submitted 1 year ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/collapse@lemmy.ml

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Forests appeared about 400 million years ago. What's that in hours?

Edit: the first human ancestors appeared about 6 million years ago. If that' 4 hours then forests appeared 267 hours ago, which is like 11 days ago.

Still, holy shit.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

indeed

[+] Koffiato@lemmy.ml -11 points 1 year ago

This logic barely works. We're also the first civilization in the planets history, so we don't have a point of reference.

[-] eleitl@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

The first global civilisation. Plenty of previous collapses of local ones.

Whether a sustainable high technology regime can be achieved after the current collapse transient is unknown. It depends on both thermodynamics and kinetics. Many things are possible, but only some are reachable.

[-] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

I mean, theoretically a sustainable high technology society can easily exist. It's just whether it cares to be sustainable or not.

If you go far enough in technology you can create everything from raw resources and sufficient processing, and capture any pollution and process it further to make harmless. With enough energy, which we have practically infinite amounts of from our sun, there's no theoretical limit for it. About the only problem would be rare earth stuff, or additional raw resources that have to be mined. But that could be mined from space.

There's no fundamental reason why a theoretical technologically advanced civilization cannot be sustainable. It's just that we don't care at all to be so, and are not working towards it.

[-] eleitl@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We are saying the same. Clearly the Earth ecosystem is proof that with sufficient level of control at nanoscale level sustainability is possible. In fact, physics tells us we can do quite a bit better than that.

Yes, we have effectively stopped trying to relevantly innovate in mid-1970s with some exceptions (semiconductor photolitho, optics and DNA technology). R&D in a collapse environment becomes more difficult, further reducing reachability of high technology regimes necessary for sustainability. Full closure self replication of solar power infrastructure largely with ISRU at small scale is a key technology for that.

[-] freagle@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago

It's a cruel joke to look at humanity compared to the rest of the species on the planet and say "now this! This is civilized behavior!"

load more comments

this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023

69 points (89.7% liked)

Collapse

3237 readers

1 users here now

We have moved to https://lemm.ee/c/collapse -- please adjust your subscriptions

This is the place for discussing the potential collapse of modern civilization and the environment.

Collapse, in this context, refers to the significant loss of an established level or complexity towards a much simpler state. It can occur differently within many areas, orderly or chaotically, and be willing or unwilling. It does not necessarily imply human extinction or a singular, global event. Although, the longer the duration, the more it resembles a ‘decline’ instead of collapse.

RULES

1 - Remember the human

2 - Link posts should come from a reputable source

3 - All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith.

4 - No low effort posts.

Related lemmys:

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

wabooti@lemmy.ml

eleitl@lemmy.ml

doom_and_gloom@lemmy.ml

maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee