3 ms·
Does what you're saying imply that growth can be perpetual ?
by bilekas 7y ago
Does what you're saying imply that growth can be perpetual ?
- weeksie 7y agoYou still need energy inputs, so I'm not sure it does.
- thegabriele 7y agoIt should last until we get to strong AI or fusion energy, both i believe will have too much an impact to be again in the hands of the fews (perhaps a global war will be in order before). Then, the problem will be about literally physical space on earth.
- baq 7y agodon't forget about waste heat, we'll get cooked alive in a few hundred years of 3% yoy growth in energy produced
- thegabriele 7y agoYep, the constraint here is not to wipe out ourself in the meantime!
- dwaltrip 7y agoYeah. To achieve 3% growth per year for several hundred years we have to expand beyond Earth. Beyond a few hundred years, it starts getting more difficult. I wonder how much waste heat Mars or other large bodies could absorb. Or what is the largest possible radiator we could build in space... Some fun facts I calculated while thinking about this: * 3% growth for 100 years is 20x * 3% growth for 300 years is 7,000x * 3% growth for 1,000 years is 7,000,000,000,000x
- tryptophan 7y agoIt only needs to hold up for the next 100-500 years. No need to talk about perpetuity.