Only 1 billion years left

[YT2095]

when you actualy Look at the situation, a Billion years is incomprehensible to most all Human minds, a million years is! it`s just a "big number" without any Real significance at all.

a Thousand years is getting there, it is afterall maybe 40 to 50 generations (thereabouts).

now lets consider just the last 100 years, and all of our (mankinds) accomplisments in this time, and also that our technological advancement isn`t Linear in growth, it`s Exponential. and so, in the next 100 years we`ll have more than doubled the last 100 years worth of technology and so it continues....

 

now then, what in 1000 years time?

we can`t even possibly HOPE to even Imagine what we`ll be up to then

 

now multiply that by another 1000!

 

there`s your 1 billion years, will any of this be an issue then? I very very much doubt it!

[insane_alien]

we could probably move our entire planet by then. like the puppeteers in Ringworld. ginally got round to reading it and it was GREAT although a little short. only took me 6 hours

[Mobius]

now then, what in 1000 years time?

we can`t even possibly HOPE to even Imagine what we`ll be up to then

 

now multiply that by another 1000!

 

there`s your 1 billion years

 

Actually a 1000 * 1000 is only a million years, you have to multiply it by 1000 again to get the billion.

 

Multicellular life has only been around for about 500 million years. So there is still a fair bit of time to sort ourselves out (escaping of course other disasters).

 

I can't see us beeing able to move our planet and it may still be difficult to move to a new planet able to sustain our life.

 

The best bet may be to colonise space and live in space stations close to some stable star for a source of power.

[Martin]

a Thousand years is getting there' date=' it is afterall maybe 40 to 50 generations (thereabouts).

[/quote']

 

yeah.

YT it does seem as if 1000 years is a timespan one can begin to comprehend in terms of human history

 

so it might be a better discussion if one just thought in a 1000 year perspective and asked questions like will we destroy our species within that timeframe?

 

will we colonize some other places (comets, asteroids, moons of jupiter, etc) in that timeframe?

 

will we be able to produce selfreplicating metal surrogates (adapted for life in cold low-gravity vacuum) within that timeframe? will we want to and be able to transfer human personality and culture to these organisms? and if not, then will they nevertheless like listening to music?

 

will we drive all the tigers and penguins and antelopes and frogs extinct? or will we manage to save them?

 

YT, I think that 1000 perspective is reasonable to discuss. million or billion seems foolish even to try

 

now lets consider just the last 100 years, and all of our (mankinds) accomplisments in this time, and also that our technological advancement isn`t Linear in growth, it`s Exponential. and so, in the next 100 years we`ll have more than doubled the last 100 years worth of technology and so it continues....

 

YT, I think this may contain a naive expectation and a failure to learn from history. I believe history shows long periods of time during which technological advance was restrained and kept almost nil.

 

the technology landscape may contain "ATTRACTORS" namely states of technology which, when reached, are relatively stable

 

disasters of one sort or another can reverse or arrest development, but also PURPOSEFUL SOCIAL ARRANGEMENTS can arrest development in certain areas, for good or bad. Chemical and biological weapons development is an area where technological progress could be halted by political decision or by convention.

 

it is not clear that continued exponential technological advance is even POSSIBLE in general and it has not been the rule throughout much of human history.

 

military technology, weapons, transport, fortifications etc has usually been the most dynamic, but even in military tech there have been long idle periods-------and social conventions could halt development in many other areas besides military.

 

I dont want to suggest that any of this is good or bad----let's take a neutral view. I just want to say that one can't automatically assume that the rate of engineering and basic science development in the past 100 or 150 years is going to be typical of the future.

[YT2095]

I`m great believer in the Cascade effect and Human diversity when it comes to technology. yes technology will overtake us (nearly has to a degree). but there will be groups, however small that will take this Tech in and modify and adapt it and make more of it than was originaly thought of (I`m not just on about the Hacker).

I dare say we`ve already passed countless number of technological paths to have gone down already, a natural (or otherwise) disaster may indeed take us to the "No Option" point of Having to force another pathway. but the Human spirit as a collective is tenacious.

I see NO reason short of total anihillation that we would Not overcome almost Any situation presented.

in fact Never has mankind ever been more resourceful and inventive than in times of crisis and/or need AND stuck together as a Group forgetting all differences

 

we`re on a Path, a path of Tecnology and Information, this is OUR age, not stone or iron or bronze.

and if the big corporate guys are all just in it for the money (and most are) there will still be sub groups that will adopt this and adapt it to suit, THESE are the ones that bear watching and relying upon when the crunch comes.

 

eventualy the rest would catch up and we`ll continue again on our merry way

[Douglas]

If humans can survive even another 10,000 years i'd be surprised

Only the cockroach will be around in 10,000 years. They're genetically perfect......IMO

[-Demosthenes-]

Our space program is a joke. They arent working to colonize other planets. Our last shuttle up was to collect garbage....

Thats all they can do, this isn't star trek

[eruheru]

i beleive that we so much in the future becomes irelevent to us. most people cant imagine the world in ten years, so when the figure one billion presents itself, the first thought is "i wont be alive then." this is what sepperates us from the animals. we think of ourselves as individuals rather than a species. humans as we exist today cannot continue for more than a thousand years, as the resorces we posses are far less than are needed. as for a billion years, we stand no chance of survival for that long, no other creature has done it. and if we are distroyed, oh well life goes on

[MaxCathedral]

well, said....even our language will be completely different in 200 years. In 500 it will almost be unrecognizable.

[Martin]

well, said....even our language will be completely different in 200 years. In 500 it will almost be unrecognizable.

 

Max, to get an idea of how rapidly language changes here is some English from 400 years ago:

 

"Now entertain conjecture of a time

When creeping murmur and the poring dark

Fills the wide vessel of the universe.

From camp to camp, through the foul womb of night,

The hum of either army stilly sounds,

That the fix'd sentinels almost receive

The secret whispers of each other's watch.

Fire answers fire, and through their paly flames

Each battle sees the other's umber'd face;

Steed threatens steed, in high and boastful neighs

Piercing the night's dull ear; and from the tents

The armourers accomplishing the knights,

With busy hammers closing rivets up,

Give dreadful note of preparation.

 

....

 

The poor condemned English,

Like sacrifices, by their watchful fires

Sit patiently and inly ruminate

The morning's danger; and their gesture sad

Investing lank-lean cheeks and war-worn coats

Presenteth them unto the gazing moon

So many horrid ghosts. O, now, who will behold

The royal captain of this ruin'd band

Walking from watch to watch, from tent to tent,

Let him cry 'Praise and glory on his head!'

For forth he goes and visits all his host;

Bids them good morrow with a modest smile,

And calls them brothers, friends, and countrymen."

 

Max, I am wondering where you got your NUMBERS. I think this sample of 400 year old language is recognizable as English. You say that the language of 500 years in future will be hardly recognizable. Why should English evolve so much more rapidly in the future than in the past---that it becomes barely recognizable as the same tongue?

 

Sure admittedly the passage from 1600s is DIFFERENT from how we talk and write now. But my point is that it is RECOGNIZABLE. most of the words are quite familiar to us today.

[MaxCathedral]

oh, I personally disagree....new words are added all the time, others are dropped.

For instance the word Groovy was used in the sixties, now its looked upon as archaic.

While in between the pronunciation of certain words actually evolves.

 

Changes in English Pronunciation

 

home stones name tongue

 

Old hääm stää´näs nä´mä toong´ge

Middle hôm stô´nez nä´me toong´ge

Modern hōm stōnz nām tŭng

 

Old English...5th century to 12th

Middle.........12th to 15th

Modern........15th to present.

 

Both King James Bible and Shakespeare are considered modern English.

 

I may not have bullseyed the exact time periods in my original post, but the concept is still largely intact. Language does change. Any paperback copy of Hamlet will have footnotes on the side explaining words within the play itself, which may have different meanings than we are used to, or are not even in use anymore.

[qwerty]

who cares about language. who cares about 1 billion years. who cares about 1000 years. the way the world is goin now, petrol $2 a litre soon, everyone money hungry, they'd rather the money than look after the world. soon enough we'll all die. 10,000 years, i wish. i dont know much, but look at 100 yeras ago, the earth was fine. look now. look in another 100 yeras.

[MaxCathedral]

in our defense Querty....life expectancy has jumped, we have seen deep into space far greater than we ever thought, we have cloned, and deciphered the Human DNA genome...and yes, we know have tv with over a hundred channels...

 

but history runs in cycles....and we have had it good for along while...and so now its time to retograde back to the 70's....a war halfway across the world becoming unpopular, gas prices spiking, and end of the world talk.

 

but we will survive....we always do...

[BobbyJoeCool]

but we will survive....we always do...

 

You of course mean we always have... Just because we haven't been wiped out by our own devices yet doesn't mean it won't happen...

[Xyph]

this is what sepperates us from the animals. we think of ourselves as individuals rather than a species

I don't think that's the case at all - if anything, I think the opposite is true or, at least (in the case that not everyone lives up to their duty as a human) something close to it - in that we are capable of thinking of ourselves as a species. Animals generally consider only themselves, or if anything else their immediate family, hive, nest or herd. On the other hand, humans are capable of putting work into things that they may well never see results from in their lifetimes, simply because they hope that their species will be around to continue - and reap the benefits when technology has reached a stage that makes whatever they've worked on practical.

 

 

who cares about language. who cares about 1 billion years. who cares about 1000 years. the way the world is goin now, petrol $2 a litre soon, everyone money hungry, they'd rather the money than look after the world. soon enough we'll all die. 10,000 years, i wish. i dont know much, but look at 100 yeras ago, the earth was fine. look now. look in another 100 yeras.

Fine? That's quite an overstatement, I'm sure. That said, though, as deficient as modern society may be at the moment in many areas, we are still progressing and increasing the collective knowledge of humanity, so if we survive this, it will have been worth it. We have to go through less desirable stages at some time, otherwise we'll never know what to avoid in future.

[JonM]

Science and technology will be able to first take us away from our sun, then either stop the expansion of universe or transport us into our own custom made universe. The former probably more plausible than the latter, not because it wont be possible to create a custom universe, but because it would be hard to get into it.

 

And when I say us of course I mean whatever the hell our species will evolve into by then.

 

So dont worry

 

 

On another note with nanotechnology, the internet, and whatever else, the young generation, my generation, will see the greatest social and technological changes in our lifespan than any other generation before us. The next 60 years are going to be pretty wild.

[Xyph]

Science and technology will be able to first take us away from our sun, then either stop the expansion of universe or transport us into our own custom made universe. The former probably more plausible than the latter, not because it wont be possible to create a custom universe, but because it would be hard to get into it.

I disagree. Where do you intend to get the mass to stop the expansion of the universe? On the other hand, the latter idea may not be entirely impossible given a high enough level of technology.

[JonM]

True, the fact is even in a million years we have no idea what will be possible, much less a billion. So our thoughts are so primitive it doesnt even matter

[yuyw]

I'm puzzled by your assertion "In 1 billion years, the sun will get hotter by ten percent". How do you obtained this conclusion? Can you give me more detailed evidences? Thank you!

[yuyw]

Sorry, I misread "billion" in the sentence as "million". Here I think you are right according to current theory of the evolution of stars. However, in my opinion it is unnecessary to worry about the future after 1 billion years, which is too long for us. To say the least, our knowledge up to today is so limited comparing with the abstruse universe.

[HAVOK]

I've been gone many months. Hello to all. This is my favorite topic. First off, I've not read every reply here so I'm kinda jumpin in midstream here. In response to the original post, "Isn't a Billion years a bit too far to extrapolate?" Our sun is about half dead already, isn't it? Anyway, - - Here's my question, or thought; At some point in the future, won't all mass be converted back to the energy it came from thru Black Hole processing? It would be an incredibly long time, but even the proton should decay in somewhere beyond 10(33) years; we're still waiting to catch one in the process of decay but - - no luck yet. It would seem that once this process is complete, and all is energy again, there would be no mass to create gravity necessary to bring things back together. Since we can only theorize here, is this proposal not worthy? What are everyone's thoughts on this ?

L8R HAVOK.

[Conceptual]

Moon habitation only needs hydrogen. There is already plenty of oxygen contained with mineral oxides (lunar dirt) and plenty of solar heat. If one figures culture has only been around for less than 10k years and we have already been to the moon using only computers as powerful as a modern PC, 1 billion years is plenty of time to prepare. Necessity is the mother of invention. If those calculations are true there are already serious minds making preparations.

[Aristarchus]

This is a story by Jim Holt from Slate, http://www.slate.com/id/2096491/entry/2096506/

 

*Text removed by Mokele. Please do not just copy & paste the entire text of an essay you've already linked to, it wastes space.*

[Aristarchus]

Its proposes some interesting theories. I'm generally pessimistic about the whole thing.

[Vanitas]

If an asteroid was heading to Earth (for the sake of argument) and it was going to hit in lets say 32 years, we would develop more technology in those 32 years then we have ever...ironic isnt it?

 

Check the news near the bottom of the mainpage. There IS an asteroid possibly heading towards Earth. From the sound of it, NASA seems to think they have it under control.