The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 57 of 57
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    That page you linked to is also using Kepler's Third Law, like I did, but it notes this near the bottom of the first section:

    "The time to traverse half the distance R, which is the infall time from R along an eccentric orbit, is the Kepler time for a circular orbit of R/2 (not R), which is (1/32)1/2 times the period P of the circular orbit at R. For example, the time for an object in the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, to fall into the Sun if it were suddenly stopped in orbit, would be P / 32 {\displaystyle P/{\sqrt {32}}} P/{\sqrt {32}}, where P is one year. This is about 64.6 days."

    I'm not sure I understand what that means, but it suggests my calculation was essentially correct but I used the wrong multiplication factor--so this is saying that our hypothetical Persephone would take 126.5 years to fall in with its orbital period of 716 years, still *way* longer than the timescale implied in the novel.

    @halfeye: Kepler works just as well for circular orbits as for ellipses. The semimajor axis of a perfectly circular orbit is just its radius.
    Last edited by factotum; 2019-12-02 at 03:04 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Orc in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Feb 2015

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post

    I'm not sure I understand what that means, but it suggests my calculation was essentially correct but I used the wrong multiplication factor--so this is saying that our hypothetical Persephone would take 126.5 years to fall in with its orbital period of 716 years, still *way* longer than the timescale implied in the novel.
    If I remember the novel correctly, they had a couple of different methods for "immortality". So a war that takes centuries to resolve isn't ruled out.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Traab's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    right behind you

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidSh View Post
    If I remember the novel correctly, they had a couple of different methods for "immortality". So a war that takes centuries to resolve isn't ruled out.
    Even so you have to admit, "GASP! We only have 126 years to stop our sun from exploding! We are all going to die!" Doesnt seem very.... likely.
    "Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum"
    Translation: "Sometimes I get this urge to conquer large parts of Europe."

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd-o-rama View Post
    Traab is yelling everything that I'm thinking already.
    "If you don't get those cameras out of my face, I'm gonna go 8.6 on the Richter scale with gastric emissions that'll clear this room."

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tail of the Bellcurve
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Maybe I'm missing something, but if I can stop a planet, and want to kill everybody on a planet, wouldn't I just stop that planet?
    Blood-red were his spurs i' the golden noon; wine-red was his velvet coat,
    When they shot him down on the highway,
    Down like a dog on the highway,
    And he lay in his blood on the highway, with the bunch of lace at his throat.


    Alfred Noyes, The Highwayman, 1906.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by warty goblin View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something, but if I can stop a planet, and want to kill everybody on a planet, wouldn't I just stop that planet?
    Range.

    Again, the 'dark forest' hypothesis for alien relationships requires that species be able to destroy each other immediately upon detection. The central idea is that if it becomes known that some sapient species exists around a star they will be destroyed as soon as the speed of light permits said destruction to occur. However, depending upon how far away you are a planet may well be invisible no matter how good your instruments, but the star's position is quite obvious. So you attack the star.
    Resvier: a P6 homebrew setting

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by warty goblin View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something, but if I can stop a planet, and want to kill everybody on a planet, wouldn't I just stop that planet?
    I'm not familiar with the story in question, but I'd think that the people who lived on the planet might be able to do something about that - sounds to me like the story essentially has somebody strapping a giant rocket to the planet and then firing the rocket in such a manner as to cancel out the planet's orbital velocity and maybe give it a push towards the sun, which might be the kind of thing that you can't really do in the face of organized opposition.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    The giant rocket in question was using the atmosphere of the gas giant as fuel. It wouldn't really be possible to do that on a habitable planet. (OK, realistically it wouldn't be possible in a gas giant either because regular hydrogen is actually really, really difficult to fuse into helium, but it's less of a stretch than trying to fuse *oxygen*).

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tail of the Bellcurve
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Mechalich View Post
    Range.

    Again, the 'dark forest' hypothesis for alien relationships requires that species be able to destroy each other immediately upon detection. The central idea is that if it becomes known that some sapient species exists around a star they will be destroyed as soon as the speed of light permits said destruction to occur. However, depending upon how far away you are a planet may well be invisible no matter how good your instruments, but the star's position is quite obvious. So you attack the star.
    It seems to me that if you can launch a projectile at a star from across interstellar space, you can launch something that has an antenna hooked up to a computer that does a little bit of processing and aims at the planet with all the radio signals. Hell, launch a lot of them; rendering a planet utterly uninhabitable requires a lot less oomph than blowing up a star. Add a bit of coordination between your projectiles, and you can probably smash every reasonably large rocky body in the system into a twisted hellscape. Compared to the tech level necessary to fire a weapon between solar systems in the first place, this seems like kindergarten level stuff.
    Blood-red were his spurs i' the golden noon; wine-red was his velvet coat,
    When they shot him down on the highway,
    Down like a dog on the highway,
    And he lay in his blood on the highway, with the bunch of lace at his throat.


    Alfred Noyes, The Highwayman, 1906.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
    I've been saying for years that science fiction is dead. There's only space fantasy now.
    I think the reason is that once upon a time we were more optimistic about the possibility of space travel. It is increasingly obvious we aren't leaving, and things that were science fiction are now clearly impossible.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Vibranium: If it was on the periodic table, its chemical symbol would be "Bs".

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by warty goblin View Post
    It seems to me that if you can launch a projectile at a star from across interstellar space, you can launch something that has an antenna hooked up to a computer that does a little bit of processing and aims at the planet with all the radio signals. Hell, launch a lot of them; rendering a planet utterly uninhabitable requires a lot less oomph than blowing up a star. Add a bit of coordination between your projectiles, and you can probably smash every reasonably large rocky body in the system into a twisted hellscape. Compared to the tech level necessary to fire a weapon between solar systems in the first place, this seems like kindergarten level stuff.
    The ability to make effective course corrections while traveling at relativistic velocities is somewhat tricky. But yes, it is still probably viable to kill the planets with a proper engineering fix and requiring far less overall energy expenditure, but Cixin Liu needed stars to blow up as part of a plot point in The Dark Forest that blowing up planets wouldn't have fulfilled, so he blew up some stars.

    Quote Originally Posted by TVTyrant
    I think the reason is that once upon a time we were more optimistic about the possibility of space travel. It is increasingly obvious we aren't leaving, and things that were science fiction are now clearly impossible.
    There's still plenty of science fiction being written, much of its quite good. Heck, The Martian was written only a few years ago. It's just not as popular or perhaps as approachable as it used to be. Science fiction of the mid to late 20th century mostly focused on questions related to changes in the human condition that might be produced by macro-engineering technologies, of which space flight was merely the most prominent. However, recent development has moved toward micro-engineering products such as information technology and biotechnology and all their implications. These offer the potential to change the human condition on a considerably more fundamental level than the old technologies, and a considerable portion of the potential audience reacts to these possibilities with distaste and trepidation.

    For example, it is still quite possible that we will go to the stars, but it's becoming fairly clear that if we do so it won't be as flesh and blood entities. Instead it will be as brains in jars or digital people or perhaps it will be our AI creations that inherit the cosmos. This sort of thing appears to be far less appealing than tales of heroic daring by otherwise recognizable humans in the 'final frontier.' The accessibility level of something like Greg Egan's Diaspora is much, much lower than Star Trek, even though both are ultimately about exploring the cosmos and seeking to solve its mysteries.
    Resvier: a P6 homebrew setting

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Excession's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Blowing up a planet does not stop a space-faring civilisation from shooting back. In fact it pretty much guarantees that they will try to. The trick then is changing a single relativistic projectile into something that scorches the whole system. You don't want to miss a few asteroid habitats, or you'll be facing return fire in a few centuries.

    The idea, it seems, is to hit the star hard enough, and in the right way, to stop fusion in the core briefly. The outer layers of the star will then start falling inward. By the time fusion restarts the inertia of those layers means it will start big. The resulting nova then cleanses the whole system for you.

    On the bright side, if this was happening I suspect we would see it. The explosion would be bright, but noticeably smaller than we could explain with physics.
    Last edited by Excession; 2019-12-05 at 02:42 AM.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Mechalich View Post
    For example, it is still quite possible that we will go to the stars, but it's becoming fairly clear that if we do so it won't be as flesh and blood entities.
    That's been fairly clear ever since Einstein formulated his theories of relativity more than a century ago now. Any time an SF writer invoked hyperspace, warp drive, wormholes or whatever they're using something known to be impossible. I think this is why the likes of the Expanse is set entirely within the Solar System, because that's more realistic (even if it requires impossibly efficient fusion drives to make the whole thing work).

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2010

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post
    That's been fairly clear ever since Einstein formulated his theories of relativity more than a century ago now. Any time an SF writer invoked hyperspace, warp drive, wormholes or whatever they're using something known to be impossible. I think this is why the likes of the Expanse is set entirely within the Solar System, because that's more realistic (even if it requires impossibly efficient fusion drives to make the whole thing work).
    Warping space (say via wormhole or Alcubierre metric) still presents theoretical possibilities for faster than light travel.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Chen View Post
    Warping space (say via wormhole or Alcubierre metric) still presents theoretical possibilities for faster than light travel.
    So does time travel if it is possible. Go back in time, space moves back as far as it was, move a bit, move forward in time to when the thing you want to get to will be there.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Vibranium: If it was on the periodic table, its chemical symbol would be "Bs".

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Chen View Post
    Warping space (say via wormhole or Alcubierre metric) still presents theoretical possibilities for faster than light travel.
    Any actual FTL travel, regardless of the means it is achieved, is not possible per Relativity because it would then be possible to set up a reference frame in which causality was violated (e.g. the cause of an event occurs after said event).

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2007

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post
    Any actual FTL travel, regardless of the means it is achieved, is not possible per Relativity because it would then be possible to set up a reference frame in which causality was violated (e.g. the cause of an event occurs after said event).
    Not quite: causality will still work just in a way that makes you have a headache. There are even publications explicitly solving simplified versions of grandfather paradox for example (ball is thrown into a wormhole and hits itself off the course so it never enters the portal in the first place). Those situations only show that you cannot find the solution in an iterative manner but they still exist. Worse yet: one of the most elegant interpretations of quantum electrodynamics requires you to consider antimatter as regular matter moving back in time and in this case virtual particles are simply ontological loops (they exist, because they made themselves exist in the past).
    In a war it doesn't matter who's right, only who's left.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post
    That's been fairly clear ever since Einstein formulated his theories of relativity more than a century ago now. Any time an SF writer invoked hyperspace, warp drive, wormholes or whatever they're using something known to be impossible. I think this is why the likes of the Expanse is set entirely within the Solar System, because that's more realistic (even if it requires impossibly efficient fusion drives to make the whole thing work).
    Um, you do know that the Expanse has branched out into other star systems using alien created wormholes, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Radar View Post
    Not quite: causality will still work just in a way that makes you have a headache. There are even publications explicitly solving simplified versions of grandfather paradox for example (ball is thrown into a wormhole and hits itself off the course so it never enters the portal in the first place). Those situations only show that you cannot find the solution in an iterative manner but they still exist. Worse yet: one of the most elegant interpretations of quantum electrodynamics requires you to consider antimatter as regular matter moving back in time and in this case virtual particles are simply ontological loops (they exist, because they made themselves exist in the past).
    Some of the tests they have been doing with the double slit experiment have really been playing games with quantum physics (even worse than normal). The Delayed Choice Double Slit experiment gave results that the particles acted as if they were being observed before they actually were observed. (Result of an action being taken before action the action took place.) The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Double Slit gave results that indicate the particles "chose" the path they took after they ended the journey. No such thing as time?
    Last edited by HandofShadows; 2019-12-06 at 02:46 PM.
    Member of the Giants in the Playground Forum Chapter for the Movement to Reunite Gondwana!

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by HandofShadows View Post
    No such thing as time?
    I'd believe that. I mean, everything we use to observe time is just motion and/or entropy.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  19. - Top - End - #49
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    I'd believe that. I mean, everything we use to observe time is just motion and/or entropy.
    Obviously, there is such a thing as time. Only the term we use to describe it - 'time' - doesn't describe seconds and hours, but rather motion, entropy, our accumulation of memories and the inexorable march towards becoming fertilizer.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by HandofShadows View Post
    Some of the tests they have been doing with the double slit experiment have really been playing games with quantum physics (even worse than norma)... The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Double Slit gave results that indicate the particles "chose" the path they took after they ended the journey. No such thing as time?
    Step two technology technology test for the infinite probability drive IMO.

    Step one being hot tea.


    As for destroying a star. Compressed star plasma is phenomenally dense....like slows light down to the point of taking 10K years to make it the radius of our sun distance (very very not a straight line).
    Hiting it with a relativistic object could make a powerful energy event at the surface of the star which could well mess up civilizations, but unless your object is, say a black or brown dwarf I'm not seeing how that would work.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaptin Keen View Post
    Obviously, there is such a thing as time. Only the term we use to describe it - 'time' - doesn't describe seconds and hours, but rather motion, entropy, our accumulation of memories and the inexorable march towards becoming fertilizer.
    I suppose the question is; is there a difference between time and the motion of particles? All of the physical changes in the world seem to ultimately boil down to particles being in different locations and/or types.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  22. - Top - End - #52
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by AvatarVecna View Post
    You fool. You insolent coward. The only way to kill a star simply and quickly is to maneuver a Cosmic Candle Snuffer into place, and the star's fires will run out of oxygen.
    I mean you're not actually wrong.

    If you could introduce a sufficient mass of iron into a star you'd interrupt the fusion process and it would go out (quite violently).

    Of course "a sufficient mass" would be ~8 times the mass of the star (for a main sequence G class like our sun).

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2010

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by GloatingSwine View Post
    I mean you're not actually wrong.

    If you could introduce a sufficient mass of iron into a star you'd interrupt the fusion process and it would go out (quite violently).

    Of course "a sufficient mass" would be ~8 times the mass of the star (for a main sequence G class like our sun).
    I guess if you put enough 9s in your fraction of light speed you could get an object's mass that high....course if you could actually do that presumably you have much simpler ways of destroying a civilization.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lord Torath's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Sharangar's Revenge
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by GloatingSwine View Post
    Of course "a sufficient mass" would be ~8 times the mass of the star (for a main sequence G class like our sun).
    A you sure about that being 8 solar masses of iron required to shut down fusion? I'm pretty sure if you gathered only 3 solar masses of iron into a sphere you'd have a black hole in short order, without the need to introduce it to a star.

    Edit: Wikipedia tells me the maximum mass for a neutron star is only 2.16 solar masses. Anything more than that will collapse into a black hole unless it's got fusion (or something else) going on in its core to provide enough energy to prevent it.
    Last edited by Lord Torath; 2019-12-10 at 11:15 AM.
    Warhammer 40,000 Campaign Skirmish Game: Warpstrike
    My Spelljammer stuff (including an orbit tracker), 2E AD&D spreadsheet, and Vault of the Drow maps are available in my Dropbox. Feel free to use or not use it as you see fit!
    Thri-Kreen Ranger/Psionicist by me, based off of Rich's A Monster for Every Season

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    California
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Chen View Post
    So I've been reading Cixin Liu's Rememberance of Earth trilogy (The Three Body Problem, The Dark Forest, Death's End) and was wondering about some of the science in it.

    At several instances in the trilogy extremely high veloctity objects are used to destroy stars (and the planetary systems around them). Essentially extremely fast relativistic kinetic kill vehicles, but targetted at the solar system's stars rather than a planet directly. It mentions when one of these objects impacted the star it "tore a hole through the photosphere and the convection zone" that was ~50k km in diameter. In the end it resulted in lower pressure in the core (stuff was being expelled from this "hole") and eventually lead to collapse and stellar explosion.

    I'm wondering if this is actually what would happen? Is it just somewhat technobabble or could it really occur?
    At a basic level, all stars are trying to destroy themselves constantly. They're not finely-tuned machines, they're completely chaotic messes of gas and plasma that are forced into their current shape by the fact that even the ridiculously high energy fluctuations of a stellar core can't get over the energy barrier to a different state.

    So to really, significantly change what a star looks like is going to require energy levels and/or mass at least on the same order of magnitude as the stellar output. Even Jupiter is only 1/1000 of the Sun's mass; you'd either need something far larger than Jupiter using gravity, or you'd need an accelerator that had solar-levels of energy inputs.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Quote Originally Posted by Sermil View Post
    At a basic level, all stars are trying to destroy themselves constantly. They're not finely-tuned machines, they're completely chaotic messes of gas and plasma that are forced into their current shape by the fact that even the ridiculously high energy fluctuations of a stellar core can't get over the energy barrier to a different state.

    So to really, significantly change what a star looks like is going to require energy levels and/or mass at least on the same order of magnitude as the stellar output. Even Jupiter is only 1/1000 of the Sun's mass; you'd either need something far larger than Jupiter using gravity, or you'd need an accelerator that had solar-levels of energy inputs.
    After they self-destruct, where are the pieces? Are they still in the universe?The latter fell to earth.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Germany

    Default Re: Destroying a star

    Exploding stars turn into an enormous cloud of gas that expands and becomes thinner as it spreads out until it's barely detectable. The core of the star remains behind as either a white dwarf, neutron star, or black hole, depending on how much mass it has.
    When the star explodes in a supernova, it also converts a significant amount of mass into pure energy in the form of an extremely bright flash of light.
    We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.

    Beneath the Leaves of Kaendor
    Undreamed Ages - A forum for Sword & Sorcery literature and art

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •