[ExI] Von Neumann Probes

[Jason Resch]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2026, 4:55 PM John Clark via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 4:23 PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
> *> *
>>
>>
>>
>> *Rather than crush Jupiter into a black hole, consider lifting it out of
>> the gravity well.  Drexler worked this out a long time ago and had to
>> invent a new measure of energy to make it (sort of) comprehensible. It
>> would take the total output of the sun for 3 centuries to pull Jupiter
>> apart.*
>>
>
> *The amount of energy needed to tear Jupiter apart would be trivially tiny
> compared with the gargantuan amount of energy that would be required to
> crush it into a 20 foot wide Black Hole.  *
>

Just drop a small black hole into it, gravity will do the rest. It's an
exothermic process, you don't need to add energy for it to fall into itself.

Jason



>
> *John K Clark*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Keith
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 12:58 PM John Clark via extropy-chat
>> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 9:43 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>> >>> Answer my question from my previous email: how many
>> non-reversible computations can be performed for two computers at those two
>> temperatures,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> >> That depends on the mass of the computers in question. Regardless
>> of what temperature the computers are at, the maximum number of bits of
>> information one kilogram of mass can process per second is 1.36*1^50 bits .
>> If all else was equal a computer with a black hole heat sink would be able
>> to process  0.0064699999983% more information than a computer that used
>> empty space as a heat sink. Does that improvement seem worth crushing
>> Jupiter into a 20 foot wide Black Hole to you?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > I see your error.
>> >
>> >
>> > MY ERROR?!
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> > You are confusing wasted energy for useful energy.
>> >
>> >
>> > My confusion?!  The total amount of energy produced has nothing to do
>> with the temperature of the cold heat sink, it does have an effect on the
>> theoretical limit of how much of the total energy can be turned into work.
>> AND the amount is almost exactly the same for both, 0.99353 % can be if
>> empty space is used as a cold heat sink, and 0.9999999999983%  can be if an
>> unspecified method is used to crush Jupiter into a 20 foot wide black hole
>> and that is your cold a heat sink.
>> >
>> > I think the gargantuan amount of energy required to crush Jupiter into
>> such a dense state, FAR greater than the amount of energy the sun will
>> produce in its entire lifetime, could more productively be used in other
>> ways.
>> >
>> >
>> >> > See my email in the other thread which shows how this difference
>> yields a 3.8 billion fold increase in the number of computations that can
>> be performed. (Because it is wasted energy that has been reduced, not the
>> amount of useful energy that has been increased).
>> >
>> >
>> > If I had written that email I'd be embarrassed by it and not be urging
>> others to read it again.
>> >
>> > John K Clark
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > extropy-chat mailing list
>> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260128/e973dd5b/attachment.htm>