From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Mon Jul 16 2001 - 11:18:43 MDT
"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
>
> Robin asked:
> > Care to make any predictions about observational features
> > of these objects? That is, if they were MB or JB, what
> > would that predict about them?
>
> The 6 unresolved objects (because the HST didn't take images
> frequently enough to provide the full light curves) have
> a guesstimated mass of ~0.25 M_jupiter which would put them
> clearly in the Jupiter Brain class. Alternatively they
> could be Matrioshka Brains running off fusion reactors
> (e.g. no internal star). I would presume that the spectral
> properties and temperature of these would be similar to those
> previously stated, but Anders might have other opinions.
Or old black holes. What is the Hawking estimates on the lifetime of
black holes in the range of .1-1.0 jupiters?
>
> I believe that Ander's Jupiter Brain design has a lot of fiber
> connecting the internal nodes, if so, one needs a *lot* of
> silicon for that. If the spectra of the stars in the GC
> indicate they are low in C/Si/O relative to other less useful
> elements (perhaps Na, K, Ca, He, Kr, etc.) then that could
> be an indication that star lifting is occurring and the
> useless materials are being recycled back through the stars
> until they end up as something more useful.
Well, you are assuming that they use silicon/electron based computation.
If instead they use photon/quantum well based computation, they could
construct on any more populous substrate, from lithium and carbon, etc.
I'd look for unusual concentrations of elements popular in laser
mechanisms: fluoride, CO2, etc. which would be needed to supply
concentred high power photons for computing nodes.
Similarly, these would be interesting targets to look for coherent
radiation from...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:48 MST