'Half a Life' [TNG]

[Glom]

Okay, how would you reactivate a dying star?

[tracer]

The same way I'd reactivate the core of the earth if it stopped spinning: Nuke it.

(But I'd better bring along an extra 6 or 7 pounds of plutonium, just in case my outer-core-density calculations were off.)

[Wingnut Ninja]

Start talking technobabble until it starts up again in an attempt to singe you with a solar flare just to shut you up. Physics are no match for changing the frequency of the plasma interphase couplings and rerouting the output with a .03 variance through the main deflector di-*foom*

[Pinemarten]

This reminds me of an idea I had on a cold winter day in Canada.
Would it be possible to 'kick start' a nuclear reaction in the moon, and thus create a small sun for more energy?

[BigJim]

I'm runnning out of time, but just quickly, so others can expand on this:

Okay, how would you reactivate a dying star?

Passing a large amount of mass like a black hole by it might do it (well, at least brown dwarfs can ignite that way).

Would it be possible to 'kick start' a nuclear reaction in the moon, and thus create a small sun for more energy?

Not if you're talking fission- there's not really anything to fission. On the other hand, the moon contains helium-3, but you'd have to mine it to use it, and it's only about 4 ppb.

As I explained elsewhere:
There are two main kinds of thermonuclear fusion that we could achieve. One, which is what we are experimenting with now and which we occasionally use in thermonuclear bombs, is deuterium-tritium fusion. Deuterium, a hydrogen atom with a neutron, and tritium, a hydrogen atom with two neutrons, are the easiest atoms to fuse. Deuterium tritium or D-T fission creates a helium-4 atom and a neutron, as well as 17.6 million million electron volts (MeV), about ten million times the energy burning coal releases.

The helium-4 nucleus created, also known as an alpha ray, is a charged particle, and the magnetic field of a tokamak confines it in the magnetic field, and as it collides with surrounding deuterium and tritium it heats the plasma. However, the neutron is uncharged and collides with the wall of the tokamak. Some of the neutrons will collide with a lithium blanket, creating more tritium, and the heated walls could turn a generator, but eventually the wall of the tokamak would need to be replaced.

The other kind of fusion, D-He3 or deuterium-helium 3 fusion, creates 18 MeV of energy, one hydrogen nucleus, one helium-4 nucleus, and no neutrons. So, clearly, this type of fusion is preferable as it creates more energy and does not require the costly and dangerous replacement of radioactive walls. However, D-He3 fusion is harder to start than D-T fusion. The larger problem with D-He3 fusion, though, is that He-3 does not exist on Earth. The solar wind has put it into lunar soil with about 4 ppb on average. While not much per unit of soil, over the whole moon this is more energy than all the fossil fuels on Earth. This is a reason for spaceflight and lunar colonization.

The reason neither D-T nor D-He3 reactors currently exist is that the reaction needs to produce energy at a rate equal to the power being using externally to heat the plasma. This condition is called "Breakeven" and was first reached in 1997. The next step, called ignition, requires about 4 times more energy but can heat itself, and is the last remaining barrier to nuclear fusion plants.

Once this technology becomes available, though, it will by FAR be better than other power forms. It produces no pollution, cannot melt down, creates far more energy than any other natural source, and it should be fairly simple to build the facilities once the technology is acquired.


But basically, no, not really, however, you can use lunar products to make energy.

[Colt]

You could just dump alot of spare hydrogen onto the star. -Colt

[Grey]

You could just dump alot of spare hydrogen onto the star. -Colt

Well, even a star near the end of its life cycle still has mostly hydrogen in the outer layers; it's just the core that's depleted. So you couldn't just dump hydrogen on the surface, you'd have to magically transport it to the stellar core.

[Ba Witda]

Or one could take a giant sun-proof stick and just stir the hydrogen in, making sure it's even and fluffy.

Or one could use Ba's method. Find the ignition and ease the gas pedal. Be careful not to flood the star.

[QuagmaPhage]

Would it be possible to 'kick start' a nuclear reaction in the moon, and thus create a small sun for more energy?

Arthur C. Clarke's Novel The Sands of Mars which was written in the late 1940s has a similar idea, where Phobos is turned into a small sun. Maybe that is where you got the idea?
While it might be beneficial to Canada if we got a second sun, it would be disastrous to the tropical countries.

[Pinemarten]

I agree.
Should we be wary of politicians that read Clarke?

On a humourus note, do you know of that short story refering to a Mars moon called 'Bottomos'?

[logicboy]

If the sun were dying we could just tow another star into the sun. :P

[Pinemarten]

Should we warn the Jovian about that hidden agenda?

[SollyLama]

Flick your Bic.
Gather the entire world's supply of Matchlight charcoal and send it to the star.
Rub two REALLY big sticks together

[tracer]

If the sun were dying we could just tow another star into the sun. :P
Yeah, but attaching that towing cable is going to be murder.

[Glom]

Has anyone read Q-Zone by Greg Cox? The TKon empire feature in it. They know their star is dying, so the comission a project called the Great Endeavour, which involves building a huge transporter encasing the red giant as well as another young, healthy star, so they can switch them.

[Moose]

Interesting idea, Glom, but wouldn't significant and sudden alterations to the center of mass have some rather significant ramifications as far as planetary orbits are concerned? Like possibly destabilizing one's orbit sufficiently that it might potentially be ejected (or take on a comet-like orbit)?

[Glom]

That was discussed. The star they chose as the replacement was specially chosen because it had similar mass to their old one and the beaming would work such that there would be only a small delay.

[captain swoop]

That was discussed. The star they chose as the replacement was specially chosen because it had similar mass to their old one and the beaming would work such that there would be only a small delay.

And what was the power source?

[Glom]

Can't remember it saying. Of course there's an awful lot of solar power you're going to get.

[tracer]

Interesting idea, Glom, but wouldn't significant and sudden alterations to the center of mass have some rather significant ramifications as far as planetary orbits are concerned?
If they have Star-Trek-like transporters that can teleport whole stars, readjusting the orbits of the planets afterwards ought to be child's play.

[Donnie B.]

Why bother transporting a whole star? Save some energy and just transport your planet into orbit around the young, healthy sun.

[Digital Apprentice]

Why bother transporting a whole star? Save some energy and just transport your planet into orbit around the young, healthy sun.

Or hijack (http://www.thescarymonkeyshow.com/pj.htm) a different planet and toss it into the old star. Critters burn good.