Re: dyson sphere stability

From: Emlyn (emlyn@one.net.au)
Date: Thu Dec 07 2000 - 02:02:50 MST


----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Broderick" <d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: dyson sphere stability

> At 02:00 PM 7/12/00 +0930, Emlyn wrote:
>
> >Maybe a lot of outer rings (3 place orthogonally to each other, plus
more?)
> >plus some attractive mechanism, could be used to stabilise the otherwise
> >unstable sphere?
>
> What makes you think a spinning ring is more stable than a sphere? The big
> boo-boo in RINGWORLD was the thing's gravitational instability, which
Niven
> had to retrofix (somewhat shamefacedly) as the key plot element of the
sequel.
>
> Damien Broderick
>

Isn't a spinning ring more stable than the dimension of the spinning sphere
described by it's axis?

Further, I thought the major instability was a sideways wobble. With three,
nested, all orthogonal to each other, and assuming some way to join them
without solid attachment (super bearings? Magnetic attraction? Dunno), isn't
the wobble in each compensated by the other two?

--

Shamefacedly? He made a sequel out of it, and the sequel made money, I imagine. I'm sure he coped somehow, wiping the tears away with lovely new greenbacks...

Emlyn



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:34 MDT