From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Tue Jul 06 1999 - 08:16:00 MDT
>> I wrote:
>> We are approaching the carrying capacity of the planet (w/o
>> nanotech) [and and will eventually approach the carrying capacity
>> of the solar system]. Unfettered reproduction reduces the resources
>> available to us all and/or reduces our quality of life by secondary
>> effects when we as indivduals don't pay for damage we cause (such as
>> global warming caused by fossil fuel consumption).
> Elizabeth Childs <echilds@linex.com> wrote:
> Again, read Julian Simon:
> http://www.inform.umd.edu/EdRes/Colleges/BMGT/.Faculty/JSimon/Ultimate_Resource/
>
> PJ O'Rourke covers some of the same stuff in "All the Trouble in the World".
I am aware of the economics of substitutions and the declining costs
of most raw materials. However as Simon points out it really all
comes back to "energy", and like it or not there is a finite amount
of energy available!
There are *hard limits* to growth.
- There is a finite amount of phosphorous on the planet and that limits
the number of people you can build.
- There is a finite amount of silicon on the planet and that limits the
number of computers you can build.
- There is a finite amount of solar insolation and that limits the
amount of energy you have (for the people or the computers).
- Robert Freitas has a calculation in Nanomedince that seems to
indicate that we will be heat-production contrained to the
personal use of something like 10 kg of operating nanobots
(unless we turn the planet into a giant radiator). Now while
you may argue that 10 kg of operating nanobots is enough for
you, you may be assuming that your capacities for consumption
will remain unchanged or your desires will not increase in the
nanotech age.
Yes, we can go off the planet. Dyson did the calculations nearly
40 years ago and I've repeated them for my Matrioska Brain studies.
If you don't assume Nanotech (Dyson didn't) you hit the limits in
3000 years. If you do assume Nanotech (I did) you hit the limits
in a few weeks. Robert Freitas has done some calculations that
show that if stellar disassembly is feasible, we could burn up
all of the hydrogen in the stars of a galaxy in a few million years.
The stuff that the "Club of Rome" wrote about and the stuff that
Julian Simon writes about revolve around economic limits and
they always leave out technology improvements, discoveries,
increased productivity, etc. The stuff I'm talking about
involves what happens when we really hit the limits.
If humans decide to remain humans, don't upload, etc. then
you have a few thousand rosy years before you get to crunch
time (unless you squash biotech, you will probably be around
to see it). If humans do develop nanotech, do upload, etc. then
you will start feeling really constrained in a few dozen years.
Like it or not -- personal longevity forces you to confront
the issue of personal reproduction. It forces you to select
between 2 of the most fundamental drives built into living
beings (the preservation of self and the making of copies).
Now, maybe you can say, since I'm here first, I get to
reproduce and when crunch time arrives, those people don't.
So, you've reserved for yourself a "right" that your
children (or great great ... grandchildren) (or your
clones or backup-copies) cannot have (at least not
without killing you :-))!
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:24 MST