Arxiv:2009.08874V2 [Physics.Pop-Ph] 31 Oct 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Draft version November 3, 2020 A Typeset using L TEX twocolumn style in AASTeX63 Constraints on the abundance of 0.01 c stellar engines in the Milky Way Manasvi Lingam1,2 and Abraham Loeb2 1Department of Aerospace, Physics and Space Sciences, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne FL 32901, USA 2Institute for Theory and Computation, Harvard University, Cambridge MA 02138, USA ABSTRACT Stellar engines are hypothesized megastructures that extract energy from the host star, typically with the purpose of generating thrust and accelerating the stellar system. We explore the maximum potential speeds that could be realizable by stellar engines, and determine that speeds up to 0.1 c might perhaps be attainable under optimal conditions. In contrast, natural astrophysical phenomena∼ in the Milky Way are very unlikely to produce such speeds. Hence, astrometric surveys of hypervelocity stars may be utilized to conduct commensal searches for high-speed stellar engines in the Milky Way. It may be possible to derive bounds on their abundance, but this requires certain assumptions regarding the spatiotemporal distribution of such engines, which are not guaranteed to be valid. 1. INTRODUCTION date, as reviewed in Wright (2020) and Lingam & Loeb The search for signatures of extraterrestrial techno- (2021). logical intelligence (ETI) - appositely termed “tech- Another group of megastructures belonging to a sim- nosignatures” by Jill Tarter in 2007 (Tarter 2007) - ilar category are stellar engines, which draw upon the has been dominated by the quest for artificial electro- star’s energy to extract useful work and typically gener- magnetic signals from the 1960s onward, mostly at ra- ate thrust. Leonid Shkadov is widely credited with the dio wavelengths (Drake 1965; Shklovskii & Sagan 1966; first design for a stellar engine wherein a gigantic mirror Tarter 2001; Worden et al. 2017; Lacki et al. 2020); in was deployed to reflect a fraction of the radiation back spite of the numerous searches conducted hitherto, the toward the host star (Shkadov 1987, 1988). However, fraction of parameter space sampled remains minus- Zwicky (1957, pg. 260) explicitly articulated this sce- cule (Tarter et al. 2010; Wright et al. 2018). Since the nario in his characteristically wide-ranging monograph: very inception of this field, however, the potentiality Considering the sun itself, many changes are of non-radio technosignatures was recognized, and its imaginable. Most fascinating is perhaps the importance has been increasingly underscored in the possibility of accelerating it to higher speeds, 21st century (Dyson 1966; Freitas 1983; Bradbury et al. for instance 1000 km/sec directed toward α- 2011; Wright et al. 2014; Cirkovic 2018; Lingam & Loeb Centauri in whose neighborhood our descen- 2019a). dants then might arrive a thousand years In classifying prospective ETIs, the Kardashev scale hence. All of these projects could be realized pioneered by the late Nikolai Kardashev has proven to through the action of nuclear fusion jets, us- be a valuable metric (Kardashev 1964; Cirkovi´c2015´ ; ing the matter constituting the sun and the Gray 2020). Type II ETIs, for instance, are capable of planets as nuclear propellants. harnessing the entire radiative energy output of their host star. As these ETIs are considerably more ad- Looking further back in time, the qualitative notion of stellar engines appears in Stapledon (1937, Chapter XI), arXiv:2009.08874v2 [physics.pop-ph] 31 Oct 2020 vanced in terms of their technology than humans, it is conventionally anticipated that their resultant tech- as seen from the following quote: nosignatures would be commensurately more striking. The occasion of the first accident was an at- The best known technosignatures in this category are tempt to detach a star from its natural course Stapledon-Dyson spheres - these megastructures are and direct it upon an inter-galactic voyage composed of swarms of objects to tap the energy of . Plans were therefore made for projecting the star (Stapledon 1937; Dyson 1960). Several searches several stars with their attendant systems of for Stapledon-Dyson spheres have been undertaken to worlds across the vast ocean of space that separated the two floating islets of civiliza- tion. Corresponding author: Manasvi Lingam mlingam@fit.edu Stellar engines have been explored in several other pub- lications (Badescu & Cathcart 2000, 2006; Hooper 2018; 2 Caplan 2019; Svoronos 2020) and methods for detecting In this work, we explore stellar engines from a generic them during the course of exoplanetary transits were physical standpoint in Sec. 2, and describe how they discussed in Forgan (2013). may attain terminal speeds that are sub-relativistic. We In the classification scheme of Badescu & Cathcart compare these speeds against stars ejected by natural (2000), three major classes of stellar engines were identi- astrophysical phenomena in Sec. 2, and argue that the fied. Class A stellar engines utilize the impulse from stel- latter cannot reach such large values in the Milky Way. lar radiation to generate a thrust force. The quintessen- By making use of this proposition, we examine current tial example of a Class A engine is the so-called Shkadov astrometric surveys to set tentative constraints on the thruster described in Shkadov (1987, 1988). Class B stel- abundance of putative ETIs that develop high-speed lar engines, in contrast, harness the radiation emitted stellar engines in Sec. 3. We end with a summary of by the host star and convert it into mechanical power. our results and prospects for future work in Sec. 4. Class C stellar engines combine elements of both Class A and Class B stellar engines, and thereby generate both 2. MAXIMUM ATTAINABLE STELLAR SPEEDS thrust force and mechanical power. Class D stellar en- We will begin with a synopsis of the maximal speeds gines, mentioned briefly in Badescu & Cathcart (2006, realizable by ejected stars and stellar engines. pg. 121), extract mass from the star by means of “mass 2.1. Maximum speeds of ejected stars in astrophysical lifting” (Criswell 1985) and expel the material to gen- systems erate a rocket effect; such stellar engine were previously termed “stellar rockets” by Fogg (1989). The maximum speed (vmax) achievable by stars The designs suggested for the putative stellar engines ejected after tidal disruption of a stellar binary system vary from one class to another. The Shkadov thruster by Sagittarius A* was computed in the classic analy- (Class A engine) is composed of a collection of reflective sis by Hills (1988), and it was concluded that vmax −2 ≈ statites (Forward 1991), which effectively functions as 1.3 10 c; see also Yu & Tremaine (2003) and Brown × a large mirror in the shape of a spherical arc; the de- (2015). Subsequent numerical simulations by Sari et al. sign for a Class C engine is also similar in this respect (2010, Section 8) determined that the maximum speed (Badescu & Cathcart 2006, Figure 1). Class D engines of the least massive object in a triple system that un- operate on the rocket effect, and can therefore be en- derwent ejection is given by visioned as stellar rockets, but the engineering specifics 1/6 2GM2 M1 differ across proposals (Caplan 2019; Svoronos 2020). vmax 1.3 , (1) ≈ R2 + R3 M2 + M3 We will briefly summarize one such design later in Sec. r 2.2. where M1 denotes the mass of the supermassive black Clearly, stellar engines represent a massive engineer- hole (SMBH), while Mj and Rj are the masses and radii ing feat, and this raises the question of why they would of the stellar binary system that is subjected to tidal be constructed. Before doing do, it should be noted breakup (j = 2, 3), where M3 < M2. We adopt M1 6 ≈ that the planets and moons orbiting the host star would 4 10 M⊙ for Sagittarius A* (Boehle et al. 2016), and need to be accelerated as well, but this feat is relatively substituting× this value into the above equation yields easier in comparison to the star. One possible reason 1/2 −1/2 suggested in Caplan (2019) is that stellar engines may −2 M2 R2 + R3 vmax 3.4 10 c enable ETIs to preemptively escape the vicinity of catas- ≈ × M⊙ R⊙ trophic phenomena (e.g., supernovas) and avoid the ad- −1/6 1 M2 + M3 verse consequences. This issue may be rendered more , (2) × M⊙ prominent near the Galactic center, where higher stellar densities are associated with higher rates of catastrophic and this expression is considerably simplified when M3 events. Another option is that the ETIs might wish to is at least a few times smaller than M2, and using the undertake intergalactic travel, which is perhaps easier to 0.8 scaling R2 M2 for main-sequence stars (Tout et al. undertake by moving the planetary system as a whole, 1996). In this∝ optimal situation, we end up with in contrast to the alternative concept of building “world −0.07 ships” (Hein et al. 2012). We will not speculate on this −2 M2 vmax 3.4 10 c , (3) topic further, as it partly overlaps with the poorly un- ≈ × M⊙ derstood fields of xenosociology and xenopsychology. which implies that vmax is nearly independent of M2. Hitherto, we have assumed that M2 is a main-sequence 1 For instance, theoretical models indicate that the habitability of star, but the other extreme is to consider a stellar-mass the Milky Way might be affected over kpc scales due to the cu- black hole instead. The resultant maximum speed was mulative impact of tidal disruption events and a potential quasar phase at some point (Balbi & Tombesi 2017; Forbes & Loeb calculated in Guillochon & Loeb (2015, Equation 5): 2018; Lingam & Loeb 2019b; Lingam et al. 2019; Pacetti et al. 1/6 −0.12 2020). −2 M2 M3 vmax 6.7 10 c , (4) ≈ × 10 M⊙ M⊙ 3 where M2 is the mass of a typical stellar-mass black hole condition is fulfilled for M⋆ & M⊙.