[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

[warpus]

This became true for every big movie recently. Trailers are now that perfectly done.

The new Star wars didn't give much away in any of the trailers. There are other examples as well.

And why would you call that "perfectly done" ? It's the worst possible thing you can do - give away the whole movie in the trailer. A trailer is supposed to entice you to go watch the movie, not show you the whole movie in 30 seconds.

 

[Arakhor]

Well, if you can watch a trailer tell a film better in 2.5 minutes than the film does in 2.5 hours, one could probably say that it was perfectly done.

 

[warpus]

Well, if you can watch a trailer tell a film better in 2.5 minutes than the film does in 2.5 hours, one could probably say that it was perfectly done.

I disagree, mainly because one of the defining characteristics of a well done trailer is that it doesn't give away major plot elements of a movie, while still enticing people to go see it.

So in my mind a trailer that gives everything away is the exact opposite of perfectly done. A perfectly done trailer to me is one that makes me want to go see a movie really bad, while not giving away anything important about it, so that I can still enjoy it and be surprised by the twists if I do decide to go see it.

 

[Arakhor]

I'll grant you that, as normally I'd agree with you, but it still takes considerable skill to tell a film succinctly in so short a time (and that goes double if the trailer is widely considered to be better than the film in question).

 

[warpus]

I agree only if we are not going to call it a "perfectly done trailer" but rather a "perfectly done 30 second long summary of the movie"

A trailer to me has other implications in the definition of what a trailer is other than "summarize the movie", such as "don't give stuff away", and "entice people to want to see it". A perfect trailer would have to succeed at not just one of the requirements, but at all 3. In the case we are discussing, the trailer fails at one of the requirements in a rather spectacular fashion, so it can't be a perfect trailer in my mind, but it can be a perfect 30 second long movie summary.

 

[Cutlass]

Spoiler :

 

[Cutlass]

Spoiler :

 

[Arakhor]

I'd have thought that the ME species were Type I, rather than II.

Full marks for the Fingers of Creation reflected in the Type V entity's visor though.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Yes.

Although humans could have done a lot better. Maybe near-constant wars and greed/pettyness/self-otherpeople hatred gets in the way.

 

[warpus]

So we're not even type 1 yet? It says we need to be able to control all of our weather and the entire planet, including earthquakes, volcanos, etc.

That's pretty depressing, humanity can't even get 1/5 on the galactic intelligence test.

 

[Cutlass]

Well, all the others are in fact hypothetical. It's possible none of them exist, nor ever will.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Not seeing how any 3d-sensing being (like us) could consciously built a Dyson Sphere as shown there. That thing looks like having roughly 60 times the circumferance of the Sun itself (?) (in the pic the diameter of that is at least 20 times the diameter of the Sun, and i suppose the periphery has some mass as well, regardless of how thin that one can be, so its mass would be monstrous as well, and Star-sized)

 

[JohannaK]

God, or the gods, were all really Type V guys who stumbled across the speck of dust that is Earth and decided to have some fun.

 

[warpus]

Well, all the others are in fact hypothetical. It's possible none of them exist, nor ever will.

It just seems weird to me to start level 1 at a level we haven't even reached yet, and probably won't reach for a while (if ever).

 

[Lohrenswald]

^Not seeing how any 3d-sensing being (like us) could consciously built a Dyson Sphere as shown there. That thing looks like having roughly 60 times the circumferance of the Sun itself (?) (in the pic the diameter of that is at least 20 times the diameter of the Sun, and i suppose the periphery has some mass as well, regardless of how thin that one can be, so its mass would be monstrous as well, and Star-sized)

Tbh I don't think we could ever get enough stuff to make a Dyson sphere

maybe a dyson ring, but I doubt that too

 

[El_Machinae]

So we're not even type 1 yet?

That's right. We're still type zero. Ready to be squashed by any boring calamity, or ones of our making.

 

[Kyriakos]

Type 0 negative.

 

[Arakhor]

That's right. We're still type zero. Ready to be squashed by any boring calamity, or ones of our making.

If you want something even less encouraging, MinutePhysics recently did a video on how most people fall into the majority of any given group and thus we're looking for intelligent alien life in all the wrong places.


Link to video.

 

[warpus]

Tbh I don't think we could ever get enough stuff to make a Dyson sphere

maybe a dyson ring, but I doubt that too

I tried to find someone who "did the math", and I found this:

Spoiler :

Dyson originally calculated that there is enough matter in the solar system to create a shell at least three meters thick, but this might be an overestimate since most matter in the solar system is hydrogen and helium, which isn't usable as building materials (as far as we know today). They could presumably be fusioned into heavier elements, but if you can fusion elements on that scale, why bother with a dyson sphere?
If one assumes that all elements heavier than helium are usable (a slight exaggeration), then the inner planets are completely usable, as is the asteroid belt.

Mass (1e24 kg)

Mercury: 0.33022
Venus: 4.8690
Earth: 5.8742
Moon: 0.0735
Mars: 0.64191
Asteroids: ~0.002

Sum: 11.78733e24 kg
It is a bit more uncertain how much of the outer planets is usable. Jupiter and Saturn mainly consist of hydrogen and helium, with around 0.1% of other material. Jupiter is assumed to have a rock core massing around 10-15 times the Earth, and Saturn probably contains a smaller core massing around 3 times the Earth. Uranus and Neptunus seem to be mainly rock and ice, with around 15% hydrogen, so a rough estimate would be around 50-70% usable mass. Pluto seems to be around 80% usable.

Mass (1e24 kg) Usable Mass (rough estimate)

Jupiter: 1898.8 ~58
Saturn: 568.41 ~17
Uranus: 86.967 ~43
Neptune: 102.85 ~51
Pluto: 0.0129 ~0.01
Kuiper belt objects: ~0.02 ~0.016

Sum: 2657.06 Usable: ~170

(this is based on the assumption that the size distribution of the Kuiper belt mirrors the asteroid belt)
(these tables based on information from Physics and Chemistry of the Solar System by John S. Lewis and The Nine Planets by Bill Arnett)

The inner system contains enough usable material for a dyson sphere. If one assumes a 1 AU radius, there will be around 42 kg/m^2 of the sphere. This is probably far too little to build a massive type II dyson sphere, but probably enough to build a type I dyson sphere where mass is concentrated into habitats and most of the surface is solar sails and receivers, which can presumably be made quite thin.

With the extra material from the outer system, we get around 600 kg/m^2, which is enough for a quite heavy sphere (if it was all iron, it would be around 8 centimeters thick, and if it was all diamond around 20 centimeters).

A Type III shell, a "dyson bubble", would have a very low mass. Since its density is independent of the radius (see the stability section), its mass would scale as r^2. For an 1 AU bubble, the total mass needed would be around 2.17e20 kg, around the mass of Pallas

At first glance that seems wildly unrealistic, since you can't just dismantle the entirety of Mercury or Venus and use every single atom in the construction of the dyson sphere. It seems obvious to me that you could only really use a small % of a planet's makeup in the construction of this thing, but.. I suppose if you sent in a bunch of nanobots to do the job for you, atom by atom, it might be doable, but it still seems like a super fantastical proposition. When we build stuff here on earth and in space, we use, what, a tiny % of the makeup of the Earth to accomplish this, let's say maybe only 1% of all of the Earth's mass is stuff you can mine and/or use, realistically speaking, it seems that for most major projects on this planet and beyond (ISS) we use a super tiny fraction of that small fraction.

So.. yeah it seems like an unrealistic estimate, unless we have the technology to dismantle planets from 100% to 0% and use all the atoms in the construction of the sphere, somehow. With today's technology and even tomorrow's technology, it seems you're right, there just isn't enough stuff in the solar system to use to build such a thing.

 

[Kyriakos]

Even if there was, it would not happen. The planet is not aspiring for such things, at least under recent (last 2K years or more) times.