Hal Finney wrote,
> The curious thing about the paper is the conclusion. After going
> through equation after equation, graph after graph showing infinite
> economic output and population in the mid 21st century, they now proceed
> to interpret their results. There are two scenarios presented: either
> the human race essentially wipes itself out through ecological disaster,
> or it manages to limit its population growth and live in harmony with
> the earth, a "balanced symbiosis with nature." "Perhaps what is needed
> to avoid the finite-time singularity is a massive transfer of resources
> from developed to developing countries."
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cond-mat?0002075
"Contrary to common belief, both the Earth's human population and its economic
output have grown faster than exponential for most of the known history. These
growth rates are compatible with a spontaneous singularity occuring at the {\it
same} critical time $2052 \pm 10$ signaling an abrupt transition to a new
regime. In support, a multivariate analysis coupling population, capital, R&D
and technology shows that an ``explosion'' in the population can occur even
though the isolated dynamics do not exhibit it. Close to the mathematical
singularity, finite-size effects will smoothen the transition. Possible
scenarios for the cross-over and the new regime are discussed."
I guess this paper posits a negative or entropic singularity rather than a
positive or extropic singularity. It envisions a terminal end point, an omega
point of death. That could explain its conclusion and its prescription.
> The seem to be utterly ignoring their models as offering any real insight
> into the possibility that economic output could rise to unheard of levels
> in the next few decades. After all the charts and equations pointing
> towards something incredible happening, they continue to see the future
> in conventional terms. What a letdown.
What should we expect from a "gov" site?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:15 MDT