Feeding a High Population, Non-Agricultural world

[rinku]

Not necessarily. Prototypes may be subject to various restrictions. I could see a solid case that it might be able to make a TL15 fab (normally impossible for TL16 one) but not a TL16+ fab, as a Referee assigned Quirk.

Edit: The self replicating fabricator angle doesn't much affect the main discussion point. If a planet can build fabricators, it can build simpler machines that can process raw minerals into soil and life support gasses. Water itself tends to be something you just gather. Carbon Dioxide is also usually very common as ice.

 

[swordtart]

Nanobots can be constructed in specialised facilities or enhanced fabrication chambers at TL13. TL13 Nanos can only construct basic facilities. However the fabrication chamber that produced them can also produce the more advanced electronics that they cannot and the construction robots can fit them.

The TL13 Hive Queen presumably has a TL13 fabricator and cannot make Nanobots, however it can make robots that can build a TL13 facility which does not suffer the fabricator TL limitation. It also mentions that the Hive Queen can develop prototypes so actually building a TL15 Nano Queen (possibly unreliable) is within scope. If you have a prototype TL+1 system then you can use that to build a real TL+1 system that doesn't suffer the prototype issue. It will take time, but the Hive Queen has at least 60 years to perfect the tech (assuming it doesn't simply build a maintenance robot to conduct its maintenance).

I am sooooo having a Hive Queen off world colony in my next game.

 

[Terry Mixon]

I built a TL15 Enhanced Hive Queen last night and it costs about the same as the TL13 version. That would make the enhanced fabricator able to produce TL13 nanobots and that would be a game changer.

 

[Terry Mixon]

And, because I could. I made a TL16 one (from Vincennes) with a prototype advanced fabricator so it could replicate itself and other tech up to TL16.

I made the required quirk for the fabricator be 2x the cost (already 5x because it’s a prototype, so 10x in total). It is 5x the cost of a TL15 (or TL13) Hive Queen but has a few added feature.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Nanobots can be constructed in specialised facilities or enhanced fabrication chambers at TL13. TL13 Nanos can only construct basic facilities. However the fabrication chamber that produced them can also produce the more advanced electronics that they cannot and the construction robots can fit them.

The TL13 Hive Queen presumably has a TL13 fabricator and cannot make Nanobots, however it can make robots that can build a TL13 facility which does not suffer the fabricator TL limitation. It also mentions that the Hive Queen can develop prototypes so actually building a TL15 Nano Queen (possibly unreliable) is within scope. If you have a prototype TL+1 system then you can use that to build a real TL+1 system that doesn't suffer the prototype issue. It will take time, but the Hive Queen has at least 60 years to perfect the tech (assuming it doesn't simply build a maintenance robot to conduct its maintenance).

I am sooooo having a Hive Queen off world colony in my next game.

I submit the TL15 (or even TL16) builds I just posted for your consideration.

 

[rinku]

It might be worth pointing out that biological solutions can be completely self-replicating, even at lower tech levels.

So once you get up to advanced genetics (typically TL11-13) and being able to print creatures (TL17) that may be a better way to go than nanobots as such.

There's even possible exotic variations where the lifeforms use a different range of substances to eat, grow and reproduce than what we're used to. Extremophile bacteria on Earth might qualify, but if you understand genetics so well that you're designing new life forms (probably TL13-15), you can likely work with critters tailored for exotic environments, or which use existing resources in novel ways (such as life forms that eat ores and excrete metals).

 

[tytalan]

Hydroponics are solidly available at TL8, as is solar power, even if Fusion is not around. Asteroid belts will usually be well supplied with Carbon compounds and Water, from which you can manufacture the essentials to refresh losses from a mostly closed cycle. External dependency may happen, but is not inevitable.

Yes carbon and water are in abundance in most Astroid belts but the tech required to effectively mine, refine and manufacture is not available at TL 8 and lower. Without maneuver drive technology or some other highly efficient STL drive system you will run at a deficit when it comes to fuel. Solar panels are a poor option for backup power in such a high impact environment. Plus efficient ways to deal with waste heat and industry waste are not available at these TL. TL 9 is the minimum for a Astroid belt based population to support itself and even that will be rough.

 

[Sigtrygg]

TL8 - fusion power is the game changer.

A fusion power plant can power a plasma rocket, ion drive and the like, it can provide all the electricity you need to control the environment in the ship. Reaction drives of up to 6g are available. In point of fact HG gives you the tools to build spacecraft at TL7 with improved fission power plants and up to 3g reaction drives. The computer/5 is TL7.

"TL8 (Pre-Stellar)
At TL8, it is possible to reach other worlds in the same star system, although terraforming or full colonisation are not within the culture’s capacity. Permanent space habitats become possible. Fusion power becomes commercially viable."

I would add asteroid mining to the list of TL8 capabilities.

 

[Condottiere]

That, and gravity.

Geneering and artificial intelligence, might go off in undesired directions.

 

[rinku]

Yes carbon and water are in abundance in most Astroid belts but the tech required to effectively mine, refine and manufacture is not available at TL 8 and lower. Without maneuver drive technology or some other highly efficient STL drive system you will run at a deficit when it comes to fuel. Solar panels are a poor option for backup power in such a high impact environment. Plus efficient ways to deal with waste heat and industry waste are not available at these TL. TL 9 is the minimum for a Astroid belt based population to support itself and even that will be rough.

I disagree here. In a microgravity environment such as an asteroid field or moon fuel requirements are quite low, and I would imagine you'd be setting up on a rock with what you need, maybe a dwarf planet like Ceres. If you're pre-Gravitics, reaction mass can be a lot of things; there's been many studies showing how to turn lunar regolith or Martian soil into usable rocket fuel.

Any sizable mass can cope with thermal issues that a ship in space would struggle with.

If the asteroids in question are too far out for practical solar (not a given), fission will do, though that may need more setup. Certainly while the colony is building its hydrogen fuelling infrastructure, fission plants might be preferred in an outer system colony.

In any case, low tech is an edge case in this general discussion. I think we've largely established that high population, non-agricultural worlds will be able to feed themselves at a basic level. They won't be exporting food, and are good places to sell delicious cargo that's not been grown in a tank.

 

[Sigtrygg]

It's doable with TL7 Traveller ship technology, reaction drive ships will have to burn and coast, but will still flit about the inner solar system much faster than any chemical rockets we have in the real world. 10 g hours of fuel is 25% of the ship. Non-gravity hulls with hamster cages for staterooms and bridge provide spin gravity when not under the effect of burn based gravity, and you only need 1.25 tons of fission power plant per 100t (one advantage is available to reduce its size if you want to pay the money) for the ship's power needs.

 

[mb345345]

TL8 - fusion power is the game changer.

A fusion power plant can power a plasma rocket, ion drive and the like, it can provide all the electricity you need to control the environment in the ship. Reaction drives of up to 6g are available. In point of fact HG gives you the tools to build spacecraft at TL7 with improved fission power plants and up to 3g reaction drives. The computer/5 is TL7.

"TL8 (Pre-Stellar)
At TL8, it is possible to reach other worlds in the same star system, although terraforming or full colonisation are not within the culture’s capacity. Permanent space habitats become possible. Fusion power becomes commercially viable."

I would add asteroid mining to the list of TL8 capabilities.

Came here to say this. With fusion power you have almost limitless energy and even below TL8 I would simply import one and pay technicians for it's upkeep. With this energy there are many possibilities.

Water is usually available, even if it's only as ice on asteroids, or as a waste product from hydrogen fuel cells.

Food can be had from numerous sources, Imported small creatures that can be farmed for meat, eg. rabbits and chickens

Carniculture vats for growing artificial meat

Protein can even be synthesised from CO2
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332221002888

Homepage - IndieBio - #1 in Early Stage Biotech

indiebio.co

There are many options. It doesn't mean the population is going to eat well, but it does mean they can survive

 

[tytalan]

I disagree here. In a microgravity environment such as an asteroid field or moon fuel requirements are quite low, and I would imagine you'd be setting up on a rock with what you need, maybe a dwarf planet like Ceres. If you're pre-Gravitics, reaction mass can be a lot of things; there's been many studies showing how to turn lunar regolith or Martian soil into usable rocket fuel.

I don’t think you understand the issue. It’s not available fuel its thrust to mass ratio which currently makes this impossible. There’s a reason why the current holy grail of every space program is a more efficient engine it’s because current engines require to much of the mass of the vehicle to be fuel to move any significant size mass. As for microgravity that doesn’t figure in the equation at all you not fighting microgravity in a Astroid Belt your fighting inertia and orbit mechanics.

Any sizable mass can cope with thermal issues that a ship in space would struggle with.

This is false in this case also since in a Astroid belt your in vacuum which is a poor medium in which to regulate heat.

Another issue is gravity in a Astroid belt your in zero gravity which messes with the development of all gravity evolved life so you need artificial gravity also.

In any case, low tech is an edge case in this general discussion. I think we've largely established that high population, non-agricultural worlds will be able to feed themselves at a basic level. They won't be exporting food, and are good places to sell delicious cargo that's not been grown in a tank.

I never argued that a planetary base low tech population couldn’t be self sufficient my whole argument was saying that a Astroid Belt based population either needs to be a minimum of TL 9 or it’s dependent on outside infrastructure which you did not counter in any way. I’ll even go farther bodies as small as the moon are not going to be able to because of the low gravity, we’ve proven the effects of low gravity on a embryo and it’s not pretty

 

[Sigtrygg]

I don’t think you understand the issue. It’s not available fuel its thrust to mass ratio which currently makes this impossible. There’s a reason why the current holy grail of every space program is a more efficient engine it’s because current engines require to much of the mass of the vehicle to be fuel to move any significant size mass. As for microgravity that doesn’t figure in the equation at all you not fighting microgravity in a Astroid Belt your fighting inertia and orbit mechanics.

We are not talking about reality, we are talking about magic Traveller TL7 reaction drive engines. 1-3g, 25% of the ship as fuel is good for 10ghours.

As to holy grails, getting a starship to work and then building a refueling station in orbit would open up the whole inner solar system. Mining the moon to make rocket fuel that could then be sent to Earth orbit to refuel Starships is perfectly doable. And if the US doesn't get on with it the Chinese will have their base on the moon manufacturing rocket fuel for their missions to Mars and the asteroids and beat the US to the punch.

This is false in this case also since in a Astroid belt your in vacuum which is a poor medium in which to regulate heat.

You transfer the heat to the asteroid...

Another issue is gravity in a Astroid belt your in zero gravity which messes with the development of all gravity evolved life so you need artificial gravity also.

Hamster cages are trivial engineering, it all comes down to political will and money.

I never argued that a planetary base low tech population couldn’t be self sufficient my whole argument was saying that a Astroid Belt based population either needs to be a minimum of TL 9 or it’s dependent on outside infrastructure which you did not counter in any way. I’ll even go farther bodies as small as the moon are not going to be able to because of the low gravity, we’ve proven the effects of low gravity on a embryo and it’s not pretty

With Traveller technology TL7 is sufficient to mine asteroids, build moon bases and the like. By TL8 it is vastly more efficient.

I even started a thread about near future Traveller TL7 and then on to TL8.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

I’ll even go farther bodies as small as the moon are not going to be able to because of the low gravity, we’ve proven the effects of low gravity on a embryo and it’s not pretty

I'm unaware of any embryological studies outside 1g and microgravity. When were such tests done at lunar gravity?

 

[Sigtrygg]

Latest research suggests it may be possible after all:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949907024000445

 

[tytalan]

I'm unaware of any embryological studies outside 1g and microgravity. When were such tests done at lunar gravity?

The most recent test done in both microgravity and 1g simulated gravity shows a significant decrease in viability in the most early stages of development. Your suggestion that lunar gravity or lower will be acceptable does not fit the computer models. Additionally we have studied the effects of various levels of gravity on bone density and muscle strength both show a significant decrease based on the local environment. Your lunar people would not be able to survive in a 1g environment if they can even reproduce.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

I did not suggest that Lunar gravity would be acceptable. I merely stated that "I'm unaware of any embryological studies outside 1g and microgravity. When were such tests done at lunar gravity?"

You're citing a pair of tests at 1g and microgravity is too few data points to say anything about intermediate g fields in my opinion.

 

[Sigtrygg]

The most recent test done in both microgravity and 1g simulated gravity shows a significant decrease in viability in the most early stages of development. Your suggestion that lunar gravity or lower will be acceptable does not fit the computer models. Additionally we have studied the effects of various levels of gravity on bone density and muscle strength both show a significant decrease based on the local environment. Your lunar people would not be able to survive in a 1g environment if they can even reproduce.

I posted the latest study it shows the opposite.

" The primary findings from both space embryo experiments indicate that mouse embryos can progress through embryogenesis from the 2-cell stage to the blastocyst stage under real micro-G conditions with few defects. Collectively, these studies propose the potential for mammalian reproduction under real micro-G conditions, challenging earlier simulated micro-G research suggesting otherwise."

Put another way more research is needed and it is far too soon to make blanket statements.

 

[tytalan]

I did not suggest that Lunar gravity would be acceptable. I merely stated that "I'm unaware of any embryological studies outside 1g and microgravity. When were such tests done at lunar gravity?"

Your citing a pair of tests at 1g and microgravity is too few data points to say anything about intermediate g fields in my opinion.

We do know that time in a low gravity environment such as the moon causes both bone mass loss and muscle strength decrease from actual empirical evidence. It’s not too much of a logical extrapolation to expect this would cause issues with embryological development. By bringing this up as a counter argument to my points you are at the least suggesting that low gravity doesn’t effect embryological growth or human development which is not indicated in any way.