Home « Forum « Story Ideas

Forum: Story Ideas

Help needed-maybe too much help needed

aubie56
Updated:

I've come up with an idea for a story, but I have discovered that there are too many gaps in my knowledge base to do it justice.

The plot revolves around a shell put around the Earth by some aliens. This shell blocks all radiation, including electromagnetic and gravity. That means that the Earth is no longer affected by external gravity and flies out of its current orbit. Gravity at the Earth's surface would remain at 1g.

My main problem is figuring out what the climate would be like on the Earth if it could not receive solar radiation or any other, even cosmic rays and neutrinos. I would expect that there would still be wind because of the Earth's rotation, but would it always be from the same direction? Also, would there be storms if the temperature of the Earth became uniform over its whole surface?

This shell is in the form of a hollow sphere with a diameter of something on the order of 100,000 miles. Thus the moon would not longer be included with the Earth.

Any ideas would be appreciated.

richardshagrin

@aubie56

I am not the expert you want. However, if solar radiation is blocked, it will get cold and dark. Dark immediately, cold pretty fast. Plants won't grow without light. I suspect Oxygen will be turned into carbon dioxide fairly quickly, since oxygen comes from growing plants and living things turn oxygen into CO2. Solar energy drives the weather. I doubt there would be wind from the earth's rotation, the atmosphere moves at the same speed as the planet or there would be no windless days. I am not sure the temperature of the earth would be uniform, because higher altitudes are colder than flat land, and seas might be colder than land. Thermal variation from volcanos or places where the crust is thinner, easier for the core temperature which is high enough to produce magma (liquid rock) and other volcanic phenomena, Will the shell work both ways, keeping in the heat of the earth, or does it block heat transfer only from outside the shell? If the heat on earth is reflected from the shell, temperatures might rise. Someone who understands geology and meteorology might be able to predict things. Its still going to be dark, and bad for plants. And people who need oxygen.

sagacious

Losing the moon would mean the loss of tides and the seas would quickly turn stagnant. The loss of outside gravity influence would probably cause multiple earthquakes and volcanoes.

Replies:   Grant
Dominions Son

@aubie56

My main problem is figuring out what the climate would be like on the Earth if it could not receive solar radiation or any other, even cosmic rays and neutrinos.


A lot depends on what the aliens who build the shell are trying to accomplish. Why did they build the shell in the first place? This by itself will fill in a lot of the gaps.

A simple inert shell would be a disaster for life on earth.

Without the competing gravitational forces from the sun and moon not only would the tides stop, but the movement of the tectonic plates would change causing a burst of increased geological activity (volcanoes, earthquakes) particularly in areas that they don't normally occur now.

Without the radiation of the sun, wind would stop. All noticeable wind is the result of thermal gradients in the atmosphere. The rotation of the earth doesn't create wind, because friction with the ground and other effects keep the atmosphere rotating with the planet. Also photosynthesis would stop, which means the end of life on earth outside of what humans might manage to maintain with artificial lighting. (How much time do we have to prepare? How much time does it take to build the sphere?)

On the other hand, I would think that any alien species that can get here across interstellar distances and build such a sphere would have the capability of providing artificial replacements for everything the sphere cuts the earth off from, including keeping the tides going, possibly even to the point where they could keep us from noticing at all.

So, it all boils down to what do the aliens want? Are they stealing the earth for the raw physical material? Are they trying to rescue us from some impending interstellar disaster?

Replies:   Grant
Grant
Updated:

@aubie56


My main problem is figuring out what the climate would be like on the Earth if it could not receive solar radiation or any other, even cosmic rays and neutrinos.


As rachargshagrin asked, would this sphere retain all existing heat?

If it doesn't then within a day or 2, everyone (and most animals) would be dead.

As things are- in the desert the day time maximum could be 30°c, and it will drop to 0°c (or lower) overnight. Without the Sun, it wouldn't warm up again, and will continue to drop until it approaches absolute zero.

For all of the heat we produce, and all of the heat released by volcanoes, hot springs etc, it's the Sun that keeps us warm.

It is also the Sun that is responsible for day to day weather, and the Sun combined with the Earth's axial tilt that produces the seasons.

It is also the Sun that is responsible for winds- differences in air temperature at the same and different altitudes results in high & low pressure systems. It's the Earth's rotation that is responsible for Cyclonic & Anti-cyclonic systems (low & high air pressure systems).

And without the moon- no tides.

Also, would there be storms if the temperature of the Earth became uniform over its whole surface?


Even if the sphere kept all existing heat within it, fairly quickly the temperature over the earth's land masses would mostly equalise (it would take a very long time for the seas to eventually mostly equalise- huge thermal mass) and with the temperatures all over the earth pretty much the same (other than a few warm spots around volcanoes etc), there would be no wind, no weather, no climate, no evaporation, no rain.

Grant

@sagacious

Losing the moon would mean the loss of tides and the seas would quickly turn stagnant.

Just losing the moon would result in the eventual death of all animals, fish, plants that rely on the tides to exist.
But as long as the Sun is there, there would still be evaporation, rain, wind storms, and the ocean currents & conveyor belt.

Grant
Updated:

@Dominions Son


Without the competing gravitational forces from the sun and moon not only would the tides stop, but the movement of the tectonic plates would change causing a burst of increased geological activity (volcanoes, earthquakes) particularly in areas that they don't normally occur now.


My take on the tectonic effects is that things would probably quieten down for some time (100's, 1,000's, 10,000's of years? Not a clue).

But when they do start up again they would be catastrophic in their effects.

As it is the Moon exerts considerable force on the Earth, it moves the oceans & seas around as well, all acting on the earth & helping to cause earthquakes to occur earlier than they would without it's effects.

Without the moon, the stresses on fault lines would build up to much higher levels than they do now, before finally releasing.

aubie56
Updated:

Thanks for the comments so far--there were a few things that I had not thought of.

The shell was put into place over a few seconds, so it had to be built someplace else and transported to the Earth. The purpose of the shell was to keep humans from contaminating the galaxy with their presence once space flight was perfected. Everybody was afraid of us; cf Heinlein's "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel." Humans were expected to die.

There would be some wind as the Earth tended to spin out from under the atmosphere. That's what causes the west to east atmospheric flow.

The shell would keep heat inside it because it could not escape; thus, the shell would warm up and only radiate some of the heat back to the planet. The radioactive elements under the ground do a lot to heat the biosphere.

Yes, a lot of people would die, but I think that some could survive if the climate permitted it.

Dominions Son

@aubie56

There would be some wind as the Earth tended to spin out from under the atmosphere. That's what causes the west to east atmospheric flow.


Actually that is more because the warm and cold areas move east to west as the earth rotates relative to the sun. Wind at the surface blows from high pressure(cold) to low pressure (hot) and in the opposite direction at the top of the troposphere. Of course the warmest temperature at any latitude will happen just a little bit behind the noon line as it sweeps across the earth.

If the rotation of the earth had any significant affect in terms of wind, there could never be calm windless days because the earth never stops rotating.

tppm

I think that fairly quickly temperatures would drop, particularly if the shell is absorbing, rather than reflecting heat from the surface. Timing is gross and uninformed guesstimation, but I think the oceans would freeze within a year, and the atmosphere within two, except maybe for hydrogen. For an example look at the atmospheres of the outer planets and Kyper belt objects (big enough to have atmospheres), and they DO get some sun light.

Ernest Bywater

@aubie56

There's an old main-stream sci-fi set of books where Earth science comes up with a device called a spindizzy and they plant a number of them around a city to be able to fly the city away from the Earth and use it as a giant space vessel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_in_Flight

Dominions Son
Updated:

@aubie56


Yes, a lot of people would die, but I think that some could survive if the climate permitted it.


There wouldn't be a climate, at least not a natural one.

With enough advanced warning (years), a few artificial habitats with hydroponic gardens for food and oxygen and geothermal for heat and power could be built and maybe a few hundred thousand could survive, maybe even indefinitely

With no warning, there wouldn't be time to build the kind of shelters that would be needed.

Cold is the big enemy. Under the scenario you describe unless the shell is a perfect thermal insulator the surface of the earth would drop below freezing very rapidly.

No much of a story and certainly not one with a happy ending.

Replies:   tppm  Ernest Bywater
Grant
Updated:

@aubie56

There would be some wind as the Earth tended to spin out from under the atmosphere. That's what causes the west to east atmospheric flow.


Not sure what you mean by "spin out from under the atmosphere" and "west to east flow".

The Earth's rotation drags the atmosphere along with it. The atmosphere at ground level is moving along with the rotation of the Earth- that's having a nice calm windless day.

The poles are colder than the equatorial regions, so the general movement of air is from the equator, upwards, down to the poles, then back towards the equator at ground level. Rinse & repeat.

Of course here & there are land masses (some very large, others not. Some heavily covered in vegetation, others not. Some very wet, others not), which heat the air more than the oceans, so you get other rising regions of air adding to the general equator-pole flow. And because there are cooler parts amongst the warmer, you get some areas of descending air there as well- all within the general equator-polar flow.

Because of the rotation of the earth, and air being a fluid, you end up with coriolis forces.

End result- winds, high & low pressure systems, bands at various latitudes of high & low pressure (roaring 40s, the doldrums, the jet stream etc), and weather comes from the east or the west depending on where you are in relation to these regions.

And then of course local geography has it's own effect- high mountain ridges, plateaus etc.

The shell would keep heat inside it because it could not escape; thus, the shell would warm up and only radiate some of the heat back to the planet.


Ok.

If we consider the shell a perfect insulator- it lets nothing in, nor lets anything out.

The end result would be a drop of the Earth's temperatures to pretty much the same all over- poles to equator, ground level up to the shell.

As we are burning fuels, producing heat through nuclear reactions etc and the Earth's own production/release of heat the temperature would very, very, very (not enough verys) slowly rise from what ever it did drop to, and be (many verys) slightly warmer at ground level than higher altitudes.

The warmest areas would be around volcanoes, open areas of lava, geothermal regions.

I'm nothing close to smart enough to contemplate the maths required, but I suspect the temperature would drop to extremely low levels before starting to increase again; and I don't see any of us (or most other animals surviving that).

Wild arse guess, -120°c or lower (check out Mars).

The radioactive elements under the ground do a lot to heat the biosphere.


Afraid not.

Heat from the Earth is estimated at 0.09W/m*m

Heat from the Sun is estimated as 341.3W/m*m

http://www.skepticalscience.com/heatflow.html

tppm
Updated:

@Dominions Son


With enough advanced warning (years), a few artificial habitats with hydroponic gardens for food and oxygen and geothermal for heat and power could be built and maybe a few hundred thousand could survive, maybe even indefinitely


Nope, even hydroponic agriculture needs sunlight (possibly artificial, but that would only last as long as fossil or nuclear fuels, geothermal, and batteries, as most alternative energy sources rely on sunlight either directly (e.g. solar panels) or indirectly (wind and hydroelectricity)).

Maybe use deep sea thermal vent lifeforms.

W/m*m


What do the variables stand for? I'm guessing "W" per minute scared, but what does "W" stand for?

Replies:   Grant  madnige  Dominions Son
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

With enough advanced warning (years), a few artificial habitats with hydroponic gardens for food and oxygen and geothermal for heat and power could be built and maybe a few hundred thousand could survive, maybe even indefinitely


That just about describes some of the major Cold War bunkers, many of which are still around and still in commission and ready to use (especially the ones in Europe).

Replies:   Dominions Son
aubie56

Okay, I surrender. It looks like there are enough problems with my idea to make it impractical as a story for SOL. Thank you to all who contributed ideas; I appreciate the interest and advice. I have umpteen other ideas for stories, so I will go work on one of them instead of this one.

Ernest Bywater

@aubie56

there are enough problems with my idea to make it impractical


I wouldn't say impractical, you just need to establish what environmental parameters you want to exist once the shield goes into effect, then include something like a conversation between the aliens that establishes them, and go from there. It's your universe, you can do anything you want.

Replies:   tppm  Grant
tppm

@Ernest Bywater

From earlier comments I gather the aliens want to sterilize the planet. This would be a very effective way to do it.

madnige
Updated:

@aubie56

Humans were expected to die.


So the idiot question here is 'why didn't they just kill us all directly'? Possibly nudging Earth so it drops into the sun - then we can't contaminate anything, but they don't directly kill us.

That's what causes the west to east atmospheric flow.


-but the

!!%$@ stupid thing dumped most of my post!

Summarising what I had, if the shell doesn't insulate, we freeze in days; if it does insulate, we bake in years. The quote was to highlight trade winds which flow east to west near the equator.

Grant

@tppm

What do the variables stand for? I'm guessing "W" per minute scared, but what does "W" stand for?

I don't know what the short cut is for squared, so it stands for Watts per square metre.

Replies:   Dominions Son
madnige

@tppm

What do the variables stand for? I'm guessing "W" per minute scared, but what does "W" stand for?


Watts per square meter.

Replies:   tppm
Dominions Son

@tppm

Nope, even hydroponic agriculture needs sunlight (possibly artificial, but that would only last as long as fossil or nuclear fuels, geothermal, and batteries, as most alternative energy sources rely on sunlight either directly (e.g. solar panels) or indirectly (wind and hydroelectricity)).


First I was assuming that the "shelters would be deep underground, as close to the mantle as we can get them. I specified geothermal power, and there is no reason to believe that geothermal power wouldn't last for millions of years. The surface may freeze fairly quickly, but the earths core won't.

What do the variables stand for? I'm guessing "W" per minute scared, but what does "W" stand for?


That one isn't mine, but W=watts and m=meters

Its an expression of energy spread across an area watts per meter squared.

Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

That just about describes some of the major Cold War bunkers, many of which are still around and still in commission and ready to use (especially the ones in Europe).


Not deep enough and most are probably on some kind of nuclear or fossil fuel power not geothermal.

Grant

@Ernest Bywater

I wouldn't say impractical, you just need to establish what environmental parameters you want to exist once the shield goes into effect, then include something like a conversation between the aliens that establishes them, and go from there. It's your universe, you can do anything you want.


Yep.
Instead of them killing us off, their goal is isolation.

If they can make a shell that size, and it can nullify external gravity, it would need a power source. Part of the output of that could provide a single point source of light & heat (artificial Sun), and make the shell large enough to include the moon which would help with the distribution of the heat over the planet- something close would have to have much less output then the Sun so as not too cook things at the equator, but things at the poles would still be much colder.
Hell, they could also make the light & heat source move up & down the shield on a 12 month cycle to simulate the seasons.

Dominions Son

@Grant

I don't know what the short cut is for squared, so it stands for Watts per square metre.


Use either ^ or ** for "to the power of" so x^3 or x**3 would be x cubed.

Replies:   Grant
Grant

@Dominions Son

Use either ^ or ** for "to the power of" so x^3 or x**3 would be x cubed.


Thanks.
I managed to find it, but I suspect it's a bit hard to see depending on your screen resolution, font size & text size settings.
W/m²

tppm

@madnige

Thank you Grant and madnige

Crumbly Writer

@aubie56

Okay, I surrender. It looks like there are enough problems with my idea to make it impractical as a story for SOL. Thank you to all who contributed ideas; I appreciate the interest and advice. I have umpteen other ideas for stories, so I will go work on one of them instead of this one.

Again, I think you need to ask what you're trying to say with your story. (Earth/Humans need to be controlled, or Humans want to be free, regardless of what others want to force us to do?)

If the idea is to kill of humanity, it would be easier to fry the planet. Building a huge shell in only a day is, excuse me for being blunt, patently ridiculous. Major events take time. It may make a story a dramatic to surprise people, but there would be little justifiable reasons for it happening on that scale.

If your objective is to make a statement about humanity struggling against external controls, then you'd do better having a small collection relocated to an artificially constructed environment, rather than an alien force creating an artificial environment around the Earth. That way the focus would be on a specific population, as opposed to how billions of people respond across the globe.

I'm not so sure the whole story needs to be abandoned, as you simply need to reexamine what you're trying to say in the first place.

P.S. In one of my past and future stories, aliens decide isolate humanity, but they launch an artificial satellite which threatens to shoot down any space flights. A much, much easier process than encasing the entire earth in an artificial shell in a single Earth day's time.

PervOtaku

@aubie56

This shell blocks all radiation, including electromagnetic and gravity. That means that the Earth is no longer affected by external gravity and flies out of its current orbit.


Gravity is caused by mass. Scientists like to talk about a theoretical particle that "transmits" gravity, but they really don't know how all that exactly works. You might want to adjust your technobabble there. On the other hand though, I'm not really sure why it makes a difference. All your consequences will be from the solar radiation being blocked. Whether or not the earth leaves its orbit or is "blocked from external gravity" shouldn't have any real impact (other than the tides).

aubie56
Updated:

I was trying to make my original question as short as possible, so I had to leave out a lot of stuff. Otherwise, I would have wound up posting at least four chapters to get it all in, and I did not want to do that for obvious reasons.

I appreciate all of the comments, but a number of them were based on the motives of the aliens. Frankly, they are a bunch of self-righteous paranoids who have more power than good sense. Thus, they do not want to cause the death of the humans, just to keep them away from all right-thinking aliens.

The shell was built elsewhere and teleported to Earth a-la the "Startrek" transporter technology. It appeared in only a few seconds to the humans, and there was nothing that they could do about it.

The insulation from gravitational effects was a side issue that I threw in in case I wanted to write sequels in which the Earth was wandering through the galaxy. This was one of those unforeseen side effects that the aliens had not expected.

The comments did make me push the time of the event farther ahead so that electricity, etc. was generated by geothermal sources and fusion plants. I think that I will write the story after all, but it may be a while in showing up. The working title is "Forlorn Planet."

Again, thank you to everybody who commented. Any additional comments will be appreciated.

aubie56


There was one thing that I forgot to mention: the atmosphere does not move as fast as the Earth rotates.

You are assuming "plug flow" of the atmosphere, and that does not happen. The actual motion is "laminar flow" such as you see when stirring a liquid. Not all of the fluid moves at the same speed, and there is some drag on it which shows up as this non-uniform speed. From this, I have assumed that there would always be wind, and I further assume that it would always be from the same direction.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@aubie56

There was one thing that I forgot to mention: the atmosphere does not move as fast as the Earth rotates.


That depends on what part of the atmosphere you are talking about. Being a fluid, different layers and rotate at different speeds. The near surface layers are rotating very very close to the same rate as the surface. At the surface there would be no noticeable wind.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Dominions Son

Thus, they do not want to cause the death of the humans, just to keep them away from all right-thinking aliens.


At that point, if they can build the shell at all and get it to the earth in the manner you describe, assume that they can provide substitutes internally for just about everything they cut us off from.

aubie56
Updated:

There is ALWAYS laminar flow. Physics requires it whenever there is friction.

The aliens don't want us to live. Why should they? They are scared shitless by our very existence.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@aubie56

There is ALWAYS laminar flow.


That doesn't mean that it's always significant at all layers of the fluid.

Thus, they do not want to cause the death of the humans, just to keep them away from all right-thinking aliens.


The aliens don't want us to live. Why should they? They are scared shitless by our very existence.


Make up your mind. Either they intend to kill us or they don't. If they intend to kill us, very nearly everyone would be dead within a couple of weeks. If they intend to isolate us without killing us, why not provide for our survival inside the sphere?

Replies:   Grant  tppm
aubie56

Because it is my story and that is the way I want it to run.

Grant

@Dominions Son

Either they intend to kill us or they don't. If they intend to kill us, very nearly everyone would be dead within a couple of weeks. If they intend to isolate us without killing us, why not provide for our survival inside the sphere?

It's plot holes or inconsistencies like that which kill stories for me.
If they want to kill us, there are plenty of much easer/ cheaper/ more effective ways of doing it. So the sphere would make no sense at all.

If they're trying to isolate us, to protect themselves & the rest of the universe from us and they are opposed to killing, then the sphere with it's own power source to function and provide earth with heat & light is a plausible option.

aubie56

I think it is ridiculous to call this a plot hole. I have dealt with some victims of paranoia, and my most significant observation was how far they were from doing the most logical thing. For that matter, most of the current criminal justice system was dreamed up by people who were afraid of criminals, but were too dumb to do the right thing. What is the sense of a sentence of life without parole as compared to death, which would be a whole lot kinder and a lot cheaper. I know, the bleeding hearts would scream "foul," but where is their logic? Well, the aliens I have in mind were that foolish, and were afraid to admit it, even to themselves.

If you call my premise a plot hole without knowing the whole story, then you have my sympathy. I suppose that as soon as you see the title on the SOL list, you will vote a 1 without reading the story.

Replies:   Dominions Son  Grant
Dominions Son

@aubie56

I think it is ridiculous to call this a plot hole.


Sci-Fi stories depend on the suspension of disbelief. Maintaining the suspension of disbelief requires the story to at least be internally consistent.

Real life, particularly government, is often inconsistent. Fiction can't be internally inconsistent if you want people to read it.

Grant
Updated:

@aubie56


If you call my premise a plot hole without knowing the whole story, then you have my sympathy.


As the story hasn't be written and you haven't explained the plot or reasoning, I can only base my judgment on what has been given so far.

Enclosing the Earth in a sphere that kept out all light and heat would kill off most life on Earth within a matter of days.

Many smaller life forms would probably last several months. Those that live in & around sub-oceanic vents would continue on unaffected.

Even if the aliens were able to teleport the sphere to cover the Earth, they would still have to build it. That would take considerable time & resources. Any civilisation of that level would have plenty of less resource & energy intensive ways of taking care of the Earth problem.

Hence the suggestion that they don't want to kill us, just isolate us. In which case most people would survive.

But without the light & heat from the Sun, we are dead. So having a sphere around the Earth, blocking all heat & light and having any people survive is a big plot hole.


I suppose that as soon as you see the title on the SOL list, you will vote a 1 without reading the story.


I only vote on stories I finish, and I only finish stories worth reading.

I'm not a mindless tool like all the 1 bombers that regularly abuse the scoring system for their own purposes.

tppm

@Dominions Son

Make up your mind. Either they intend to kill us or they don't. If they intend to kill us, very nearly everyone would be dead within a couple of weeks. If they intend to isolate us without killing us, why not provide for our survival inside the sphere?


I'm getting the impression that they don't want humans getting into the universe and don't care, one way or the other, whether we survive their countermeasures.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
aubie56

That's what I said earlier. They couldn't care less about us as long as we are locked safely away.

sagacious

To keep it entertaining I would have the aliens erect a barrier that does not allow vessels to leave the immediate vicinity of earth without affecting the interaction of the universe with the planet.

There was a short story of that nature many many years ago. When the barrier was discovered there was some kind of sign that said that "the children may not leave the yard until they clean it up". I assumed that the moral was directed at pollution and war.

El_Sol
Updated:

I think you are taking it too far.

Why cut off the sun... just encapsulate the entire solar system and fully isolate us.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

Essentially, the best of all worlds.

You can even make it so it happened a long, long time ago... but we just discovered it. Essentially, the stars are all bullshit - it is just being projected but actually the universe is completely different than what gets projected on the inside of the sphere for us to 'discover'.

Replies:   madnige
BigE3160

I am no astrophysics by any means but to tell the truth it would depend on what the aliens could do. We could loose the moon if we still kept the same tilt to the world. Waves would still happen but we would need some external gravitation to keep the bulge around the earth near the equator. If this could all be kept in place and we could get a heat source and some of the radiation that is needed for plants and animals the earth would be fine. This would need to be provided some how.

I do have multiple science degrees and i have worked and have seen actual problems without the aliens that have been posted in the science journals over the past 30 years.

I hope this helps you.

E

Replies:   Grant
madnige

@El_Sol

You can even make it so it happened a long, long time ago... but we just discovered it. Essentially, the stars are all bullshit - it is just being projected but actually the universe is completely different than what gets projected on the inside of the sphere for us to 'discover'.


- Actually, paralax, changes in relative angles between stars or other celestial objects changing due to the position of Earth in its orbit and/or which side of the Earth we view from, lets us be sure that some things really are a long way out - it's how the nearer distances were measured (it's where we get 'parsec' from). If there's a shell it would have to enclose the whole solar system out to beyond the Oort cloud (otherwise we'd see inconsistent paralax from one side of the Earth to the other) and have patterns projected to match changing views according to where Earth is in its orbit (and Voyager should be reaching it in a reasonable time), or be even bigger (order of the size of the galaxy) with fixed patterns. This seems so much trouble to go to for no definable reason, that Occam's razor allows us to be pretty sure the universe hasn't already been replaced by something even more bizzarly inexplicable.

Replies:   sejintenej
sejintenej

@madnige

If there's a shell it would have to enclose the whole solar system out to beyond the Oort cloud (otherwise we'd see inconsistent paralax from one side of the Earth to the other) and have patterns projected to match changing views according to where Earth is in its orbit

The "shell" would have to enclose all or most of the universe because parallax changes the positions of stars relative to each other over time.
Ancient pictures of the stars have been dated because it was possible to work out the date that the stars were in the relative positions indicated. This couldn't work if "stars" were just lights on the inside of a sphere.
The shell would have to be transparent which would allow light to the earth's surface BUT its composition could affect the wavelengths of light reaching the surface (and thus affect agriculture)and earth's ability to shed heat into space

Don't you think that if we were dirtying the playpen then Big Mamma would not simply close us down and perhaps just allow amoeba?

Replies:   Grant  tppm
Grant

@BigE3160

We could loose the moon if we still kept the same tilt to the world.

Sorry, I don't follow that at all.
The proposal was for the sphere to surround the Earth, not including the Moon.
The axial tilt of the Earth doesn't have anything to do with retaining the Moon, that's due to gravity.

Waves would still happen but we would need some external gravitation to keep the bulge around the earth near the equator.

Waves are a result of the wind, which is a result of temperature differences in the atmosphere, which is a result of the Sun.
The Equatorial bulge is the result of the Earth spinning about it's axis.

Grant

@sejintenej

This couldn't work if "stars" were just lights on the inside of a sphere.

Unless they were able to move about the sphere, and able to change their spectra over time.
Very tricky.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son
Updated:

@Grant


Unless they were able to move about the sphere, and able to change their spectra over time.

Very tricky.


Difficult yes. Imagining it is beyond the capability of a race capable of building a shell large enough to encase a planet and then teleporting said shell across interstellar distances so that it encloses a moving object is impossible.

tppm
Updated:

@sejintenej

It would have to be more than thirty times the diameter of Earth's orbit (rule of thumb for 3D photography, 3D is discernible at up to thirty times the separation of the cameras). I'll let someone else do the math.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Crumbly Writer

@tppm

I'm getting the impression that they don't want humans getting into the universe and don't care, one way or the other, whether we survive their countermeasures.

Aubie, in one of my books, "Stranded", the aliens did the same thing by putting a simple satellite in orbit which would shoot down any launched space vehicles. It's a heck of a lot more 'cost efficient' than teleporting a completely fabricated shell around an existing planet! The humans would survive, but would never impact any other space faring race.

Replies:   aubie56
aubie56

@Crumbly Writer

It may be more efficient, but it sure ain't more fun!

Dominions Son

@tppm

It would have to be more than thirty times the diameter of Earth's orbit (rule of thumb for 3D photography, 3D is discernible at up to thirty times the separation of the cameras).


No it wouldn't Assuming a sphere that encapsulates the Earth, the farthest apart you could get any two cameras is the diameter of the earth itself, not it's orbit.

Replies:   tppm
tppm
Updated:

@Dominions Son


No it wouldn't Assuming a sphere that encapsulates the Earth, the farthest apart you could get any two cameras is the diameter of the earth itself, not it's orbit.


As it's done now, the two images that are to be pared are photographed six months apart, so the parallax is the diameter of Earth's orbit. The objects being looked at don't move enough to matter in that time. Of course, almost nothing is close enough (less than 60 AU) for it to matter, either.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@tppm

As it's done now, the two images that are to be pared are photographed six months apart


And for detecting that the sky has changed to an animated computer generated image projected on the inside of a sphere surrounding the earth, those six months don't add anything.

Back to Top