Some Scientists Are Looking For God

[ERayR]

You know about them because of Star Trek? 

 

Nope, I have one in my back yard but don't tell anybody, it's a secret.

[Calm]

" I am not sure any one has given thought to how much material would be required to make one"

Indeed they have.

Larry Niven, iirc, wrote a series of books on the alternative of using a ring instead of a sphere. Takes much less resources with the same benefits. Superintelligent, super protective forerunner race built it and populated it with species they were saving. The floor faced out to space and the walls on the side were high enough to keep the air from spilling over, didn't float out the top due to gravity. I believe the Ring spun to create that, it had rockets mounted on its side to correct movement over time. Ring got hulled by a meteor, also broke on one of the superstrong strings that held the three iirc shades that were in a smaller orbit around the sun to provide the day/night cycles. Evolution was thrown off, intelligent species devolved, life became very exciting.

Interesting ideas, but I didn't like the characters all that much. Or what happened to them.

Edited August 14, 2015 by calmoriah

[Robert F. Smith]

Hi Robert,

Anyway, what's so controversial about it? Doesn't virtually every Christian religion teach God was made flesh on this earth in the person of Jesus Christ? Since planet earth is the planet where this man/God was born, in scientific parlance that would make him a terrestrial or earthling. Or is it somehow too crass or disrespectful to say the Lord is an earthling even though it's true? Even though our spirits came from afar, just as the Lord's spirit did, I guess it's acceptable to say we fallen creatures are earthlings because we're all just a bunch of schlubs.

Well, as long as you capitalize Earthling, just as you would Martian.  And, smile when you say that Pilgrim, er Bobbie.

[Stargazer]

Pretty sure I know what the hypothetical structure known as the Dyson sphere is. They even came across one on Star Trek.

 

Is it possible to build? Sure. I guess. I am not sure any one has given thought to how much material would be required to make one. And there would be significant issues in building one. Further more, what would be the point?

 

Pretty sure there is an easier way to get energy.

 

I think it interesting that they are looking for something that really does have the slimmest change of existing of anything that they could be looking for.

 

Yeah, I thought so.  You don't know what a Dyson sphere is.  It is commonly believed that the one that the USS Enterprise encountered (along with Mr. Scott) was what Dyson proposed, but that is not the case.  Dyson himself said:

 

"A solid shell or ring surrounding a star is mechanically impossible. The form of 'biosphere' which I envisaged consists of a loose collection or swarm of objects traveling on independent orbits around the star."

 

A true Dyson Sphere would not entirely block the energy of the surrounded star, but its energy emissions would be in the infra-red part of the spectrum, and would come from the waste heat generated by the civilization.

 

That's a lot easier to accomplish building than any supposed solid shell.  Relatively, anyway.  It's still an unimaginably enormous undertaking.

[Stargazer]

Yeah you can't prove a negative I agree. However where is the evidence for one that exists? I see no reason to assume they do exist.

 

As I said, evidence for one would consist of a star whose energy output was largely or entirely in the infra-red part of the spectrum, with possible flashes of "regular" full-spectrum light.  But nobody's looking for this, as far as I know.  Even if they were looking for it, I'm not sure what characteristics they would clue in on.  And we wouldn't be able to see one, unless it were quite close (within a couple hundred light years or less). 

 

Nobody has come up with a mechanism for building such a structure, but I know a theoretical means.  It's called a "von Neumann machine".  This is a "machine" that is capable of self-replication, and that could use at-hand materials.  Fictional von Neumann machines that I am aware of are the "monoliths" in the movie "2010", which was part 2 of 2001: A Space Odyssey, in which the planet Jupiter was seeded by self-replicating monoliths that concentrated the atmosphere of that planet so that it ignited to become a second sun, in order to illuminate one of Jupiter's moons which had life.  The other is Greg Bear's Forge of God series, in which self-replicating machines called "Doers" and "Makers" are used to create weapons, and also to actively destroy planets.  A fully developed self-replication technology could easily create a Dyson Sphere out of the mass of a solar system. 

Edited August 14, 2015 by Stargazer

[Stargazer]

" I am not sure any one has given thought to how much material would be required to make one"

Indeed they have.

Larry Niven, iirc, wrote a series of books on the alternative of using a ring instead of a sphere. Takes much less resources with the same benefits. Superintelligent, super protective forerunner race built it and populated it with species they were saving. The floor faced out to space and the walls on the side were high enough to keep the air from spilling over, didn't float out the top due to gravity. I believe the Ring spun to create that, it had rockets mounted on its side to correct movement over time. Ring got hulled by a meteor, also broke on one of the superstrong strings that held the three iirc shades that were in a smaller orbit around the sun to provide the day/night cycles. Evolution was thrown off, intelligent species devolved, life became very exciting.

Interesting ideas, but I didn't like the characters all that much. Or what happened to them.

 

Yes, Larry Niven.  Ringworld was a great concept, for sure. 

 

Dyson has said that such a ring is mechanically impossible.  I don't know for sure if he's right, but I wouldn't dare argue with him.

 

In fact, Dyson is one of the most imaginative and brilliant scientists produced in the 20th Century.  He is a pure joy to read.

 

From his book, Infinite in All Directions:

"The universe shows evidence of the operations of mind on three levels. The first level is the level of elementary physical processes in quantum mechanics. Matter in quantum mechanics is [...] constantly making choices between alternative possibilities according to probabilistic laws. [...] The second level at which we detect the operations of mind is the level of direct human experience. [...] t is reasonable to believe in the existence of a third level of mind, a mental component of the universe. If we believe in this mental component and call it God, then we can say that we are small pieces of God's mental apparatus"

There are some people who hate Dyson because he is not a militant atheist, but is a Christian (of no particular denomination).

Edited August 14, 2015 by Stargazer

[Avatar4321]

What is a Dyson sphere?

[Avatar4321]

there is no evidence, but that doesn't mean science shouldn't look for them.  However, anything that is possible does exist in a eternal universe 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipdRhgLWGXo

 

Do you have a better idea of how science can look for God?

 

There is no archaeological proof for the Book of Mormon, but it doesn't mean it is false. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Considering science basis its observation on experimentation and the five senses, they could ask the Lord and experiment on the word.

[thesometimesaint]

What is a Dyson sphere?

 

So far it is a theoretical hollow built structure with a star at its center. i don't see anything in science that would preclude them. But the logistics would be incredibly hard. All due deference to Dr. Tyson.

[Calm]

Yeah, I thought so.  You don't know what a Dyson sphere is.  It is commonly believed that the one that the USS Enterprise encountered (along with Mr. Scott) was what Dyson proposed, but that is not the case.  Dyson himself said:

 

"A solid shell or ring surrounding a star is mechanically impossible. The form of 'biosphere' which I envisaged consists of a loose collection or swarm of objects traveling on independent orbits around the star."

 

A true Dyson Sphere would not entirely block the energy of the surrounded star, but its energy emissions would be in the infra-red part of the spectrum, and would come from the waste heat generated by the civilization.

 

That's a lot easier to accomplish building than any supposed solid shell.  Relatively, anyway.  It's still an unimaginably enormous undertaking.

Good to know. Can't believe so many sources I learned it from got it wrong, including a science textbook or two.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 If "X" exists "Y" can't is a logical fallacy. It really wasn't all that long ago that the assumption was that man would never be in space or land on the moon. We've done both. 

HUh? I agree that is a logical fallacy but I have never said that X exists there for Y can't. Or is this more a response to Star Gazer's post about Einstein rings existing. 

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You know about them because of Star Trek? 

Yeah that is what I said. Good grief.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Calm]

Now that I have read up on them, my memory telss me I once upon a time knew the right answer but the first impression of learning about a Dyson shell stuck while the others didn't. The brain is both a marvelous and a sad thing. Why can't corrected ideas stay corrected, for example.

Edited August 14, 2015 by calmoriah

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Yeah, I thought so.  You don't know what a Dyson sphere is.  It is commonly believed that the one that the USS Enterprise encountered (along with Mr. Scott) was what Dyson proposed, but that is not the case.  Dyson himself said:

 

"A solid shell or ring surrounding a star is mechanically impossible. The form of 'biosphere' which I envisaged consists of a loose collection or swarm of objects traveling on independent orbits around the star."

 

A true Dyson Sphere would not entirely block the energy of the surrounded star, but its energy emissions would be in the infra-red part of the spectrum, and would come from the waste heat generated by the civilization.

 

That's a lot easier to accomplish building than any supposed solid shell.  Relatively, anyway.  It's still an unimaginably enormous undertaking.

Rofl looks like you mis understood my post as well.

 

Maybe you should update Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

 

"A Dyson sphere is a hypothetical megastructure that completely encompasses a star"

 

In this article it does discuss the " Dyson swarm" which seems to be what you are saying. And I agree that is more plausible.

The next variant is the Dyson Bubble

 

Which that also seems plausible but less so.

 

The last is the Dyson Shell. Which is what I had in mind. And I said it had the least chance of existing. And everyone agrees with me. Funny that you are wasting all this time and energy trying to disagree with me and show me up. Good one.

 

In the end I still so no reason to hang my hat on find such a structure even in it's simplest form. But hey, if you want to go ahead. I don't really care.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

As I said, evidence for one would consist of a star whose energy output was largely or entirely in the infra-red part of the spectrum, with possible flashes of "regular" full-spectrum light.  But nobody's looking for this, as far as I know.  Even if they were looking for it, I'm not sure what characteristics they would clue in on.  And we wouldn't be able to see one, unless it were quite close (within a couple hundred light years or less). 

 

Nobody has come up with a mechanism for building such a structure, but I know a theoretical means.  It's called a "von Neumann machine".  This is a "machine" that is capable of self-replication, and that could use at-hand materials.  Fictional von Neumann machines that I am aware of are the "monoliths" in the movie "2010", which was part 2 of 2001: A Space Odyssey, in which the planet Jupiter was seeded by self-replicating monoliths that concentrated the atmosphere of that planet so that it ignited to become a second sun, in order to illuminate one of Jupiter's moons which had life.  The other is Greg Bear's Forge of God series, in which self-replicating machines called "Doers" and "Makers" are used to create weapons, and also to actively destroy planets.  A fully developed self-replication technology could easily create a Dyson Sphere out of the mass of a solar system. 

Fair enough.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

there is no evidence, but that doesn't mean science shouldn't look for them.  However, anything that is possible does exist in a eternal universe 

 

 

Do you have a better idea of how science can look for God?

 

There is no archaeological proof for the Book of Mormon, but it doesn't mean it is false. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. 

This is not my argument and I reject the premise. Science should not be looking for God. It is and always will be a matter of faith.

[Calm]

That part of the wiki article is poorly written imo. Other parts discuss it more accurately, imo.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

That part of the wiki article is poorly written imo. Other parts discuss it more accurately, imo.

I agree. That is why I said he should fix it.

 

But the word sphere denotes that it is all encompassing. A ring is not a sphere. It really comes down to being more accurate with your word choice of the person that wrote the original article linked in the OP.

 E.g., "But 'it’s also almost exactly what you’d expect a cluster of Dyson Spheres Swarms to look like"

Edited August 14, 2015 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[TheSkepticChristian]

 Science should not be looking for God. It is and always will be a matter of faith.

 

Why? Do you have any evidence that proves science shouldn't be looking for God?

I bet Science will find God next year, are you aware of the new Stephen Hawking project? 

 

 

Yeah that is what I said. Good grief.

 

 

No, you didn't say you learned about Dyson spheres in star trek. 

[thesometimesaint]

Why? Do you have any evidence that proves science shouldn't be looking for God?

I bet Science will find God next year, are you aware of the new Stephen Hawking project? 

 

No, you didn't say you learned about Dyson spheres in star trek. 

 

God is incapable of being falsified. He/she/it will always be a matter of faith, until the Second Coming.

[TheSkepticChristian]

God is incapable of being falsified. He/she/it will always be a matter of faith, until the Second Coming.

 

but dr. wright may have found the work of God, it is possible. 

 

See post 1 

 

 

Dr. Jason Wright "intends to perform follow-up work investigating some of his survey’s strangest galaxies, looking for civilizations further down the Kardashev scale. He also hopes to examine a curious cluster of optically dark point sources just outside the Milky Way’s galactic plane that his team discovered by their infrared glows in the WISE data. The cluster is probably a previously unknown giant molecular cloud, an unmapped stellar nursery filled with protostars, Wright says. But 'it’s also almost exactly what you’d expect a cluster of Dyson Spheres to look like.' It seems [Freeman] Dyson’s dream is still alive"

Edited August 16, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[thesometimesaint]

but dr. wright may have found the work of God, it is possible. 

 

See post 1 

 

We don't have to look that far. The works of God are all around us. But putting on my scientist hat it is very hard to tell which if any are the product of God from which if any are the product of nature. IOW If you have to put your God into science to make it work. You are doing many things but science isn't one of them.

[ERayR]

Why? Do you have any evidence that proves science shouldn't be looking for God?

I bet Science will find God next year, are you aware of the new Stephen Hawking project? 

 

 

 

No, you didn't say you learned about Dyson spheres in star trek. 

Oops missed and you got a free rep point. 

 

If the Hawking project did find God they wouldn't recognize him.

[ERayR]

but dr. wright may have found the work of God, it is possible. 

 

See post 1 

 

Anybody can find the work of God.  That is not a difficult task.  Look around you.  The problem for some is giving him credit.

[TheSkepticChristian]

Anybody can find the work of God.  That is not a difficult task.  Look around you

 

but we can't prove that