5 ms·

Sufficiently advanced civilizations seem likely to integrate energy generation technology to the point of invisibility, optimizing for aesthetics and potentiall

Sufficiently advanced civilizations seem likely to integrate energy generation technology to the point of invisibility, optimizing for aesthetics and potentially going classical and opting for something that looks like ancient Rome or Egypt. It seems unlikely that the pyramids were power plants and obelisks energy receivers [1], but maybe power plants of the future will look like the pyramids and energy receivers like obelisks. The pyramids seem to have been built in the 26th century BCE rather than 100th, but an advanced ur-civilization may have developed the means and will that "they actually got out with whisk brooms, scoop shovels and little spoons and cleared out every single trace of their daily lives, their utensils, their pottery, their wood, their tools and so on" [2]. 1. https://medium.com/understanding-reality/were-the-pyramids-power-plants-95fd2ebaf7af https://medium.com/understanding-reality/were-the-pyramids-p... 2. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/howold2.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/howold2.html

kevincox 4y ago
Terracotta tiles were probably more about practicality than astestics as well. There is a good chance that we only find it astetically pleasing because we associate it with historical architecture. If that had been shiny black surfaces we may have thought that modern solar panels look beautiful and antique. Don't get me wrong, I think it is great to have more choice in what solar panels look like and I think preserving the appearance of historical architecture is important. But I don't think that one is fundamentally more astetically pleasing than the other. It also makes the idea "integrated to the point of invisibility" an interesting concept. What is invisible? Most of our current building are founded in practically with astestic choices a minor customization on top.
midoridensha 4y ago
>but maybe power plants of the future will look like the pyramids and energy receivers like obelisks. Unless people in the future become religious nuts even worse than today's, I don't see why they'd waste so much space and resources on power-generating burial mounds. The pyramids may be impressive for a primitive civilization to build, but they were functionally completely useless and just a collosal waste of manpower, materials, and space. This is quite unlike solar-power-collecting terra cotta roof tiles: roofs serve a real purpose, on buildings that people live and work in.
- glass3 4y ago
  >but they were functionally completely useless and just a collosal waste of manpower, materials, and space. That's how you show affluence. With all the resources we have, we don't have enough to waste them. From that point of view, that civilization was much more than primitive. Also: [1]. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Ancient_Egyptians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Ancient_Egypt...
- cmarschner 4y ago
  People built 1000s of churches and cathedrals which, at face value, was a collossal waste of manpower, materials, and space. And yet we admire them and keep them around for 100s or 1000s of years, because of their greatness. The same for the pyramids. Of course, the effort served a function as well: to establish and maintain a power structure, to give people whose lives hung on strings far more often than ours do a sense of safety and hope. Man needs greatness. A glimpse of the divine. Our civilization has lost this, and the hyperfunctionalism has taken over our cities. We have removed even ornament and other signs of beauty from our buildings. And it has made them worse. But these trends come in waves. 50 years from now and we might again spend extra money on whatever will be the equivalent of neogothic or classicist buildings. And I‘m looking forward to it.
  - kavouras 4y ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/11/skyscrapers-wasteful-damaging-outmoded-time-to-stop-tall-buildings https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/11/skyscra...
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    I'm not advocating bulldozing ancient churches or the pyramids, but to build those things (or modern equivalents in terms of resources as a percentage of resources available to the society at large) today would be supremely stupid and wasteful. Arguably, wasting resources on burial mounds might be part of why Ancient Egyptian civilization collapsed, just like the civilization of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) with their statues. We still build great things, but today they're functional: skyscrapers, for instance. They're not really the most efficient type of building, but they are functional. And modern buildings are not devoid of ornamentation or signs of beauty, we just don't find gargoyles to be fashionable any more.
hammock 4y ago
Ancient people worshipped and brag about their favored relationships with energy sources (the sun) Modern people hide their energy givers and their dependency on them (gosh forbid your tv has power cords showing)
- nick123567 4y ago
  >>modern people hide their ... power cords Except those decorative halogen lights that hang from the + and - wires. As a kid I was messing with a pendant light over my kitchen island and accidentally bridged those wires together!

kevincox 4y ago

Terracotta tiles were probably more about practicality than astestics as well. There is a good chance that we only find it astetically pleasing because we associate it with historical architecture. If that had been shiny black surfaces we may have thought that modern solar panels look beautiful and antique. Don't get me wrong, I think it is great to have more choice in what solar panels look like and I think preserving the appearance of historical architecture is important. But I don't think that one is fundamentally more astetically pleasing than the other. It also makes the idea "integrated to the point of invisibility" an interesting concept. What is invisible? Most of our current building are founded in practically with astestic choices a minor customization on top.

midoridensha 4y ago

>but maybe power plants of the future will look like the pyramids and energy receivers like obelisks. Unless people in the future become religious nuts even worse than today's, I don't see why they'd waste so much space and resources on power-generating burial mounds. The pyramids may be impressive for a primitive civilization to build, but they were functionally completely useless and just a collosal waste of manpower, materials, and space. This is quite unlike solar-power-collecting terra cotta roof tiles: roofs serve a real purpose, on buildings that people live and work in.

glass3 4y ago
>but they were functionally completely useless and just a collosal waste of manpower, materials, and space. That's how you show affluence. With all the resources we have, we don't have enough to waste them. From that point of view, that civilization was much more than primitive. Also: [1]. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Ancient_Egyptians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Ancient_Egypt...
cmarschner 4y ago
People built 1000s of churches and cathedrals which, at face value, was a collossal waste of manpower, materials, and space. And yet we admire them and keep them around for 100s or 1000s of years, because of their greatness. The same for the pyramids. Of course, the effort served a function as well: to establish and maintain a power structure, to give people whose lives hung on strings far more often than ours do a sense of safety and hope. Man needs greatness. A glimpse of the divine. Our civilization has lost this, and the hyperfunctionalism has taken over our cities. We have removed even ornament and other signs of beauty from our buildings. And it has made them worse. But these trends come in waves. 50 years from now and we might again spend extra money on whatever will be the equivalent of neogothic or classicist buildings. And I‘m looking forward to it.
- kavouras 4y ago
  https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/11/skyscrapers-wasteful-damaging-outmoded-time-to-stop-tall-buildings https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/11/skyscra...
- midoridensha 4y ago
  I'm not advocating bulldozing ancient churches or the pyramids, but to build those things (or modern equivalents in terms of resources as a percentage of resources available to the society at large) today would be supremely stupid and wasteful. Arguably, wasting resources on burial mounds might be part of why Ancient Egyptian civilization collapsed, just like the civilization of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) with their statues. We still build great things, but today they're functional: skyscrapers, for instance. They're not really the most efficient type of building, but they are functional. And modern buildings are not devoid of ornamentation or signs of beauty, we just don't find gargoyles to be fashionable any more.

hammock 4y ago

Ancient people worshipped and brag about their favored relationships with energy sources (the sun) Modern people hide their energy givers and their dependency on them (gosh forbid your tv has power cords showing)

nick123567 4y ago
>>modern people hide their ... power cords Except those decorative halogen lights that hang from the + and - wires. As a kid I was messing with a pendant light over my kitchen island and accidentally bridged those wires together!