A Dyson sphere is a hypothetical megastructure that completely encompasses a star and

captures a large percentage of its power output. The concept is a thought experiment that
attempts to explain how a spacefaring civilization would meet its energy requirements once those
requirements exceed what can be generated from the home planet's resources alone. Only a tiny
fraction of a star's energy emissions reach the surface of any orbiting planet. Building structures
encircling a star would enable a civilization to harvest far more energy.
The first contemporary description of the structure was by Olaf Stapledon in his science fiction
novel Star Maker (1937), in which he described "every solar system... surrounded by a gauze of
light traps, which focused the escaping solar energy for intelligent use."[1] The concept was later
popularized by Freeman Dyson in his 1960 paper "Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared
Radiation."[2] Dyson speculated that such structures would be the logical consequence of the
escalating energy needs of a technological civilization and would be a necessity for its long-term
survival. He proposed that searching for such structures could lead to the detection of advanced,
intelligent extraterrestrial life. Different types of Dyson spheres and their energy-harvesting ability
would correspond to levels of technological advancement on the Kardashev scale.
Since then, other variant designs involving building an artificial structure or series of structures to
encompass a star have been proposed in exploratory engineering or described in science
fiction under the name "Dyson sphere". These later proposals have not been limited to solar-
power stations, with many involving habitation or industrial elements. Most fictional depictions
describe a solid shell of matter enclosing a star, which was considered by Dyson himself the
least plausible variant of the idea. In May 2013, at the Starship Century Symposium in San
Diego, Dyson repeated his comments that he wished the concept had not been named after him.
[3]

Contents

 1Origin of concept
 2Feasibility
 3Variants
o 3.1Dyson swarm
o 3.2Dyson bubble
o 3.3Dyson shell
o 3.4Other types
 3.4.1Dyson net
 3.4.2Bubbleworld
 3.4.3Stellar engine
 4Search for megastructures
o 4.1Postulated explanations
 5Fiction
 6See also
 7References
 8External links

Origin of concept[edit]
See also: Energy development
Freeman Dyson in 2005

The concept of the Dyson sphere was the result of a thought experiment by physicist and
mathematician Freeman Dyson, when he theorized that all technological civilizations constantly
increased their demand for energy. He reasoned that if human civilization expanded energy
demands long enough, there would come a time when it demanded the total energy output of
the Sun. He proposed a system of orbiting structures (which he referred to initially as a shell)
designed to intercept and collect all energy produced by the Sun. Dyson's proposal did not detail
how such a system would be constructed, but focused only on issues of energy collection, on the
basis that such a structure could be distinguished by its unusual emission spectrum in
comparison to a star. His 1960 paper "Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infra-Red
Radiation", published in the journal Science, is credited with being the first to formalize the
concept of the Dyson sphere.[2]
However, Dyson was not the first to advance this idea. He was inspired by the 1937 science
fiction novel Star Maker,[4] by Olaf Stapledon, and possibly by the works of J. D. Bernal.[5]

Feasibility[edit]
Although such megastructures are theoretically possible, building a stable Dyson sphere system
is currently beyond humanity's engineering capacity. The number of craft required to obtain,
transmit, and maintain a complete Dyson sphere exceeds present-day industrial
capabilities. George Dvorsky has advocated the use of self-replicating robots to overcome this
limitation in the relatively near term.[6] Some have suggested that such habitats could be built
around white dwarfs[7] and even pulsars.[8]

Variants[edit]
In fictional accounts, the Dyson-sphere concept is often interpreted as an artificial
hollow sphere of matter around a star. This perception is based on a literal interpretation of
Dyson's original short paper introducing the concept. In response to letters prompted by some
papers, Dyson replied, "A solid shell or ring surrounding a star is mechanically impossible. The
form of 'biosphere' which I envisaged consists of a loose collection or swarm of objects traveling
on independent orbits around the star."[9]

Dyson swarm[edit]
A Dyson ring—the simplest form of the Dyson swarm—to scale. Orbit is 1 AU in radius, collectors are
1.0×107 km in diameter (10 Gm or ≈25 times the Earth–Moon distance), spaced 3 degrees from center to
center around the orbital circle.

A relatively simple arrangement of multiple Dyson rings of the type pictured above, to form a more complex
Dyson swarm. Rings' orbital radii are spaced 1.5×107 km with regard to one another, but average orbital
radius is still 1 AU. Rings are rotated 15 degrees relative to one another, around a common axis of rotation.

The variant closest to Dyson's original conception is the "Dyson swarm". It consists of a large
number of independent constructs (usually solar power satellites and space habitats) orbiting in a
dense formation around the star. This construction approach has advantages: components could
be sized appropriately, and it can be constructed incrementally.[10] Various forms of wireless
energy transfer could be used to transfer energy between swarm components and a planet.
Disadvantages resulting from the nature of orbital mechanics would make the arrangement of the
orbits of the swarm extremely complex. The simplest such arrangement is the Dyson ring, in
which all such structures share the same orbit. More-complex patterns with more rings would
intercept more of the star's output, but would result in some constructs eclipsing others
periodically when their orbits overlap.[11] Another potential problem is that the increasing loss of
orbital stability when adding more elements increases the probability of orbital perturbations.
Such a cloud of collectors would alter the light emitted by the star system (see below). However,
the disruption compared to a star's overall natural emitted spectrum would most likely be too
small for Earth-based astronomers to observe.[2]

Dyson bubble[edit]
A Dyson bubble: an arrangement of statites around a star, in a non-orbital pattern. As long as a satellite
has an unobstructed line-of-sight to its star, it can hover at any point in space near its star. This relatively
simple arrangement is only one of an infinite number of possible statite configurations, and is meant as a
contrast for a Dyson swarm only. Statites are pictured as the same size as the collectors pictured above,
and arranged at a uniform 1 AU distance from the star.

A second type of Dyson sphere is the "Dyson bubble". It would be similar to a Dyson swarm,
composed of many independent constructs and likewise could be constructed incrementally.
Unlike the Dyson swarm, the constructs making it up are not in orbit around the star, but would
be statites—satellites suspended by use of enormous light sails using radiation pressure to
counteract the star's pull of gravity. Such constructs would not be in danger of collision or of
eclipsing one another; they would be totally stationary with regard to the star, and independent of
one another. Because the ratio of radiation pressure to the force of gravity from a star is constant
regardless of the distance (provided the satellite has an unobstructed line-of-sight to the surface
of its star[12]), such satellites could also vary their distance from their central star.
The practicality of this approach is questionable with modern material science, but cannot yet be
ruled out. A 100% reflective satellites deployed around the Sun would have an overall density of
0.78 grams per square meter of sail.[13] To illustrate the low mass of the required materials,
consider that the total mass of a bubble of such material 1 AU in radius would be about
2.17×1020 kg, which is about the same mass as the asteroid Pallas.[14] Another illustration: Regular
printing paper has a density of around 80 g/m2.
Such a material has not yet been produced in the form of a working light sail. The lightest
carbon-fiber light-sail material currently produced has a density—without payload—of 3 g/m2, or
about four times as heavy as would be needed to construct a solar statite.[15]
A single sheet of graphene, the two-dimensional form of carbon, has a density of only 0.37 mg
per square meter,[16] making such a single sheet of graphene possibly effective as a solar sail.
However, as of 2015 graphene has not been fabricated in large sheets, and it has a relatively
high rate of radiation absorption, about 2.3% (i.e., still about 97.7% will be transmitted).[17][18] For
frequencies in the upper GHz and lower THz range, the absorption rate is as high as 50–100%
due to voltage bias and/or doping.[17][18]
Ultra-light carbon nanotubes meshed through molecular manufacturing techniques have
densities between 1.3 g/m2 to 1.4 g/m2. By the time a civilization is ready to use this technology,
the carbon nanotube's manufacturing might be optimised enough for them to have a density
lower than the necessary 0.7 g/m2, and the average sail density with rigging might be kept to 0.3
g/m2 (a "spin stabilized" light sail requires minimal additional mass in rigging). If such a sail could
be constructed at this areal density, a space habitat the size of the L5 Society's proposed O'Neill
cylinder—500 km2, with room for over 1 million inhabitants, massing 3×106 tons—could be
supported by a circular light sail 3,000 km in diameter, with a combined sail/habitat mass of
5.4×109 kg.[19] For comparison, this is just slightly smaller than the diameter of Jupiter's
moon Europa (although the sail is a flat disc, not a sphere), or the distance between San
Francisco and Kansas City. Such a structure would, however, have a mass quite a lot less than
many asteroids. Although the construction of such a massive habitable statite would be a
gigantic undertaking, and the required material science behind it is early stage, there are other
engineering feats and required materials proposed in other Dyson sphere variants.
In theory, if enough satellites were created and deployed around their star, they would compose
a non-rigid version of the Dyson shell mentioned below. Such a shell would not suffer from the
drawbacks of massive compressive pressure, nor are the mass requirements of such a shell as
high as the rigid form. Such a shell would, however, have the same optical and thermal
properties as the rigid form, and would be detected by searchers in a similar fashion (see below).

Dyson shell[edit]

A cut-away diagram of an idealized Dyson shell, a variant on Dyson's original concept, with a radius of
1 AU

The variant of the Dyson sphere most often depicted in fiction is the "Dyson shell": a uniform
solid shell of matter around the star.[20] Such a structure would completely alter the emissions of
the central star, and would intercept 100% of the star's energy output. Such a structure would
also provide an immense surface that many envision would be used for habitation, if the surface
could be made habitable.
A spherical shell Dyson sphere in the Solar System with a radius of one astronomical unit, so
that the interior surface would receive the same amount of sunlight as Earth does per unit solid
angle, would have a surface area of approximately 2.8×1017 km2 (1.1×1017 sq mi), or about
550 million times the surface area of Earth. This would intercept the full 384.6 yottawatts (3.846 ×
1026 watts)[21] of the Sun's output. Non-shell designs would intercept less, but the shell variant
represents the maximum possible energy captured for the Solar System at this point of the
Sun's evolution.[20] This is approximately 33 trillion times the power consumption of humanity in
1998, which was 12 terawatts.[22]
There are several serious theoretical difficulties with the solid shell variant of the Dyson sphere:
Such a shell would have no net gravitational interaction with its englobed star (see shell
theorem), and could drift in relation to the central star. If such movements went uncorrected, they
could eventually result in a collision between the sphere and the star—most likely with disastrous
results. Such structures would need either some form of propulsion to counteract any drift, or
some way to repel the surface of the sphere away from the star.[13]
For the same reason, such a shell would have no net gravitational interaction with anything else
inside it. The contents of any biosphere placed on the inner surface of a Dyson shell would not
be attracted to the sphere's surface and would simply fall into the star. It has been proposed that
a biosphere could be contained between two concentric spheres, placed on the interior of a
rotating sphere (in which case, the force of artificial "gravity" is perpendicular to the axis of
rotation, causing all matter placed on the interior of the sphere to pool around the equator,
effectively rendering the sphere a Niven ring for purposes of habitation, but still fully effective as
a radiant-energy collector) or placed on the outside of the sphere where it would be held in place
by the star's gravity.[23][24] In such cases, some form of illumination would have to be devised, or
the sphere made at least partly transparent, because the star's light would otherwise be
completely hidden.[25]
If assuming a radius of 1 AU, then the compressive strength of the material forming the sphere
would have to be immense to prevent implosion due to the star's gravity. Any arbitrarily selected
point on the surface of the sphere can be viewed as being under the pressure of the base of a
dome 1 AU in height under the Sun's gravity at that distance. Indeed, it can be viewed as being
at the base of an infinite number of arbitrarily selected domes, but because much of the force
from any one arbitrary dome is counteracted by those of another, the net force on that point is
immense, but finite. No known or theorized material is strong enough to withstand this pressure,
and form a rigid, static sphere around a star.[26] It has been proposed by Paul Birch (in relation to
smaller "Supra-Jupiter" constructions around a large planet rather than a star) that it may be
possible to support a Dyson shell by dynamic means similar to those used in a space fountain.
[27]
 Masses travelling in circular tracks on the inside of the sphere, at velocities significantly
greater than orbital velocity, would press outwards on magnetic bearings due to centrifugal force.
For a Dyson shell of 1 AU radius around a star with the same mass as the Sun, a mass travelling
ten times the orbital velocity (297.9 km/s) would support 99 (a = v2/r) times its own mass in
additional shell structure.
Also if assuming a radius of 1 AU, there may not be sufficient building material in the Solar
System to construct a Dyson shell. Anders Sandberg estimates that there is 1.82×1026 kg of
easily usable building material in the Solar System, enough for a 1 AU shell with a mass of
600 kg/m2—about 8–20 cm thick on average, depending on the density of the material. This
includes the hard-to-access cores of the gas giants; the inner planets alone provide only
11.79×1024 kg, enough for a 1 AU shell with a mass of just 42 kg/m2.[14]
The shell would be vulnerable to impacts from interstellar bodies, such as comets, meteoroids,
and material in interstellar space that is currently being deflected by the Sun's bow shock.
The heliosphere, and any protection it theoretically provides, would cease to exist.

Other types[edit]
Dyson net[edit]
Another possibility is the "Dyson net", a web of cables strung about the star that could have
power or heat collection units strung between the cables. The Dyson net reduces to a special
case of Dyson shell or bubble, however, depending on how the cables are supported against the
sun's gravity.
Bubbleworld[edit]
A bubbleworld is an artificial construct that consists of a shell of living space around a sphere of
hydrogen gas. The shell contains air, people, houses, furniture, etc. The idea was conceived to
answer the question, "What is the largest space colony that can be built?"[28] However, most of
the volume is not habitable and there is no power source.
Theoretically, any gas giant could be enclosed in a solid shell; at a certain radius the surface
gravity would be terrestrial, and energy could be provided by tapping the thermal energy of the
planet.[28] This concept is explored peripherally in the novel Accelerando (and the short
story Curator, which is incorporated into the novel as a chapter) by Charles Stross, in
which Saturn is converted into a human-habitable world.
Stellar engine[edit]
Stellar engines are a class of hypothetical megastructures whose purpose is to extract useful
energy from a star, sometimes for specific purposes. For example, Matrioshka brains extract
energy for purposes of computation; Shkadov thrusters extract energy for purposes of
propulsion. Some of the proposed stellar engine designs are based on the Dyson sphere.[29]
A black hole could be the power source instead of a star in order to increase the matter-to-
energy conversion efficiency. A black hole would also be smaller than a star. This would
decrease communication distances that would be important for computer-based societies as
those described above.[28]
Search for megastructures[edit]
In Dyson's original paper, he speculated that sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial civilizations
would likely follow a similar power-consumption pattern to that of humans, and would eventually
build their own sphere of collectors. Constructing such a system would make such a civilization a
Type II Kardashev civilization.[30]
The existence of such a system of collectors would alter the light emitted from the star system.
Collectors would absorb and reradiate energy from the star.[2] The wavelength(s) of radiation
emitted by the collectors would be determined by the emission spectra of the substances making
them up, and the temperature of the collectors. Because it seems most likely that these
collectors would be made up of heavy elements not normally found in the emission spectra of
their central star—or at least not radiating light at such relatively "low" energies compared to
what they would be emitting as energetic free nuclei in the stellar atmosphere—there would be
atypical wavelengths of light for the star's spectral type in the light spectrum emitted by the star
system. If the percentage of the star's output thus filtered or transformed by this absorption and
reradiation was significant, it could be detected at interstellar distances.[2]
Given the amount of energy available per square meter at a distance of 1 AU from the Sun, it is
possible to calculate that most known substances would be reradiating energy in the infrared part
of the electromagnetic spectrum. Thus, a Dyson sphere, constructed by life forms not dissimilar
to humans, who dwelled in proximity to a Sun-like star, made with materials similar to those
available to humans, would most likely cause an increase in the amount of infrared radiation in
the star system's emitted spectrum. Hence, Dyson selected the title "Search for Artificial Stellar
Sources of Infrared Radiation" for his published paper.[2]
SETI has adopted these assumptions in their search, looking for such "infrared heavy" spectra
from solar analogs. As of 2005 Fermilab has an ongoing survey for such spectra by analyzing
data from the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS).[31][full citation needed][32] Identifying one of the many
infrared sources as a Dyson sphere would require improved techniques for discriminating
between a Dyson sphere and natural sources.[33] Fermilab discovered 17 potential "ambiguous"
candidates, of which four have been named "amusing but still questionable".[34][full citation needed] Other
searches also resulted in several candidates, which are, however, unconfirmed.[35][36][37]

Postulated explanations[edit]
On 14 October 2015, Planet Hunters' citizen scientists discovered unusual light fluctuations of
the star KIC 8462852, captured by the Kepler Space Telescope. The star was nicknamed
"Tabby's Star" after Tabetha S. Boyajian — the initial study's lead author. The phenomenon
raised speculation that a Dyson sphere may have been discovered.[38][39] In February 2016,
Boyajian gave a TED talk where she explained the story of how her research on the star quickly
took a turn into the mysterious. However, she was skeptical and in the talk she reminded
everyone that skepticism is the best policy whenever delving into alien territory. Her exact quote
is as follows:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and it is my job, my responsibility, as an
astronomer to remind people that alien hypotheses should always be a last resort.[40]
Wanting to understand the strange light pattern, Tabetha S. Boyajian put several hypotheses to
the test. The first general assumption was an exoplanet transiting (eclipsing) its massive star, but
the dips in light lasted between 5 and 80 days and were erratically spaced apart, thus ruling out
any kind of an orbit for one celestial object.[41] A dust cloud was proposed but the star showed no
signs of being young so a dust cloud was highly improbable. Lastly, a comet shower was
hypothesized. However, as Boyajian pointed out in her TED talk this was also highly improbable.
"It would take hundreds of comets to reproduce what we're observing. And these are only the
comets that happen to pass between us and the star. And so in reality, we're talking thousands
to tens of thousands of comets."[42]
So after all the natural explanations turned up weak, her team decided to send off their research
to SETI (Search for extraterrestrial life) to rule out alien structures. After reviewing the research,
the SETI Institute was so intrigued that they decided to study the star themselves and pointed
their Allen Telescope Array (ATA) at the star "with hopes of catching a tell-tale signal that might
reveal a technological civilization."[43]
The SETI Institute mentioned that what caught their interest was that "the timing of the present
dip (in light) suggests that whatever this material is, it is situated at just the right distance from
the star to be in the habitable zone, where we believe life like ours could develop as it has on
Earth."[43]
Being skeptical as Boyajian was, she finally decided to take SETI's approach and allow herself to
have a bit of fun in hypothesizing what the light pattern could have been. In her Ted Talk she
joked: "Another idea that's one of my personal favorites is that we had just witnessed an
interplanetary space battle and the catastrophic destruction of a planet. Now, I admit that this
would produce a lot of dust that we don't observe. But if we're already invoking aliens in this
explanation, then who is to say they didn't efficiently clean up all this mess for recycling
purposes?"[44] The search for answers to KIC 8462852 is still ongoing.
On August 25, 2016, a similar phenomenon was reported for another stellar object: EPIC
204278916,[45] a young M-type pre-main-sequence star with a resolved disk. Dimmings of up to
65% for 25 consecutive days (out of 79 total observation) were observed. The variability is highly
periodic and attributed to stellar rotation.[45] The researchers hypothesize that the irregular
dimmings are caused by either a warped inner-disk edge or transiting cometary-like objects in
either circular or eccentric orbits.[45]