Re: Setting the controls for the sun

Eugene Leitl (
Sun, 17 Aug 1997 07:29:41 +0200 (MET DST)

On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Paul Hughes wrote:

> On Sat 8-16-97, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> I think a dyson sphere is a tremendous waste of matter. If ones
> intent is to maximize useful surface area - a mandelbrot foam-like

If we are to rely on solar energy, a cloud of orbiting bodies around=20
the star (=3DDyson shell) is virtually the only configuration I can think=

If we can do fusion, or have harnessed microsingularity power, Anders'=20
Jupiter brain scenario appears best.

> structure beats a dyson sphere by several orders of magnitude. Also,
> assuming we are uploads, it would be much more effiecient to simulate
> our =91spatial=92 experiences rather than actually creating them.

You are thinking of a Dyson shell (=3Dsolid sphere). This would require=20
unobtainium at least. Even buckytubes fall infinitely short of the mark.

Conc. uploads: the form of intelligence was not specified in the above=20
scenario. A Dyson sphere is an optimal (in regards to available material=20
and energy) configuration for any application. If you want to minimize=20
latency, you ought go Jupiter brain.

> Paul Hughes