WoodScientist @ WoodScientist @lemmy.world

Posts

17

Comments

1,309

Joined

12 mo. ago

Energy isn't always conserved. Energy isn't meaningfully conserved in an expanding spacetime. And the mass-energy of the universe had to come from somewhere. It's entirely possible that whatever process created the mass-energy of the universe could someday be discovered and duplicated on a smaller scale. Truly unlimited energy sources may be possible. Or perhaps, an energy source whose only practical limitation is the amount of waste heat you can dissipate.

And while I would be extremely skeptical of any human who claimed to have invented such a machine today, we have to consider the timelines. If an alien species comes to visit you, they are likely far older than your species. And not just a few decades or a few centuries ahead. If we were visited by aliens, odds are that they were a technological species millions of years before we even mastered basic spoken language. We cannot know what we cannot know. And aliens visiting us have had eons to plumb the depths of reality to try to locate a free energy hack.

Master Roshi.

I'm going to right now start the conspiracy theory that the actual US president, Donald Trump, has not worn pants or underwear in decades. He's somehow just hypnotized us all into not noticing.

Ships float because their hulls are made from a special form of foamed steel that is lighter than water. A great amount of air is forced into the steel as it cools, generating a steel bubble lattice that on net is lighter than water. This allows steel ships to float, even though the density of solid steel is about 490 lb/ft^{3, while water is 62.4 lb/ft}3.

/s

We should feed his paranoia. Everyone should start messaging him on Twitter warning him of the prospect of mosquito-sized suicide drone assassins. Warn him there are rumors that he is the target of a group developing this technology.

Let's see if we can drive him truly mad. We'll turn him into a proper Howard Hughes in no time. He'll lock himself in a hermetically sealed bunker 24/7. And that's when the real demons kick in....

I say next time Musk wants to get a permit to fly one of his Starship test flights, we require he be riding on the thing.

He probably identifies with The Mule.

Aww, thanks.

Wait, what the hell did Denmark do to New Zealand?

If it was working for everyone, there would never be a widespread movement that got Mercator largely phased out of education.

If we were to talk about education injustices we could argue about how the USA stole the name of the continent for theirs and how most of the world went along with that, and you people don’t seem to like that talk…

I propose that Brazil go for the option of maximum chaos. Brazil should formally change its official name to Os Estados Unidos da América. Ain't no rule that says two nations can't have the same name. By default, every diplomat on Earth would just start casually referring to each country as the North United States and the South United States. Brazil could effectively rename the United States on a global diplomatic level.

Pfft. Antarctica is but a few islands in an ice-sheet trench coat. If the ice sheets melted, it would remain uninhabited except for some stalwart rancher folk.

I don’t think there’s any standard that requires it anywhere. So I’m not sure exactly what this is about.

Don't give the right any ideas. They'll be on about "geometric purity" or other such nonsense. Or anything but Mercator will just be "woke."

After all, Cain only ever killed one man...

A third increase is the kind of increase to the minimum wage that has happened countless times. It happens in any place that the minimum wage isn't indexed to inflation. It isn't until there's been a substantial degradation in the earning power of minimum wage earners that there's enough political pressure to have a hope of actually getting a minimum wage increase through. The business lobby will always resist any increase. And minimum wage earners don't really have a lot of political capital.

It is a reasonable fear. Don't trust strange energy sources you don't understand the physics of. If they want to teach us the physics to build free energy machines, so be it. But you should definitely not just accept mystery power sources. You shouldn't even accept the blueprints for mystery power sources. And even if you fully understand how they work, you still might not want them.

The danger is that the gift might be a Trojan Horse, or a suicide pact technology. Consider a (technobabble) example. Imagine there is some way of tapping vacuum energy for a power source. However, if sufficient vacuum energy is tapped within a gravity well, it destabilizes the local spacetime and causes the region to collapse into a singularity. And this occurs without warning. The reactors are a suicide pact technology. The very act of building and using them guarantees the destruction of your world. I don't consider that a likely scenario, but when dealing with completely unknown physics, you literally cannot know what the consequences of using a device would be.

It could even be a technology that didn't cause some completely unpredictable physical phenomenon. For example, maybe they give us blueprints and describe the physics to build cold fusion reactors, or some other way of cheaply accessing nuclear energy. It's not new completely incomprehensible physics. Once we know where to look, we can completely understand them with existing theory. It's just a way of inducing and controlling nuclear reactions that we weren't previously aware of. However, after the information has already been widely disseminated; it's discovered that this knowledge also allows people to build nuclear weapons in their garage from commonly available components. Instead of school shooters, we have entire cities disappearing because some nutjob became convinced that God wants them to vaporize Chicago.

Or it could even be something with an obviously apparent downside, but something that would be easily ignorable. Imagine a classic free energy machine that actually worked. Like, some arrangement of magnets, springs, and clockwork that actually could return a net energy gain. Or if that's too hard to imagine, imagine an energy source that could be used anywhere, is truly safe, and can be built from easily available materials. It's not going to let you build a nuclear bomb in your basement. But it will allow you to build a device that can power your house from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. The devices won't explode, melt down, destabilize spacetime, make everyone go mad or become infertile. The aliens deliver exactly what they promise. The devices are the truly ideal power source. No physical waste products. No ill health effects. Can't explode. Just a cheap box that turns out endless power, that can be made as big as we want them. The aliens actually deliver precisely what they promise: the perfect energy source.

The only downside of these reactors is that they generate waste heat. And the aliens are advanced in all sciences, including psychology and sociology. They predict that if they give us this technology, it is almost certain that we won't be able to contain ourselves. Give it a few centuries, and we'll build so many of these things that we'll cook ourselves alive. Drowned in our own waste heat. And even though the devices themselves aren't dangerous, just having access to unlimited raw energy is itself a dangerous prospect. The devices may not be weapons, but they certainly allow you to build terrifying weapons. Right now we don't build antimatter bombs because we get far less than 1% energy efficiency in making antimatter. But with an unlimited energy source? Who cares how efficient the process is? And Jesus. Imagine cryptocurrency paired with an unlimited energy source. The sheer number of clever and stupid ways we'll figure out how to soak up power?

And we either use the energy source to blow ourselves up or end up drowned in our own waste heat. Why would we allow the waste heat problem to get so bad? Why wouldn't we see it coming?

Look at how well we're handling the greenhouse gas problem. And this would be an even harder coordination problem. And if we were given these devices today, well, we could be confident that even with healthy growth rates, the waste heat issue won't be a problem for centuries. So why not use the tech now to solve the climate change problems of today?

Just think of all the good we could do with it! This would actually give us a power source cheap and abundant enough to do atmospheric carbon capture! Hell, we now have energy so abundant we can literally filter the entire ocean to remove microplastics and other pollutants from the biosphere. Hell, we can even control the weather now! No one needs to die in a hurricane or flood ever again! We'll just apply raw flows of energy to bend entire weather systems to our will. We might even be able to use the power source to prevent damaging earthquakes. Think of how many people die in natural and manmade disasters. With enough energy, they can all be saved! Let's solve the problems of today and let future generations worry about the waste heat problem...

Even if the device itself works completely as advertised, with no hidden negative consequences at all, it could still be an attack. They're giving us a technology they know we are not ready for, and they do so knowing full well that it will almost certainly destroy us. This is the kind of technology that will just kill off any technological species that doesn't have really good global coordination. A one-world government, or some suitably hefty diplomatic equivalent, is probably a prerequisite, at an absolute minimum. Any member of the alien species would know that handing such a technology to a planet divided into nation-states is a deliberate act of mass murder. It's like handing a chimpanzee a revolver. You know exactly how that's going to end. They're deliberately exterminating us by giving us exactly what we ask them for.

And one might say, "why would aliens use such a convoluted attack method, why not just bombard us from orbit?" But there are scenarios where a more subtle approach to genocide might be warranted. Maybe an alien race sees us as a future competitor. However, they don't just want to wipe us out directly, as other alien races would see them do it, and perhaps intervene. Or maybe there is some higher galactic laws or treaties that advanced species follow, and this is their equivalent of a CIA black ops mission? Or maybe an alien species largely has a policy of non-interference, but some faction within them supports genociding up and coming rival alien species. There are reasons one might want to make an alien genocide against us look like what is, from their perspective, a natural disaster. After all, if we happen to invent a technology that we use to wipe ourselves out, the expanding alien empire we just happen to be on the doorstep of...are they really responsible? We wiped ourselves out. Oh well. I guess the Sol system and its treaty-standard 100-ltyr radius space reserve is colonizable now. They don't hate us; we're just in the way. We were an inconvenience and they needed a way to quietly get rid of us.

It is wise to be skeptical of alien gifts. If they're coming here, they are almost certainly far older and smarter than we are. And we ultimately cannot know their true motives. Consider how we treat other species. At best, we leave them be or try to reverse the damage we do to them. But we don't go out and try to improve the lot of other species. No governments are funding efforts to send out expeditions to scrub barnacles off whales. We don't try to teach wild animals how to use our technology. Unless humans have something to gain, or we are trying to fix the damage we caused, we at best leave other species alone. If we don't perform widespread acts of benevolence to other species, why should it be assumed aliens would treat us any differently? Why shouldn't they view us the same way we view whales at best, or worse, cattle?

When dealing with aliens, a level of extreme paranoia is warranted; the very survival of our species could be at stake. Nations already show a high level of paranoia between each other. But while the CIA may get spooked about China selling the US network equipment that will spy on us for Beijing, they don't have to worry about China deliberately selling us something that will destroy the whole world. We all live on the same rock, and no nation has an incentive to deliberately destroy or render the planet uninhabitable. No nation has to worry about another deliberately releasing a suicide pact technology. We should be treating aliens with all the paranoia we treat other human nations, except an order of magnitude or more higher.

It may still be possible to interact with alien species. But such contact should really take place over generations and at a distance. Everything would have to be carefully explored and its dissemination controlled. Any communication will require a great level of trust. And maybe over time it becomes possible for some level of mutual trust and vulnerability to be forged between two distant worlds. But aliens just showing up? Just showing up in person and offering ways to completely and fundamentally change our world in ways we cannot possibly predict? That is an existential risk to the species.

TL:DR: Beware of aliens bearing gifts. While they appear free, they may cost you everything.
EDIT: Or, more pithily referenced.

Because we're supposed to be one party. The centrists will pull more towards the right, the progressives to the left. But there's supposed to be a mutual give-and-take. Centrists can't pass anything without the progressive wing; the progressives can't pass anything without the centrists. We're supposed to support each other and compromise when needed. And the centrists can't just compromise with liberal Republicans, as that era of politics ended quite awhile ago.

The problem is this is a one-way street. Progressives will support centrists, but then centrist turn around and stab progressives in the back.

Paragon works, but it's not really a title. Could we make "Paragon" a title? Instead of "Saint Stephen of San Jose," we have "Paragon Stephen of San Jose." Sounds odd, but maybe?

What made you come to that conclusion? That's a perfectly fair minimum wage for a place as expensive as NYC. And it could be passed by the city council and signed by the mayor. Adams just vetoed a bill trying to raise the app worker minimum wage to $22/hour or so. $30 is only 1/3 more than this, and Mamdani proposed implementing it over several years. I think you may just be suffering from jealousy, and ignoring that this is in the context of NYC, where $60k/year is not a lot of money.