r/IsaacArthur

Both are made out of a Jupiter Brain or a Matryoshka Brain. The Subverse Time Machine simulates time travel with multiple branching, but only a limited number of multiple branches can be simulated at a time, so if you simulate an alternate outcome, you can continue simulating that alternate history from that outcome so long as you choose to devote resources to it. Simulating an entire galaxy means simulating all the star systems in that galaxy that you want, there is just one simulated reality here, the Galaxy is based on real world physics with some FTL loopholes added for convenience. If you don't know how to make a wormhole in the real universe, you just simulate one in the subverse that allows it to be transverse able.

Been thinking about something for awhile now. Initially it was a 9 emitter convergence array (microwave, THZ would be difficult) in a spherical boundary chamber (such as a 3D geodesic array mounted inside a dielectric sphere) vacuum back filled with penning gas. 3 emitters on the equatorial plane spinning (mechanical or electronic phase rotation) around the center 120° apart, 3 stationary on top and bottom tight triad formation and a picosecond (maybe femto) aimed at the focal point. (That's the high level quick and dirty.)

If the sphere's internal radius is sized to a multiple of your drive wavelength, the spherical boundary should create a standing electromagnetic wave. The EF vectors from all 9 emitters should constructively interfere at the geometric origin, forming an ultra-intense central E-field node. That should create a stable (sustainable?) ball/toroid of dense plasma correct? In other iterations I thought about using 6 spinning emmiters. 3 on the polar axis and 3 equatorial or adding an x axis cut quartz (MgO coating?) at the focal point but I think I'm doing to much here. I feel like more is possible with less. I'm not a scientist but it's been a persistent thought for a few years. Has anyone tried something like this?

Apologies if this is not the place for this if there's a better one please let me know.

I have basically no background in biology. I have spiky depth of knowledge in astrophysics, and a degree in electrical engineering, so please don't rip me to shreds if the following premise is objectively impossible.

I am writing a trauma epic into humanity's far future (30k years from present day) utilizing mostly known science to yield plausible technology in my world building for this. The only handwave being the ontological transfer for global consciousness downclocking within an ultra high relativeistic spaceships to enable human scale rapid transit at interstellar distances. I have built my world on a hybrid of loud and landaur engineering principles.

In chapter 9, far off the interstellar laser highway infrastructure - my protagonist ends up on the only earth-like colonized world in the whole story (most are toxic, vacuum, hostile, etc.).

I have decided to craft this currently unnamed world as a world that is only 45% covered with deep oceans (up to 29km deep in trenches). The land is a super contenent that stretches over both poles. The land has flora (plant like and tree like structures except its not wood its a chitonous-like material.

The haunting thing is: there is no land fauna. Only ocean fauna but not near the shallow shores.

Because I am about maximum plausability in my world building; is such a planet possible by any such mechanism, no matter how bizarre?

World specs are:

Atmosphere: 1.02 Atm

Gravity: 0.89g

Atmospheric Composition: 78.5%, nitrogen, 20.5% oxygen, 0.9% argon, 0.05% CO2, 0.05% trace gases

Land to Water Ratio: 55% L to 45% W

Maximum peak: 16.88km

Minima Trench: 29.1km

Our supposed brain trust in Silicon Valley has dumped over $1 trillion into data centers in the largest misalocation of capital of all time. "AI" amounts to negative return on investment in almost every case study. How did this happen?

Essentially we have an ideologically motivated cult that believes the only way to "progress" as a species is to brute force LLM's into becoming machine gods. The only logical conclusion I can come up with is that science fiction media has been for some time a psychological operation with the aim of convincing the population that this is feasible. We will not see this in our lifetime because it is not. It's not a question of being early; It's simply wrong.

I'm no luddite. Technology can, will and has improved our lives, however that is not the issue. Even Ted Kaczynski believed that science fiction was a harbinger for the near future. This fallacy has caused immeasurable damage and is currently the largest impediment to real human progress.

Historians and anthropologists have a concept called 'Presentism' which I think applies particularly well when speculating about the future.

Presentism is a term wherein present-day ideas, practices, and perspectives are introduced into the past. A good example of this is Whig history, where British historians wrote history in such a manner as to validate their own contemporary political beliefs instead of looking at objective historical context.

Historical presentism can also be slightly different, it is when you imagine the past by imagining the present minus something (say the automobile, or money), and then you try to cobble the past together using your present understanding. You start to imagine constructs that did not exist at all.

Now here is the crux: this exact fallacy can also apply to futurism! Here the situation becomes even worse because we have no objective historical context to work with, to throw off our present understanding of how things just work.

This is how you become trapped with eternal concepts, how things are today is how they have always been and will always be. This is even applicable to aliens living in totally different historical contexts. The only thing that changes is the (technological) objects which become subsumed or excluded from the present.

Everything you take for granted did not exist in the past in the way your understanding born from the present imagines it to be. Only with study of objective historical context can you approach fact.

Similarly, the future will not exist the way your present understanding of the world primes you to understand it. But here comes the biggest issue: there is no objective historical context to study. So I say be particularly careful when talking about the (far) future with present day ideas or practices or perspectives.

My world has Belters and where you find Belters you find asteroid mining. The problem is asteroids are mostly just balls of dust held together by their own weak gravity. There's nothing to anchor to, you can't carve bits off, trying to move it will cause it to disintegrate, the high grade ore is evenly mixed with worthless rock, you would probably sink if you tried standing on it.

So here's the bag and drag method:

Once a rock with a sufficient percentage of high grade has been found a balloon is put around the asteroid. to prevent dust from escaping or the entire thing breaking up, called spilling out in miner's slang. The mining is done by drones called moles which dig/swim through the asteroid siphoning up the dirt and mixing it with a fluid which is pumped back to the mothership. There the fluid is centrifuged, high grade is stored and tailings are bagged for disposal, the fluid is pumped back down to the moles.

High grade is carried back to the refinery, probably by towing it in bags hence the name. If the refinery is close by the bags could just be shoved towards it. Tailings are also bagged but are left at the worksite with navigation bouys to warn anyone nearby of the navigation hazard. After processing the refined ore is sent to market on an unmanned barge.

This method is mainly used for valuable resources like rare earths and phosphorous that justify the cost of shipping everything rather than just letting it float. Reaction mass is cheap but fusion fuel, crew salaries and operating costs of a mining torchship aren't. Low value resources like carbon, water, iron and nitrogen that are only profitable in bulk, or when a large amount of construction material is needed, would probably use a simpler method. In that case you might as well just bag and drag the entire rock, doesn't matter if it breaks up inside the bag since it'll be broken down anyway.

I'm still left with the question of how the mole bots will actually dig through the dust. I'm thinking some combination of very small thrusters and methods similar to how earthworms push their way through the soil.