4 ms·
>A massage table doesn't seem finite either. If its made from wood, leather/cotton, those would be regenerable resources But it is finite, because those resour
by Rury 4y ago
>A massage table doesn't seem finite either. If its made from wood, leather/cotton, those would be regenerable resources
But it is finite, because those resources aren't infinitely regenerable. You're forgetting that, in order to grow a tree (or animals for wool/leather), you need to take energy and material from somewhere else. This is physics 101: you cannot create nor destroy matter or energy, you can only change its form, but to do so always takes away from somewhere else. Hence because it takes both material and energy to grow a tree, and energy and material aren't infinitely available to us, then you cannot have infinite wood tables. So, the amount of wood tables we can have is therefore finite.
Now if we converted all available material to us into wood tables, we can of course burn some them, so we again have more material to grow a new tree. Then after having grown a new a tree, we can turn it back into a wood table again. However, the amount of times we can repeatedly cycle back and forth like this between tables and trees, is not infinite, because this takes excess energy to do, and the amount of excess energy available to us is not infinite, ultimately because of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, but for anyone having trouble thoroughly understanding that law, more practically because the sun is eventually going to burn out.
- mikeg8 4y agoWow, this is a pretty big swing-and-a-miss, honestly. This discussion is about finite vs infinite in Economics, not physics. Arguing that wood is finite, in an economic sense, would be a laughable position - wood is almost always used as an example of an infinitely renewable resource.
- Rury 4y agoThis is an ad hominem. I did not a miss at all. Economics is bounded by the laws of physics. So, because wood is finite in a physical sense, it is also finite economically speaking.