5 ms·
Counter-intuitive number: The net energy production in the sun's core is about the same as what a mammal produces per cubic meter. So we're already there, we ju
by kabdib 14y ago
Counter-intuitive number: The net energy production in the sun's core is about the same as what a mammal produces per cubic meter. So we're already there, we just need more mammals. :-)
While fusion is indeed what powers the sun, we're trying to do something with fusion that's on a completely different scale.
- pavel_lishin 14y agoObligatory semi-XKCD: http://what-if.xkcd.com/4/ http://what-if.xkcd.com/4/
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- a-priori 14y agoNot according to my calculations. The sun's energy production is 3.846x10^26 W, nearly all of which is produced in its core which has a volume of 2.207x10^25 m^3. This gives the sun's core a power density of 17.43 W/m^3. The average human male has a basal metabolism rate of about 81.3W, with a volume of 0.0664 m^3. This gives an energy density of 1224W/m^3. So by volume, a human produces over 70 times the energy of the sun's core. (Source: Various queries to Wolfram Alpha.)
- laserDinosaur 14y agoWow, that's surprising.
- SilasX 14y agoSorry to get so late to this exchange, but that gets really interesting when put in perspective. I was reading this book that showed a correlation between: a) Net free energy flux per volume, and b) Complexity a) Is basically the measure being discussed here (free energy flux = useful energy that crosses the boundary) The author then listed a bunch of stuff in increasing order of a), and it roughly corresponds with our notions of complexity (or at least "interesting" or "directed" complexity, some similar concept). The list (smallest to largest) went about like this: Stars Planets (measured by change in energy of the light reaching vs leaving it) Life-bearing planet (only one example, obviously) Plants Fish Mammals (I'm skipping a few here) Humans Human brains Human societies Cars Airplanes Power plant turbines Airplane engines Computer chips (Pretty neat correlation)
- gte910h 14y agoThat's amazing, so the matrix was not that silly after all.
- gd1 14y agoOf course it was silly. Conservation of energy... There is no net gain, they would put energy (food) in to their 'human batteries' but it is impossible to get back any more than they put in. Complete nonsense.