Guest jstfrths Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Before the first atomic bomb was tested in the New Mexico desert on July 16, 1945, some of the scientists working on the bomb thought there was a three-in-one-million chance that an atomic bomb might melt down the entire earth. They went ahead and tested that first atomic bomb. - from http://www.intellectual-playground.com How much out of control experimentation is going on today? Have fun pondering! - Jeff
jackson33 Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Before the first atomic bomb was tested in the New Mexico desert on July 16, 1945, some of the scientists working on the bomb thought there was a three-in-one-million chance that an atomic bomb might melt down the entire earth. They went ahead and tested that first atomic bomb. - from http://www.intellectual-playground.com How much out of control experimentation is going on today? Have fun pondering! - Jeff those odds are a few thousand times better then a solar event will happen this year to wipe us out. the neutron bomb or at least theory considered that possibility. nanotech, has many on going experiments with catastrophic possibilities, but i have no idea what limits are place on them. self reproduction from any matter the villain.
Bluenoise Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 nanotech, has many on going experiments with catastrophic possibilities, but i have no idea what limits are place on them. self reproduction from any matter the villain. Oh yeah and what experiments are those pray tell?
Bettina Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 How much out of control experimentation is going on today?Have fun pondering!- Jeff The most dangerous one to me would be a biological weapon that we lose control of. I would bet that somewhere their working on something scary. Bettina
Ndi Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 I agree, bio-engineered life is more deadly but *it is containable*. You can do all experiments behind several filters, sealed doors, heck, you can instantly burn everything if needed be. However, other experiments depend on prone-to-failure magnetic fields - that's more dangerous IMO.
insane_alien Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 well, there is a chance that a particle accelerator will cause space time to drop to a lower energy level creating a self fueling shockwave that might possible move faster than the speed of light and destroy not only the entire world but the entire universe. although, they estimate the chances of a solar mass blackhole spontaneously appearing in your porridge tomorrow is a few thousand times more likely.
JohnB Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 I agree, bio-engineered life is more deadly but *it is containable*. You can do all experiments behind several filters, sealed doors, heck, you can instantly burn everything if needed be. But all those safeguards are designed by humans, who are fallible. Hence the safeguards contain flaws. To be honest, when I hear the words "Don't worry, nothing can go wrong." I start looking for the nearest exit.
woelen Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 The most dangerous experiment, mankind is doing, is changing the climate on earth, modifying the CO2/methane content of the atmosphere. The effect of this experiment we all will experience in the next 20 to 50 years.
swansont Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 I agree, bio-engineered life is more deadly but *it is containable*. You can do all experiments behind several filters, sealed doors, heck, you can instantly burn everything if needed be. However, other experiments depend on prone-to-failure magnetic fields - that's more dangerous IMO. Filters and seals fail, and nothing burns instantly. And you've discounted the disgruntled employee who does something on purpose.
jackson33 Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 Oh yeah and what experiments are those pray tell? think they refer to it as "Green or Blue Goo". this involves some thing that can reproduce its own kind from any material. the problem in testing, would be where to test since this has not known method to stop, if it indeed did work.
Bluenoise Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 think they refer to it as "Green or Blue Goo". this involves some thing that can reproduce its own kind from any material. the problem in testing, would be where to test since this has not known method to stop, if it indeed did work. You know that this stuff is 100% in the relm of science fiction and isn't actually going on? Nanotech is have trouble making things like hinges or a single spinning wheel never the less a robots completely able to reproduce themselves. Heck we can't even make a life sized one able to do that.
insane_alien Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 You know that this stuff is 100% in the relm of science fiction and isn't actually going on? Nanotech is have trouble making things like hinges or a single spinning wheel never the less a robots completely able to reproduce themselves. Heck we can't even make a life sized one able to do that. The technical term is a von-neumann machine.
Ndi Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 [...]they estimate the chances of a solar mass blackhole spontaneously appearing in your porridge tomorrow is a few thousand times more likely. I understand they don't really understand the dynamics of a black hole completely, so how can you compute such a chance? They could be off by a lot. But all those safeguards are designed by humans, who are fallible. Hence the safeguards contain flaws. Indeed nothing is safe but you can make redundant controls for friggin ever. I know a lock can be picked, but if you have 1000 doors and 1000 locks with guards you have more than enough time to shoot the thief. Add more guards and it becomes as close to impossible as possible . Filters and seals fail, and nothing burns instantly. And you've discounted the disgruntled employee who does something on purpose. That's why you build several filters in sequence, so you have enough time to incinerate everything. A bio lab with the hazard can be rather small, like a big room which you can then encase in protective layers, like several rooms enclosing the previous, in concrete, with several bio-filters. The chance of all 10 filters malfunctioning and nobody noticing is quite low. You don't have to go to zero, just a very low number. With safety guards in place I believe we have a better chance of spontaneously combusting. What I'm saying is - bio filters are a lot more resilient and a heck of a lot cheaper and smaller than a magnetic containment field - thus the chance of having several fail-safes is quite high. I understand that magnetic containment have power backups but nothing resembling secondary coils so a bad wire can set it off. Because the field needs to be strong you can't build a secondary layer 2 meters away; plus, the effect is instantaneous and global. You can build a sealed door though - for bio containment. Also, when working with the deadliest agents in the world, there is no such thing as disgruntled employees. They are called residents. Because they don't leave home each evening. I suppose. Hope.
swansont Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Indeed nothing is safe but you can make redundant controls for friggin ever. I know a lock can be picked, but if you have 1000 doors and 1000 locks with guards you have more than enough time to shoot the thief. Add more guards and it becomes as close to impossible as possible . Right. And yet we have the occasional spy case where we find a whole bunch of top-secret material has been turned over to the enemy, despite all of the safeguards.
bascule Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 Molecular nanotechnology poses a greater threat to mankind than any technology we have previously conceived of, and yes, I'm quite concerned
Rocket Man Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 the "grey goo" scenario is way off, the best anyone has come up with so far is a molecular drill with a piece of RNA as a bit. it's not nearly clever enough to replicate.
bascule Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 the "grey goo" scenario is way off Which is a good thing. We certainly aren't ready for self-replicating molecular nanotechnology today.
Bluenoise Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 the "grey goo" scenario is way off Actually I take that back it's already begun!! It's started taking the potatoes under my kitchen counter. At the rate it's doubling we'll likely loose the east coast in about a month.... On a more serious point I'm pretty sure before we can makes something like that from scratch we'll figure out that it'd have to be just about as complicated as a living cell and we'll already be manipulating those to do the same thing...
Hades Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 At the rate it's doubling we'll likely loose the east coast in about a month.... Not the east coast
Ndi Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 Right. And yet we have the occasional spy case where we find a whole bunch of top-secret material has been turned over to the enemy, despite all of the safeguards. So you basically disagree that for all intents and purposes a bio lab can be made safe enough that we can sleep soundly at night knowing we are on far more danger from something else than the biohazard? Note I'm considering a military/government/international bio lab, not your average large-glass, tour-ready pharmaceutical lab.
-Demosthenes- Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 Actually I take that back it's already begun!! It's started taking the potatoes under my kitchen counter. At the rate it's doubling we'll likely loose the east coast in about a month.... On a more serious point I'm pretty sure before we can makes something like that from scratch we'll figure out that it'd have to be just about as complicated as a living cell and we'll already be manipulating those to do the same thing... Yeah, there are already millions of species on the earth that already replicate themselves, and yes, they are too small to see with the naked eye. Why would a metallic version be scarier?
swansont Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 So you basically disagree that for all intents and purposes a bio lab can be made safe enough that we can sleep soundly at night knowing we are on far more danger from something else than the biohazard? Note I'm considering a military/government/international bio lab, not your average large-glass, tour-ready pharmaceutical lab. No, you should not assume that. "Sleep soundly at night knowing we are on far more danger from something else" and "as close to impossible as possible" are not even close to being the same thing.
Rocket Man Posted January 13, 2007 Posted January 13, 2007 Yeah, there are already millions of species on the earth that already replicate themselves, and yes, they are too small to see with the naked eye. Why would a metallic version be scarier? the grey goo scenario describes nano tech that can self replicate from anything, rocks, air, water, not just existing biological material. it basically suggests that the entire planet will eventually turn completely into a great big blob of unintelligent grey goo.
swansont Posted January 13, 2007 Posted January 13, 2007 the grey goo scenario describes nano tech that can self replicate from anything, rocks, air, water, not just existing biological material. it basically suggests that the entire planet will eventually turn completely into a great big blob of unintelligent grey goo. Which is science fiction at this point.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now