Stellaris Dev Diary #157 - Things That Rock

[8igualdos0s]

If they already have room for nonplantlike biology, eating food is just as likely as some magical super-photosynthesis. Moreso, because its more grounded and explains things like having mouths.

It could be. Or maybe those mouths are only to take more CO2 from the atmosphere cause that is the weird way they breath. And to talk with other non-plants ofc. It hasn't to be "magical", just much more efficient.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

It could be. Or maybe those mouths are only to take more CO2 from the atmosphere cause that is the weird way they breath. And to talk with other non-plants ofc. It hasn't to be "magical", just much more efficient.

Photosynthesis is already something like 90% efficient, and is woefully inadequate for animal-level metabolic activity.

This remains something that is better off as RP or represented by general traits, not a phenotype-locked mandatory thing.

 

[sortulv]

A realistic method for photosynthesis on planetoids would have them eat a lot less food (basically just fertilisers and water), but have -90% efficiency to all work areas, as they need either move very slowly, or stand still for long periods building up sugar reserves. As an alternative, Plantoid pops are a lot more numerous than other pops, and as such a pop effectively eats as much as a non-planetoid and produces as much.

 

[8igualdos0s]

Photosynthesis is already something like 90% efficient, and is woefully inadequate for animal-level metabolic activity.

This remains something that is better off as RP or represented by general traits, not a phenotype-locked mandatory thing.

Remember, it wouldn't be photosynthesis. They are not plants, bacteria nor algae. They are aliens. We , as humans living on earth, would call it that way because it could be something similar to us. Something that remind us this process, if you prefer. But in fact, it will be something very different (so that percentage does not have any importance here) . We are talking with "If's" cause we don't know anything about those aliens and their physiology and metabolism (their pigments, their organelles, etc,)

I wasn't talking about changing anything in the game or about Plantoids DLC specifically. I was talking about aliens living as animals just with sunlight.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Remember, it wouldn't be photosynthesis. They are not plants, bacteria nor algae. They are aliens. We , as humans living on earth, would call it that way because it could be something similar to us. Something that remind us this process, if you prefer. But in fact, it will be something very different (so that percentage does not have any importance here) . We are talking with "If's" cause we don't know anything about those aliens and their physiology and metabolism (their pigments, their organelles, etc,)

I wasn't talking about changing anything in the game or about Plantoids DLC specifically. I was talking about aliens living as animals just with sunlight.

It's impractical because you can't gain enough energy per individual to perform complicated tasks.

Even at *ludicrously* high efficiencies, you simply don't get enough surface area to be able to produce enough energy for higher brain functions. You can't "live as an animal just with sunlight" in any conceivable way, simply because you don't uptake enough energy to be motile, sapient, and so on.


All in all we *can* discuss the relevance of the percentage of energy absorption, because we can model the amount of energy you can absorb and convert at various degrees of efficiency, and even at close to 100% efficiency, there isn't enough. Every step of whatever process they use will lose them energy. No one process can ever be better than, or equal to, 100% efficient.

And, by definition, conversion of light energy + H2O + CO2 to sugars *is* photosynthesis, regardless of what pigment is being used. It might be photosynthesis using a different pigment, or a different energy cycle, but it *is* photosynthesis.

And "They are aliens" is *exactly* why we shouldn't be forcing the ones that look like plants to have plant like biology.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

Photosynthesis is already something like 90% efficient, and is woefully inadequate for animal-level metabolic activity.

This remains something that is better off as RP or represented by general traits, not a phenotype-locked mandatory thing.

90%!?!?!!? Try going down an order of magnitude, then maybe a factor of 2.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

I wasn't talking about changing anything in the game or about Plantoids DLC specifically. I was talking about aliens living as animals just with sunlight.

"They're alien" doesn't really get you off the hook, since you can't cheat thermodynamics. Solar power just isn't really adequate for sustaining animal-level activity.

 

[Akamia]

"They're alien" doesn't really get you off the hook, since you can't cheat thermodynamics. Solar power just isn't really adequate for sustaining animal-level activity.

Nobody said the game had to be hard sci-fi.

I mean, the Protoss of StarCraft fame are photosynthetic. It's a trope, for better or for worse.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Nobody said the game had to be hard sci-fi.

I mean, the Protoss of StarCraft fame are photosynthetic. It's a trope, for better or for worse.

And that logic takes us right back around to "they could be plants that evolved to get all their food from eating things", since that's a trope, too.

Do I oppose some sort of photosynthetic trait? No, of course not.

Do I think it should be represented by locking or gifting it to Plantoids and making them eat energy? Also no.

If you're going to argue based on "its soft-scifi fiction", that's fine, but you can't also argue from realism's sake at the same time.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

"They're alien" doesn't really get you off the hook, since you can't cheat thermodynamics. Solar power just isn't really adequate for sustaining animal-level activity.

“Animal level activity” would be a huge range in energy consumption. How many predators spend most of their time sitting around doing nothing? Why would plants not adopt the same strategy to minimize energy consumption? Why would this prevent an intelligent plant from developing machines that utilize other sources of energy?

I’ll give you some simple thermodynamics right here:

3000kCal is plenty for an “active” male human, that is 12556kJ. Sunlight density is in the neighborhood of 1kW/m^2 on Earth. That’s 3.5 hours/m^2 at 100% efficiency. At your ridiculous 90%, it *would* be quite possible with little more than a meter squared of area. I can tell you my cat spends at least that much time just sitting in the sun every day. At a more realistic 10% for a highly evolved plant, assume the organism spreads out to 3X3 m while “sunning” itself. And we haven’t even allowed for a higher energy density on this alien world.

 

[DrNukeLear]

“Animal level activity” would be a huge range in energy consumption. How many predators spend most of their time sitting around doing nothing? Why would plants not adopt the same strategy to minimize energy consumption? Why would this prevent an intelligent plant from developing machines that utilize other sources of energy?

I’ll give you some simple thermodynamics right here:

3000kCal is plenty for an “active” male human, that is 12556kJ. Sunlight density is in the neighborhood of 1kW/m^2 on Earth. That’s 3.5 hours/m^2 at 100% efficiency. At your ridiculous 90%, it *would* be quite possible with little more than a meter squared of area. I can tell you my cat spends at least that much time just sitting in the sun every day. At a more realistic 10% for a highly evolved plant, assume the organism spreads out to 3X3 m while “sunning” itself. And we haven’t even allowed for a higher energy density on this alien world.

Alternative mechanisms could be to reduce habitability around colder stars (those with lower luminosity), increase consumer goods upkeep or amenities usage (in place of food). At the end of the day these are ‘plantoids’ and should share some aspects with plants.

 

[8igualdos0s]

“Animal level activity” would be a huge range in energy consumption. How many predators spend most of their time sitting around doing nothing? Why would plants not adopt the same strategy to minimize energy consumption? Why would this prevent an intelligent plant from developing machines that utilize other sources of energy?

I’ll give you some simple thermodynamics right here:

3000kCal is plenty for an “active” male human, that is 12556kJ. Sunlight density is in the neighborhood of 1kW/m^2 on Earth. That’s 3.5 hours/m^2 at 100% efficiency. At your ridiculous 90%, it *would* be quite possible with little more than a meter squared of area. I can tell you my cat spends at least that much time just sitting in the sun every day. At a more realistic 10% for a highly evolved plant, assume the organism spreads out to 3X3 m while “sunning” itself. And we haven’t even allowed for a higher energy density on this alien world.

This.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

“Animal level activity” would be a huge range in energy consumption. How many predators spend most of their time sitting around doing nothing? Why would plants not adopt the same strategy to minimize energy consumption? Why would this prevent an intelligent plant from developing machines that utilize other sources of energy?

I’ll give you some simple thermodynamics right here:

3000kCal is plenty for an “active” male human, that is 12556kJ. Sunlight density is in the neighborhood of 1kW/m^2 on Earth. That’s 3.5 hours/m^2 at 100% efficiency. At your ridiculous 90%, it *would* be quite possible with little more than a meter squared of area. I can tell you my cat spends at least that much time just sitting in the sun every day. At a more realistic 10% for a highly evolved plant, assume the organism spreads out to 3X3 m while “sunning” itself. And we haven’t even allowed for a higher energy density on this alien world.

Surface area to volume presents HUGE issues for an animal generating energy from photosynthesis. Solar is reliable, but fairly weak, and animals consume a LOT of energy just by basic processes. "Sleeping a lot to conserve energy" doesn't really cut it- predators can DO that because they're consuming meat, which is high energy density.

Plants already DO "spend most of their time sitting around doing nothing". By being sessile. Because that's all that solar energy can sustain.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

Surface area to volume presents HUGE issues for an animal generating energy from photosynthesis. Solar is reliable, but fairly weak, and animals consume a LOT of energy just by basic processes. "Sleeping a lot to conserve energy" doesn't really cut it- predators can DO that because they're consuming meat, which is high energy density.

Plants already DO "spend most of their time sitting around doing nothing". By being sessile. Because that's all that solar energy can sustain.

I just did a back of the envelope calculation showing that it is possible to sustain an *active* adult male on 3X3 m of sun for about 4 hours at 10% efficiency. That’s the whole day, he could be sleeping in the sun for that 4 hours.

Sure, just adding chlorophyll to human skin would not magically make humans not need food, but most animals don’t have body structures optimized for this. However, animals can adapt their bodies quite extensively, as evolution has shown.

Look, the real problem with plants walking around is ... why bother? Animals spend a lot of energy and biomass on muscles, plants just don’t have to. I’d be fascinated to see such plantoids, if they existed, especially to understand how they evolved the way they did. Carnivorous plants don’t even bother accessing the energy of what they catch, despite the fact they can digest it and the energy density is high. They just want the nitrogen so they can keep doing their thing photosynthetically.