Theoretical question about the Sun

[Mshenko]

I would like to understand, for a science fiction book idea, if there is a possibility to create a theoretical energy plant that would circle the sun and tap into it's core and drain energy from the core (to use for human needs) and in the process would "drain" the sun or "shorten" it's life span. Is it possible? (or anything similar)

 

[Vanadium 50]

No, there is no way to shorten the sun's lifespan by "draining it faster".

 

[PeroK]

I would like to understand, for a science fiction book idea, if there is a possibility to create a theoretical energy plant that would circle the sun and tap into it's core and drain energy from the core (to use for human needs) and in the process would "drain" the sun or "shorten" it's life span. Is it possible? (or anything similar)

Try this:

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

Although, with current technology all you can get from Dyson are cordless vacuum cleaners.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I thought that too, be's not asking about collecting the energy - he's talking about "draining" the sun and "shortening its lifespan".

 

[PeroK]

I thought that too, be's not asking about collecting the energy - he's talking about "draining" the sun and "shortening its lifespan".

If you could get a combination of Dyson sphere and vacuum cleaner maybe it would work?

 

[Klystron]

Not sure why the OP wants to access the sun's core instead of the freely accessible EM radiation. However...

For an example of a science fiction story where the protagonist gathers (fictional) Illyrion from star cores, read the brilliant novel "Nova" by Samuel Delany. Illyrion represents transuranic elements used to power devices in Lorq von Ray's civilization usually mined in tiny quantities.

Lorq discovers that a small freighter starship can survive the first moments of a stellar explosion and decides to gather tons of precious Illyrion produced by core collapse before the explosion in order to 'corner the market' and ruin the von Ray rivals, the Red family.

Evil scion Prince and delectable sister Ruby Red pursue Lorq and his loyal shipmates across the galaxy to thwart his plans. Can lowly musician Mouse, master of the sensory-syrynx, help Captain von Ray achieve his goals and destroy the Reds?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_(novel)

 

[member 656954]

a theoretical energy plant that would circle the sun and tap into it's core and drain energy from the core

Peter F. Hamilton uses wormholes to kind of tap stars in this way, though I can't recall any of his stories where that led to a shorter life. That's because most stars are HUGE so you'd need a gigantic wormhole to 'drain' sufficient mass to make an impact.

But I think in one of John C. Wright's Eschaton Sequence that a giant solar harvesting operation around the Sun did dim it and cause issues; it one of the early novels, I gave up reading after the third, they went from excellent to okay to ridiculous in short order.

for a science fiction book idea

Make something up. The hint is in the word 'ficition'

 

[Lren Zvsm]

If you could get a combination of Dyson sphere and vacuum cleaner maybe it would work?

How about this: Everything in the solar system other than its sun would be converted to a Dyson swarm. The swarm settles around the sun to gather its energy, creating a barrier between the sun and the planets in the solar system. This leaves the inhabited planets out of luck.

 

[Rive]

drain energy from the core ... and in the process would "drain" the sun or "shorten" it's life span.

I think the opposite is more likely to happen. By reducing the mass, the life span of the star increases.

Ps.: I know, the question was about energy. But that won't come without mass pulled.

 

[DrStupid]

I think the opposite is more likely to happen. By reducing the mass, the life span of the star increases.

Star lifting works by removing mass from the surface of the star. That results in reduced pressure and tempreature in the core and therefore reduced fusion rate.

If I understand the OP correctly, this thread is about draining energy from the core while the mass of the star remains (almost) unchanged. In this case the lost energy would need to be compensated by an increased fusion rate in order to keep the star stable.

 

[stefan r]

...Everything in the solar system other than its sun would be converted ... ... between the sun and the planets in the solar system...

No planets are left if you convert them into something else.

 

[Lren Zvsm]

How about this: Everything in the solar system other than its sun would be converted to a Dyson swarm. The swarm settles around the sun to gather its energy, creating a barrier between the sun and the planets in the solar system. This leaves the inhabited planets out of luck.

Holy Moley! One of our Phellow Physics Phorum Phans just pointed out that my scheme eliminated the planets that I had stated would be disadvantaged. Yikes!

 

[DHF]

As others have stated, building a shell or swarm around the sun would be the best way to collect the energy. There is no reason to physically collect matter from the star. If you did remove matter you would not "drain" the star, in fact you would lengthen its lifespan because you would be decreasing its mass and a lower mass star lives longer.

 

[Interested user]

I don’t know about draining the sun, but if you could somehow increase the gravity of the sun’s outer parts, you may be able to make its core collapse on itself.

 

[DrStupid]

As others have stated, building a shell or swarm around the sun would be the best way to collect the energy. There is no reason to physically collect matter from the star.

There could be a reason for somebody who has the technology for fusion down to iron.

 

[DHF]

There could be a reason for somebody who has the technology for fusion down to iron.

True, I suppose I should have said no reason in regards to producing energy. you can harness a profound amount of energy by building collectors around the star. in that respect there is no reason to pull anything physical from the star.

 

[DrStupid]

True, I suppose I should have said no reason in regards to producing energy.

My reply refers to energy production.