There's nothing wrong with the idea that inflation might kick-off between 10^28 and 10^29 that we know about, but for any region of spacetime large enough for that to be an issue, the region should become enclosed by an event horizon. In other words, every black hole may contain its own reality. Which comports nicely with the idea that our universe is almost precisely at the critical density.
Secondly, I find it much more interesting to wonder what happens when large enough regions of the universe have low enough energies. Will there be another phase transition? We're not just talking cold, we're talking cold with densities on the order of a couple of atoms in a volume the size of our visible universe AND hypercold. If there's no big rip (itself a phase transition in slow motion), that is the future.
It occurs to me that you are focusing on a few points that irk you while ignoring the bigger picture. First, and here's the rub, most gains in efficiency are small historically. Such progress is incremental. So while you are correct about the bulbs, aggregate effects build. That 60W incandescent will create heat, which then the air conditioner will need to counter, which means it is more inefficient than it first appears. Further, money not spent on energy will be spent elsewhere, generating economic activity.
Mass agriculture as currently practiced needs to also go away. Vertical farming combined with other techniques will greatly reduce water use while restoring natural habitat to native flora and fauna, once the technology matures. This, combined with either efficient solar (which is coming soon) and/or fusion (which may or may not be coming in the next 10 to 50 years) would allow for near-total water reclamation.
Efficient consumption is the goal of the realistic conservationist. You are correct that it has often been pursued without regard to actual behavior or usage. Ranting is not going to promote your solutions, though. Calm education is the best approach.
As for desalination, it must be done with some care not to damage any more ocean habitat. I like seafood, and would like to continue to have it.
Agreed on most points. But in fact most of the grand ideas are falsifiable. Eventually. A hypothesis beyond current reach is no less a hypothesis, but must be treated with more skepticism than one that has been tested, more than once preferably. Gamma ray observations looking for evidence of quantum foam are an example of creative testing via observation. Frankly I think this is a fascinating time to be watching the field.
While I would not make cursive be a mandatory aspect of penmanship anymore, I would point out that manual note taking is generally far quicker with cursive. As for why it is still taught, I submit that most historical handwritten documents are written in cursive. Essential? Not really anymore. Useful? Yes, under any condition where a keyboard is not immediately available.
Speed up- maybe. However, 100% efficiency in any process is thermodynamically impossible as waste heat cannot be avoided. Further, there may be inherent limits in photovoltaic efficiency beyond the aforementioned limitation. With wind, these inefficiencies are mechanical in nature and more naturally understood. But research into solar is not easy even today. During a societal reboot it would be far harder.
I have not forgotten. But accumulating them, and wiring these together in a meaningful way will be tricky at best as there is no unifying design standard, While possible, I am not sure getting these together in a useful way as they are so widely distributed is likely plausible, either.
Given enough time, the fact that basic principles of electricity, magnetism, and combustion are well disseminated throughout society seems to guarantee an eventual rise form the ashes. However, it will not be rapid. Wind power will be the easiest to re-establish. Coal remains fairly abundant and easy to find (easy to mine is trickier). However, this is not the initial problem.
Roving pirate gangs would be a major threat to any attempt to settle and grow. Immediate needs will almost certainly trump the desire to rebuild when a person's child will be dead from hunger next week. Thus the amount of mental and temporal capital invested in the idea of rebuilding will be limited. I submit getting back to the age of steam would be fairly quick in some areas, but anything like modern society will take a very long time.
My friends and I have had this discussion many times over the last 15 years and determined the following: Petroleum was not a major economic consideration in the West until the mid- to late- 1800s. The biggest impediments to rapid rise back to such a level would be loss of knowledge and difficulty in locating easy-to-extract coal. After that, we will have a tougher time rebuilding unless we embrace other sources of energy. Remember that solar will not be a likely option as the energy to purify large quantities of silicon (currently a requirement) will not be initially available. Unless one embraces solar-fueled steam power.
Slashdot Mirror
There's nothing wrong with the idea that inflation might kick-off between 10^28 and 10^29 that we know about, but for any region of spacetime large enough for that to be an issue, the region should become enclosed by an event horizon. In other words, every black hole may contain its own reality. Which comports nicely with the idea that our universe is almost precisely at the critical density. Secondly, I find it much more interesting to wonder what happens when large enough regions of the universe have low enough energies. Will there be another phase transition? We're not just talking cold, we're talking cold with densities on the order of a couple of atoms in a volume the size of our visible universe AND hypercold. If there's no big rip (itself a phase transition in slow motion), that is the future.
No, that part is actually correct in that all known fundamentals could exist. If you mean uranium nuclei, well then yeah, you're right.
It occurs to me that you are focusing on a few points that irk you while ignoring the bigger picture. First, and here's the rub, most gains in efficiency are small historically. Such progress is incremental. So while you are correct about the bulbs, aggregate effects build. That 60W incandescent will create heat, which then the air conditioner will need to counter, which means it is more inefficient than it first appears. Further, money not spent on energy will be spent elsewhere, generating economic activity. Mass agriculture as currently practiced needs to also go away. Vertical farming combined with other techniques will greatly reduce water use while restoring natural habitat to native flora and fauna, once the technology matures. This, combined with either efficient solar (which is coming soon) and/or fusion (which may or may not be coming in the next 10 to 50 years) would allow for near-total water reclamation. Efficient consumption is the goal of the realistic conservationist. You are correct that it has often been pursued without regard to actual behavior or usage. Ranting is not going to promote your solutions, though. Calm education is the best approach. As for desalination, it must be done with some care not to damage any more ocean habitat. I like seafood, and would like to continue to have it.
Agreed on most points. But in fact most of the grand ideas are falsifiable. Eventually. A hypothesis beyond current reach is no less a hypothesis, but must be treated with more skepticism than one that has been tested, more than once preferably. Gamma ray observations looking for evidence of quantum foam are an example of creative testing via observation. Frankly I think this is a fascinating time to be watching the field.
While I would not make cursive be a mandatory aspect of penmanship anymore, I would point out that manual note taking is generally far quicker with cursive. As for why it is still taught, I submit that most historical handwritten documents are written in cursive. Essential? Not really anymore. Useful? Yes, under any condition where a keyboard is not immediately available.
Speed up- maybe. However, 100% efficiency in any process is thermodynamically impossible as waste heat cannot be avoided. Further, there may be inherent limits in photovoltaic efficiency beyond the aforementioned limitation. With wind, these inefficiencies are mechanical in nature and more naturally understood. But research into solar is not easy even today. During a societal reboot it would be far harder.
I have not forgotten. But accumulating them, and wiring these together in a meaningful way will be tricky at best as there is no unifying design standard, While possible, I am not sure getting these together in a useful way as they are so widely distributed is likely plausible, either.
Given enough time, the fact that basic principles of electricity, magnetism, and combustion are well disseminated throughout society seems to guarantee an eventual rise form the ashes. However, it will not be rapid. Wind power will be the easiest to re-establish. Coal remains fairly abundant and easy to find (easy to mine is trickier). However, this is not the initial problem. Roving pirate gangs would be a major threat to any attempt to settle and grow. Immediate needs will almost certainly trump the desire to rebuild when a person's child will be dead from hunger next week. Thus the amount of mental and temporal capital invested in the idea of rebuilding will be limited. I submit getting back to the age of steam would be fairly quick in some areas, but anything like modern society will take a very long time. My friends and I have had this discussion many times over the last 15 years and determined the following: Petroleum was not a major economic consideration in the West until the mid- to late- 1800s. The biggest impediments to rapid rise back to such a level would be loss of knowledge and difficulty in locating easy-to-extract coal. After that, we will have a tougher time rebuilding unless we embrace other sources of energy. Remember that solar will not be a likely option as the energy to purify large quantities of silicon (currently a requirement) will not be initially available. Unless one embraces solar-fueled steam power.
Apologies, just over half a meter.
150 billion cubic meters of ice would not cover Texas with half a meter of water. I am calling bad math.