What are the biggest, boldest things that humanity could engineer? From planet lifters to space cannons, Anders Sandberg explores some of history's most ambitious visions – and why they're not as 'impossible' as they seem.
人類能設計出的最大、最大膽的東西是什麼？從行星升降機到太空大炮，安德斯·桑德伯格探索了一些歷史上最雄心勃勃的願景——以及為什麼它們不像看上去那麼「不可能」。
In 1603, a Jesuit monk invented a machine for lifting the entire planet with only ropes and gears.
1603年，一位耶穌會僧侶發明了一種僅用繩索和齒輪就能提升整個地球的機器。
Christoph Grienberger oversaw all mathematical works written by Jesuit authors, a role akin to an editor at a modern scientific journal. He was modest and productive, and could not resist solving problems. He reasoned that since a 1:10 gear could allow one person to lift 10 times as much as one unassisted, if one had 24 gears linked to a treadmill then one could lift the Earth… very slowly.
克裡斯託夫·格裡恩伯格（Christoph Grienberger）負責審核耶穌會作家撰寫的所有數學著作，這一角色類似於現代科學期刊的編輯。他謙虛而富有成效，總是想要解決問題。他推理說，由於1:10的齒輪可以讓一個人在無人協助之下舉起10倍的重量，如果一個人有24個齒輪連接到一個跑步機，那麼一個人就可以舉起地球…只不過非常緩慢。
Like any modern academic who prizes theory above practice, he left out the pesky details: 「I will not weave those ropes, or prescribe the material for the wheels or the place from which the machine shall be suspended: as these are other matters I leave them for others to find.」
就像任何一個只注重理論而不精於實踐的現代學者一樣，他忽略了那些煩人的細節：「我不會編織那些繩索，也不會規定輪子的材料或機器懸掛的地方：因為這些是我留給別人去發現的其他事情。」
For as long as we have had mathematics, forward-thinking scholars like Grienberger have tried to imagine the far limits of engineering, even if the technology of the time was lacking. Over the centuries, they have dreamt of machines to lift the world, transform the surface of the Earth, or even reorganise the Universe. Such "megascale engineering" – sometimes called macro-engineering – deals with ambitious projects that would reshape the planet or construct objects the size of worlds. What can these megascale dreams of the future tell us about human ingenuity and imagination?
自從我們有了數學，像格裡恩伯格這樣具有前瞻性思維的學者就一直試圖想像工程的極限，即使當時的技術還不成熟。幾個世紀以來，他們一直夢想著用機器來提升世界，改造地球表面，甚至重組宇宙。這類「超大規模工程」（有時稱為宏大工程）涉及的是重塑地球或建造世界大小物體的雄心勃勃的項目。關於人類的聰明才智和想像力，這些對未來的巨大夢想能告訴我們什麼呢？
The roots of megascale engineering can be traced back to the Ancient Greeks. Archimedes is famous for many things, but one enduring boast is: 「Give me a place to stand and I can move the Earth!」 He was thinking about levers: he knew that with a fixed pivot, a very long lever can exert tremendous force. Like Grienberger’s machine did for gears, his insight into these mechanics made it irresistible to speculate about problems of a magnitude far beyond anything practical.
巨型工程的起源可以追溯到古希臘。阿基米德以許多事情而聞名，但有一句經久不衰的自誇是：「給我一個支點，我就能撬動地球！」他想到的是槓桿：他知道有了固定的支點，一個長槓桿就能產生巨大的力量。就像格裡恩伯格的機器對齒輪所做的那樣，他對這些力學的洞察使人們無法抗拒對遠遠超出任何實際問題的思考。
Since then, every time a physical law was revealed as universal, the natural next step was to scale it up and explore the theoretical consequences. Isaac Newton realised the law describing Earth's gravity applied to both apples and the Moon. So, long before travelling to space became a reality, he pointed out that a powerful cannon could, in principle, be scaled up to propel a satellite into Earth orbit. The idea was later described in science-fiction, in the story From the Earth to the Moon in 1865.
從那時起，每當一個物理定律被揭示為普遍性時，下一步自然就是擴大它的規模並探索其理論結果。艾薩克·牛頓意識到地球引力定律同時適用於蘋果和月球。因此，早在太空旅行成為現實之前，他就指出，一門威力強大的大炮原則上可以放大到可以推動衛星進入地球軌道。這一想法後來在1865年的科幻小說《從地球到月球》中得到了描述。
In the 20th Century, some groups in the US and elsewhere made serious attempts to explore whether such a cannon could work. Those efforts failed, so Newton's musings might be easy to disregard as a mistaken forecast. But it's worth remembering that our current mode of space transport – the rocket – was once thought unlikely and fanciful too. In 1920, the New York Times famously mocked the proponents of the idea, implying that they lacked the physics education of a high-school student. (In 1969, the newspaper issued a light-hearted retraction a day after the Apollo 11 astronauts lifted off towards the Moon.)
在20世紀，美國和其他地方的一些組織進行了認真的嘗試，以探索這種大炮是否能起作用，但這些努力都失敗了，所以牛頓的思考可能很容易被忽視，因為這是一個錯誤的預測。但值得記住的是，我們目前的太空運輸方式（火箭）曾經也被認為是不太可能的幻想。1920年，《紐約時報》以嘲弄這一想法的支持者而聞名，暗示他們缺乏高中生的物理教育。（1969年，該報在阿波羅11號太空人升空登月一天後漫不經心地撤回了那篇文章。）
Over the years, similar theoretical leaps of the imagination into space have led some to ask whether orbital elevators could be built. By hanging a very strong cable from a counterweight it is (just barely on Earth) physically possible to have a literal solar-powered elevator to space. By flinging spacecraft off the end of the cable they could be propelled to other bodies with a minimum of fuel. Elevators on the Moon or Mars look even more practical thanks to the lower gravity found there.
多年來，類似的理論想像空間的飛躍讓一些人質疑是否可以建造軌道電梯。通過把一根非常結實的電纜掛在一個配重上，從物理上來說（僅僅是在地球上）就有可能有一個真正的太陽能電梯到達太空。通過將太空飛行器拋離纜繩末端，它們可以用最少的燃料被推進其他天體。由於在月球或火星上發現了較低的重力，電梯看起來更加實用。
And scaling up our astronomical ambitions even further, others have speculated about whether future humans could terraform Mars to become habitable, or even construct a "Dyson sphere" of solar collectors around the Sun. In the very long run, we may want to perform modifications to make the Sun last longer, move the Earth into a wider orbit, or even move stars between galaxies. These projections are all far-fetched today, but mathematics and physics do not rule them out.
為了進一步擴大我們的天文野心，其他人猜測未來人類是否能將火星變成可居住的地球，甚至在太陽周圍建造一個由太陽能集熱器組成的「戴森球體」。從長遠來看，我們可能需要進行改造，使太陽壽命更長，讓地球進入更寬的軌道，甚至在星系之間移動恆星。這些預測在今天看來都是牽強的，但數學和物理並不排除它們。
Redesigning Earth
重新設計地球
Back on Earth, megascale engineering dreams have also inspired various blueprints for utopian schemes that involve altering the oceans and atmosphere on a grand scale.
回到地球上，巨型工程夢想也激發了各種烏託邦計劃的藍圖，這些計劃涉及大規模改變海洋和大氣。
In the 1920s and beyond, Herman Sörgel's Atlantropa project dreamt of building a hydroelectric dam across the Strait of Gibraltar. The surface level of the Mediterranean Sea would be lowered by 200m (656ft), opening up new land for settlement. An extra dam across the Dardanelles to contain the Black Sea would supplement the first dam, then a dam between Sicily and Tunisia to further lower the inner Mediterranean, extending the Suez Canal with locks, and for good measure redirecting the Congo River to refill the basin around Lake Chad to irrigate the Sahara. Today ecological concerns would presumably rule out the whole endeavour even if it had political support, but if the will and the money had been there, it might well have been attempted.
在20世紀20年代及以後，赫爾曼·索爾格爾的亞特蘭特洛帕（Atlantropa）項目夢想在直布羅陀海峽上建造一座水電站大壩。地中海的海平面將降低200米（656英尺），為定居開闢新的土地。在達達內爾河上修建一座額外的大壩，以遏制黑海，這將補充第一座大壩，然後在西西里島和突尼西亞之間修建一座大壩，進一步降低內地中海的水位，用船閘延長蘇伊士運河，並將剛果河重新引向查德湖周圍的盆地，以灌溉撒哈拉。今天，即使有政治支持，生態問題也可能會排除整個努力，但如果有意願和資金的話，很可能已經嘗試了。
A modern descendant, more intended as a warning than a serious proposal (still, meticulously analysed), is damming the North Sea between Scotland, Norway, France and the UK to handle sea levels rising.
與其說是一個嚴肅的建議（仍然在仔細分析中），不如說更像是一個警告，一個現代後裔正在蘇格蘭、挪威、法國和英國之間的北海築壩，以應對海平面上升。
And between 1957-1977, Project Plowshare was a United States programme to develop nuclear explosive techniques for large-scale, peaceful construction purposes (a similar programme, Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy, existed in the Soviet Union). Ideas included using nuclear explosions to widen the Panama Canal, dig artificial harbours or roadcuts through mountain ranges, as well as stimulating underground gas or oil reservoirs. Perhaps unsurprisingly, interest in mildly radioactive infrastructure never truly caught on.
1957年至1977年期間，「犁鏵計劃」是美國為大規模和平建設目的開發核爆炸技術的一個方案（蘇聯也有類似的方案，即國民經濟核爆炸）。這些想法包括利用核爆炸拓寬巴拿馬運河，在山脈中挖掘人工港口或道路，以及刺激地下的天然氣或石油儲備。因此，人們從未真正對放射性較弱的基礎設施產生過興趣，這一點或許就毫不奇怪了。
A megascale alteration to the planet that is, however, now seriously considered and studied is geoengineering. This involves deliberate interventions in the climate system to reduce solar input (whether from whitening clouds with seawater, adding aerosols to the stratosphere, or putting a shade in space) or binding carbon dioxide (using crushed olivine, seeding algal blooms, or pumping it underground). It appears possible and may even become necessary, but solar input control is definitely a risky idea.
然而，地理工程學正在認真考慮和研究這顆行星的巨大變化。這涉及到對氣候系統的有意幹預，以減少太陽能的輸入（無論是用海水使雲層變白，向平流層添加氣溶膠，還是在太空中遮陰）或結合二氧化碳（使用破碎的橄欖石，播種藻華，或將其泵入地下）。這一點看起來似乎是可能的，甚至可能還存在必要性，但太陽能輸入控制絕對是一個冒險的想法。
Hubris for fun and humanity
自娛自樂式的傲慢
What is the motivation for this kind of thinking? It is not just that it is fun to play God on paper.
這種想法的動機是什麼？這可不是在紙上扮演上帝覺得好玩那麼簡單。
In many cases it is the logic of "more is better": if it is good to gain agricultural land, why not try to get as much as possible? If energy is valuable, just how much could we conceivably gather using known technology? It tells us important things about where the limits may be, and how much we could gain if we really wanted to. The aim is not to predict "how" or "when", it is more often about charting out whether the laws of the Universe prevent it. It can help us distinguish the impossible from the merely improbable.
在很多情況下，這是「多多益善」的邏輯：如果獲得農業用地是好事，為什麼不儘可能多地獲得呢？如果能源是有價值的，那麼我們可以利用已知的技術收集到多少呢？它向我們揭示一些重要的方面，比如極限在哪裡，我們又真正能根據需要獲得多少。其目的並不是預測「如何」或「何時」，更多的是要弄清宇宙法則是否阻止了它。它能幫助我們把不可能與純粹的概率區分開來。
Many megascale engineering projects are also, in their makers' eyes, strongly utopian visions. Sörgel believed Atlantropa would provide energy, arable land, and improved climate, but also help to bring together Europe and Africa. The Russian philosopher Nikolai Fedorov proposed weather control as a first step in his cosmist program to peacefully unify mankind (later, space and immortality). The point is working together on a grand goal. It is not so much about lifting the world as lifting up humanity.
在製造者眼中，許多巨型工程項目也是強烈的烏託邦式願景。索爾格爾相信，亞特蘭蒂斯洛帕（Atlantropa）項目將提供能源、耕地並改善氣候，但也有助於歐洲和非洲的聯接。俄羅斯哲學家尼古拉·費多羅夫（Nikolai Fedorov）提議將天氣控制作為其宇宙計劃的第一步，以和平統一人類（後者被稱為太空與不朽）。這裡的關鍵點是為了一個宏偉的目標而共同努力。與其說是提升世界，不如說是提升人類。
It is easy to laugh and regard these dreams as impractical utopianism or engineering hubris. Except that the Earth is encircled by a machine that transmits petabytes of data every second, stores exabytes, and that you are likely using right now (the internet). There is a machine larger than a football field moving faster than a rifle bullet orbiting overhead (a space station). And another machine in Europe is 27km (17 miles) in circumference and converts energy into exotic matter (the Large Hadron Collider). Imagine what Archimedes or Newton would have made of those.
人們很容易笑稱這些夢想是不切實際的烏託邦主義或工程狂妄自大。除了地球被一臺每秒傳輸數PB數據、存儲數EB的機器包圍，而你現在可能正在使用它（網際網路）。有一臺比足球場還大的機器，它的移動速度比一顆步槍子彈在頭頂上的軌道（空間站）還要快。歐洲的另一臺機器周長為27公裡（17英裡），可以將能量轉化為奇異物質（大型強子對撞機）。想像一下阿基米德或牛頓會用這些做什麼。
In fact, we are living amid megascale structures we hardly notice. Some large-scale engineering of our environment is nearly invisible. The Netherlands, as well as the Fens of Lincolnshire, Cambridgeshire and Norfolk, are land reclaimed from the sea. The Amazonian rainforest is not as pristine as once thought: it was farmed for millennia. The terraces of South East Asia and modern metropolitan cities are engineering that turns into landscapes. Sometimes with a grand plan, often not.
事實上，我們生活在我們幾乎沒有注意到的巨型結構中。我們環境中的一些大型工程幾乎是看不見的。荷蘭，以及林肯郡、劍橋郡和諾福克郡的沼澤地，都是填海而成的土地。亞馬遜河流域的雨林並不像人們曾經想像的那麼原始：它實際上被耕種了幾千年。東南亞和現代大都市的梯田正在變成景觀。有時看來是一個宏偉的計劃，但往往並非如此。
When and why does it work?
發揮作用的時間和原因？
Experience with large projects typically show a mix of cost overruns, pathologies of planning and bad project management. If we are so bad at it, how come some do succeed?
大型項目的經驗通常表現為成本超支、計劃病態和糟糕的項目管理。如果我們做得這麼差，怎麼會有人成功呢？
If we consider megascale engineering that has actually happened – the terracing of parts of South East Asia, the land reclamation of the Netherlands, the US Interstate Highway System, the internet – it consists of projects that can be implemented piecemeal, where work can cease and resume after learning experiences, and where the system is not dependent on every part functioning perfectly. They can be maintained, and it usually makes sense for the people involved to maintain their homes and servers.
如果我們考慮實際發生的巨型工程，例如東南亞部分地區的梯田建設、荷蘭的土地復墾、美國州際公路系統、網際網路，這些工程都包括可以分項實施的項目，可以停止然後在獲得經驗後又恢復工作，而且整個系統又不依賴於每個組成部分的完美運作。它們是可以維護的，而且對於相關人員來說，通常維護伺服器的同時並不妨礙對家庭的維護。
This is very different from many of the grand but often brittle visions in the literature, created by single-minded individuals. Yet some megascale projects may be far more modular and practical than they first look. The issue is not the size scale but what forms of coordination are needed. Take the example mentioned earlier of building a Dyson sphere. It seems far off, but in a sense, we have started to englobe the Sun with solar collectors already by placing satellites in orbit around it. If we continue for a few million years there could be a Dyson sphere in place.
這與文學作品中許多宏大但往往脆弱的景象截然不同，這些景象是由一心一意的個人創造的。然而，一些巨型項目的模塊化和實用性可能遠遠超過它們最初的樣子。問題不在於規模，而在於需要何種形式的協調。以前面提到的構建Dyson球體為例。這似乎很遙遠，但從某種意義上說，我們已經開始通過在環繞太陽的軌道上放置衛星，用太陽能集熱器來吸引太陽。如果我們繼續幾百萬年，就會有一個Dyson球體。
The grand top-down plans to lift the world to a better state are weaker than the bottom-up piecemeal solutions. Nevertheless, we need the visions to know what might one day be possible (「Sure, we cannot build elevators to space yet… but one day!」) and to think about the large directions we want to move towards – sustainability, space, prosperity, safety – in ambitious ways.
自上而下把世界提升到一個更好狀態的宏偉計劃比自下而上的零碎解決方案要弱。儘管如此，我們還是需要有遠見，知道有一天什麼是可能的（「當然，我們還不能建造通往太空的電梯……但是有一天！」），並以雄心勃勃的方式思考我們前面的大方向——可持續性、空間、繁榮、安全。
Hubristic utopias are perhaps better left on paper than built in the real world, yet we can also recognise that there are more ambitious ideas for improving things today than ever before in human history. We may not have the technology to carry worlds, but Archimedes might have been pleased to know that we have many more levers.
傲慢的烏託邦也許留在紙上比建立在現實世界中更好，然而我們也可以認識到，今天有比人類歷史上任何時候都更雄心勃勃的想法來改善事物。我們可能沒有技術來承載世界，但阿基米德如果知道我們有更多的槓桿，他可能會很高興的。
（By Anders Sandberg 安德斯·桑德伯格；14th January 2021 2021年1月14日）