gjm comments on Existential Risk - Less Wrong

28 Post author: lukeprog 15 November 2011 02:23PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (108)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Gedusa 15 November 2011 04:04:01PM 22 points [-]

Whilst I really, really like the last picture - it seems a little odd to include it in the article.

Isn't this meant to seem like a hard-nosed introduction to non-transhumanist/sci-fi people? And doesn't the picture sort of act against that - by being slightly sci-fi and weird?

Comment author: gjm 15 November 2011 07:06:04PM 4 points [-]

Not only is the picture slightly sci-fi and weird, it's also wrong. I mean, my thought processes on seeing it went something like this: "Oh, hey, it's a ringworld. Presumably this is meant to hint at the glorious future that might be ahead of us if we don't get wiped out, and therefore the importance of not getting wiped ou ... no, wait a moment, it's kinda like a ringworld but it's really really really small. Much smaller than the earth. What the hell's the point of that?"

Comment author: arundelo 15 November 2011 11:39:11PM 5 points [-]

The picture is of a Stanford torus.

Comment author: gjm 15 November 2011 11:43:23PM 0 points [-]

Don't those have to be fully enclosed?

Comment author: arundelo 15 November 2011 11:50:49PM 2 points [-]

Yes. The part that looks like a sky in the picture is some transparent material that holds the atmosphere in.

Comment author: timtyler 16 November 2011 03:00:42PM 1 point [-]

it's kinda like a ringworld but it's really really really small. Much smaller than the earth. What the hell's the point of that?

Faster build, reduced cost, not such heavy stresses placed on the materials.

Comment author: gjm 17 November 2011 12:10:27AM 0 points [-]

I meant "what's the point of that, as opposed to not bothering?". Not "what's the point of that, as opposed to building a full-sized ringworld?".

Comment author: dlthomas 15 November 2011 07:21:55PM 1 point [-]

Not much smaller than the earth at all!

With more physics and attention, one could produce better numbers, but as a crude ballpark (using data from wikipedia):

Surface area of the Earth: 510,072,000 km^2

Circumference of ring, if it's placed at 1 AU: 2 * pi AU = 939,951,956 km

So, if the ring is a little over a half a kilometer in width, it has the same surface area as the Earth - and could be smaller still, if we just compare habitable area.

Comment author: wnoise 15 November 2011 07:24:20PM 7 points [-]

The scale of curvature there makes it clear it's not 1 AU in radius.

Comment author: dlthomas 15 November 2011 07:33:56PM 1 point [-]

Fair enough, I suppose. But then it's not really a ring world so much as a... what? Space station?

Comment author: wnoise 15 November 2011 08:06:57PM 4 points [-]

Yeah, pretty much. If it were bigger, I might call it a Culture orbital.