a thing. Solar panels that produced large amounts of energy but needed to be turned towards the sun to work would be cool, though.

 

[Warboss612]

Actually I think I would make a Dyson Sphere for the sheer engineering challenge. I would not do it to get energy though, instead to make one with cities, and Terran like landscapes on the inside of it. I would like to recreate the Dyson Sphere from Freelancer (in Omicron Major).

Putting solar panels on the inside of it would just be more of a requirement from building such a massive thing and to keep it running. But there is no point to harvest the star for energy sense there is no solar panels in the game (yet, I think). Plus we can just use a bunch of power blocks and power tanks. It will cause quite a lot of lag too, but I would like to see how far one can get before lagging so much they are unable to simply go forward.

TL;DR: I would not make one to harvest energy, I would make one because it's fun, challenging, and cool. :D

 

[der_scheme]

Are there no moderators in this forum? I swear, every thread this guy enters he seems to bring along a tidal wave of negative attitude - but this is just blatant being a jerk and flaming.

You can get them in here by using that Report link at the bottom of the posts that annoy you.

Are you really comparing something as small as a candle to something like a star...? Wow.

No, I am invalidating your argument in general. In fact, that "comparison", as you'd call it, is directly derived from your claim that every reaction is an explosion. You can tell that this is false by taking a look at the Wikipedia quote above, or thinking about candles.
Here's your only choices:

1. Admit that you are wrong.
2. Claim that there's no reaction happening with a burning candle.
3. Make your farewell thread come true.
4. (see below)

Here's one for you. What do you think happens to make an atomic or hydrogen bomb explode?

4. Tell me that you have some kind of disorder that makes you incapable of reasoning. This is not an insult.

 

[Incap]

der_scheme
Really now? Name calling? Yeah, it's a condition called; "Moron who drags up irrelevant shit into a discussion as to why you can't just scoop up chunks of a fucking star." As compared to your own condition, hence named; "Pseudo-Intellectualism"

 

[rece ktore leczo]

Oh piss off. Never said solid core. And an explosion is one of the main results of a reaction. It's a massive nuclear fusion furnace.

Condescending prat.

Furnace is actually a good analogy. And bear in mind that furnaces do not explode.

If You weren't trying to prove other people that they are wrong, i wouldn't care, but when You start arguing without proper knowledge, i've tried to clear some not scientifically correct views on how the stars work. Without insulting.
And checking Your knowledge before convincing others to Your truth is what would made the internet better place.

Never said solid core.

The only solid part is the core.

Gotcha

What stellar material? A star is not a tangible object that you can just scrape a little off the top and haul it away. It's an enormous nuclear explosion in space, (...)

Well, it is tangible object. It would be very hard to gather anything from the surface of the star, but the outer layers (also the inner ones) are made from physical particles, mostly made from well known neutrons, protons and electrons.

Of course i do agree that much easier way to gather any elements would be to harvest asteroid or planets, especially gas giants, which mostly consist hydrogen. But if there is no such objects nearby, with advanced technology it may be possible to harvest matter from the stars.

Understand I'm not arguing about the absolute scientific nature of a star and the technicalities of their chemical makeup. All of that is moot, when the point I'm trying to get across is that it is a giant ball of constantly exploding nuclear fire.

Then do not start teaching people wrong theories. I really do not like when others are doing this.
When You are wrong, i have a right to prove that and tell how it really is. Going mad about this or saying "well, who cares?" isn't a great way to gather knowledge or even to discuss.

Can we stop arguing about the exact chemical and physical make up of stars? The point is that you can't "scoop up" solar plasma like it's a liquid or some sand or something.

The fact that it is a plasma probably makes it even easier to harvest, because plasma can be moved and shaped by electromagnetic field. Also after cooling down, plasma would turn into other states of matter, which would make it easier to storage.
The real problem would be getting close enough and creating magnetic field strong enough to overcome natural magnetic and gravity field of the star.

They were getting annoyed at the fact that a person was completely ignoring their actual argument, and instead focusing on smaller, less important details of their argument to try and wear down their argument as less credible.

Knowing how the stars work is an important knowledge, when trying to consider if solar mining is possible. Incap wasn't very scientifically correct, so i wanted to clear things up.

The point of the matter is, harvesting solar plasma is stupid and pointless in a game with infinitely fueled reactors, and doesn't appear to be changing away form such a thing. Solar panels that produced large amounts of energy but needed to be turned towards the sun to work would be cool, though.

If there would be reactors, which require fuel (probably could happen with mods), then i don't see a problem with this type of gathering fuel. It could be also done in other, different ways, but i don't see how this exactly is the "stupid" one.