/sci/ - Science & Math

Why don't we take the earth, and move it into the sun.

I wasn't aware that was on our agenda until now. Would you like to kill all humans, or substantially destroy the planet? I saw a double meaning so I had to ask.

If we wanted to I bet we could make enough anti-matter and enrich enough uranium to do it. It would be so expensive that it would literally take everything we have.

>tie a rope around the moon
>pull

>>3558610
no

>>3558605
The natural course of technology, advancement, and intelligence ; at least for humans ; is to destructive end s

The atom was first split in order to kill.
Combustion was first initiated in order to kill.
The wheel was first created in order to kill.

Dyson was wrong.

Intelligence is not immortal

Intelligence is as transient as you can imagine.

It is the ultimate self-destructive force.

The earth will ultimately be completely annhilated by its own "intelligent" spawn.

The energy it would require to vaporize the entire earth would be more than is available on the entire earth.

what about detonating nuclear weapons below the earths crust? would that be like trying to move a car with a feather or could it potentially cause earthquakes and super volcanos to go ape shit?

>>3558608
ideally i would like a complete existential failure. however since such a thing does not seem possible, the best case would appear to be vacuum collapse.

>>3558619
my working idea is gravitational singularity which then eats the earth inside out leaving us nothing but a 9.0mm black hole orbiting a dead sun

>>3558620
Even if it could set off a "supervolcano" which is unlikely considering the amount of force thats exerted on those faults, a supervolcano won't destory the planet

>>3558622
Meh, don't care enough right now. I'd rather just get along with people and be responsible with our resources.

>>3558628
where would we get the mass for it? The starter mass alone would be significant and second it wouldn't be able to consume enough mass to sustain growth.

>>3558629
>>3558620
You're thinking too small.

Actually the second concept is better then the first

self replicating nanomachines, grey goo, that's the way to go if we can't collapse it into a singularity

this is why we'll never find aliens

some depressed scientists will kill themselves and the entire planet when it becomes clear that consciousness is a curse and not a gift

>>3558637
but that's just effectively repopulating the earth with a new species and displacing the old ones, not destroying it.

>>3558638
smash high energy particles into the densest material you can find as fast as you can.

it's then a probabliity function

# singularites produced/second [reminder that even the vacuum produces black holes continuously but they evaporate on the order of the planck second] * % chance of interacting with a proton/neutron/electron

once the singularity consumes a single proton or neutron the entire earth will be destroyed because it wil kick the particle out of extremely fast hawking-radiation death.

Drain the lava in the center of the planet by poking a hole in the south pole (the bottom) and the the Earth will collapse in on itself because of all the fat people

>>3558644
it's a billion times more likely they figure out how to manipulate their consciousness (aka the brain) to feel nothing but pure pleasure 200% of the time (yes faggots this is possible if you control the brain because the brain controls your entire perception of the universe and existance and logic) so they never do anything except maintain the barest standards of life and quite frankly probably don't even reproduce and they all die off with electrodoes hooked into their consciouness/nervous system/brain

>>3558646
grey goo is not conscious/sentient like human beings

the goal is to destroy life as we know it

>>3558658
I thought the goal was to destroy the planet. Also, it will evolve.

>>3558656
That's retarded, people do that now, its called overdosing on meth.

>>3558671
nope.jpg

if a prefect BCI was created the high we could create would be 10^10^10^100000000! times better feeling then doing heroin with zero side effects

also we would have ABSOLUTE control over human motivations/emotions/everything.

>>3558680
yeah, that's retarded.

>>3558682
>implying you wouldn't have absolute control over everything you know and feel with control of the brain

Hydrogen bomb
/thread

>implying humanity has any reason to devise a weapon which could physically destroy the earth instead of simply wiping out life

>>3558689
Mutually assured destruction

We are currently working towards killing every human on earth. But we're doing it slowly, like cancer.
We want it to hurt.
>'We' being everyone

>>3558680
While i do agree with your concept, and consider this a strong argument against a diety, I would love to see your math

>>3558698
This is 360 degrees from what humanity is trying to do

>>3558689
Fail. We could not wipe out all life on Earth no matter how hard we tried. What arrogance. Thank you - come again.

>>3558716
you discount the posbilities of (in descending order of possibility)
1. self replicating nanomachines (grey goo)
2. creation of a black hole
3. vacuum collapse

>>3558777
yes, consider them thoroughly discounted

>>3558777
Sorry. I meant to imply "with technology and methods available to us in the reasonably foreseeable future".

>>3558790
man that's a depressing thought

time to do a PhD in nanoscience to change all that

> has not read one of those existential risk papers that describe way too many ways

>>3558826
Orly? Please cite some methods or papers of methods.

>>3558826
i'd kill the entire earth to see one of these

>>3558828
Even if he didn't mean this, whatever he's talking about is probably covered.
http://www.exitmundi.nl/exitmundi.htm