How can I move a planet?

Or rather how a tool capable of moving the planets can be done.
TL;DR
 Build a planet big spaceship, move stuff with the gravity of that ship, using star energy for propulsion solar sail like. Or by pressing on the planet by a huge shell.

As reasons to move planet are not given, so are not defined approaches to doing so. So I will pick few of possible solutions. Also, it have to be noted, CII may have better ways to deal with that particular subject if let’s say eLISA will lead to deeper understanding of gravity and CII may be able to manipulate that gravity which will make moving planets piece of cake, and alter all I have written.

So my suggestion is rather like how our today civilization with CII energy capability’s may deal with that. And I ensure you, gap by energy isn’t such big deal actually(It’s way much closer as people usually do think), but difference how to use it may be like steam arithmometers vs Top500. I feel like I can throw stones to Kardashev scale all nights.

Today knowledge, Sun energy

Sun energy is a lot, but not too much actually

  • Power 3.828×1026 W

Few numbers to represent it as kinetic energy, velocity mass, where 1k=1000, 1kk=1’000’000 etc.

relativistic kinetic energy

latex_a27504d451027f14f2fbe1349ed24add

  • 1c, just energy-mass conversion(E=mc^2): 4.3kk ton
  • 0.99c, 0.7kk t
  • 0.95c, 1.93kk t
  • 0.90c, 3.29kk t
  • 0.80c, 6.38kk t
  • 0.50c, 27.5kk t
  • 0.30c, 88.1kk t
  • 0.10c, 833kk t

Not proud to write numbers, mostly for my personal reference, but as you may see from velocities starting from 0.9c and above matter transports more energy than the mass itself, and mass is just a carrier for that energy.

Even if we may send everything we have at the moment, in 5-10 minutes with resulting speed 0.1c, but compared to the planet, everything we have isn’t so much.

  • 1km/s, 765e+18kg

There comes difference, as the result of that we wish to accomplish, for which purpose we do it, etc. We are not equally interested in all 100+ elements we know, and from civilization stand point of view, importance may differ from values we assume for them now. We can’t eat gold, but we happy to eat carbon based stuff, and as technology develops, no one can guarantee that technology valuable properties of gold will be so much important as it is now – it’s a subject of changes, but until we stay carbon based live, carbon will be important.

Also, carbon-based technology, wonderful (atm) strength of CNT may be very important for future tech, especially for moving planet’s projects.

Option 1, take what you need, planets disassemble

When it comes to specific elements, then definitely there is a reason to mess with the whole planet, not necessarily do that but if civilization does not have the tech to fuse elements easily(this is rather knowledge challenge then energy challenge) it may have sense. But we have force – me not thinks, me dissemble planet, hugh hugh, rrr – besides it’s fun, why not.

Disassembly may be done in different ways. Evaporating by focusing light-energy on the surface of a planet (some suggest to moving planet that way, however, they should think twice before doing that, because low ISP and high escape velocity it will just not work and just imagine what it means for a planet. It will be just magma ball, not a planet.)

It may be more gently disassembled and that is more energy efficient and allow to have more control over the process which produces less mess and less after work.

But evaporating is the easy way to a rough estimation of max energy we need for the process.
Disassemble Venus will take: mass_kg*E(escape velocity, 1kg)/Power(sun, 1sec)/Seconds_in_year

(4.867*10^24 * 10360^2/2)/(3.828*10^26)/(365*24*3600) == 0.022 years or 8 days

This is a rough estimation, which does not consider escape velocity changes because of planet mass loss and efficiency of the process, which is less than 100% because losing energy by plasma emitting the EM waves aka light and infrared. But as a rough estimation, it is good enough and the value calculated with use of Gravitational binding energy is 4.77 days.

Same for Jupiter

(1.8986*10^27 * 59500^2/2)/(3.828*10^26)/(24*3600) = 101613 days or 278 years.

(or 168 years if we calculate using gravitational binding energy formula)

I’m practically ok with that number, but I think 2000 min of my time worth to improve the efficiency of the process at least for 1% for it to be more efficient, even humanity may think one year or two about that situation before to begin some movements in that direction.

Sure, we have to recuperate our energy, probably we do not need that hydrogen cloud flying around, if we need hydrogen we may scoop it in any place in the universe. So probably we will make 3 piles for hydrogen, one pile for He, and small moons with elements, one moon for each.(however, that will be not the best use of available materials.)

As we already sorted the Venus, so I expect 0.2-0.5% by mass carbon stuff with the 100GPa strength to operate, which will be useful to deal with the decomposition of gas giants. Abundance of elements can be seen there – 12

I’ll take optimistic number 0.2% – it means 1e22 kg CNT, not bad it’s already 1/7 of moon mass, so we may already start to move earth, but thinking spares the time in that planet moving business. So we will use that material to cook Jupiter first.

3 Pile H and 1 Pile He, each is 1/4 of Jupiter mass, each will have radius something like 44-50k km and escape velocity 38 km/s and having Jupiter in 4 such piles – when recuperating energy, will save us 40000 days. Not bad, not bad. (you may wish to play with escape velocities here)

I could be satisfied, not each day you may save 100+ years of work for entry civilization, sure they could figure that for them selfs, but, u know …

I’m not satisfied with that 60000 days of decomposition, not only because it’s still too long, but mostly because of the slow start of such process. Before we start to get that recuperated energy in reasonable amounts from placing mass in a pile, the first pile will be ready in something like 10k days, and at the time we will recuperate significantly lesser than 40%, and we do not get something useful from that mass, it’s still just a big pile which we do not need and have no use for it.

We need max 1% or less of that gas giant, so reasonable time frame which looks good is 1000 days or less, for the first giant, for CI tech, but unfortunate part of that extracting process is that most interesting stuff is deep in the core of the Gas Giant, and to access core we to have to scoop out most of GG. (It is not entirely true, as carbon which is available from atmosphere of the gas giant is a significant part of the GG, which will be seen later)

Gas Giant or reason to move planets

  • The man said – before selling something unuseful, u have to buy something unuseful.

And we already have that unuseful aka hydrogen, deal of the life, 99% of Gas Giant we do not need, and we may exchange it for what we need in star

As the body orbiting around a star, a planet, or a gas giant already have all energy we need for to make such exchange.
But we, as just CI civilization with a big hammer, we may need energy from the star as a catalyst for that process and to compensate our losses during the process etc. Efficiency is one limiting factor, so 90% efficiency means 10 times faster disassembly.

So exchange GG mass, for something useful from the star is one of the reasons to move or change something in planet orbit.

Note about Venus scrap, snake elephant

probably most important part of that answer

I expect, and I have reasons for that(humanity lazy and smart is at least one of them), Venus scraping has been done more gently, and we have products as result, but not a big cloud of materials.

After successful scraping Venus, we have 1e22kg CNT, and I have to explain what I consider as my knowledge about what that actually means, and probably that is the only reason, why I write that.

You probably have seen that Tesla snake funny elephant manipulator, and if you search youtube for more, you will find more, maybe not best search keyword but still, elephant manipulator

And as one interesting, and most importantly, simple design, I will point that video: Robotic arm inspired by the Elephant trunk, time 4:08

What is good about the design? It is simple, device made of the same or similar parts – simple to produce, efficient to scale its production etc.

There are other interesting uses of properties of CNT thisthis

Another interesting example is Carbon Nanotube Muscle #2, the material itself is not important, important is the ability to make strings from it and their conductivity and strength.

Both of that principles combined(and they are not all possibilities which we already know), allows us to make 100GPa strong, very flexible manipulators.

And as CNT is very thin by their nature, such manipulators may be very thin too, and strong, and they may form more ticker manipulators.

So imagine that tesla snake but made from at least 500 times stronger material(I bet that tesla snake is weaker then 200MPa, which is the strength of ordinary steel cable), and which is definitely more flexible.

So imagine one unit same thickness as tesla snake but longer, 100-200 meters long, each equipment with some processor, some swarm algorithms, some sensors over its surface: light pressure temperature etc – everything we may need for that unit is made from one material (maybe with some little additions of other materials, not as parts but as additive to change some properties of CNT’s in desired way – but mostly 99.9% it’s just carbon). And it is assembled from thin actuators.

So that one unit, which we may control by different programs, with strength is like space lift cable, which may change shape, which bends as we need, moves as we need, can be as thick as we need (from micron sizes to the limits defined by amount of the material you have), works at about 0K to up 2300K temperature, is very precise in form making-changing, is dynamic in form and shape and stiffness.

If you understand that moment, you will never wonder about howto make big constructions in space, huge ships, big thermonuclear reactors, your cubic worlds, many things considered like handwavium stuff, may be done from or with help of that material. If you go deeper in considering which particular uses it may have then you will not wonder about the speed of spaceships, anything under 1c is not a problem for them. It’s not nanobots though, but it’s better, stronger, it will pass any reality-check, it’s almost real.

There are downsides too of that understanding, you will begin to wonder why things may break at all, why they do not change shape, why things have just one form all the time, why you can’t just upgrade a hardware like phone today – oh wait why I have to buy new phone why not just take small piece from that big chunk which is airplane at the moment and convert it to phone, who needs space suit, why people think gauss gun of any kind is Wunder Waffen, why someone has to resupply something, why someone can’t gather another 10kkk people and fly to some star for a vacation, or make honey moon in center of our galaxy and return back 100k years later, why all wish to live on planets instead of comfortable space habitats made from smart material, why someone thinks pressure 1000bar is too big, why slicing 100-1000km asteroid in dust is too hard.
Planet stuff is most annoying from them all.

True limitation will be energy, and law of physics, there will stay the things you can’t do, taking a planet core just right away from a gas giant is probably one of them, also taking the planet core from an earth size planet one of them too(but you may take stuff from 2000-3000 km deep), but taking a core of moon size object will be not a problem, moon can be mined just as it is. Slicing earth size planets is not a problem, by removing upper layers – layer by layer.

Tool, Space swiss knife

Main valuable resource, from the decomposition of Venus, is 1e22kg of active metamaterial, actually, it is our tool, which has to help us exchange 99% of mass Jupiter to stuff from star to make even a bigger tool.

Tool consists of parts with different sizes and ticklishness, typical muscle let’s say 1km long, square 10x10cm (I’m lazy mess with Pi or any complex form), density 1 t/m3, strength 50 GPa, they may stick together with good seal and slide like linear motor, be reprogrammed to another form with accuracy 0.1mkm
They may store energy mechanically at least 10MJ/kg (or 2.7kWh/kg) like a spring, and release it like a capacitor(fast if needed, mechanically or by generating electricity), with approximately 0 storage discharge.
They may store and convert electricity to kinetic energy and back.
They may conduct electricity, they may regulate temperature like Peltier modules probably close to theoretical value.

I assume 100% efficiency, but even if it is 50% this is not a problem, but I expect it to be 90% and above, like high power electric motors efficiency.

1e22kg it will be 1e19 of TMU (typical muscle unit), it is also 1e19 km long cable 10x10cm, which is a 66,666,666,666.7 a.u. long cable, or 11.5×11.5km cable with 5 a.u. length.

and all that mass orbiting at the orbit of Venus with the rest of Venus scrap, which is 99.8% of previous Venus by mass, which may be used as reactive mass for that tool, with a wide range of ISP values actually, this linear motor sliding of TMU is quite handy.

Current form is probably ring-toroid(venus like orbit or close to that), to keep tool less dense, and to avoid the need to wait for 8days of star work to unfold it(with all that 99.8 not so much useful stuff) to something useful. But tool alone may be moon size(which is 7 times more that we have after scavenging of Venus) at least, and unfold pretty fast. Something up to mars sizes is ok for dense and compact storage of the tool, basically, everything with less than 3.3km/s escape velocity is good enough, because the energy is about the limit of static energy storage capabilities of the tool. However, the size and mass can be much bigger than Mars sizes/mass if we use more sophisticated ways to fold and store the tool.

We could exchange venus scrap first, but we do not have to, and we rather will have metal elements(everything above He), then loose them in the process even if it gets us more carbon, because those materials may be used for transmutations by neutron capture(something like Nuclear transmutation), it’s especially useful if have a star as neutron source and ability to efficiently expose material to it. Some isotopes of ordinary materials like Fe as an example, are more valuable than other isotopes of the same material. Also, those materials can be used as passive protection layer preventing degradation of our Carbon based material, especially if we wish to dip some parts of our tool into a star, and because of other reasons.

With 10MJ/kg storage capacity we may store 260 sec of star energy in the tool, not bad, but it may store way much more than that in form of kinetic energy.

Because tool consists of elements, which may slide against each other(let say 1m/s, not top speed but a reasonable speed of sliding), flex on command, we may separate them into 2 rings, two sets of MTU, one moving clockwise and another is moving counter clockwise.

Energy stored in Venus motion is equivalent to 90 days of Sun work.

Gravitational potential is: Gravitational potential

The difference of potential energy between Venus orbit and Earth orbit will be:

1.98855*10^30 * 6.68408*10^-11 / (108*10^9) – 1.98855*10^30 * 6.68408*10^-11 / (150*10^9) = 344597744.4 J/kg

To move Venus to a different orbit, Sun has to work with 100% efficiency:

  • to Earth orbit, 1 a.u. – 51 days
  • to Jupiter orbit, 5 a.u. – 155 days
  • to fly away – 181 days

To move Jupiter:

  • to Saturn, 10 a.u. – 4693 days
    with a proper tool we could form a binary system of them, and refine at least one body pretty fast, saving some years. Or refine them both in 3th body. But we have to have tool for moving GG first, but with such tool, we could refine them in place.
  • fly away, 9779 days
  • to Venus orbit, get energy 60847 days of sun work, although we can’t do it now, however, that’s an interesting number, ~150y of star energy, a possible number for moving hot GG to more distant orbits.

rvery

Just as notes:

  • We can change inclination, by splitting ring again in the orbital plane if we need to do so.
    Venus inclination is 3.39 deg, Jupiter 1.3 deg, Saturn 2.49 deg
    and because 99.8 percent of Venus is just scrap, which we use as we need without much care about, we may make small moon perpendicular to ecliptic – I notice that just for ease of understanding, we do not have to loose any reactive mass, in that case, we need just energy, and compared to other tasks it’s rather small. But yes, we have to respect momentum and impulse conservation.
  • Friction between rings or any other energy loss isn’t big issue, surface area of tool is pretty big, and if it stacked as a disc, it may dissipate 100% of the energy emitted by the Sun at temperature 900K, which is 627 °C. And this is without other 99.8 mass venus available to use as parts of heat dissipation system.
    Actual friction and energy loss is at the level of a good air bearing or better(which they actually may be, but this isn’t the only option). For those who aren’t familiar with air bearings, you may have to look at this and this as examples
  • As we have 2 rings rotating in opposite directions, at earth orbit it will be 60km/s difference between the rings (30 in one direction, 30 in another direction), as we set TMU slide speed to 1m/s (to be suitable for different approaches and implementations) it means 60000 layers separation between two main rings, as TMU is 10x10cm it means that area is 6000m wide intermediate ring
  • I took air bearing principle because that way implementation does not depend on the internal structure of TMU and that way it is easier to refer to today’s technologies, but this isn’t the only option.
  • layers could be thinner actually nothing stops us from using 1mm thick layers, or 0.1mm thick layers, this is more question how strong we wish them to be, and how much sliding force we wish to have.
  • There is no centrifugal stress from rotating rings, they orbiting, but just close together, so zero force for them. There is no difference (practically) in which rotation direction to orbit, just in case.
  • only part which is not orbiting properly are separation layers, but forces are small, 6km wide separation layer (if assume it does not rotate at all) at venus orbit will press on inner ring with the pressure of 6800 Pa, on earth orbit 3500 Pa, so actual pressure between layers will be typically less than 1Pa.
  • with 1,5,10,20 a.u. ring radius, we still may make an enormous amount of layers, if with TMU(10x10cm 1km long) we have 66’666’666’666 a.u. cable to play with. As TMU consists out of even smaller strands, we may split it into smaller units or build bigger units from them – so it’s just typical unit we operate at the moment.
  • gravitational influence from other bodies may be compensated by playing with layers and counterweight strands. Also, this is one of the ways to tune star system and affect orbits of all bodies in a system at once.
    it may be a way to convert potentially unstable (for billion years) system to stable one. Way to move planets actually. But long way, not efficient.
  • I do not talk about micrometeorites, asteroids etc – you may guess, not a problem (just collect them, omnomnom)
  • We may have an elliptic ring, changing orbital velocity along orbit is not a problem with sliding strands. We may convert circular ring to elliptic, there are at least several ways to do so. One of which is by split the ring.

Rings arranged something like that, black are rings:
1NkMo

GG scrap, lift setup

  • To scrape Jupiter in a timeframe of 10years or less – we need to have a mass transfer something like 60’185’185’185’185’185’185 kg/sec or 60kkkkk ton/sec
  • Elliptical orbit of ring from Jupiter to Venus orbit, will have a period of about 5 years, so first year or two we will be kinda limited by Sun power alone, which allows us to lift 2.16e+17 kg/sec or 216kkkk ton/sec (which is about two orders of magnitude less than we need for 10y plan)
  • to scrap Jupiter in 10 years, we have to lift 6e+19 kg/sec
  • Orbit velocity at Jupiter orbit is 13 km/s, orbit period is 11.9y
  • would be GG on earth orbit, it would make operation easier
  • Sphere from TMU, one layer thick (10cm), approximately 318km radius under 1 bar pressure of Hydrogen+, will contain about 12’170’840’439’815’458 kg of Hydrogen mix, or 1.2e16 kg. TMU mass will be about 1% of Hydrogen mass. I will refer that sphere as Spoon Unit (SU). The size is defined by the strength of the material, for the SU to be able to have the 1 bar pressure inside of it.
  • 10y scrape plan means approximately 500 Spoon Units per second to lift
  • some gravitational effects are omitted because they can be compensated, and it’s not only one way to do the job.
  • originally I wished another approach to describe, but this looks simple to explain.
  • the challenge is big, and the tool is too small, so the 10y plan has to be smarter than I describe.

The plan is simple, we will make a balloon from Jupiter. 1e22 kg TMU is enough to cover entry Jupiter with 23.5 km thick layer, at its 1bar-atmosphere-pressure level. This 23.5 km thick balloon is capable of squeezing Jupiter up to 2347 bar pressure inside of that balloon, just by gravity force. With using 99.8 percent of Venus aka dead scrap this pressure could be higher up to 500 times and probably more. We do not apply force by the tool itself, it’s just gravity of Jupiter, and our limit is the structural strength of TMU, which is around 50GPa or 500’000 bar.

I’m ok with 1bar pressure near TMU shell, so we need 10m thick layer or 100 layers of TMU.  The shell will be a not perfect sphere, but we ok with that because of the flexibility of our shell and mobility of our TMU units so we may dynamically compensate what we have to compensate.

For that shell, we have to allocate approximately 1/2300 of our tool, by mass.

The shell may be formed in different ways, hm that’s stupid but like that, I wish guys did that better than that, but… it illustrates.

After we formed shell over-around Jupiter, we will have 1 bar pressure inside one side shell, and 10m over on another side of the shell, we have a vacuum. We do not apply force, we just chill on hydrogen couch. (it will not collapse because of the pressure and it’s just a replacement of the atmosphere layer which was there before)

On the vacuum side, over that side, we may wish to form 2 rings, same 3 layer structure, the plane of this set of rings has to be same as the plane of the main ring to Jupiter. This set of equatorial rings will stiffer our balloon structure, pre-stretch let say equator region, to allow us to lift SU units to the vacuum side(E=mgh style). Also, they are used to accelerate SU units to orbital velocity, same principle as Launch loop but instead single rotor there is 2 rings and an intermediate layer.

1 SU with Hydrogen, near the surface of the shell/balloon around Jupiter, will weight 1.2e16*23.12=2.8e17 N, and to be able to withstand that force cable should be approximately a square 2.5×2.5 km (everything could be done inside the hull itself, by forming same structures or proper equivalent of them where we can use pressure to support our SU’s, it can be done in different ways)

We open hole in the shell, pressure blows our SU up, like glass blowing process, the bubble moves away and we begin blow next – continuous process.

3layer ring system which accelerates bubbles one ring in one direction, another in opposite direction.

layers have to be pretty big, to be strong enough to to be able to accelerate pretty massive SU, but we may do that with smaller SU’s if we have to.

from 1% of 1e22kg active mass with resulting volume of 1e17m3 we may make a 15x15km ring with radius 75000km, we also may wish to add all(or a significant part of it) venus scrap to act like the rotor in launch loop, we need just inertia mass to distribute stress over the ring.

Accelerating SU at 1m/s2 is pretty reasonable value. So at max productivity, there will be 500*59000 SU units, the mass of active material used for that will be 35% of our tool.
(500 is amount of SU per second we need to launch for 10y plan, 59000 seconds is the time required to accelerate on SU to escape velocity, to 59km/s, which is escape velocity for Jupiter)

  • 35% of TMU’s for accelerate process
  • 5% for Acceleration rings and reinforcement rings
  • 50% of scrap for rotors for acceleration rings, and for rotors of reinforcement of shell.
  • 0.05% for shell around Jupiter

I reconsidered approach slightly, will be below, but I leave this part as it is, as possible use case

After acceleration to orbiting velocity’s, we attach SU to ring on close to Jupiter orbit. There will be different proportion in both directions, because of 13km/s Jupiter orbital speed, and we may wish to keep the momentum of the ring.

Refine Jupiter mix, problem

Intensive disassembly of Jupiter is actually challenging, there is set of problems: the tool is too small, some processes still need years to accomplish like cooling SU’s, separate mix into components, transfer closer to the sun. Although some problems may be solved, I wish to present a more general overview of the process, without going deep details of possible solutions.

To imagine what intensity of process is that 10y plan, we have numbers to tell us that. To make something near 10y plan, we really have to blast Jupiter, just nonstop blasting. Sending 500SU/sec, with content mass 1.2e16kg each, means each 1m2 of 75000km radius sphere, should have flow with velocity 970 m/s at 1 bar pressure. SUvolume*500/Jupiter_surface(75000km radius) = (320000^3*4/3*3.14*500 / (75000000^2*4*3.14)).

As we have regions where SU are forming it means that the compression(just adding more mass over shell top in that region) will make pressure and density of content higher and thus it will make required flow speed lower. So it is still possible to use equatorial setup, but it should start not from a 1 bar level, but at level thousands of bar which still possible because of the strength of CNT’s and that they probably are ok up to 500’000 bar.

Probably we have to use entry equator region to fill SU, and this region will be our acceleration ring, which we will divide to SU’s later. So it kinda shell flows to the equator and accelerates perpendicular to flow, so on the equator, we use most of the energy the process needs – to reach desired pressure levels everything is preloaded with venus scrap, as much as it is needed. Pretty much is happening there in that process.

  • we do not have to stress entry Jupiter, it’s enough just to bend equatorial part to desired pressure (any pressing we do by just placing more weight in that place. That ring starts somewhere 300km deep under the surface, the scale height 27 km, pressure 70000bar)

frb0F (1)

Build up the amount of available Active Material is critical for the whole process. Each SU content contains 0.3% of CH4 by volume or 2.4% by mass, and SU itself weights 1% of that content. So when we manage to separate CH4 from that mix, we may make 2.4 new SU for each SU we send down to Venus orbit.

Extraction should be done directly from Atmosphere of Jupiter by shell AM. We have to extract building material until we close cycle, and SU will begin to return back for reuse. After that, it can be done anywhere underway. That way we may have a continuous growing flow of SU up our max needs.

1st priority to grow tool first. Separating CH4 may be done in many ways but overall just usual gas separation, but on large scale with AM. Good about that, more we get, faster we get next portions and we have more than enough AM for such task.

Exchange

I’ll not describe mass exchange in details because the topic is bigger than I have already written.

  • local magnetic fields at sun spots are 0.3Tesla(probably not extreme case but above average field which is 1/10000 T, twice of earth’s), we do create fields with the density of 2T with current approaches on regular basis, and we definitely can do more with stronger materials. So even if the field isn’t weak, but mostly the size what makes them impressive, but with stronger materials and use of active materials we probably can do better that that.
  • there are some suggestion for probes and support-stabilizing structures for thermonuclear reactors which are inside that reactor surrounding by plasma, they are protected by their own magnetic field. Same way we may protect parts of our tool inside sun.
  • as we transport mass from Jupiter, we have disproportion of momentum in tool(because of Jupiter’s momentum), mass exchange with sun is way to compensate and move that proportion to desired equilibrium.
  • Sun scooping may be done with same 3layer ring system
  • Because surface area grows like x^2 and volume like x^3, then bigger is the part, longer it may stay in the hot area. Passive materials are limited by natural heat transfer rate, but with moving strands inside of the part, we may do much better and faster heat distribution in the part, also we have plenty of Jupiter scrap to use too, as protection gaseous layers, if we have to.
  • Probably we can’t dip too deep. The density of suns photosphere is 0.0002kg/m3 and that’s not bad actually, the pressure is also not very high Sun.
  • Energy flow in photosphere is 68MJ/sec/m2, but with AM we may have entry ring inside photosphere, and separate heavy isotopes just directly there. (sure with some cooling setup outside of the sun, which is connected to that ring inside of the sun photosphere)

Conclusion

The whole concept heavily uses Centrifugal force direct or indirect(like orbiting bodies them selfs) aka inertia – so you have to understand and be familiar with Orbital ringLaunch loopSpace fountainOrbit

Playing KSP help to understand some basic principles of orbital mechanics, fly safe. There are other games with some realistic orbital mech, and that’s good.

C. Clarke is a genius, Gerard K. O’Neill is great.
Special tanks for Google and the Internet, without your help guys, writing would be impossible.

xkcd I Do Not Laugh Anymore, Ever, Thank You Very Much C.C.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “How can I move a planet?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s