The future of the world

[julius2]

Aside from evolution, but related to Time, does anyone have an opinion on where our world is heading?

My guess is that we are heading towards an "Old World" unless we find something fantastic in the universe first.....

[iNow]

Depends on timeline. Tomorrow is the future, but so is 5 billion years from now, and in the long run we’re all dead. 

[swansont]

What do you mean by “Old World”?

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, julius2 said:

Aside from evolution, but related to Time, does anyone have an opinion on where our world is heading?

Climate apocalypse.

[julius2]

4 hours ago, iNow said:

Depends on timeline. Tomorrow is the future, but so is 5 billion years from now, and in the long run we’re all dead. 

Good question. I am thinking the next 1,000 years to the year 3000.

No doubt we expect technology to keep developing, nuclear fusion, AI etc.

But what about the resources of the planet. Will we have solar farms everywhere as oil runs out?

4 hours ago, swansont said:

What do you mean by “Old World”?

A world devoid of resources as they have all been depleted over thousands of years.

And going "back" to a more tribal way of living - after probably an age of wars amongst people. etc.

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Climate apocalypse.

That's not much to go on.

What do you mean?

[swansont]

5 hours ago, julius2 said:

A world devoid of resources as they have all been depleted over thousands of years.

And going "back" to a more tribal way of living - after probably an age of wars amongst people. etc.

What is your argument for this, and what evidence is it based on?

[sethoflagos]

11 hours ago, iNow said:

and in the long run we’re all dead. 

Is it my imagination or has Fatalism suddenly gone on the rampage on this site?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbL9Vsobx8I

 

[Phi for All]

8 hours ago, julius2 said:

A world devoid of resources as they have all been depleted over thousands of years.

And going "back" to a more tribal way of living - after probably an age of wars amongst people. etc.

I think if the second sentence above were to happen, it might help with the first sentence above. You probably think of "tribal way of living" as a bad thing; I see it as a way for humans to work together for their own ends, to be able to realize 100% of their work efforts, rather than working to make others wealthy. One of our biggest problems today is we think rugged individualism is attractive, when we really need to pull together and stop isolating ourselves in small family units. The resources aren't being depleted so much as they're being hoarded by the wealthy, who recognize that we're stronger in numbers. 

[julius2]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

What is your argument for this, and what evidence is it based on?

Well, just looking at recent history with the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s. And then numerous technological advances in the 1900s and now in the 200s. More of earth's resources are being used such as oil etc. And earth's resources are finite. Even Elon Musk mentioned he is not looking forward to a world with depleted resources hence his push to explore further e.g Mars.

But we are still relatively early in time so we are all very optimistic. Hoping someday, someone will stumble across the next big thing for humanity to move on to. I guess we are lucky in that respect.

11 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I think if the second sentence above were to happen, it might help with the first sentence above. You probably think of "tribal way of living" as a bad thing; I see it as a way for humans to work together for their own ends, to be able to realize 100% of their work efforts, rather than working to make others wealthy. One of our biggest problems today is we think rugged individualism is attractive, when we really need to pull together and stop isolating ourselves in small family units. The resources aren't being depleted so much as they're being hoarded by the wealthy, who recognize that we're stronger in numbers. 

A more tribal way of living might not be a bad thing. We would use less of earth's resources. And probably last thousands of years as a result.

Maybe towards the end, people rely again on fire for warmth, cooking and some kind of modified agriculture to sustain.

[swansont]

4 minutes ago, julius2 said:

Well, just looking at recent history with the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s. And then numerous technological advances in the 1900s and now in the 200s. More of earth's resources are being used such as oil etc. And earth's resources are finite.

Seems to we’re doing things to make us less reliant on oil.

 

4 minutes ago, julius2 said:

Even Elon Musk mentioned he is not looking forward to a world with depleted resources hence his push to explore further e.g Mars.

Why listen to Elon? Or any celebrity? Fame is not expertise.

 

[Phi for All]

10 minutes ago, julius2 said:

A more tribal way of living might not be a bad thing. We would use less of earth's resources. And probably last thousands of years as a result.

Maybe towards the end, people rely again on fire for warmth, cooking and some kind of modified agriculture to sustain.

It still seems like you're thinking this would all be a slide backwards, but there's no reason why we have to go back to using fire when we still have modern energy sources. We wouldn't be using less of Earth's resources necessarily, but the resources could be used MUCH more efficiently. It doesn't necessarily use more resources to distribute food where it's needed rather than letting it rot on a dock.

There are tons of things we do wrong in modern agriculture, imo. I think monocrop yields blind us to the concerns about crop rotation, overuse of pesticides and fertilizers, and overall quality of the food we grow. I'd love to see the US in particular adopt more indigenous practices, such as food forests where multiple layers of crops protect each other from pests, naturally fertilize the ground and keep it full of nutrients, and give depth and sophistication to the taste of the foods we eat. And none of this means we have to take a single step backwards.

[iNow]

2 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

Is it my imagination or has Fatalism suddenly gone on the rampage on this site?

False dichotomy. It's probably both.  

It's a reference to an old John Maynard Keynes quote about what economics says about future status "in the long run," btw. 

[Phi for All]

9 hours ago, julius2 said:

A world devoid of resources as they have all been depleted over thousands of years.

Is "old world", defined in this way, something others have used or did you make it up? Either way, I don't think it's a good term. We already use it to mean "traditional", and it can also imply that a world is well established or hasn't changed fundamentally in a long time. I also object to using "old" as a synonym for "used up and long ago depleted" for personal reasons.

[sethoflagos]

1 hour ago, julius2 said:

And earth's resources are finite.

Only the radionucleides.

In principle, hydrocarbon reserves can be restored from water and carbon dioxide via photosynthesis which is how they were created in the first place.

Strategic metals can be recovered from wherever their used form was disposed of.

Don't confuse 'financially viable exploitable deposits' with total disappearance. It's a myth perpetuated by those who demand maximum profit from minimum investment.  

[Peterkin]

10 hours ago, julius2 said:

What do you mean?

I thought climate apocalypse was a pretty familiar concept to everyone by now. But, okay:

Plans and projects for climate change mitigation are formulated to start making significant improvements in 10, 20, 30 years.

Within the next five years, we will pass at least one of the key 'tipping points' from which there is no return. Factor in uncontainable methane and ancient plagues that have been lying dormant under the melting permafrost that will contribute to future global pandemics. Wildfires increase in frequency and magnitude, as do tornadoes, hurricanes and blizzards. The oceans get warmer and dirtier: fish die and wash up on the shores to rot. Farther inland than ever before, since the sea level keeps rising due to melted icebergs. Many populous islands disappear; many previously arable lands will become uninhabitable. Hunger, conflict, mass migration. Retreating glaciers will cause more rivers to dry up, which will precipitate more famines and wars, as well as loss of hydroelectric capacity and power blackouts, industries grinding to halt, cities in panic. Governments, unable to cope, will topple; the global economic network will tatter and civilization will crash. Lots and lots of deaths; lots and lots of deserts; lots and lots of people wandering around with guns, looking for anybody who still has food. 

Eventually, I expect some survivors to form new communities in different parts of the world - some of which may grow into new civilizations. But you can stop worrying about AI and forget any prospect of space exploration.   

[julius2]

On 12/9/2023 at 2:18 AM, swansont said:

Seems to we’re doing things to make us less reliant on oil.

 

Why listen to Elon? Or any celebrity? Fame is not expertise.

 

I don't particularly like or dislike Elon. He is at times the richest man in the world.

On 12/9/2023 at 4:30 AM, Peterkin said:

I thought climate apocalypse was a pretty familiar concept to everyone by now. But, okay:

Plans and projects for climate change mitigation are formulated to start making significant improvements in 10, 20, 30 years.

Within the next five years, we will pass at least one of the key 'tipping points' from which there is no return. Factor in uncontainable methane and ancient plagues that have been lying dormant under the melting permafrost that will contribute to future global pandemics. Wildfires increase in frequency and magnitude, as do tornadoes, hurricanes and blizzards. The oceans get warmer and dirtier: fish die and wash up on the shores to rot. Farther inland than ever before, since the sea level keeps rising due to melted icebergs. Many populous islands disappear; many previously arable lands will become uninhabitable. Hunger, conflict, mass migration. Retreating glaciers will cause more rivers to dry up, which will precipitate more famines and wars, as well as loss of hydroelectric capacity and power blackouts, industries grinding to halt, cities in panic. Governments, unable to cope, will topple; the global economic network will tatter and civilization will crash. Lots and lots of deaths; lots and lots of deserts; lots and lots of people wandering around with guns, looking for anybody who still has food. 

Eventually, I expect some survivors to form new communities in different parts of the world - some of which may grow into new civilizations. But you can stop worrying about AI and forget any prospect of space exploration.   

Good to see some future thought about where we are heading. It may not be good news but hopefully there are some "nice" times as well. For example the "peace years".

Any thoughts on how many years we have left? Homo sapiens have been on earth 300,000 years it appears. I am guessing we might have 180,000 years left??

Who knows what happens to Industrialised Worlds.....

What is the meaning of all this if we spend thousands of years developing into an Industrialised World only to decline again and live a slow death...

 

[Peterkin]

3 hours ago, julius2 said:

For example the "peace years".

Had those. Except for the odd missile crisis, they were delicious. Not likely again for a considerable while: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00679-w  https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/countries-currently-at-war/

3 hours ago, julius2 said:

Any thoughts on how many years we have left?

The present civilization - a couple of decades, if it's lucky. And it had better lucky, 'cose it sure ain't no stable genius! The species? Who knows? My guess is, some isolated human colonies and individual families  will survive the collapse, but they may well be wiped out later by fallout, airborne disease, weather events or human marauders from the cities. What they will survive on, if they do, is still open to speculation. My personal hope is that the climate topples this house of madness and lies before the nukes have a chance to: that would leave more of the planet alive.

 

3 hours ago, julius2 said:

What is the meaning of all this if we spend thousands of years developing into an Industrialised World only to decline again and live a slow death...

Recovering from the enormous, inexcusable, catastrophic mistake of industrialization is not 'decline' in book.      

[swansont]

4 hours ago, julius2 said:

I don't particularly like or dislike Elon. He is at times the richest man in the world.

Wealth isn’t expertise, either

[julius2]

On 12/11/2023 at 12:51 AM, swansont said:

Wealth isn’t expertise, either

You don't think he has expertise?

[swansont]

3 hours ago, julius2 said:

You don't think he has expertise?

Not much in technical areas. He didn’t actually found Tesla, and has said some really stupid things (remember his idea to send a sub in to rescue people from a flooded cave?). And by many accounts he’s a terrible boss.