3 ms·

>world population It is a big assumption that we will be restricted to the 'world'. When we are not, it doesn't make much sense to stop a population explosio

• collyw 9y ago
  At present we pretty much are restricted to the world. Technically we have a few people in a space station, but I am pretty sure that isn't the answer to our overpopulation problems.
• majewsky 9y ago
  Yes it does. Assuming a constant positive reproduction rate (i.e. N children per woman with N > 2.3), the population will grow exponentially, i.e. the population growth function is O(e^t). If you solve this with space travel, i.e. by colonizing habitable planets within our reach, then you will be limited by the speed of light (i.e., how fast people can reach new planets to colonize). Given a time t, the radius of that available region is O(t), and therefore its volume is O(t^3). As you see, O(t^3) is much smaller growth than O(e^t). (In fact, there's a theorem in analysis that for any exponential function, there exists no polynomial function that it won't eventually outgrow.) So, if population growth is the problem, you can buy yourself a few more years by colonizing other planets, but the same problem ultimately re-emerges.