Asked a similar question before but didn't think it through and mangled it.

Anyway would it be possible to build a structure between two star systems?

Basic scenario is that you have two stars surrounded by Dyson spheres, assuming time and resources is no object would it be possible to build a bridge between two the two sphere's and effectively anchor them relative to each other?

Or would their slightly different orbits/movements in the galaxy make it impossible, or the shear length of the connection cause it to collapse/bend under its own weight.

In addition what would happen to the galaxy if you applied this process to every star in it? Apart from the fact you would need more materials that actually exist would it simply turn the galaxy into a blackhole.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Well, solid-shell Dyson spheres are quite far from being possible with any known material. So if you have them, you can equally easy have a bridge, $\endgroup$
    – FiatLux
    Commented Mar 29, 2018 at 12:51
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Also unless you have magical technology that can produce a near endless supply of matter, Dyson spheres just aren't practical $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 29, 2018 at 13:03
  • $\begingroup$ @BinaryWorrier well giving that this would have been the start of a massive city/complex between the stars (feed and supplied by transdimensional technology) that wouldn't have been a problem. $\endgroup$
    – Exostrike
    Commented Mar 29, 2018 at 13:16
  • $\begingroup$ Dude if you're going to handwave that much science, it's not much of a stretch to have them be able to manipulate gravity at massive scales, then any problems you'd have with this go away. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 29, 2018 at 13:19
  • $\begingroup$ If you are talking about a binary system, then yes, after building two Dyson spheres around the stars you can connect them if you like. $\endgroup$
    – Alexander
    Commented Mar 29, 2018 at 17:08

2 Answers 2


This is not feasible.

Check this section of wikipedia's article on Proxima Centauri:

Among the known stars, Proxima Centauri has been the closest star to the Sun for about 32,000 years and will be so for about another 25,000 years, after which Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B will alternate approximately every 79.91 years as the closest star to the Sun. In 2001, J. García-Sánchez et al. predicted that Proxima will make its closest approach to the Sun in approximately 26,700 years, coming within 3.11 ly (0.95 pc). A 2010 study by V. V. Bobylev predicted a closest approach distance of 2.90 ly (0.89 pc) in about 27,400 years, followed by a 2014 study by C. A. L. Bailer-Jones predicting a perihelion approach of 3.07 ly (0.94 pc) in roughly 26,710 years. Proxima Centauri is orbiting through the Milky Way at a distance from the Galactic Centre that varies from 27 to 31 kly (8.3 to 9.5 kpc), with an orbital eccentricity of 0.07.

And then this graphic:

Distance of nearest stars

Bottom line being that stars move too fast in relation to each other. Any structures between them would have to contract and stretch considerable fractions of light years per century.

While one might think that this is feasible given the timelines for closest approaches (which take millenia), at some point any two stars will separate increasingly faster due to their different orbital paths around the galactic center. In a way, stars orbit the center of the galaxy, just like Earth and Mars orbit the sun. Once a star starts going away from the sun, it should take at least half a galactic year for them to start approaching again. At that point they will be in opposite sides of the galaxy.

Also notice that these structures would form a self-mangling blackwidow web if you decided to build them connecting every pair of stars. You would collapse the galaxy.



I recently saw a documentary (sorry I forget the name) where some astronomers were using long range telescopes, on Earth and in space, to see if they could determine whether or not there is in fact a large black hole at the center of our galaxy keeping everything together.

By observing a specific area for a long time they were able to determine the orbits of several stars/solar systems, and they found that the stars, all in different, erratic orbits, were in fact circling something central; what they now presume is that supermassive black hole.

What's my point? Stars move through space the same way that planets move through space in orbit around stars etc. etc.

A Dyson Sphere (if it were even possible to build) would orbit right along with the star that its around, but a bridge between two Dyson Spheres would be pulled apart because the stars are moving in two separate orbits. The bridge would snap! Your web of bridges would be even worse. It would break apart into millions of pieces. And I think this would all happen fast too. As a matter of fact this movement between these astral bodies would prohibit you from being able to build such a thing in the first place.

Imagine a spiders web where every point that the threads meet/connect is constantly moving in all sorts of different directions. In the case of the web it would become a tangled mess (because the strands are malleable and its all a relatively small structure).

But in the case of your web of massive, intergalactic, hard, solid structures, it would be catastrophic chaos! I don't think I'm even exaggerating.

Not to mention, building such a thing in the first place... The only substance that is abundant enough to be used as the building material might be dark matter and we cant even observe the stuff (outside of its gravitational pull)!

So, that brings up an idea: Maybe your web should be made out of energy or dark matter. That's all hand wave of course, but its better than physical bridges across galaxies imo.

p.s. since I brought up black holes, can you imagine what those and any large gravitational pulls would do to specific spots of your bridge/web?! The warping of space/time around such large structures?! Chaos!

Good luck with you story/idea!


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .