Will humans ever become a type II civilization?

your mom has a very flexible, wobbly ring

What website does these posts? They suddenly started many years on Veeky Forums and there's always just 1 post about that type of joke. They are very consistent and normally unwarranted. I've not seem as many in the past couple of years though.

Is the definition of a Dyson sphere to be a literal sun surrounding sphere?
>>So, what % of the star's energy does the device need to capture to still be called a Dyson sphere and fall into the definition of being a Type II Civilization?
The civilization chart just says "capture the energy of a star" so who the fuck actually knows.
I can't even imagine what that energy would be useful for other than some sort of acceleration gate to accelerate ships to sanic speed.

>>The only way I can think of harnessing 100% of the energy of a star would be to make independent, overlapping rings that are spinning. They would be multiple levels deep. The outer rings would barely get any of the energy and would be there only to sweep up the last of it.

If it were a sphere made of magic materials that didn't break, it would capture 100% of the energy anyways, after that it would be down to efficiency of the panels.

>>But, that only takes into account a single stable gravity well. Add planets to the mix and suddenly your solar-sized mega structure rips itself apart due to tidal forces.

Very true. Would there not be a way of counter balancing this with some sort of mass, like on the end of a crane? Not pulling but just using its inertia to keep the object in place,

>>Also the distance you'd need the rings to be from the star would be on planetary orbit scales.

I think that's the point, but again I'm not sure because my extend of orbital mechanics knowledge is all from Physics 2.

>Is the definition of a Dyson sphere to be a literal sun surrounding sphere?

It needs to capture all or "most of" the star's energy. Which doesn't help anything.

>I can't even imagine what that energy would be useful for

Basically, everything life uses the sun's energy for on Earth. photosynthesis, electric generation, heat capture, etc.

>magic

Well, use your imagination then.

>counter balancing

On this scale, I'd imagine they'd just remove the planets and not give a damn about anything else. Like vaporizing comets and such with their uber sun powered lazers. That would fix gravity problems and everything else.

Here's another idea. Scratch the sphere completely and the rings. Instead make individual power plants floating in space. Have them orbit the sun at a distance that is optimal. Make so many that they completely cover the sun. They'd look like swarm of floating cities perhaps, dipping in and out of the star's radiation, taking turns from being inside to being outside. This would still use 100% of the star's energy, but be much more forgiving in every regard. you could even keep the planets and erratic comet/asteroid orbits since the cities would merely float around them as needed.

>>his would still use 100% of the star's energy, but be much more forgiving in every regard. you could even keep the planets and erratic comet/asteroid orbits since the cities would merely float around them as needed.

Would a viable way of getting energy from one spot to another be Microwaves? Having fucking miles of copper cables floating in space is obviously not viable.

Other than for communication, I doubt they'd need to share energy, but if they did, they could use any number of wireless methods. It'd be better if they were more independent and only did that during an emergency.

what is actually wrong with you

You weren't here for the mompocalypse. It was probably a bot though. Every single thread ever created during that month has a "well your mom" posts as the 1st reply on several, but not all of the boards.

>building a shell, ring, etc around a star
>not just disassembling the star itself to extract energy from baryon annihilation

Come on, people...step up your game.

We won't even make it to type 1. We will exterminate ourselves and destroy the biosphere well before them.

...

Go choke on a pot brownie, hippie.

>soon
>ever
>so no

Dyson Spheres don't work.
1. Every comet would destroy it.
2. What are you gonna build it out of? Let's say it shall have a radius of 2.8 AU, the distance between the sun and the asteroid belt. So Earth and Mars as living quarters will be enclosed by it and you have at least some material to start construction right where you need it. But a sphere with that radius and a thickness of just 3cm with an average density of that of silicon is more than three times as heavy as the Earth. But the asteroid belt has just 5% of the mass of Earth's moon.

Not likely. Technological civilization is built on and highly dependent on cheap hydrocarbon energy. The energy returns (EROEI) has been declining since the mid-1800s. If we could access another 100:1 energy source, we would destroy ourselves.

stupid thread

i guess so but even so it would be impossible to balance reliably. and you simply can't construct it either, you would need like 3 or 4 giant planets worth of mass to build it

>breeding

Why on earth would you take the long route that will result in lowered IQ?

Guess what happens next

who cares about iq? no scientists

Please go back to /b/

>Nothing will become a type two system. That is completely stuff.

We already have several candidates
home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Fermilab_search.htm
The sensitivity was 1 Jansky while the angular resolution was 1 minute. Starting from a 250,000 source sample sources were discarded if the IRAS flux quality for the 12 and 25 μm filters only corresponded to an upper limit. This left 10982 sources. The search focused on a temperature range of 100 to 600 �K leaving about 6521 sources. No cut was made on proximity to other sources. By doing this partial Dyson spheres were not ruled out. As noted on the Dyson Sphere look-alike page there are several natural surrogates that are difficult to rule out. Several cuts were used on the LRS sample to focus in on a Dyson Sphere signature. These included temperature, classification, and visual scans in SIMBAD. This led to a sample of 17 weak and ambiguous candidates..

Yet, we lack the scientific, engineering, and manufacturing competence to even broach the challenge. Doom and gloom dogma aside, we could just use less energy, or at the very least, stop egregiously wasting it. Something like 15% of the energy powering the internet is used to watch cat videos.

Or we could use more energy.
Anyway fossil fuels will last us 500 more years at least.
BURN UP BABY.

You obviously aren't aware of resource depletion. The low hanging fruit is gone. What's left is the difficult to extract, difficult to refine. When oil was seeping out of the ground, you could invest one barrel of oil and yield several hundred in return (known as EROEI). In the 1930s, the return was down to 100:1. In the 1970s, 30:1. Around the year 2000, 10-15:1. The ground is running up to meet us.

Once Antarctica melts up, we will have easy access to continent full of mega oil fields and coal deposits.

So you're saying enjoy and use as much of these cheap abundant resources while I can because tomorrow it will even more expensive and much scarcer?

Gotcha! Livin' like there's no tomorrow starting today!

Bound and governed by economics ultimately. The average breakeven on a barrel of oil is $60-80; some places it's $100 or more. Brent is trading around $45. Market prices dictate investment in new projects. Many have been postponed or cancelled due to depressed prices. Once the excess is worked out, there won't be enough new supply to keep up with demand and the price will spike worse that 2008. The economy can't handle oil at more than $100 a barrel, maybe not even $80, and it will crash again. So too will prices killing those projects again.

Learn to live without it. Learn to grow food. Get over the stigma that it's only for the proletariat. 90% or more of the population will be directly involved in agriculture in the future.

Assuming the fallout is manageable.

If we started getting close to that, we probably wouldn't be using the Kardashev Scale to classify ourselves. There would like be several different gauges, scales and ratios far more complex than this extremely vague yet narrow outline.

Oil from Antarctica mega oil fields will be cheap as $40 per barrel.
Also there is huge tonne of oil in shale deposits.

If the bombs fall, it's over. Primary concern is around reactors going critical and radiation getting picked up by the jet stream.

According to historian Joseph Tainter's book Collapse of Complex Societies, there's been 23 distinct human civilizations throughout the course of history. This excludes isolated groups like indigenous tribes. Out of the 23, 22 have failed. Statistically, this represents a 95% probability that society will collapse. Especially given the notion that our present economic paradigm is built on continuous growth. Sustained quarters of flat or negative GDP growth will have disastrous consequences. Alas, infinite growth is not possible on a finite planet.

It will probably collapse in several stages coinciding with spikes in the energy market. After which, each new "normal" will be a less complex arrangement than before. We are a globalized society, so as trade breaks down with China, tensions will increase correspondingly. WWIII will be a resource war; a desperate last gasp to control the last remaining deposits. If we can avoid nuclear warfare, we have a chance at longterm survival. At which point, we only have to manage decommissioning the >400 nuclear reactors worldwide as centralized power distribution is not a sustainable model with an ailing electrical grid that's too costly to repair. Infrastructure will decay; you already see it with bridges.

It takes a while to work through the Kubler Ross model, but I don't think the depression ever really goes away.

>Learn to live without it. Learn to grow food. Get over the stigma that it's only for the proletariat. 90% or more of the population will be directly involved in agriculture in the future.

Oh look it's a peaker, how cute.

If you want to discuss oil peak myth /x/ is this way----->

>If we started getting close to that, we probably wouldn't be using the Kardashev Scale to classify ourselves. There would like be several different gauges, scales and ratios far more complex than this extremely vague yet narrow outline.

There is a more detailed Kardashev Scale from what I remember.

No way will it be that cheap.

Shale oil or oil shale? Do you know the difference? Oil shale is kerogen which is rock. You can't drill it, you mine it like coal. Shale oil? Do you have any idea what the decline rates are on those wells?

>Alas, infinite growth is not possible on a finite planet.
Peaker cult still doesn't realize that the planet is not flat, and we live in an infinite universe.

Also we have barely started to scratch the surface of this planet.

>. WWIII will be a resource war; a desperate last gasp to control the last remaining deposits

What last remaining deposits?
Coal deposits are abundant and can last for 1000 years.
Plenty of shale oil.
Antarctica isn't even exploited.
We haven't begun even to drill boreholes for energy.
>its. If we can avoid nuclear warfare, we have a chance at longterm survival.
Nuclear war wouldn't destroy civilization, some areas would be destroyed others would be set back to early 20th century tech level. The rest(South America, parts of Asia, Africa) would be fine.
We are unstoppable and we are going rape Earth till it bleeds dry. Our human cock has barely entered Earth's pussy and we are going to ram it HARD.

It's easier to live in denial. I envy you.

Whatever peaker cultist.

You're on your own. You want to live in the delusion and that's fine. Go mine some asteroids with unproven technology and bring back all those resources in infeasible and impractical ways. Believe the ruse: technology is magic because you don't understand a bit of it.

Can't wait to DRILL IT.

Buahahaha, posting peaker religious texts and imagery.
They don't even realize that a whole continent and whole Arctic area are unexploited and waiting to be DRILLED.

Since when is Antarctica an asteroid ?
Buahahahhaahhaah.
Peaker pussies.

I suggest reading more. Learning the scientific method. Learn propositional logic.

First homework assignment: learn the difference between resources and reserves.

theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/08/china-antarctica-trip-icebreaker-snow-dragon

Brady adds that the energy needs of many nations in 2048 will differ from today. If predictions about Antarctica's 200 billion barrel oil capacity prove correct, the continent's reserves would be third largest in the world, according to the Lowy Institute. Fresh water is also abundant. As persistent high temperatures melt ice from the 1.5m sq km of coastal shelf, scavenging could become a reality in a water-hungry world.

No worries peaker, I am sure your cult has an answer to that too.

Also, it's important to not get emotional. Realize that energy is complex subject that requires deep analysis to fully comprehend. A few JPEGs and news articles pale in comparison to pulling datasets off USGS, EIA, IEA... Geopolitics is also important. You might want to take night classes in business and learn how to read balance sheets.

Apply to yourself cultist.

Also I like how you started backtracking and no longer deny that we have plenty of oil left.....

Did you research resources vs reserves. You can also break that down into what is economically recoverable. No one is backtracking. You lack the requisite education to have a argument.

It's interesting who devolved into madness and name calling...
> Oh look it's a peaker, how cute.
> We are unstoppable and we are going rape Earth till it bleeds dry. Our human cock has barely entered Earth's pussy and we are going to ram it HARD.
> Whatever peaker cultist.
> Peaker pussies.

You may want to study proper etiquette as well. This type of behaviour is unbecoming and undermines your argument by disproving a rational basis. Your cortex is built on top of your limbic system, but don't let it control you.

sounds good user!

because we definitely knew what to do with the last few billion....

but this few billion, its, its gonna be different! we swear!

>last few
>few
>last

It's just the tip of the iceberg baby.

We got Antarctica, we got Arctic, we got shale.....
We got hundreds of years of fossil fuel left.
And then to Titan baby!
DRILL AND BURN!

pull elons cock out of you ass user. its time for ass to mouth

Population explosion is due to fertilizer, not energy consumption. Fritz Haber who invented the methods used in industry to synthesize ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen gases is the one to thank for the unprecedented population explosion, though I'm sure someone else would have figured out how to do it eventually. You can also thank him for weaponizing gases like chlorine.

Thus, population explosion and weaponizing gases are his claim to historical fame. Both of which spell doom for humanity; though the former far more so than the latter ever would.

>We already have several candidates

Not at all, not even close.

You would never want to build a Dyson Sphere, because for much less effort you could mine the Sun for resources and use that more efficiently in your own technology.

>Not at all, not even close.
Nasa scientists say otherwise /x/fag

>Something like 15% of the energy powering the internet is used to watch cat videos.

Can you imagine what humanity would be like if it didn't dick around on purely pleasure/escapism pursuits? Like, how focused it would be and what it could accomplish.

And after that dries up? The only true constant seems to be the sun. Figuring out ways to harness that which do not require something that needs to be replaced all the time is the best long term goal. Because even the minerals used to make photovoltaics have to come from somewhere are get used up and need to be replaced eventually.

Long term energy sources will probably come from a rather large looping system that uses photosynthesis technologies.

>Learn to grow food. Get over the stigma that it's only for the proletariat. 90% or more of the population will be directly involved in agriculture in the future.

That needs to be done now, without direct incentive to do so via war or whatever thing is to come to wreck the current easily-wreckable system.

>peeker cultist

Sure thing, kid.

>scientists say

That's a popscience retort. Do you even know what was posted in ? It is not what you think.

Civilization depends on slavery (what we call "work" today). You can think of hydrocarbons as liquid slavery. Something we can extract a lot of work from without putting in almost any work ourselves. Once this is gone, we're through as an "advanced" civilization, and you can say hello to literal slavery once again.

I AM the scientists. What now, boy?

>mine the Sun
>mine something that has a surface temperature of 5,777 K
>Carbon sublimes in a carbon arc which has a temperature of about 5,800 K

That's something I'd like to see myself. I wonder if a carbon crucible/tube and support structure could survive the velocity needed to escape the sun let alone actually be able to scoop up something.

Very true. At least we will still have the knowledge and technology to turn slavery into literal energy more efficiently than past pre-hydrocarbon civilizations were able to do.

or

who cares i'll be dead long ago

>Will humans ever become a type II civilization?

Yes. They will in the far future.

I doubt that.

>destroy the biosphere
luckily, we're aware of the things we're doing wrong and are acting to work out the kinks. We might survive ourselves yet. Have faith in our ability to know. It's really our only hope

The solar helium mine?

astro-ecology.com/Astroecology_Human_Space_Populations.htm

How much living matter (biomass) can the Solar System support? The most readily accessed resources are carbonaceous asteroids and maybe comets. We therefore measured the amounts of organic carbon and of mineral nutrients in asteroid/meteorite materials, in soluble bioavailable forms and as total contents. We also know how much of elements are needed to form biomass, and how much of such resource materials are present in the Solar System. asteroids and in comets. From these data we can estimate the amounts of biomass and populations that can be sustained by space resources.
Based on the limiting elements N and P, water-extractable materials in one kilogram of carbonaceous asteroid soils can support 0.6 grams of biomass. On this basis, bioavailabe extractable materials in the 1e22 kg carbonaceous asteroids can support 6e18 (six million trillion) kilograms of biomass, six thousand times more than the biomass presently on the Earth, that supports six billion humans. The extractable asteroid materials could then support on the order of 40e12 (40 trillion) humans. Using the total elemental contents of the carbonaceous asteroids could support a biomass and population a hundred times larger yet, 4,000 trillion humans, comparable to the population of a million Earths

>liquid slavery

So that's why oil is black.

>If we started getting close to that, we probably wouldn't be using the Kardashev Scale to classify ourselves. There would like be several different gauges, scales and ratios far more complex than this extremely vague yet narrow outline.

centauri-dreams.org/?p=30255

“A Type I Kardashev civilization is similar to the modern technological societies found on Earth. It draws upon the energy falling upon a planet from its sun. Kardashev estimated the Earth’s energy consumption at about 4 x 1019 ergs per second. The Earth has not quite reached Type I status because its inhabitants are unable to capture all of the radiant energy streaming down upon it. For this reason, Carl Sagan said that the Earth was more accurately called a Type .7 civilization.” [5]

This is an entirely reasonable extrapolation of Kardashev, but it is an imaginative reconstruction of Kardashev rather than an explication and application of the principles implicit in the exposition of his civilization types. The passage to which Basalla alludes in from Sagan’s The Cosmic Connection: An Extraterrestrial Perspective:

“The energy gap between a Type I and a Type II civilization or between a Type II and a Type III civilization is enormous – a factor of about ten billion in each instance. It seems useful, if the matter is to be considered seriously, to have a finer degree of discrimination. I would suggest Type 1.0 as a civilization using 1016 watts for interstellar communication; Type 1.1, 1017 watts; Type 1.2, 1018 watts, and so on. Our present civilization would be classed as something like Type 0.7.” [6]

I like this post. 4 quadrillion humans is a scary thought. However, the Earth can support way more than 6 billion. Also, it already supports over 7.34 billion people right this moment. The main problem right now is waste. People waste so much energy and resources. If that one thing were "fixed" then Earth could support 1000 times as many people as currently projected.

That used a force field. Such things do not exist in real life on such a scale. To do so would expend more energy than you'd be harvesting materials to make energy.

What is illuminating the outside of that dyson sphere? And the inside of it is dark as fuck??

>We are unstoppable and we are going rape Earth till it bleeds dry.

That's the spirit!

Hippie/Peakers >>>/plebbit/

Not science.

The Kardashian scale is science fiction.

The question itself is impossible to answer using science.

Shit. If the human race for any reason goes exstinct, are any of you guys saving your digital stuff in a time capsul so that a future race could dig it up and know more about us.

You can't "fix" waste. Waste is a more or less fixed metric. It's like wanting to "wish away" cancer. "We WANT to fix it, so it SHOULD be gone already."

I don't want an advanced civilization/aliens scrutinizing my porn habits and fetishes. What the fuck is wrong with you?

>Not science.
>The Kardashian scale is science fiction.

Dopey premise, too. Yet another one of those quaint concepts that were popularized for no good reason.

Consider this bleeding-edge SF scenario:
>mankind achieves Singularity with ASI (Artificial Superintelligence)
>ASI launches nanostarship Von Neumann probes capable of 80% of c.
>probes move from star to star, pausing to establish a small solar-powered ASI base at each new star before quickly building more nanostarships to two new stars
>galaxy swamped by ASI in ~150,000 years

Now, at this point, is this ASI a Type I? II? III? It doesn't even fully exploit the energy of a single world, except maybe in a collective sense. Yet it occupies an entire galaxy. It will eventually retrench and start disassembling planets and stars as its needs grow, but it still doesn't even qualify as a "Type II".

Antiquated bullshit notion.

No, I mean like going from a $200 electric bill down to a $35 electric bill without even changing your quality of life. Just simple shit like that is a revolution in itself.

You need to engrave it on diamonds for it to hang around long enough to teach a new sentient species about us. Or, laser it onto the surface of the moon so the entire planet can see it for all time.

In fact the diamond thing could be a form of seeding the universe with humanity. Just launch encoded-DNA-diamonds and human history like a shotgun blast of them in all directions of space. Just hope there's some species of alien out there that would be able to decode and be willing to make something with it.

The type II civilization scenario comes when they've depleted all other forms of energy and are required to harvest 100% or so of the star in order to prolong their existence.

who the fuck cares? c is the great filter, extending our existence in this solar system is meaningless

>thinking humanity will ever get out of this solar system in any meaningful way

Well there's a some hope in the Alcubierre drive if it ever becomes a thing (please redpill me on this Veeky Forums).

People who do this are annoying. If you don't know what something means, for fucks sake, google it before you post. It's not as if you have to post in a time limit or some shit

Meme space engine with outputs so low they can't be differentiated from background noise.

As scarcity increases the bar for economical recovery is also lowered, I don't feel like there are many models that accurately model this.

He asked about Alcubierre drives, not the EM drive fegit.

>please redpill me on this Veeky Forums
The only way we know to possibly make warp drives is if we live in a specific 4 dimensional brane-world
Don't hold your breath.

If we somehow survive long enough to spread not only throughout the solar system but also to other systems, to avoid the inevitable natural disaster that could wipe us all out. Then it will probably happen given enough time.

If harnessing all of the energy of a star is a good idea in the first place is a different question, but we will probably be able to do it at some point, given the above requirement of not dying before we can get the resources to do it.

I see people (mostly teen-agers) every single day riding around in quads, dirt-bikes, sid-by-sides and in the winter snowmobiles. And not just a few but dozens every day. There must be a hundred or more owners of these things within a 1 mile radius of my home alone.
They aren't used for work (much) just riding around, I can only imagine how much fuel is wasted on them.

Maybe if we get our shit together, but that's probably not happening, so we'll be lucky to get to type I