Uncontrolled population growth

[shruggle]

If humans multiply as fast as possible but never develop more technology or medicine than needed to simply feed everyone, how long will it be until the mass of our bones sends the Earth careening into the Sun?

[fucktard loser]

[Bob3141592]

It's inevitable as long as people continue behaving like chimps. Nasty creatures, the ones nearest to us. Any of a number of crisis could tip things over. The overpopulation issue. The continuing and repeating global economic crisis. The climate crisis. The energy crisis. Religious extremism from any faith. Exclusionary military alliances that divides the world into us and them, and doomsday weapons are on a hair trigger all over the place. Resource wars. Should oil get scarce, the world will starve. The wealthy will try to isolate, but the revolts will make that impossible. Need any more reasons? They're easy to come up with. Make it into a game. Invite your friends over and hand out End-of-the-World points to the players. First one to win loses.

Have a nice day.

[Jaglavak]

Jaw-Dropping Global Crash In Children Being Born

Falling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century.
And 23 nations - including Spain and Japan - are expected to see their populations halve by 2100.
Counties will also age dramatically, with as many people turning 80 as there are being born.

[silenus]

The literal answer is never, since the population of the planet will make the total mass less over time, as matter is converted into waste heat and radiated into space, albeit very slowly.

[shruggle]

Originally Posted by silenus

The literal answer is never, since the population of the planet will make the total mass less over time, as matter is converted into waste heat and radiated into space, albeit very slowly.

Supposing we use solar energy to feed everyone, and all anyone ever does is eat, in theory, we could simply convert the light from the sun into mass as bones.

That works out to 3.767*10^24 Joules of energy per year, or 92,403,511 pounds. At that rate, it would take 64 quadrillion years to double the Earth's mass.

Since it will take 10 quintillion years for the Earth's orbit to decay into the sun without any increase in mass, it does not appear that a failure to develop anything besides enough solar technology to feed people will appreciably influence humanity's ability to continue to hang out here, while getting fat as fuck.

We could also build an epic fort out of bones.

[Pogo]

Originally Posted by silenus

The literal answer is never, since the population of the planet will make the total mass less over time, as matter is converted into waste heat and radiated into space, albeit very slowly.

I feel pretty certain that the earth acquires much more mass each year than it loses via radiation+space junk+hydrogen/helium loss. The solar wind, for example drops a lot onto the earth.

[Diamonds2020]

Originally Posted by shruggle

If humans multiply as fast as possible but never develop more technology or medicine than needed to simply feed everyone, how long will it be until the mass of our bones sends the Earth careening into the Sun?

LOL

[3acres]

Originally Posted by Pogo

I feel pretty certain that the earth acquires much more mass each year than it loses via radiation+space junk+hydrogen/helium loss. The solar wind, for example drops a lot onto the earth.

These guys say the Earth gains about 40,000 metric tons of space dust, etc. but loses about 95,000 metric tons of hydrogen and helium each year, so they think there's a net annual loss.
https://scitechdaily.com/earth-loses...ss-every-year/

[Pogo]

silenus 1 Pogo 0. Good thing I am crushing him in all of the megapolls when we disagree.

[fucktard loser]

Isn’t this planet made mostly of stardirt? Like isn’t most of what went into our local solar system the annihilated remains of previous stellar mass?

[Steve Dallas' Mom]

Well don't blame me! I only had one child. My son Stevie, the tall handsome lawyer.

[Mr. Plumbean]

Hopefully we'll hit Venus on the way to the sun, shove a lot of the useless eaters off as we pass, then bounce back into the right orbit.

[Swammerdami]

I don't think the present population growth rate is sustainable, even though it's a paltry 1.05%. If my arithmetic is correct and the present 1.05% growth rate continues, human biomass will equal the total mass of the observable universe in 9255 years. That's not so long: The city of Jericho was founded much more than 9255 years ago. The calculation assumes the current average body weight. We'll last 9274 years if we can cut average weight by 25%.

I've excluded dark matter from the calculation. Humanity will get another century or two if it finds a way to convert dark matter into human food.

[Inna Minnit]

But what if we eat each other?

[fucktard loser]

Nice

[Rock]

Soylent Green is prophecy!

[Swammerdami]

My calculation of number of years until the universe is wholly consumed by continued population growth implicitly assumes that humanity will develop warp drive.

In a more realistic scenario, humanity has only 4430 years left. That may be enough time to reach, and devour, a million star systems. (This figure assumes that we will get the 25% kick from combating obesity.)

This is all due to the humongous power of compounding of course. Invest $1 in the stock market today and get 10% annual returns and after just ten centuries you'll have 200 billion trillion trillion gigadollars.

(If Pocahontas gets her 3% wealth tax, you'll have to make do with just 10 billion trillion gigadollars. Ouch!)

[C2H5OH]

Originally Posted by Inna Minnit

But what if we eat each other?

Grace has an answer to that question... i love that song...

[SamuelA]

The population growth is not sustainable insofar as we keep to the surface of the earth. it is inevitable that humankind will be colonizing other planets, so we have to keep in mind the net losses of machinery, resources, and material that will be obviously leaving teh planet with the colonists. It's not a matter of 'if' but "when," and that "when" is accelerating faster than people care to admit.

[Pencil]

https://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=51256

[C2H5OH]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

... It's not a matter of 'if' but "when," and that "when" is accelerating faster than people care to admit.

Who is contesting that question, moron? Do you often have arguments with the people in your head? You should, perhaps, seek psychiatric help with your obvious issues... After you finish fucking your East European under-age sex-slave obviously willing and enthusiastic sex partner, of course...

BTW, how have you been managing this past year, not being able to travel internationally? Rubbing it out by hand? Or did you finally work up the courage to hire a domestic sex-slave temporary girlfriend? Assuming you could find one that didn't just tell you 'get lost, creep'?

[SamuelA]

So basically you have no logical argument against my point, huh? You have to come in with the worst possible thing to say because you have absolutely nothing else, right? sick burn, ya got me.

Now back to the science and an actual discussion.

Halyard talks about this and proposes good ideas, but misses the point about extraction of raw maaterials from this planet. Its entirely possible to introduce self replicating technology with the colonists that would draw resources from new planets or even asteroids along the way if a method were developed to scan them for necessary elements, but that's already in use. Spectroscopy can easily be done by drones to identify element-rich asteroids, identifying them for use.

[Jaglavak]

Aw gee that's great! Why don't you just whip out a detailed drawing of that self replicating technology complete with sensor specifications. That should be no problem for someone of your massive intellect.

[SamuelA]

I'll ignore your negativity, and enlighten you that laser spectroscopy already exists, and in fact is being used on the Mars Rover to analyze materials. Self replicating technology is achievable within our lifetime, and is being experimented with at DARPA, Google, etc. Are you in denial, or just biased against the arguments somehow. You should pay attention to what is being argued and not who does the arguing if you can get your mind wrapped aroun that concept.

[C2H5OH]

No one here is arguing about anything except for you arguing with the voices in your head.

[Jaglavak]

Anything is possible to those who don't have to do anything.

Of course we're going to have bots. Big bots, medium bots, little bots, itty bitty bots, we're going to have lots of bots. But we don't yet and won't for quite some time. And when they do arrive they won't be self replicating and they won't solve All The Problems. If you want to have an actual discussion about technology you might want to stick a whole lot closer to what's in the pipeline now.

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by Jaglavak

Of course we're going to have bots. Big bots, medium bots, little bots, itty bitty bots, we're going to have lots of bots. But we don't yet and won't for quite some time. And when they do arrive they won't be self replicating and they won't solve All The Problems. If you want to have an actual discussion about technology you might want to stick a whole lot closer to what's in the pipeline now.

We do have bots now, big bots medium bots and tiny bots, like right now. While we haven't gotten their AI heuristics to the point of self manufacture we're right on the edge of it. its just a question of resources. So, they are in the pipeline now, and have the potential to solve any problem humans are willing to try to tackle. Get your head out of the sand and see the bigger picture.

My point in the future is that when humans start migrating to other systems, mass will be leaving with them. Lots of it. But by then nuclear propulsion will probably be more advanced so maybe not so much mass.

[Pencil]

This is somehow about nanobots again? Right?

I'm sure Musk is looking into transhumanism, to upload himself. I'm sure he's seething that in spite of all his money, it'll end the same way for him as for a beggar in Soweto: oblivion.

I also thinks that he believes that colonizing Mars is a viable way to solve problems here on earth. Me, I am all for space exploration, but your fantasy/dystopia, what Musk and you are envisioning, is a kinda Wall-E-ish future. Of course, you both think you're gonna be the guys floating in the sky, not down here, cleaning up.

ETA:

But by then nuclear propulsion will probably be more advanced

As compared to the nuclear propulsion we have today? Fusion or fission? Are we talking about Thorium? I hear that Plutonium is a no-go.



BTW, want to buy some stock in my Nanobot factory before its IPO?

[fucktard loser]

We are a zero class civilization, good luck trying to save the inhabitants of planet “Dirt”.

[C2H5OH]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Get your head out of the sand and see the bigger picture.

Get your head out of your ass and see the fact that no one here is interested in flogging your pet subject. No one cares what you think [yeah, I'm going out on a limb, here, and calling what he does 'thinking'], so you're never going to get anyone to respond to your mental diarrhea. People care what you think about virtually everything, about as much as your East European sex slaves girlfriends care about your dick. They deal with it only insofar as they are forced to. Since we are not forced to, we don't, and won't, pretend to care about your idiotic spew on technology.

You are an idiot. Everyone but you recognizes this fact. Your life will go better once you do, too.

[Jaglavak]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

My point in the future is that when humans start migrating to other systems, mass will be leaving with them. Lots of it.

The asteroid belt weighs about 6x10^21 pounds. When we run out of that, Jupiter weighs 4×10^27 pounds of mostly hydrogen. We're good to go.

[Pencil]

Originally Posted by Jaglavak

Jupiter weighs 4×10^27 pounds of mostly hydrogen.

[SamuelA]Oh, oh, oh!
What if... WHAT IF... we set up a chain of nuclear explosions in Jupiter's atmosphere, then we can make it a miniature star and terraform its moons[/SamuelA]

[Tripler]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

But by then nuclear propulsion will probably be more advanced so maybe not so much mass.

Your statement seems to indicate that nuclear propulsion exists now and may be "more advanced" in the future. At the risk of dumbing us all down by 20 IQ points from exposure, I dare ask the question; Just what nuclear propulsion are you talking about?.

Start with what exists now. You may not 'handwave' yourself into some fanciful speculation on what may exist in the future.

Show your work, and citations.

Tripler
Go.

[Jaglavak]

Oooh! Oooh! I know this one! Pick me Mr Kotter, pick me!

[Tripler]

Uhhh, yes. . . second row. You, with the orange hair. Go ahead. . . .

[Jaglavak]

There are two basic types of rocket propulsion. High thrust and low thrust.

For the high thrust types, the technology that offers the highest performance is the gas core open cycle fission rocket. By directly mixing the hydrogen fuel with fissioning reactor fuel, a specific impulse of up to 5000 seconds may be achievable. The minor issue of how to handle a mile long torch of radioactive death is left as an exercise for the reader.

For the low thrust types a plasma engine holds the greatest promise, with possible specific impulse up to 12,000 seconds combined with relative simplicity and long endurance. The power source is a 1,000 megawatt compact fission plant fuelled with HEU and cooled by liquid metal, driving a supercritical CO2 brayton cycle turbogenerator.

The most practical arrangement is to connect a lightly shielded rocket module to the personnel module by a 300 yard cable and spin them about the common center of gravity. Thus providing excellent radiation protection and also centripetal acceleration for the health and comfort of the crew.

Mr Kotter sir!

[C2H5OH]

You were supposed to start with what actually EXISTS, NOW.

FAIL...

[Jaglavak]

Give me great wads of cash and get the NRC out of the way, and I'll have one fired up by Christmas.

[fucktard loser]

You forgot tenure.

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by Jaglavak

There are two basic types of rocket propulsion. High thrust and low thrust.

For the high thrust types, the technology that offers the highest performance is the gas core open cycle fission rocket. By directly mixing the hydrogen fuel with fissioning reactor fuel, a specific impulse of up to 5000 seconds may be achievable. The minor issue of how to handle a mile long torch of radioactive death is left as an exercise for the reader.

For the low thrust types a plasma engine holds the greatest promise, with possible specific impulse up to 12,000 seconds combined with relative simplicity and long endurance. The power source is a 1,000 megawatt compact fission plant fuelled with HEU and cooled by liquid metal, driving a supercritical CO2 brayton cycle turbogenerator.

The most practical arrangement is to connect a lightly shielded rocket module to the personnel module by a 300 yard cable and spin them about the common center of gravity. Thus providing excellent radiation protection and also centripetal acceleration for the health and comfort of the crew.

Mr Kotter sir!

This is actually correct I have hope for you in the long run. The hydrogen propelled reactor technology has actually been proven by laboratory work, and was even recommended for use in long-range cruise missiles like the SLAM. Higher impulses generated mean higher efficiency for motors, which is based in the materials we have now. advances in reactor design and proteum and deuterium based fuels also provide edges in efficiency we couldn't realize back in the sixties and seventies. I've read articles indicating more recently discovered elements will produce lighter reactors with lower material for k factors. Its just a matter of time before demand reaches up with existing capabilities to drive the research to more than just laboratory work.

[C2H5OH]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

...SLAM.

Got a brother who designed that. Get that through your head, moron. I personally KNOW the people who designed that thing. Got an uncle who worked for GE, designing this sonofabitch: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger. You are an idiot. All i did was design buildings, BUT.. I come from a LONG line of engineers who design shit. And make it work. You are not an engineer... You are a moron. Who literally knows nothing, except how to get eastern European sex slaves to fuck you. Helpful hint. They don't want to fuck you. They have no choice. You are not anything anyone would consider fuckable...

Damn. You're a fucking gullible moron, ain'tcha. Someone spews bullshit and you swallow it whole, thinking someone is actually engaging you on your intellectual level. Helpful hint. He was. But your level is so low that he could do 'technobabble', which he did, and you'd buy into it. He said virtually nothing. Kinda like what you spew...

[Pencil]

I've read articles indicating more recently discovered elements will produce lighter reactors with lower material for k factors.

List of recently, i.e. discovered after 2000, elements:

113 Nihonium is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Nh . It is extremely radioactive; its most stable known isotope, nihonium-286, has a half-life of about 10 seconds.

115 Moscovium is an extremely radioactive element: its most stable known isotope, moscovium-290, has a half-life of only 0.65 seconds.

116 Livermorium is an extremely radioactive element that has only been created in the laboratory. Four isotopes of livermorium are known, with mass numbers between 290 and 293 inclusive; the longest-lived among them is livermorium-293 with a half-life of about 60 milliseconds.

117 Tennessine is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Ts. It is the second-heaviest known element and the penultimate element of the 7th period of the periodic table all its known isotopes have half-lives of less than one second.

118 Oganesson is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Og. Since 2005, only five (possibly six) atoms of the isotope oganesson-294 have been detected. It has a half-life that appears to be less than a millisecond.


Using these as fuels? Seems solid enough.

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by C2H5OH

Got a brother who designed that. Get that through your head, moron. I personally KNOW the people who designed that thing. Got an uncle who worked for GE, designing this sonofabitch: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger. You are an idiot. All i did was design buildings, BUT.. I come from a LONG line of engineers who design shit. And make it work. You are not an engineer... You are a moron. Who literally knows nothing, except how to get eastern European sex slaves to fuck you. Helpful hint. They don't want to fuck you. They have no choice. You are not anything anyone would consider fuckable...

Damn. You're a fucking gullible moron, ain'tcha. Someone spews bullshit and you swallow it whole, thinking someone is actually engaging you on your intellectual level. Helpful hint. He was. But your level is so low that he could do 'technobabble', which he did, and you'd buy into it. He said virtually nothing. Kinda like what you spew...

You dumb fuck. if you come from a long line of engineers then you know its a viable technology. there are Tier 1 companies like your beloved Tesla and Virgin that are adapting the Energy Departments work . . . https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/6...mal-propulsion im a moron, huh? Looks like youre the dipshit

[C2H5OH]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

if you come from a long line of engineers then you know its a viable technology.

Of course it is, but you demonstrably don't know shit about it, or anything else, for that matter.

[babale]

Originally Posted by Pencil

I also thinks that he believes that colonizing Mars is a viable way to solve problems here on earth. Me, I am all for space exploration, but your fantasy/dystopia, what Musk and you are envisioning, is a kinda Wall-E-ish future. Of course, you both think you're gonna be the guys floating in the sky, not down here, cleaning up.

There are definitely fair criticisms of Musk, and I'm really not his biggest fan and can't believe I'm about to defend him, but... I don't think this is one of those fair criticisms.

Musk thinks we should live on multiple planets, not abandon Earth. Going to Mars is about going to Mars, not fixing Earth's problems - we can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time, and to be fair, while there are many fair criticisms of Tesla, it IS a driving force behind an emerging industry in what will be a major component of stopping global climate change, and Musk himself was a pioneer in that field. So it's not like Musk wants Earth to be some WALL-E trash world for the poor while the rich live on Mars. He wants to turn both worlds into paradises for humanity. Whether his plans are truly the best path forward for humanity is certainly debatable, and I have my own criticisms of the man. But arguing that he wants to thrash Earth and dip out is just incorrect.

SamuelA on the other hand is a moron.

[babale]

Originally Posted by C2H5OH

You were supposed to start with what actually EXISTS, NOW.

FAIL...

Define "exist". And "now". For example, does an engine that was tested on its own and was promising enough but was never actually strapped onto anything or sent to space and got mothballed half a century ago count as "existing now"? Because that's the best I got.

[babale]

Originally Posted by Pencil

List of recently, i.e. discovered after 2000, elements:

113 Nihonium is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Nh . It is extremely radioactive; its most stable known isotope, nihonium-286, has a half-life of about 10 seconds.

115 Moscovium is an extremely radioactive element: its most stable known isotope, moscovium-290, has a half-life of only 0.65 seconds.

116 Livermorium is an extremely radioactive element that has only been created in the laboratory. Four isotopes of livermorium are known, with mass numbers between 290 and 293 inclusive; the longest-lived among them is livermorium-293 with a half-life of about 60 milliseconds.

117 Tennessine is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Ts. It is the second-heaviest known element and the penultimate element of the 7th period of the periodic table all its known isotopes have half-lives of less than one second.

118 Oganesson is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Og. Since 2005, only five (possibly six) atoms of the isotope oganesson-294 have been detected. It has a half-life that appears to be less than a millisecond.


Using these as fuels? Seems solid enough.

When was the element of surprise discovered?

[Pencil]

Moments after Adam took up Eve's offer and took a bite.

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by C2H5OH

Of course it is, but you demonstrably don't know shit about it, or anything else, for that matter.

Your circular logic is an impressive display of your stupidity. On one hand, you admit that it is a viable technology, but on the other, you call someone a moron for pointing it out to you. You apparently can't be bothered with science, so I'll just leave you to your own doomed misery. Ignored.