Skip to main content
12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 18, 2022 at 16:13 comment added DKNguyen @tom There is one workaround: the shell radius is so unimaginably large around the star that the power per area is tolerable. Although.... not sure if that would just collapse into a black hole or another neutron star. The OP's proposed shell size might already do that.
Nov 16, 2022 at 22:26 answer added Juraj timeline score: 1
Nov 16, 2022 at 1:08 history edited Arcturus CC BY-SA 4.0
added 238 characters in body
Nov 15, 2022 at 20:38 comment added ShadoCat One theory is that neutron stars do this already as protons hit and get stuck in the outer "skin" of the neutron star.
Nov 15, 2022 at 12:51 comment added Arcturus @Daron Beryllium is for reflecting the neutrons back onto the hydrogen. Iron is used for blocking ionizing radiation.
Nov 15, 2022 at 12:14 comment added Daron But why Berrylium?
Nov 15, 2022 at 12:12 history edited Daron CC BY-SA 4.0
edited title
Nov 15, 2022 at 11:13 answer added Starfish Prime timeline score: 3
Nov 14, 2022 at 18:18 answer added Jobah_HigherMind timeline score: 1
Nov 14, 2022 at 17:54 answer added L.Dutch timeline score: 1
Nov 14, 2022 at 17:52 comment added Tom That beryllium shell will immediately melt. It completely encloses the stark, which means it receives 100% of the energy emitted by the star. I would expect it to melt or otherwise disintegrate in just a few seconds. There can be no workaround: if you completely enclose the star, your enclosure will absorb all the energy emitted by it.
Nov 14, 2022 at 17:13 history asked Arcturus CC BY-SA 4.0