[AR] Re: Freeman Dyson, RIP

  • From: Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 23:51:09 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020, William Claybaugh wrote:

I am making a still larger point:  dense spacecraft constellations intended to last millennia are a bet against the Black Swan.  It does not matter how resilient such a system design might be, eventual failure is statistically near certain.

The same is true of any artificial life-support system, e.g. the ones that keep Los Angeles supplied with water. With adequate resilience, the risk seems smaller than others which are quietly accepted.

The timescale may seem long, but *building* such a constellation is likely to be the work of centuries if not millennia. There will be plenty of opportunity for practice and learning. :-)

The constellation approach also has the enormous virtue that the "sphere" need not be completed to be useful. In fact, I rather suspect that such spheres would not, in general, be completed -- unless something very clever can be done with constellation geometry, as the density rises, the outer layers start to suffer from part-time shadowing by the inner layers, giving diminishing returns.

(Plus, there is a point I've made before in other connections, that the timescale is just too long -- it is far too likely that before such a project is anywhere near completion, goals and technology will change enough that it will no longer be appealing.)

Henry

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. arocket
  3. Archive
  4. 03-2020