3 ms·
Why wouldn't they do fusion locally but also build a Dyson sphere? Doing only the former produces less energy than doing both the former and the latter. The vi
by csee 5y ago
Why wouldn't they do fusion locally but also build a Dyson sphere? Doing only the former produces less energy than doing both the former and the latter.
The view that they wouldn't do both is premised on the assumption that they won't need or want that much energy, combined with the assumption that the problem of disposing of the waste heat makes the extra energy not worthwhile.
- ncmncm 5y agoBecause building out a Dyson sphere is a hell of a lot of trouble to go to for something you manifestly don't need. "Why buy the loaf when you get free slices?"
- csee 5y agoThe word "need" is misplaced. It's not about need. It's about whether the upside of the additional energy is bigger than the downside of having to build the thing out. You're making an assumption that that upside is too small relative to that downside.
- ncmncm 5y agoYou assume that energy would still be considered a limiting resource. When you have overabundant energy, your choices are driven by other concerns. With plentiful energy, materials are cheap, dismantling moons and minor planets. The actually valuable commodity becomes cold, because high-energy processes produce waste heat that must be radiated away, so you move out to the Kuiper belt.