RE: Total of $283 B in situ? Huh?Again?Muff..................Same post was made by you a mere 5 days ago, upon which you received a fair amount of feedback that was commensurate with the nature of your request.
In the event that you did not understand the initial feedback, allow me to bestow upon you some additional commentary since you are clearly asking for it.
The idea that you would not consider the redundancy of posting the same thing twice within a 5 day span indicates to me that you did not taske into condsideration the initial comments on your question.
My feedback would consist of saying to you that your numbers are indicative of someone who is "dreaming in technicolor" because they are so far removed from the spectrum of reality most people who live on this earth understand.
There is no basis for verification, checks or balances, nor is there any indication of source for these numbers.
Why 1/3 on our side and not 1316th or even 1/128th or even 1/2? Lombok 175B, based on what?
Why not $50 Trillion while we are at it?..............I think you get the idea.
The purely silly and wacky speculative nature of your question and your numbers makes it a waste of time for anyone to even attempt a serious answer, and therefor in the first round, you got answers that were in tune with the nature of the thought presented. I am amazed that you would come back for seconds unless you did not read the comments on the first go.
Post it a third time and the same result be be seen. What is the definition of insanity again?
You wanted feedback and it was delivered.
Enjoy.
vwig.