I don't care what anyone says, that flying swimming pool would totally work.

.... No.

I know these are just for fun and that none of them would work, but for some reason every time i see one of these i feel like humanity is lost.

Really, I hate them that much.

Hell yes.

Why? It's a clearly a joke, why would you be disappointed in humanity because humanity has a sense of humour?

I have no idea neki. I just really hate them.

I guess they served their purpose as troll physics then?

Covering the sun in solar-harvesting technology isn't possible for us now (extreme lack of materials), but it's been thought of. It's actually called a Dyson Shell, which achieves Type II on the Kardashev scale of a civilization's level of technological advancement.

Turn on your hose and remove the nozzle. Should be no pressure. Twist the hose and watch as the water stream go farther and faster from the pressure.

Grab your internet cable. Twist it. You now have x16 times faster internet.

>We can't do it yet
>Therefore, it wouldn't work



As what I have said and what Merrell reiterated, the concept of harvesting the energy output of a star in that fashion violates none of the currently known laws of physics; it is completely possible to harvest all the radiation energy from a star if the infrastructure is built. (Sure, you probably need to use all the planetary matter in the star system and some to get that much construction material, but it is by no means impossible as you have asserted). These structures are stellar engines, and, unlike the flying swimming pool, would actually work.

I know this has been mentioned before, but let me say this: distance of the wire matters. It's not feasible to transport the electricity to Earth using currently known methods.

Fiber optics, doyy.

Even fiber wouldn't carry signals over super long distances. You'd need lasers.

Which, again, just transfer signals. Which, again, doesn't transfer energy. Sure, you could rig it to heat water to steam, and use that to turn a turbine, but you'd have so much inefficiency due to having to create the laser in the first place, and then heating water to spin a turbine isn't too efficient either. Plus, you'd have to turn the lasers to point to Earth at all times, using motors and computers to calculate the position of the water, which could get fried by a solar flare, and so on and so forth. Basically, it's impossible with our current technology, as I said before. Now, if you don't mind, I'm off to my chemistry lab.

Breaking news: nuclear power plants use steam turbines.

Also LOL @ "Lasers are not energy".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer

Space-based solar power is physically far more efficient than covering deserts with solar panels because of what is in this neat little diagram here:



Also this.

Don't be talking smack about the flying swimming pool.

Don't be a noob, I never said it was impossible. I said it wouldn't work.

When you say it, you imply the idea, not the method. Say that won't work.

Super conductors.

But yeah, it's not feasible for several reasons. As MrrLL said, we don't have enough materials, and if we do, it would take a metric shitton of stuff to connect the sun to the earth. Second, the rotation of the earth would wrap the wire around the earth. Third, gravity would pull down the cable, and therefore, the solar panels down..

To solve three, you could use some sort of propulsion, but that requires the expulsion of mass, (I think?) which makes it a solution that works for a finite time. Then you have to decide whether the net energy gain is positive or negative. I'm guessing negative. A solution to two and three would be to have the wires go to just outside of the earth's atmosphere and then use the laser shooting stuff to hit the ground. However, then the receiving station on earth moves out of range because of the earth's rotation, making it vastly less efficient. Just thinking out loud. I should really be writing that paper for philosophy. Dammit SEN, you've thoroughly distracted me again.

Lasers? Yeeaah, let's focus all the energy of the sun onto our planet! Have fun with five-million times the radiation we currently get.
We receive a little under two kilograms of energy from the sun per second. Tenthousand tons per second should leave spare reaction mass.

But in other news... if we had the technological capacity to construct a Dyson sphere, why would we need to get it to Earth anyways?

Quote from Aristocrat

Quote from poison_us

Which, again, just transfer signals. Which, again, doesn't transfer energy. Sure, you could rig it to heat water to steam, and use that to turn a turbine, but you'd have so much inefficiency due to having to create the laser in the first place, and then heating water to spin a turbine isn't too efficient either.

Breaking news: nuclear power plants use steam turbines.

Yes, but think about how the water would need to be heated. By a laser that's nearby the Sun. Going through the atmosphere, like your handy dandy picture showed. The Earth orbits around the sun, meaning at least two things: 1) there would need to be more than one laser, or one laser that rotates to point at the same spot, and 2) a COMPUTER, which can be disrupted by SOLAR FLARES would need to be positioned close enough so that it can control motors (which can also be disrupted by solar flares) to effectively aim at a location of water.

Also LOL @ "Lasers are not energy".[/quote]
Did I say that? I said that they cannot transfer energy, at least not in any feasible amount. Learn to think in terms of practicality, please.