(ce) Stellaris / Paradox Interactive
Dyson’s sphere, as represented in the game Stellaris, from Paradox Interactive
Is it possible to build a Dyson sphere that is not catastrophically unstable? A new study says yes – but only in a very specific type of star system.
As Dyson spheres They are hypothetical mega-structures that advanced extraterrestrial civilizations could use to “grab” a star and enjoy their energy.
The theory gained strength in the 60s, when the physical Freeman Dyson conceived the idea of these eponymous spheres. The theorist imagined that a sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial society would have an insatiable need for vital space and energy.
Dyson also theorized that these extraterrestrials could solve both challenges disassembling a planet and turning it into a Huge spherical shell.
However – as described to – these spheres suffer from a “fatal failure”. It would be “Catastrophically unstable”. Now an engineer claims to have discovered a stabilize A sphere of Dyson.
What does it need? Only two stars.
In the study, whose results were in January in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Colin McInnesfrom the University of Glasgow, found a stable (and useful) configuration, which only happens in binary systems in which a Estrela is much smaller than the other.
In this case, the physicist proposes that Dyson’s sphere involves the smallest of the two stars. The movement of this smallest star acts as a gravitational crash, keeping the sphere of Dyson moving with the same orbit around the larger star, avoiding a catastrophic collision.
But…
As Live Science writes, there are several things to point out in this Mcinnes proposed “trick”.
From Logo, a smaller star would have to have a mass equal to or less than one of the mass of the largest companionotherwise the stable gravitational point disappeared.
In addition, the sphere would have to be extremely light and thin Compared to the two stars, otherwise its own gravitational influence would be mingled with the system dynamics and destroys stability.
And, of course, the same magazine points out, this analysis ignored practical engineering considerations, such as tensions that the sphere could suffer; or simply how the structure would be built.
