pretty has nothing to do with it, its absorbtion wavelengths. if you did it under current tech you'd maybe get 20% efficiency. it would take a reactor just to keep half a park alive. its not enough food.

There are plants that grow on no sunlight, gathering energy from the surroundings arround them. Plus theres always theirs always yeast.

And BDUalcari, the Empire is in debt to you. Our current sandwitch deposits have been recently raided by an unkown force. So I guess youll deserve something for this.... hm... how does Earth sound?

More join me Schem, you wont resist for long

they dont have a high efficiency and their nutrition pathways trace all the way back to sunlight and open air (eventually, not directly) of which you would only subside for a few days at best
additionally they require more food than we could provide.
and if you happen to be talking about mushrooms, they're almost completely void of nutrition anyway.

Yeast   

again, you feed yeast something. and that something came from the surface.

what the heck is going on in here, lol....... this post was about planet scale!

who knows...
something about how yeast can provide enough food for people sitting in a ditch to freeze to death after the sun blew out?
which is wrong, because taht assumes that yeast produces its own energy, which it doesnt (remember the "river" example that your biology teacher gave you? with the sun being the fountainhead and the delta being emission back into the solar system.)

Yeast, just needs sugar and a little heat that is it. Plus sugar has been created artificially before and is largely today. So, we dont need the surface, and we could add needed nutriants and create new strands of yeast and therefore survive

where are you getting the SUGAR from!!! why wouldn't you just eat the sugar. and its not exactly like you can eat yeast.

yes, but you need materials that you can't get from artificial sources.

Nutrients, by definition, cannot be created by our bodies

we have yet to create these in an efficient matter by ourselves (inneficient, sure)

the result is that your relying on natural things to create artificial things to feed to natural things to get NOTHING (except CO2 bubbles)

Um, your arguement is invalid just by you stating that we can not eat yeast.

Ill let you figure this one out.

you cannot eat their byproduct
sure you can eat yeast. but what your getting out compared to what your putting in??? no...

and again, where are you getting all of this from? natural sources that you DONT HAVE.
life is tied together in thousands of cycles that we dont yet understand, to say taht we could live with just yeast is idiocy.

Not really, again Ill let you figure this one out

dude, your suggesting that you can create energy in terms of food out of nothing. which is wrong

so do explain to me where I'm making a mistake. I just assumed that it takes energy to have energy, the whole Law of conservation of matter/energy.

I wonder if these things taste any good.

sulfur-spewing tough-as-nails chalk tubes.
I'm sure they taste absolutely GREAT!!!

in the future, everything will taste like chicken....

LoL!

ya eccept they won't look like chicken instead they might look like the left over puke that your dog threwup last week

who knows, we might be colonizing planets i.e. use 1planet for agricultural purpose ONLY, then 1planet for metalextractor purpose only then maybe use the moon on that planet for strategic ship buildings and then use another moon for weapons testing and training facilities. who said humans where made for limits, if we put everyones head together in one survival notion i bet you our survival rate will impress every known alien forces out there and maybe cometogether harmonizing the surviveability and respect on all types of species no matter if it's biological or energy formed species.

in the meantime it all starts here.

do you realize the extreme amounts of feul you would need for that... thats unquestionably unfeasable. that will NEVER happen, it would be cheaper to make the rocket fuel edible...

sorry schem but i do have to disagree with you on this one..
Make a transport big enough so it carries metalworks etc to agricultural planet and viceversa
in big enough amounts so it carries
atleast 10times its support cost in fuel and O2.

Really theres atleast 4 countries even on earth that dont make their food for even 10% of their
population, instead they manufacture the things the other countries cant make.

Think of a planet full of metal but not much nutrients and another full of nutrients and
no heavy metals to produce anything worthwhile.. wouldnt it be quite smart to make food
on the other and metalworks on the other??

Gotta go get some tea.. id offer you too but i quess youre on another dimension planning your
next move on TGE

Matters what type of engine we use, and if we are actually able to make something big enough and structurally safe enough to pass through atmospheres without needed excessive repairs.

And as for tea, get me some will you our current location is #Removed by order of the Higher Emperor#

Hard to send tea into: adress classified

Atmospheres, why on earth would you ram a cargo hauler into atmosphere.. make a huge ship
with iondrives (these have actually been used by humans a few years ago) and unload it in ORBIT

If a planet does not have metal, it'd be very much like the moon and unable to keep atmosphere unless it is extremely big. If it is extremely big, it'd be much like Jupiter and would be unhabitable by humans (and plant life, I'd imagine).

Planets can not go to either extreme, in my opinion. You have to have a balance of everything.

I'm sorry, but even with complete matter-matter annihilation I think you would find that you would maybe have a 2% efficiency. (assuming your planets are as close as mars to Earth)
thats just not feasible, no matter HOW big your transport is (the fuel/cargo ratio would be logarithmic with a limit at 1.02)
that would be completely unfeasible compared to just growing plants.

they dont have to deal with several hundred thousand miles of space.
not to mention to find these idealized planets you'd probably have to cross galaxies, in which case your efficiency is dead in the water.

again, statistically they would be so far apart that even matter-matter annihilation wouldn't do the job.

not even an issue in comparison.

SCHEM did you listen to a word i said.. i mean really think about what i said..
here is the faq for Ion Drives nmp.nasa.gov/ds1/tech/ionpropfaq.html

I can provide a bit more technical article if someone is intrested, the main point is
that ion drives are 10times as efficient than chemical propulsion systems, think about
80kg of xenon that lasts for a constant thrust of 20months for a small ship..

Now schem please provide a detailed calculation or similar explaining why you would
burn more fuel than you could carry as cargo in a vessel that travels in VACUUM.
Which means the speed is not really important as you could make the ship Bigger.



I am not talking EXtremes,, you could have a planet that has highly nutrient surface
and not enough heavymetals to encourage large industrial base.. it does not mean the
planet would be devoid of metals and heavymetals but you could make that planet
produce food with "every" squaremile of feasible land and use another planet that has
huge amounts of heavymetals to produce metalworks with all available land and trade
those commodities between them.

READ CAREFULLY and explain why you think this is NEVER going to happen,, and remember
that ion drives are going to get even more efficient when we reach the point of colonizing
another worlds.