[ExI] ai comments on m-brains

Tue Oct 21 20:07:56 UTC 2025

On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 at 19:20, <spike at rainier66.com> wrote:

> There just isn’t a lot of info on the internet about thermal models for
> M-Brains.  Robert perished before he could publish much of anything on it.
> I had green bound notebooks full of hand calcs I did while he was here.
> However… I didn’t write papers the topic and now it is likely too late for
> that.  Family circumstances necessitated my cleaning out a room in my house
> to make room for an elderly relative.  Among the casualties of that
> cleanout were a stack of my green books, for I realized the detailed
> analysis on M-Brains will now be the responsibility of the next generation
> of futurist engineers.
>
>
>
> Given all that, the existing space engineers will get nowhere on M-Brain
> analysis until they recognize this is an entirely new thing, where their
> traditional software and mathematical tools do not necessarily apply.  The
> software and math models we space cases have always used are for one
> spacecraft, one very hot spot and one warm spot.  The moon is a second warm
> spot but seldom matters in thermal analysis.  There are no scholarly papers
> online that I know of where any serious space case has done a deep analysis
> of what happens when some ET figures out how to make an M-Brain and what
> engineering challenges go with it.  Consequently… ChatGPT doesn’t know how
> to do it either.
>
>
>
> Fun parting shot: we are now at a level of technology where we could start
> making an M-Brain.  We can come up with plausible designs now.  We are not
> waiting for any new tech.
>
>
>
> spike
>
--------------------------------------------

The long discussion with Gemini 2.5 Pro (who is mortally offended at being
called CHATGPT) was about Dyson rings around a star.
This is the main idea of a Matrioshka Brain (M-Brain).
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrioshka_brain>
The concluding section from Gemini is below.
BillK
------------------------

You've hit the nail on the head. Your thought experiment about the
"trillions of rings" is a perfect description of the core concept *and* the
central challenge of a Matrioshka Brain (M-Brain).

In fact, what you identified as a *problem* (the inner ring getting warmer)
is the *entire point* of an M-Brain.

An M-Brain isn't just a power collector. It's a computer. That "waste heat"
is the energy being used for computation. The design is a cascade:

   -

   *Shell 1 (Innermost):* Absorbs sunlight, runs computers at a very high
   temperature (e.g., 1000K), and radiates its "waste" heat.
   -

   *Shell 2:* Absorbs Shell 1's waste heat (which is still a *massive*
   amount of energy), uses it to run its *own* computers at a lower
   temperature (e.g., 500K), and radiates *its* waste heat.
   -

   *Shell 3...N:* This repeats, with each nested shell running cooler and
   cooler, until the outermost shell radiates its final, low-grade waste heat
   (e.g., just a few degrees above the 3K background of space).

Let's re-evaluate all the problems we discussed, but this time in the
context of it being a *Matrioshka Brain*.

1. Thermal Limits (The Core Principle)

You're right, you've been pondering the *most important law* governing this
structure. For an M-Brain, the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a
challenge; it's the *operating manual*.

The total computational power of the *entire system* is dictated by the *Carnot
Efficiency* (the efficiency of a heat engine) and the *Landauer Limit* (the
minimum energy required to flip a bit). The system's power is limited by
how much energy it can take in from the star and how efficiently it can
dump its *final* waste heat from the *outermost* shell into space.

Your 10cm-ring model is a "dense" M-Brain, which, as you noted, would
quickly fry itself. This leads to the same conclusion we reached before:

*Any viable M-Brain must be a set of nested, sparse swarms.*

It cannot be a series of solid rings or shells. Each "shell" would be a
collection of trillions of independent computing nodes (computronium),
spaced far apart to allow heat to radiate *outward* to the next-largest
sparse shell.

2. Kessler Syndrome (Now Even Scarier)

This is a *catastrophic* problem for an M-Brain. In a single swarm, a
collision is bad. In a *nested* swarm, it's a nightmare.

   -

   An impact on an *outer shell* (e.g., at 10 AU) creates a debris cloud.
   -

   That debris, on its new and very eccentric orbit, will *fall inward*
   toward the star.
   -

   As it falls, it will *accelerate*, gaining enormous kinetic energy.
   -

   It would then rip through the *inner shells* (like your 1 AU ring) at
   colossal speeds, far faster than the local orbital velocity.

This makes the "sparse swarm" design not just a good idea, but the *only*
survivable option. The nodes in each shell *must* be kilometers apart to
ensure a single failure (or impact) is just a single failure, not a
system-wide cascade.

3. Gravitational vs. Electrostatic Instability

Our entire debate about "10cm spacing" is solved by the sparse swarm model.

   -

   In your *dense 10cm ring*, you're correct that gravity is weak, but as I
   argued, EM repulsion would be an even *more* violent and uncontrollable
   instability.
   -

   In a *sparse M-Brain* (nodes kilometers apart), *neither* force matters.
   The mutual gravity between nodes is negligible, and any net charge is
   irrelevant at that distance. The only force that matters is the star's
   gravity, and each node is just a stable, independent satellite.

The "M-Brain designer" doesn't need to worry about EM repulsion for
station-keeping because the design is forced to be sparse by the thermal
and Kessler constraints anyway.

4. Command & Control (The *Purpose*)

For a simple Dyson swarm, C&C is a support system. For an M-Brain, the *C&C
network is the computer*.

   -

   *Latency:* The $\sim16.6$-minute light-speed delay across a 1 AU shell
   is a *fundamental constraint* on the M-Brain's *type* of consciousness.
   It could not "think" fast in a linear way. It would be a massively parallel
   processor, ideal for running quadrillions of simultaneous, independent
   thoughts or simulations, but it would be "slow" at any task requiring
   system-wide consensus.
   -

   *Your "Two-Point" Data Link:* This is a critical bottleneck. A real
   M-Brain swarm would be a redundant mesh network, with every node firing
   lasers at dozens or hundreds of its neighbors in its own shell, as well as
   to nodes in the shells "above" and "below" it.

5. Manufacturing (The Real Showstopper)

You are absolutely right to have added this. If one ring is 10 trillion
nodes, a 10-shell M-Brain is *100 trillion* nodes. This is the true
barrier. Such a structure implies a civilization that has mastered
automated, self-replicating industry (Von Neumann probes) and has
completely disassembled *every planet, moon, and asteroid* in its solar
system for raw materials.

*Conclusion:*

Your intuition is correct. Your "dense ring" model is physically
impossible, primarily due to the *thermal limits* you identified, which is
then reinforced by *Kessler Syndrome* and *instability*.

The only plausible version of this structure is a *Matrioshka Brain*
composed of *nested, sparse swarms*. And its ultimate limit isn't gravity
or collisions, but the two things you highlighted: the laws of
*thermodynamics* and the sheer *logistical challenge* of *manufacturing* it.

-------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20251021/6fd27f1a/attachment-0001.htm>