What is the |value| of captured enemy systems?

tlb wrote:...so I am sure you are right that some systems may have asteroid belts that are rich in exotic materials.

IIRC, it is mentioned in Textev that the Yeltsin system is rich enough in heavy metals to make fissionables and other heavy metals to make them a valuable export commodity -- OWTTE

cthia wrote:You certainly could be correct. I, OTOH, don't think the BIG BANG consistently distributed materials evenly about the universe or galaxies in a convenient or considerate fashion.

I would also tend to think there are many materials that man has figured out how to make that is as expensive and rare as Californium.

We already know there are metals, or materials, out there we are not aware of courtesy of our UFO crashes.

Please take any lack of faith in God and UFO's to Free Range please.

The only baryonic matter the Big Bang distributed was hydrogen, some helium and traces of lithium. All other baryonic matter (atoms with an atomic number higher than 3), plus additional helium and lithium up to iron was created by nuclear fusion in stars and distributed by stellar winds, stellar atmosphere shedding, novae, and supernovae. Novae and supernovae also created and distributed all baryonic matter heavier than iron.

tlb wrote:

Theemile wrote:In a younger star system, material "recently" in the solar fires would contain short lived radioactive isotopes which would be abundant. A young Earth had plutonium naturally, which since has decayed to down it's decay chain to lighter radioactives and inert elements.

So if such isotopes are required, mining in a system which still has an acreation disk might be a cheaper solution.

cthia wrote:Which is in keeping with my sentiment that some systems may have asteroid belts that are veritable "Gold Mines" of rare material resource. I always imagined some really advanced technology to be the result of new materials with "Eureka-like" properties.

tlb wrote:Certainly there is no reason to expect elements to be spread evenly, so I am sure you are right that some systems may have asteroid belts that are rich in exotic materials.
It is my understanding that the current theory of element creation expects that the big bang may have distributed mostly hydrogen, helium and lithium. As stars age they cook up the heavier elements ending with iron. When they explode the heaviest elements are produced and all are distributed to the galaxy. So the solar flares of young stars may not have the short lived radioactives that you expect. Better to search systems in the neighborhood of recent supernovas or send mining ships closer to the galaxy core.

Theemile wrote:Part of the current solar formation theory is that after a pre-stellar mass compresses and fusion starts, the heavier material from the fusion start is ejected and forms the accreation disk, which then forms planets. New radioactives are created in the solar fires at this point and become part of the new planet's makeup - and decay over time, hence what we have seen in the Earth's geologic record. Those materials are again thrown off by old stars as they die and the fusion processes fail. SO I guess such interest should be focused on both old and young stars.

Thank you for the correction of my inadequate understanding.

Part of the newest LIGO discoveries is that most of the heaviest elements are generated by collisions between neutron stars rather than supernova.

https://www.popsci.com/neutron-star-gold

It makes sense - a substellar chunk of neutronium is not stable. Neutronium fragments released from the gravitational field would rapidly decay into protons and electrons and insane amounts of energy, causing bits of neutronium to explode worse than any nuclear bomb within nanoseconds of release. Atomic nuclei of literally any size could be formed from the debris, up to and past all known elements. The bigger nuclei are themselves insanely unstable and would fission or alpha decay before being incorporated into new stellar or planetary formation. Still, anything up to uranium and a dusting of plutonium would be available for planetary formation.

There are various theories.

At any rate, the theories are simply arguing semantics. My thought still stands. The Big Bang had to distribute the chemistry sets that are naturally responsible for all of the Tupperware parties. You are all correctly pointing out that the horse comes before the cart, but the Big Bang distributed the horses—and the oats, grains and hay they eat to make excrement.

My original sentiment skips directly to the excrement.

cthia wrote:There are various theories.

At any rate, the theories are simply arguing semantics. My thought still stands. The Big Bang had to distribute the chemistry sets that are naturally responsible for all of the Tupperware parties. You are all correctly pointing out that the horse comes before the cart, but the Big Bang distributed the horses—and the oats, grains and hay they eat to make excrement.

My original sentiment skips directly to the excrement.

The Big Bang distributed a very small chemistry set--mostly hydrogen, some helium, and trace amounts of lithium. Your example of the Big Bang distributing horses (stars) is wrong, as horses (stars) were not created by or distributed by the Big Bang. The Big Bang distributed gaseous H, He, and Li. Even that statement skips a lot of steps where the very young universe was so hot that electrons weren't able to be captured by protons (and matter wasn't initially present as protons, neutrons and electrons). It took about 379,000 years for the universe to cool to the point where atomic nuclei captured electrons and became stable atoms. Stars were the initial physics labs that generated heavier elements than lithium.

What everyone else is saying is A led to B, which led to C, which led to D, etc., all the way to Y led to Z. What you have been saying is something like A led directly to Z.

Or to put it more human terms, an adult human is the product of their genes and experiences. An adult human is not just the product of their genes.

Vince wrote:

cthia wrote:There are various theories.

At any rate, the theories are simply arguing semantics. My thought still stands. The Big Bang had to distribute the chemistry sets that are naturally responsible for all of the Tupperware parties. You are all correctly pointing out that the horse comes before the cart, but the Big Bang distributed the horses—and the oats, grains and hay they eat to make excrement.

My original sentiment skips directly to the excrement.

The Big Bang distributed a very small chemistry set--mostly hydrogen, some helium, and trace amounts of lithium. Your example of the Big Bang distributing horses (stars) is wrong, as horses (stars) were not created by or distributed by the Big Bang. The Big Bang distributed gaseous H, He, and Li. Even that statement skips a lot of steps where the very young universe was so hot that electrons weren't able to be captured by protons (and matter wasn't initially present as protons, neutrons and electrons). It took about 379,000 years for the universe to cool to the point where atomic nuclei captured electrons and became stable atoms. Stars were the initial physics labs that generated heavier elements than lithium.

What everyone else is saying is A led to B, which led to C, which led to D, etc., all the way to Y led to Z. What you have been saying is something like A led directly to Z.

Or to put it more human terms, an adult human is the product of their genes and experiences. An adult human is not just the product of their genes.

I am not disagreeing with any post or theory embraced.

What I'm saying is B thru Y is all "SEMANTICS and THEORY."

Theories in which I consider is way too broad for this discussion. Theories in which we all won't agree. None of it would have been possible without the Big Bang, and the Big Bang would not have been possible w/o God. Which are two other things in which we all don't agree (which I was trying to avoid from many past experiences) — that there was a Big Bang and that there is a God, a God who is responsible for the Big Bang. So yes, I skipped lots of steps, mainly the religious one, as far as I'm concerned. But only because none of the steps in-between is necessary to grasp my original statement, nor does it change it. However . . . whoever, why ever or whatever is responsible for even the distribution of B thru Y (or the matter which enables B thru Y) is also directly responsible for failing to distribute the resultant material resource evenly throughout the galaxies, again - as a result of B through Y.

I wanted to skip the messy details and reduce the equation . . .

God → Void → Big Bang → Ethereal → Ether → Interactions → Material Resource → Uneven Distribution

. . . to its lowest form . . .

Big Bang → Material Resource → Uneven Distribution

Oh, and Vince, that very small chemistry set is all that was needed for everything to come to pass, left in the icy-hot oven of space. That very small chemistry set is to creation as the primary colors is to the rainbow. Minus the missing element of a God, yet to be discovered by some, that is.

Weird Harold wrote:

tlb wrote:...so I am sure you are right that some systems may have asteroid belts that are rich in exotic materials.

IIRC, it is mentioned in Textev that the Yeltsin system is rich enough in heavy metals to make fissionables and other heavy metals to make them a valuable export commodity -- OWTTE

Going back to the original thought, if Yeltsin ever would have been captured by the Havenites, even temporarily like Candor and Minette, it seems they would at least relieve the system of as much of that valuable commodity as they can carry. But, thinking about that, they probably would have had to plan for it ahead of time and brought a freighter to make it worthwhile.

cthia wrote:E.g., one such man made material is handwavium. It takes some authors years to make it in the laboratory, even though it only requires a stoked imagination and a word processor.

----------------

And of course "unobtainium" -- that which does all functions, but of course is not available......

-- Stewart

stewart wrote:

cthia wrote:E.g., one such man made material is handwavium. It takes some authors years to make it in the laboratory, even though it only requires a stoked imagination and a word processor.

----------------

And of course "unobtainium" -- that which does all functions, but of course is not available......

-- Stewart

LOL

Perhaps what makes it unobtainable is it's only found in truly hazardous systems.

I think it might be abundant in an asteroid belt in the Darius system. It has truly exotic properties enabling the development of unprecedented technology like spider drive ships. LOL