Author Topic: The speed of light cage problem.  (Read 12909 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Smilodon

  • Warrior of Perim
  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
  • Gender: Male
The speed of light cage problem.
« on: January 24, 2012, 04:46:46 pm »
I've posted this on various areas of Reddit to spark some discussion about this. It's been bugging me for a while and I've only decided to open a debate on solutions about it today.

Here's what I've posted:

Quote
I recall reading a passage in the novel Manifold: Space by Stephen Baxter. It described how an alien civilization might burn out. The idea goes like this: since populations grow geometrically, then the number of systems (and therefore the speed at which you go outward) gets bigger. The problem is that eventually the rate of population growth will outpace the rate at which new systems are settled due to the fact that nothing can travel faster than c. As a result the civilization burns up its resources and gutters out. What if that is a possible future for mankind? We currently know of no way to break the speed limit set by light so unrestricted growth would eventually doom us. How could we prevent, or failing that, survive something like this scenario? If you have any ideas, even far out ones, then please post them.

So here are the rules: no ftl, no breaking of the conservation of energy. Your solutions?

Napoleon the Clown

  • Guest
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2012, 04:50:00 pm »
Regular purges of the weak.

Offline GLaDOS

  • Genetic Lifeform and Disk Operating System
  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2012, 04:51:57 pm »
Two words: Portal Gun
attach one to a telescope, point at planet, wait, arrive.
Space? SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!
How are you holding up? Because I'm a POTATO.
Silence will fall.
For fuck's sake, please keep my fucks given levels balanced.

Offline rosenewock21

  • The Snuffleupagus of the Satanic Sesame Street
  • God
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Gender: Female
  • Holder of the sleepy time rag
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2012, 04:52:44 pm »
Do we have to offer moral solutions? Things like the above mentioned would work (except 90% of this very forum would be considered "weak" depending on your definition) or enforcing laws like only have one or two children. But do you really want to go down that path?
Matthew 22:39 "And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." God's own "don't be a dick" rule.

Lithp and Vene really need to have some kind of confusing sexual encounter where Vene spends the entire session lovingly insulting Lithp's technique, then cums on his face, ruffles his hair, says, "You're all right, kid!", and then punches him in the nuts.

QueenofHearts

  • Guest
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2012, 04:53:39 pm »
I think limiting population growth would suffice, but Napoleon's genocide is just as viable.

Offline Smilodon

  • Warrior of Perim
  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
  • Gender: Male
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2012, 05:00:14 pm »
I think limiting population growth would suffice, but Napoleon's genocide is just as viable.

It seems like population limitations would be the best way to start out. Maybe we could even genetically engineer ourselves to have a reduced sex drive. At Reddit one person said we wouldn't have to worry until our civilization becomes a type III on the Kardashev scale (for those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about watch this).

Edit: maybe I shouldn't worry about this. We'll have plenty of energy from renewables and fusion.

Offline Yla

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 809
  • Gender: Male
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2012, 05:42:26 pm »
Population control. If we ever manage to get seriously off the planet, this will already have been put in place. With 7 billion humans, the window in which we even have the resources to start colonizing the system is closing.
That said, I've stopped trying to anticipate what people around here want a while ago, I've found it makes things smoother.
For I was an hungred, and ye told me to pull myself up by my bootstraps: I was thirsty, and ye demanded payment for the privilege of thine urine: I was a stranger, and ye deported me: naked, and ye arrested me for indecency.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3615
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2012, 06:16:59 pm »
According to Verhulst's model, population growth only looks like an exponential while you're far from reaching the carrying capacity of the environment, and begins to slow down and approach the carrying capacity asymptotically when you get closer. In other words it looks like this (the first curve is an exponential, the other is a solution to Verhulst's equations).

Point being, assuming the basic idea is right, if we don't enact population control it will happen by itself as resources become scarce.
Σא

Offline VirtualStranger

  • Blinded with Science
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
  • Gender: Male
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2012, 06:21:58 pm »
According to Verhulst's model, population growth only looks like an exponential while you're far from reaching the carrying capacity of the environment, and begins to slow down and approach the carrying capacity asymptotically when you get closer. In other words it looks like this (the first curve is an exponential, the other is a solution to Verhulst's equations).

Point being, assuming the basic idea is right, if we don't enact population control it will happen by itself as resources become scarce.

The thing is, that scarcity will still make the world a much shittier place for everyone living on it, and it would be preferable to avoid it entirely.

Napoleon the Clown

  • Guest
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2012, 06:23:19 pm »
I don't know if I should be amused or not that people are actually agreeing with my smartass statement.

In any event, nature takes care of purges pretty regularly. Just wait for a nice, happy epidemic to sweep through.

Offline Vene

  • AKA Vene-Eye the Science Guy
  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
  • Patronizing Know-It-All Snotnose
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #10 on: January 25, 2012, 11:38:37 pm »
According to Verhulst's model, population growth only looks like an exponential while you're far from reaching the carrying capacity of the environment, and begins to slow down and approach the carrying capacity asymptotically when you get closer. In other words it looks like this (the first curve is an exponential, the other is a solution to Verhulst's equations).

Point being, assuming the basic idea is right, if we don't enact population control it will happen by itself as resources become scarce.
There are known cases of a population exceeding its carrying capacity. It... doesn't end well for them. Things like famine and disease are quite common at this point and it generally results in a crash well below the carrying capacity (potentially in an environment with a reduced carrying capacity from the original point). I cringe whenever I look at a graph showing human population over time because I have pattern recognition. So far we've manged to increase carrying capacity with technology, but this can't continue indefinitely. Our only real solution is to reduce population growth to 0, which should be obtainable with education and cultural engineering (think social programs and free condoms, not Hitler).

Offline rosenewock21

  • The Snuffleupagus of the Satanic Sesame Street
  • God
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Gender: Female
  • Holder of the sleepy time rag
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2012, 11:49:21 pm »
I'd say the ideal goal would be slowly maintained negative population growth, but that can have a double edged sword of there being not enough younger people to care for the elderly.
Matthew 22:39 "And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." God's own "don't be a dick" rule.

Lithp and Vene really need to have some kind of confusing sexual encounter where Vene spends the entire session lovingly insulting Lithp's technique, then cums on his face, ruffles his hair, says, "You're all right, kid!", and then punches him in the nuts.

Offline GLaDOS

  • Genetic Lifeform and Disk Operating System
  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2012, 09:27:11 am »
another idea: invent a shrinking machine, shrink down the entire population, don't shrink the resources. Voila, you now have incredible amounts of resources to maintain your population.
Space? SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!
How are you holding up? Because I'm a POTATO.
Silence will fall.
For fuck's sake, please keep my fucks given levels balanced.

Offline rosenewock21

  • The Snuffleupagus of the Satanic Sesame Street
  • God
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Gender: Female
  • Holder of the sleepy time rag
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2012, 09:47:27 am »
A large part of the problem is that we are Apex predators. In a healthy environment the higher you are on the food chain the fewer of you there are. Other than some of the smaller prey animals (and our domestic animals) we are pretty much the biggest species on the planet in terms of population. We're certainly the most prolific of the apex predators.

Let's look at it through simple science and sharks. X is the fish population, Y is the number of lesser shark species, and Z represents the apex shark. You need Y to control X, otherwise there will be too many of X for the local plant life/krill to support. You need Z to control Y, otherwise Y will eat all of X and throw the ecosystem out of balance. But if you have too many of Z, Z will eat too many of Y, meaning there is nothing to control X. Or, even worse, Z will eat Y and X until Y and X cannot sustain healthy populations. This will then cause the die off of Z because they've eaten all their prey and can no longer sustain their population.

A good starting point for us as a species would be to ease ourselves off of so much meat. Yes, we need protein, and I love my cheeseburgers more than I should, but it takes more resources to grow animals than it does plants. And does anyone know what forms of meat are more sustainable? We're over fishing and commercial fisheries tend to be bad news for the environment. Red meat tends to be the biggest and takes the most resources to go from infant to ready to harvest adult. Is there an environmentally friendly way to raise poultry?
Matthew 22:39 "And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." God's own "don't be a dick" rule.

Lithp and Vene really need to have some kind of confusing sexual encounter where Vene spends the entire session lovingly insulting Lithp's technique, then cums on his face, ruffles his hair, says, "You're all right, kid!", and then punches him in the nuts.

Offline Da Rat Bastid

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
  • Gender: Male
  • Takes what he can, while he can.
Re: The speed of light cage problem.
« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2012, 03:13:41 pm »
another idea: invent a shrinking machine, shrink down the entire population, don't shrink the resources. Voila, you now have incredible amounts of resources to maintain your population.

I remember watching, sometime in the early 80s, a Superfriends episode wherein the villain du jour was a guy whose goal, and motivation for achieving it, were exactly that.  Superman had been shrunk to about the size of the average man's hand, if not smaller, and the villain put a snack-sized bag of peanuts next to him, saying "for me, this is only a mouthful, but for you, this would last an entire month".