Where Science has lead the Modern man

[Klaynos]

So we should scrap all scientific discoveries and go back to everyone dieing at around 40?

[Guest srirambalu]

The Buddha lived till the age of 80. That was in 500BC. I agree lot of people used to die young. That was nature's way of population control. Otherwise we run out of resources and fight with each other for oil etc which leads to war and terrorism, overpopulation, poverty, starvation etc. I would rather choose to die young rather than suffer in poverty and starvation or die in a war or terrorist bomb blast.

[Klaynos]

There was war, poverty, terrorisim and starvation centuries ago too.

 

Yes one documented case of someone living to 80, as apposed to the thousands who do now, I can see how that was better. This world is not perfect and we are killing it, but the solution to this imo is technology...

[gcol]

The Buddha only lived to 80?

Should have taken lessons from Methuselah.

[Pleiades]

If solar energy can be used to generate electricity for large scale usage, what are we waiting for? It is free and we should have already built solar power houses. The fact is that solar energy cannot supply our huge needs.

We are waiting for solar to become cheaper that fossil fuels. More solar energy falls on the earth each day than all of humanity uses in a year.

 

 

As for using solar power to drive vehicles, I have seen those flimsy vehicles with huge solar panels that move at slow speeds in discovery channel. Solar power cannot drive our heavy vehicles.

Solar energy can be used to create hydrogen for hydrogen powered cars, it could also be used to charge the batteries of battery powered cars. These systems may not be feasible for racecars and the like, but for the rest of us, these cars are a viable alternative, as soon as they become economically attractive. Ultimately all of the energy on the earth comes from the sun, using biodiesel and ethanol are just ways of using plants to collect the solar energy for us.

 

 

Let's be practical and forget about exploiting resources from other planets. It takes so much time, money and effort to just get to the space and return. We went to the moon only once and could not get anything other than a few stones as mementos. We couldn't even get gold.

As technology improves, it will become much easier to gather resources from space. Some people theorize there are large reserves of frozen hydrogen on the moon. The reason we went to the moon was just to beat Russia, you can’t expect to find gold if that’s not the reason you are going to the moon in the first place. (Why would you expect to find gold on the moon anyway?)

 

 

Even at this time, where I am they say it is very difficult to get sand! If we can't get even sand which is a pure raw material, I only wonder how they will produce cement which has to go through so much of processing

Cement isn’t that hard to make, it doesn’t require very much processing at all. You may not have much sand where you are, but I guarantee it’s going to be a very long time before the world runs out of sand. Concrete doesn’t even need sand, any inert filler (aggregate) will do, silicon dioxide is usually used (quartz sand), be here we use calcium carbonate (coral sand), both work fine. You could also just use the dust from demolished buildings instead of sand.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_cement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete

[herme3]

I need some minimum resources to survive. We need not always compete to acquire resources. If somebody competes with me for a resource I would rather give it to him without questioning.

 

How are you supposed to get the resources you need to survive if you don't compete? Competition is not just part of human society, but it is a major part of nature.

 

Why do you keep thinking nature is so peaceful? You are living in a fantasy world! Nature is really full of death and murder. Wild animals often kill each other for resources. Competition between humans is usually much more peaceful. In modern society, we use money to compete for resources. This is what you seem to think is evil. If you want to go back to nature, you might have to kill other humans just to get your food.

 

I agree lot of people used to die young. That was nature's way of population control. Otherwise we run out of resources and fight with each other for oil etc which leads to war and terrorism, overpopulation, poverty, starvation etc. I would rather choose to die young rather than suffer in poverty and starvation or die in a war or terrorist bomb blast.

 

Why do you think these people used to die young? Did you think it was something that automatically happened? No! It was because of poverty, starvation, and disease.

[Guest srirambalu]

Guys,

 

We don't actually need to go back to stone age or to the Amazon forest. Let's take the period just before the industrial revolution. Weren't people happy then? They were concentrating on art, literature and sports etc. which don't harm nature. There was minimal exploitation of non replenishable resources.

 

Then they started inventing. If they sent their inventions to the museum right away, nature would have been safe. The next thing after invention is mass production. Creating the infrastructure and Training people for mass production is the next thing. They begin with selling the product to the few who could afford and then it becomes cheap and everyone could afford it. There are still a few reluctant people and the products are sold to them using the tactics called marketing. Even otherwise they buy the product for the fear of being left out. That is how a product which did not exist becomes a necessity. My only concern is that most of these products are made out of non replenishable resources or are non recyclable. When innumerable such products come to common usage, resources are greatly exploited.

 

Another problem with this is that as days progress, the new generation has to learn the principles and workings of all that has been invented in order to be able to maintain them and create better alternatives. These days even if you are a Master's degree holder you are redundant. You spend more time in qualifying yourself to earn a livelihood than the actual living.

 

In what way can we recycle the television, the computer monitor, The computer components, keyboard, mouse, a mobile phone when they go out of order? As I already mentioned, countries are trying to dump such waste on other countries who may be willing to accept them to recover a few scrap items from them.

 

We cannot go 100 years back because we have so rapidly progressed and the lifestyle of man 100 years back is unacceptable to us. We can't even go 10 years back. We didn't have the internet 10 years back!

 

My concern is, after the industrial revolution we have started consuming non replenishable resources so rapidly and been producing non recyclable hazardous wastes. We have exploited in less than a 100 years what could be used for a million years.

 

How effectively fossil fuels will be replaced with other sources, we will have to wait and see. The task cannot be under estimated and we cannot afford to waste time.

 

We are waiting for solar to become cheaper that fossil fuels. More solar energy falls on the earth each day than all of humanity uses in a year.

We should not measure the whole of solar energy that falls on earth. We should measure only the amount of energy that falls on our rooftop or on top of the Solar Powerhouse.

 

I'm quite happy with all our inventions and sophisticated lifestyle. So far so good. My only question is, is this lifestyle sustainable? Also considering that happiness is only a state of mind and people were happy in spite of extreme conditions, is all this required or should we rather learn to be happy. That is why I started questioning education and excellence. All these inventions can make an illiterate millionaire happy, but an educated philosopher knows that none of these is required to be happy.

 

The following is from the book "The Power of Now" by eckhart tolle. http://www.eckharttolle.com. The book is a New York Times best seller. I'm not selling the book. That is only to tell you it's worth.

"Those who have not found their true wealth, which is the radiant joy of Being and the deep, unshakable peace that comes with it, are beggars, even if they have great material wealth. They are looking outside for scraps of pleasure or fulfillment, for validation, security, or love, while they have a treasure within that not only includes all those things but is infinitely greater than anything the world can offer." Isn't that intriguing! He's right and many have found that wealth.

 

You guys are probably the kind who think "Life is short, make it sweet", but do you know about the attitude of religious people about life? They say life is a disease and is for misery! You are born because of your sins and you will be reborn and experience misery till your sins get exhausted. The main purpose of life is to work for your salvation so that there is no more rebirth. I'm out of both of these. I 'm neither greedy to experience all the pleasures possible nor want to work for my salvation. I'm happy and at ease as I am and feel that is the right attitude.

[herme3]

We don't actually need to go back to stone age or to the Amazon forest. Let's take the period just before the industrial revolution. Weren't people happy then? They were concentrating on art, literature and sports etc.

 

You forgot to mention that this period of time was also called the Scientific Revolution. Isn't that what you are against?

 

Then they started inventing. If they sent their inventions to the museum right away, nature would have been safe. The next thing after invention is mass production.

 

Well... Duh!

 

Why would somebody invent the TV or computer and then send it to a museum instead of selling it to the public?

 

Creating the infrastructure and Training people for mass production is the next thing. They begin with selling the product to the few who could afford and then it becomes cheap and everyone could afford it.

 

Yeah... People get jobs and are able to buy things. Isn't that just awful?

 

My only concern is that most of these products are made out of non replenishable resources or are non recyclable. When innumerable such products come to common usage, resources are greatly exploited.

 

Now, I actually agree with this statement. We should try to recycle more of the products we use.

 

Another problem with this is that as days progress, the new generation has to learn the principles and workings of all that has been invented in order to be able to maintain them and create better alternatives. These days even if you are a Master's degree holder you are redundant. You spend more time in qualifying yourself to earn a livelihood than the actual living.

 

Ok, if you ever need major surgery, go see some guy without an education...

 

You keep posting things without thinking about what you are saying!

 

In what way can we recycle the television, the computer monitor, The computer components, keyboard, mouse, a mobile phone when they go out of order?

 

There are companies that recycle them.

 

We cannot go 100 years back because we have so rapidly progressed and the lifestyle of man 100 years back is unacceptable to us. We can't even go 10 years back. We didn't have the internet 10 years back!

 

I couldn't even go 3 years back. I didn't have high-speed Internet back then!

 

My concern is, after the industrial revolution we have started consuming non replenishable resources so rapidly and been producing non recyclable hazardous wastes. We have exploited in less than a 100 years what could be used for a million years.

 

Ok... Then how would you manage these resources? Would you get rid of your car, air conditioning, heating, or the computer you are using right now? To reach your goal, you would probably need to get rid of all of these plus almost everything else you own.

 

You are like someone going on a diet. It's easy to say it, but you just won't be able to do it.

[Pleiades]

Ok, I might have messed up on the math here, but the numbers seem right.

 

Watts per sq m (average over 24hr period over whole earth):	164
kWh / sq m / day:						3.94
kWh / sq km / day:						3,936,000
Earth’s landmass (sq km):					148,300,000
Daily total solar energy (kWh):					583,708,800,000,000
Yearly solar energy over land (kWh):				213,053,712,000,000,000
10% of yearly solar energy (kWh):				21,305,371,200,000,000
Yearly energy use (kWh):					146,535,535,000,000
Landmass needed (%):						0.69%
Landmass needed (sq km)						1,019,988

 

That’s an area slightly bigger than Egypt.

About 1% of the Earth’s landmass is devoted to growing crops.

 

This estimate might actually be more than it needs to be because most solar cells are more than 10% efficient.

 

The fact that out energy needs are growing at a rapid rate complicates things somewhat, I’m still working on that one.

[Guest srirambalu]

You forgot to mention that this period of time was also called the Scientific Revolution. Isn't that what you are against?

I feel that period was harmless. I'm not against anything or prejudiced. You guys show me the way and I'll walk with you, but tell me where it leads. I'm not like that doctorate student in the US who woke up one day and thought science is taking humanity nowhere and started blowing up universities. Right now we seem to be working with wrong priorities like building more armaments, fighting with each other for oil, experimenting with pluto etc and moving forward rapidly without a second thought. I just want people to stop, see where it all takes us, know our priorities and bridge the gaps for our own good.

 

Why would somebody invent the TV or computer and then send it to a museum instead of selling it to the public?

It is safe to send some inventions like the atom bomb to the museum.

 

Yeah... People get jobs and are able to buy things. Isn't that just awful?

At leaset that is good. Only rapid exploitation of resources as a result of that is bad.

 

Ok, if you ever need major surgery, go see some guy without an education...

There is no end to it. We can invent ways to prolong the lives of all kinds of unfit people and keep working on that. We will stop only when we meet a dead end. We haven't found a remedy for the disease called death nor will we ever be able to. Prolonging life a little bit is not great. It is better to accept nature's selection so that whoever lives lives happily. With all the modern inventions, unfit monied people manage to live while healthy poor people starve and die. Technology has only selected the rich as fit. Overall it doesn't make a big difference. Those people who starve and die in Somalia are more fit than you and I.

 

There are companies that recycle them.

Good to know that there are companies to recycle electronic waste. We should make sure we can handle waste before producing them.

 

Ok... Then how would you manage these resources? Would you get rid of your car, air conditioning, heating, or the computer you are using right now? To reach your goal, you would probably need to get rid of all of these plus almost everything else you own.

 

You are like someone going on a diet. It's easy to say it, but you just won't be able to do it.

There is no personal goal. I'm not like those few people in the office who reuse their plastic cup because it will be a non recyclable waste while all their colleagues keep throwing them away, nor believe in saying "Save Oil". It doesn't matter if oil lasts for one more day if everyone saves. We would rather find an alternative than wasting time asking people to save. Either all of us follow or no one follows.

[Klaynos]

I feel that period was harmless. I'm not against anything or prejudiced. You guys show me the way and I'll walk with you' date=' but tell me where it leads. I'm not like that doctorate student in the US who woke up one day and thought science is taking humanity nowhere and started blowing up universities. Right now we seem to be working with wrong priorities like building more armaments, fighting with each other for oil, experimenting with pluto etc and moving forward rapidly without a second thought. I just want people to stop, see where it all takes us, know our priorities and bridge the gaps for our own good.

[/quote']

Yeah harmless with all those people dieing young, when you say they where concentration on art, the rich might have baeen but what about everyone else? They where starving to death every winter in their little houses with one room sleeping 15 people that was owned by their land lord, who was bassically their slave driver.

It is safe to send some inventions like the atom bomb to the museum.

Some idiot would still build one and hold it over the world. Can't get past the human nature of wanting power

 

At leaset that is good. Only rapid exploitation of resources as a result of that is bad.

 

 

There is no end to it. We can invent ways to prolong the lives of all kinds of unfit people and keep working on that. We will stop only when we meet a dead end. We haven't found a remedy for the disease called death nor will we ever be able to. Prolonging life a little bit is not great. It is better to accept nature's selection so that whoever lives lives happily. With all the modern inventions' date=' unfit monied people manage to live while healthy poor people starve and die. Technology has only selected the rich as fit. Overall it doesn't make a big difference. Those people who starve and die in Somalia are more fit than you and I.

[/quote']

"unfit people" I HATE terms like that who decides who is unfit?

 

I agree people dieing in LEDCs when everyone else stands around say "isn't that terrible we should do something" is awfull, but stoping developing technology wont help them we'll just go back to not knowing about them...

 

Good to know that there are companies to recycle electronic waste. We should make sure we can handle waste before producing them.

 

 

There is no personal goal. I'm not like those few people in the office who reuse their plastic cup because it will be a non recyclable waste while all their colleagues keep throwing them away' date=' nor believe in saying "Save Oil". It doesn't matter if oil lasts for one more day if everyone saves. We would rather find an alternative than wasting time asking people to save. Either all of us follow or no one follows.[/quote']

...

[ffsjoe]

If somebody competes with me for a resource I would rather give it to him without questioning.

 

Ok, ill get you to wire me all your money into my paypal account. As herme3 said how are you supposed to survive if you dont compete. That is what everyliving thing does. The plants too, allelopathy? for example the camphor produced in leaves of the camphor laurel tree accumulates in the soil preventing the germination or growth of other plants. Effects that can be seen are prevention of seed germination, deformed roots, slow growth and poor reproduction. Equate that to a person poisoning other people so he may have a greater chance of living. Other people not being able to reproduce or having deformed bodies. Not very nice now is it.

 

They all compete to live and be the strongest, survival of the fittest. You would not get very far in the wild if you just let everone else walk all over you.

 

I'm wondering how The Buddha lived in 500BC without even a thatched hut, begging for food. For sure he was the happiest person ever.

 

iirc monks and soforth rely on the kindness of others to give them food. Not everyone can adapt this lifestyle, we need people to farm the land, process food, so people can buy it and give it to people begging for it. So the monks are able to live thanks to the people that they say live for material items.

 

The Buddha lived till the age of 80. That was in 500BC. I agree lot of people used to die young. That was nature's way of population control.

 

Yep, that was natures way of controlling the population.

 

 

Otherwise we run out of resources and fight with each other for oil etc which leads to war and terrorism, overpopulation, poverty, starvation etc. I would rather choose to die young rather than suffer in poverty and starvation or die in a war or terrorist bomb blast

 

War, poverty, starvation, terrorism, and illness, they all control the population.

 

 

With all the modern inventions, unfit monied people manage to live while healthy poor people starve and die. Technology has only selected the rich as fit. Overall it doesn't make a big difference. Those people who starve and die in Somalia are more fit than you and I.

 

Well in actual fact that is evolution and chance, Luckily I was not born poor and starving in Somalia, I live in a first world country thus greatly increasing my chance of survial. You said technology has only selected the rich as fit. Yes, therefor the rich will survive and the poor will die. Survival of the fittest right there. The rich are fitter because they have more money where as the poor don't so they are weak, it doesn't matter physically, in this circumstance but ofcourse health plays a part but it all comes back to money and being able to afford it.

 

It's a bit hard for me to get into words what I am thinking because its late and im tired. But hopefully you guys understand where I am comming from.

[Guest srirambalu]

Yeah harmless with all those people dieing young, when you say they where concentration on art, the rich might have baeen but what about everyone else? They where starving to death every winter in their little houses with one room sleeping 15 people that was owned by their land lord, who was bassically their slave driver.

You're right, life has definitely improved.

 

Ok, ill get you to wire me all your money into my paypal account.

You know, I wouldn't have minded if there was the culture as like The Buddha's time where people entertained Monks. These days people don't entertain begging and though I don't compete unnecessarily, surely I need to protect my little space and drive away people who enter that.

 

They all compete to live and be the strongest, survival of the fittest. You would not get very far in the wild if you just let everone else walk all over you.

We are supposed to be civilized people. We can't compete with each other and still call ourselves civilized. We, civilized people should live in harmony. Unfortunately we have only become more sophisticated and cunning in our ways to compete with each other.

[YT2095]

are you a Buddist by any chance?

[Guest srirambalu]

are you a Buddist by any chance?

I'm not a Buddhist. I'm greatly influenced by J.Krishnamurti(http://www.jkrishnamurti.org), a great philosopher who was beyond all boundaries and belonged to no sect or nationality, who went around the globe talking to people, trying to bring harmony in the world. His famous statement that I like is, "Technologically man has advanced from the bullock cart to the jet plane, but psychologically he is still a cripple". I'm not necessarily his follower, if I were, I will enclose myself. I will listen to anybody who makes sense and try to drive sense into who doesn't make sense. I'm influenced by The Buddha too (http://www.fundamentalbuddhism.com), but I'm supposed to be a hindu.

[Klaynos]

I will listen to anybody who makes sense and try to drive sense into who doesn't make sense.

 

Classic............

 

I'm sorry I simply couldn't resist...

 

Jiddu Krishnamurti it seems from what I just read was brought up to be a profit of sorts...

 

And when you say "he had no nationality" what you ment to say was "he was an indian"

 

 

Yeay for wikipedia!

[YT2095]

Klaynos, you only beat me to the draw in the post time.

 

I picked up on the same thing too

[Guest srirambalu]

War, poverty, starvation, terrorism, and illness, they all control the population.

You mean something like the September 11 incident is nice way for population control? If someone dies of disease, the family is in despair for sometime and then they come to normal. Something like the Sept 11 incident shocks the whole world and make everyone insecure. When you are insecure, it is not worth living.

[herme3]

I feel that period was harmless. I'm not against anything or prejudiced. You guys show me the way and I'll walk with you, but tell me where it leads. I'm not like that doctorate student in the US who woke up one day and thought science is taking humanity nowhere and started blowing up universities. Right now we seem to be working with wrong priorities like building more armaments, fighting with each other for oil, experimenting with pluto etc and moving forward rapidly without a second thought. I just want people to stop, see where it all takes us, know our priorities and bridge the gaps for our own good.

 

War still existed during this time that you just said was "harmless". Humans have built weapons and killed each other a long time before this time. In fact, war exists in the wild. You will find competition between one-celled organisms, so it isn't because we are advancing. The only way we could possible stop war and competition is if we advance further.

 

 

It is safe to send some inventions like the atom bomb to the museum.

 

Ok... Why would anybody ever do that?

 

Usually our weapons are created for defense. It is normally the terrorists in the poor countries that start the violence.

 

There is no end to it. We can invent ways to prolong the lives of all kinds of unfit people and keep working on that. We will stop only when we meet a dead end. We haven't found a remedy for the disease called death nor will we ever be able to. Prolonging life a little bit is not great. It is better to accept nature's selection so that whoever lives lives happily. With all the modern inventions, unfit monied people manage to live while healthy poor people starve and die. Technology has only selected the rich as fit. Overall it doesn't make a big difference. Those people who starve and die in Somalia are more fit than you and I.

 

You just don't understand. "Nature's selection" is not a peaceful death! It is usually starvation or disease.

 

Yes, therefor the rich will survive and the poor will die.

 

Right, but Srirambalu seems to think that it will help if we were all poor. If the rich became poor, that isn't going to help the people who are already poor. It's just going to make more poor people.

[YT2095]

"atom Bomb" as you call them have a Shelf Life, so as a complete unit, then of course not, but take away the time dependant parts, then Yes, I think we Should have them in Museums!

[Guest srirambalu]

No. J.Krishnamurti was a very simple man. A huge monied organization called "The order of the star in the east" was built by the theosophical society trying to project him as a Messaiah. He dissolved the order saying it is not required and talked with people as a friend. He refused to accept the Guru status that people were trying to foist on him. If you get a little deeper you will appreciate him. He was very rational minded and unlike me he liked Science and Technological progress and didn't consider them as a hinderance for harmony.

 

Though he was born in India, he was raised in UK and lived in US, Switzerland etc. He belonged to the whole of humanity.

[YT2095]

so, in a Nutshell, You`re here on a Science Forum for What purpose?

[herme3]

"atom Bomb" as you call them have a Shelf Life, so as a complete unit, then of course not, but take away the time dependant parts, then Yes, I think we Should have them in Museums!

 

I agree with you, YT. However, Srirambalu suggested that someone should have invented the atomic bomb to send it to a museum instead of ever using it for defense purposes. That made no sense to me.

[Guest srirambalu]

so, in a Nutshell, You`re here on a Science Forum for What purpose?

May be you guys are not feeling the pinch. Here in India the petrol price keeps increasing. If you catch an auto(a 3 wheeler taxi common in India) you are sure to hear the guy complain about the increased petrol price and his inability to sustain a livelihood. We use LPG for cooking and its price is also increasing. As far as we are concerned, we already repent we haven't developed alternatives for those. Atleast I do. If one country has the problem, surely it will propagate to other countries. My purpose is just to create an awareness so that we prioritize our actions properly. I have already mentioned about the priority.

 

One more thing, believe me, the objects of the world are for children. Adults can feel the happiness inherent in man directly. When they do that, they stop competing for resources and that solves lots of problems.

[ffsjoe]

You mean something like the September 11 incident is nice way for population control? If someone dies of disease, the family is in despair for sometime and then they come to normal. Something like the Sept 11 incident shocks the whole world and make everyone insecure. When you are insecure, it is not worth living.

 

I never said it was nice, it is a fact of life. People will never live in harmony, as long as there is diversity there will be conflict.