Kardashev Scale: Size vs Energy Output

In summary, the Kardashev scale is a scale that judges civilizations based on their energy output. There are three categories: Type I, Type II, and Type III. Type I civilizations use the energy output of their planet, Type II civilizations use the energy output of a star and its planets, and Type III civilizations use the energy output of an entire galaxy. However, the examples used to describe these types (e.g. Star Wars, Star Trek) may not be true types. For example, the Star Wars civilization covers most of its galaxy, yet its main power sources are disputed, claiming its energy output does not make it a type three. If we assume this is true, its power source is still a galaxy, but not
  • #1
Arian
57
0
The Kardashev Scale is a scale (duh) that judges civilizations based on their energy output.

There are Three Types:

Type I: 1.74×1017 W

Type II: 3.86×1026 W

Type III: 10^36 W


Now, its is said that civilizations will grow like this:

Type I: Uses the energy output of One Planet

Type II: Uses the energy output of a star and its planets.

Type III: Uses the energy of an entire galaxy, the black holes, stars, and planets in it.


But here is a problem: the examples used to describe these types (Star Wars, Star Trek, and others) may not be true types.

Example:

The Star Wars Civilization covers most of its galaxy, yet its main power sources are disputed, claiming its energy output does not make it a type three.

If we assume this is true, its power source is still a galaxy, but not enough energy o make it a type III.
\

So the question is:

Which is more important? Size? or energy output?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Arian said:
The Kardashev Scale is a scale (duh) that judges civilizations based on their energy output.

There are Three Types:

Type I: 1.74×1017 W

Type II: 3.86×1026 W

Type III: 10^36 W


Now, its is said that civilizations will grow like this:

Type I: Uses the energy output of One Planet

Type II: Uses the energy output of a star and its planets.

Type III: Uses the energy of an entire galaxy, the black holes, stars, and planets in it.


But here is a problem: the examples used to describe these types (Star Wars, Star Trek, and others) may not be true types.

Example:

The Star Wars Civilization covers most of its galaxy, yet its main power sources are disputed, claiming its energy output does not make it a type three.

If we assume this is true, its power source is still a galaxy, but not enough energy o make it a type III.
\

So the question is:

Which is more important? Size? or energy output?

I believe that the defintion is based on total energy used by the civilization averaged over a 1 year time period. This gives the possibility for a fairly low-tech civilization that spawns a galaxy to have a high Kardashev rating.

However, if you look at http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/DeathStar.html

for instance, you'll see that Star Wars technology can apparently generate at least 2*10^32 joules in one shot, suggesting that the Star Wars tech level can control and generate very high levels of energy. (Most of the movie does not portray this, though, this is more or less an isolated incident.)

The capability of making 50 such shots in a year would put Star Wars at the K2 level, considering only the Death star's power requirements.

Why a K2+ level civilization is messing around with manually piloted fighters is somewhat of a mystery, though. Star Wars doesn't really make sense if you try to take it seriously on a scientific level.

I rather like Ian Banks "The Culture" as a fictional representation of a K2-K3 level civilization. It probably doesn't make any actual sense either, but it's not quite as grossly inconsistent as Star Wars.
 
  • #3
is it really possible to harness all the energy from one planet without converting all the mass into energy?

assuming you are using only that planet, not a whole galaxy to achieve K1 status...
 
  • #4
Dr. Michio Kaku and Type 1, 2 and 3 Civilizations

The Kardashev scale is a general method of classifying how technologically advanced a civilization is. It was first proposed in 1964 by the Soviet astronomer Nikolai Kardashev. The scale has three designated categories called Type I, II, and III. These are based on the amount of usable energy a civilization has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonization. In general terms, a Type I civilization has achieved mastery of the resources of its home planet, Type II of its solar system, and Type III of its galaxy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale

We would be a Type 0 Civilization in transition to a Type 1.

Here's some interesting info on this:
http://destinationtype1.blogspot.com

Here's a video by Dr. Michio Kaku.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=V7FVjATcqvc

What do you think of Type 1, 2 and 3 Civilizations?

Do you think we will make it to a Type 1 Civilization?
 
  • #5


Like most things in cosmology (e.g. Drake equation), it's hard to tell if this is absolutely retarded or absolutely genius. I'm going with the prior because let's face it, a sample size of "1" doesn't really help when classifying civilisations.

Why don't we look to Earth and assume it's like a fractal? We have first world, second world and third world countries with exponential increase in resource usage as we go up. I guess that's the same principle, and I'm not sure if that's utterly stupid or utterly clever.

We're not in any fit state to progress, that's damned well assured.
 
  • #6


maybe...either that or we die. It will be an epic battle of epic proportions...causing us to eliminate each other.
 
  • #7


dst said:
Like most things in cosmology (e.g. Drake equation), it's hard to tell if this is absolutely retarded or absolutely genius. I'm going with the prior because let's face it, a sample size of "1" doesn't really help when classifying civilisations.

Why don't we look to Earth and assume it's like a fractal? We have first world, second world and third world countries with exponential increase in resource usage as we go up. I guess that's the same principle, and I'm not sure if that's utterly stupid or utterly clever.

We're not in any fit state to progress, that's damned well assured.

and yes...you make some sense. The transition from Old Order to New Order is still taking up time and effort.
 
  • #8
emason, please search for similar threads before you start a new one.

Thanks.
 
  • #9
Considering that this scale seems to start out on a planetary level, and we only know of one such civilization (our own), I fail to see how this is a scientific topic (N=1?). I'm moving this to philosophy.
 
  • #10


emason said:
Do you think we will make it to a Type 1 Civilization?
I can't get the kids to turn out the lights when they leave a room. My house is on the verge of becoming a type II civilization.
 

What is the Kardashev Scale?

The Kardashev Scale is a theoretical framework used to measure a civilization's level of technological development based on their energy consumption and usage.

What are the three types of civilizations on the Kardashev Scale?

The three types of civilizations are Type I, Type II, and Type III. Type I civilizations are able to harness and use all the energy available on their home planet, Type II civilizations can harness and use all the energy from their home star, and Type III civilizations can harness and use all the energy from their home galaxy.

How is a civilization's size related to its energy output on the Kardashev Scale?

As a civilization's size increases, so does its energy output. This is because larger civilizations have more resources and technology to harness and utilize energy on a larger scale.

What is the significance of the Kardashev Scale in understanding the development of civilizations?

The Kardashev Scale provides a way to categorize and measure a civilization's level of technological advancement and potential for future growth. It also allows for comparisons between different civilizations and their use of energy.

Is the Kardashev Scale a universally accepted measure?

No, the Kardashev Scale is a theoretical concept and is not universally accepted by all scientists. Some argue that it is too simplistic and does not take into account other factors that may contribute to a civilization's development.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
850
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
Replies
72
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
0
Views
728
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top