Just change our power source and increase our powers, laughable

I have to laugh at those who say that all we need to do to continue to
survive and prosper ever more is change our sources of power and increase
our powers in place. The absolute is that "entropy will eventually increase
and energy will eventually diminish in a closed system" -- such as one and
only, ultimately tyrannically only, one world. Entropy in this case applies
to graduating growth in hellish complexities, and hellish complications of
hellish complexities, within one room and one room only in the Universe (one
world and one world only in the Universe).

Utopians tell us intelligence, working together, reason and rationality
and evolution can and will overcome physics. Man need never expand from this
planet, and all those who want to leave Utopia, and cannot be rehabilitated,
will be treated nicely in the asylum for the insane, or in the concentration
camps within the overall world class concentration camp (Utopia), by Big
Sister or Big Brother, whichever. But disregarding that complexity and
complication here, they tell us that all Mankind needs to stay here in this
one world to grow ever more in powers is increasing -- and ever more
environmentally friendly -- power. A baby that can then stay and evolve so
much in the womb in its own powers it never needs to leave the womb, never
needing to spread out to or to be born into any outside and larger Universe.
And from inside the womb, it will maintain the womb itself unchangingly
environmentally constant --wondrously constant and perfect -- forever.

There will never be the right power, or the right power source, for such a
thing. And one world within a totalitarian iron cocoon put in place to keep
all life in breeds to infinity invisible but invincibly impenetrable walls
to all attempts at increasing positive only distributions within itself
throughout itself.

Von Neumann, physicist and early developer of computers, imagined the
future of computers to be monstrosities occupying whole but single blocks of
singularly titanic buildings. So complex, so complicated, so expensive to
maintain that no one but the largest governments, institutions or
corporations would ever have one. Utopians imagine such a world as the
future but without any of the ever increasing complexity, the ever growing
numbers and piling up of complications, or any of the inevitably ever
growing costs of an ever mounting concentration in and on just one block (so
to speak). Cheap power, environmentally friendly of course, is supposed to
solve all problems. Cheap power and forever increasing machine-like
efficiencies in humans and all human things to include all human activity
(to be completely, totally, environmental friendly). No room to maneuver, so
no freedom whatsoever to [independently] maneuver to be permitted. No
margins for error whatsoever, so absolutely zero tolerances for error, or
divergence or deviation from programming to be the Prime Directive, the
martial law, the absolute rule.

What is cheap power? How cheap to become cheap power? The Soviet Union
supplied power to its people at no cost whatsoever to its people. That was
as cheap as cheap can get. Only problem being the Soviet Union isn't around
anymore. Utopia means "Nowhereland" and the Soviet Union is certainly
nowhere on Earth now. Even successor Russia with now almost unlimited
sources of energy is dying of its ever shrinking population, dying out of
course increasing the cheapness of energy. European Socialism has all the
cheap power it needs....to supply a population no longer willing nor able to
reproduce to even survive anymore. Living cells that have all the energy in
the world they need to divide out into the larger frontier Universe with,
and flatly refuse to divide out, or are refused dividing out, implode of the
energies they already possess in abundance. Saturated to the brim and
overflowing in energy they starve for energy. Starve to death.

Cheap power? A different power source? Greater energy efficiency? A more
efficient, more environmentally friendly humanity? For what reason?
Increasing the implosion of so-called higher level civilized populations
totally pinned to the earth by Big Brother (or Big Sister as the case may
be) already so saturated in energy and powers they are dieing out for sheer
lack of any energy even to reproduce themselves or to survive in any way?
There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine (perpetually turning IN
PLACE). There is no such thing as perpetual expansion and growth within
without any frontier expansion and growth, any EXODUS, meaning any FREEING
out the door, whatsoever encouraged, permitted, or even forced.

There is only one infinite efficiency. Life moves out into it by dividing
out into it, it cannot be brought to any life that flatly refuses to
[strive] to move out or divide out into it. Life cannot live with infinite
efficiency in place. That isn't life. Thus the life that even tries for it,
in place, iron clad guarantees its own extinction all too soon from the try
(like the Soviet Union. Like Europe's present progression to. Like the
dinosaurs). There is no such as the evolution Star Trek's Organians or other
fictional total energy -- total mental energy -- characterizations are
supposed to represent. Evolution is either out into new frontiers of the
greater Universe, spreading out into bigger even more complex structures
than this one lower one, or it is toward becoming niche beings, niche
dinosaurs. Static Utopia then mindlessly savagely stupid, fatalistically
awaiting a then inevitable [mass] extinction event.

Utopia on Earth Man has no clue concerning the free man's irrepressible,
non-negotiable, fixation upon "Give me liberty or give me death." Free men
are Space (or Frontier) Man. Told by Utopia on Earth Man the only choice "AT
THIS TIME" is between achievement of Utopia on Earth or the extinction of
All Mankind, they will choose the extinction of All Mankind any day of the
week and twice on Sunday. That is precisely what "Give me liberty or give me
death" means. Non-negotiable! Not "tomorrow." Not "next year." Not sometime
soon in some indeterminate future after the achievement of "A Brave New
World" on "Earth First" of the "Herd Theory of All Mankind." After the
achievement of a "Total Quality Organization and Management" of Earth and
All Mankind, including All Mankind's every single activity being certified
to be absolutely, totally, environmentally friendly and politically correct
so to appease Gaia the Earth Mother (or rather the "sacred feminine" (The Da
Vinci Code), a.k.a. the 'sacred effeminate').

GLB

G. L. Bradford wrote:
I have to laugh at those who say that all we need to do to continue to
survive and prosper ever more is change our sources of power and increase
our powers in place. The absolute is that "entropy will eventually increase
and energy will eventually diminish in a closed system" -- such as one and
only, ultimately tyrannically only, one world.

Bzzzzzzt.

Incorrect. The world receives a low entropy source from sunlight and
radiates away heat energy, representing a high entropy sink. The world
is thus not a closed system.

You scored nil points.

Thank you for playing sci.space.policy.

GLB

Ian Woollard wrote:

Incorrect. The world receives a low entropy source from sunlight and
radiates away heat energy, representing a high entropy sink. The world
is thus not a closed system.

You scored nil points.

And now, for extra credit, answer this question:

Is the entropy of the Sun increasing or decreasing?

Paul

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 08:27:47 -0400, "G. L. Bradford"
wrote, in part:

I have to laugh at those who say that all we need to do to continue to
survive and prosper ever more is change our sources of power and increase
our powers in place.

I agree with your basic idea that space travel provides benefits that
new energy sources do not.

However, new energy sources are an attainable way of benefiting the
majority of the Earth's population. They are worth pursuing, even as
space travel is also worth pursuing - although those who will be able to
escape *into* space, and reap the true benefits of space travel, are
few.

Not that Earth won't also benefit from resources from space - but
*those* benefits won't stave off the world government that may indeed
someday become a world dictatorship any more than fusion power would.

A prosperous world, rather than a poor world, is more apt to indulge
such things as space exploration. Do not count it of no value to keep
those who will not be able to either leave Earth themselves, or send
their descendants beyond Earth, well fed.

Of course, it may be that the descendants of the few who move to space
will increase in number, and then keep Earth's government or governments
honest and democratic - as could not be done if Earth were home to all
of humanity.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

"Paul F. Dietz" wrote in message
...
Ian Woollard wrote:

Incorrect. The world receives a low entropy source from sunlight and
radiates away heat energy, representing a high entropy sink. The world is
thus not a closed system.

You scored nil points.

And now, for extra credit, answer this question:

Is the entropy of the Sun increasing or decreasing?

Paul

You did not even begin to comprehend the subject. You switched over to
things having nothing whatsoever to do with what I was talking about.
Entropy goes with ANYTHING energy goes with and "energy" is attached to much
wider areas, many more fields and senses and things, than just the one you
deliberately choose here to limit it to. Even many dictionaries in defining
"entropy" also mention "social entropy" among different realizations,
different senses, of the physic of entropy as well as the physic of energy.
You continue to display how truly narrow are the channels you've been
programmed to think in.

The Soviet Union, among all other totalitarian tyrannies throughout the
world and history, ignore (are actually ignorant of) the factor -- the
physic -- of entropy in putting up surrounding iron curtains to keep peoples
in and away from escape hatches and all outside influences for their
purposes of programming and absolute control. Entropy then gets its
conditions, its realm, in spades.

Do you even know what "en-trope" literally means? What "trope" literally
means? Do you even know what an "iron curtain" is? Also the derivitive,
"iron cocoon inclosing All Mankind and Earth," applying to the 1967 Outer
Space Treaty and even the earlier 1963 nuclear treaty that also applies to
space, not to mention the Moon Treaty the U.S. Senate, finally coming to a
small measure of sense with regard to totalitarianism in space and
concerning space and the State Parties to these Treaties all out total seige
of All Mankind on Earth via martial law and other totalitarian controls upon
all Earth surrounding space, wouldn't ratify? An iron curtain is a wall on
Earth. An iron cocoon is a worldclass totally enclosing shell. The
assumption of a true reality of "absolute power" over Mankind by government.
The statement "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
(including my own insertion, "super-power corrupts superbly") is an
unwitting realization of the true extent into other spheres, other
dimensions, of the physic of entropy.

GLB

"John Savard" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 08:27:47 -0400, "G. L. Bradford"
wrote, in part:

I have to laugh at those who say that all we need to do to continue to
survive and prosper ever more is change our sources of power and increase
our powers in place.

I agree with your basic idea that space travel provides benefits that
new energy sources do not.

However, new energy sources are an attainable way of benefiting the
majority of the Earth's population. They are worth pursuing, even as
space travel is also worth pursuing - although those who will be able to
escape *into* space, and reap the true benefits of space travel, are
few.

Not that Earth won't also benefit from resources from space - but
*those* benefits won't stave off the world government that may indeed
someday become a world dictatorship any more than fusion power would.

The more tyrannically dictatorial the dictatorship, the stronger the iron
curtain and the pinning and programming of the people, the shorter the reach
of order and the greater is the reach and growth of sheer anarchy (also
tyranny -- by another name).


A prosperous world, rather than a poor world, is more apt to indulge
such things as space exploration. Do not count it of no value to keep
those who will not be able to either leave Earth themselves, or send
their descendants beyond Earth, well fed.

I'm always aware of those who will stay behind when the exodus begins and
begins to gather steam. Growth in economies and individual wealth will no
longer top out and flatten out every time at 5 to 10 percentile levels when
a new outside frontier is colonized. I'm a lifelong close student of
history. Post 1492 Western European internal economies grew by the 100s of
percentiles almost per decade for nearly 350 years or more after 1492.
"Europe," "The Old World," itself became a brand spanking new frontier post
1492 for virtually every European who remained behind. And it was of course
a very traumatic thing, a very convulsive thing, a long, long lasting major
shakeup (earthquake). The old orders, structures, infrastructures,
institutions, distribution networks, and ideas, were shattered. Wide open
doors out and mass exoduses, pure explosive energy or energizing, massively
increased, massively increasing, activity, opportunity, creativity,
productivity -- an Old World coming upon, coming into, a brand new fountain
of its own internal, integral, juices of a brand new youth (becoming young
again), is convulsiveness, too traumatic to many (post 1492 utterly
traumatized to include Sir Thomas More (his nostalgia and longing for the
old world, the old age, now gone, his novel "Utopia")).


Of course, it may be that the descendants of the few who move to space
will increase in number, and then keep Earth's government or governments
honest and democratic - as could not be done if Earth were home to all
of humanity.


I agree with physicist Gerard K. O'Neill's assessment from his reading of
history, also including agreeing with physicist Michio Kaku's assessment (in
his "Hyperspace") from and having to do with pure physics. Space
Colonization, as opposed to Mars Colonization, most definitely will lead to
a growing mass exodus of life from Earth -- going "nova" -- much sooner than
later once begun. The usual comparisons are to either to the child in the
"womb" or to the young in the "nest" or "cradle." To environmental
dimensions and conditions that were once indistinguishable from infinite or
unlimited, long ago become far too small, far too limited and limiting in
far too much for far too many of the body of 'Man' and life on Earth in
general. But Man -- as such -- doesn't know or comprehend the real situation
for what it is. All it knows is ever growing "complications," an ever
growing "confusion"....and ever growing "frustrations" and "angers." As with
the child in the womb or the young in the nest or cradle, there is no going
back to a Utopia that never existed in the first place, as world terrorism
and all its sympathizers, allies, collaborators and unwitting -- but not
really unvilling -- fringes of others would have us do. There is no going
forward to a "better, more perfect world and evolution of mankind" either,
as yet others are trying to cajol...and inevitably failing that (because of
the creeping hell of horrors of the reality even in every differing path of
approach) trying to institute a soft / hard carrot and stick, subtle /
unsubtle and [insidious in the extreme] totalitarianism to coerce.

"...then keep Earth's government or governments honest and democratic..."
Another thing Gerard K. O'Neill argued against was thinking in terms of a
Utopian Man developing in the Space Frontier Age. Man will continue to look
like nature and nature is chock full of weaks (the weak force), wasps,
wolves and weeds. Life itself is a weapon of mass destruction, a convertor
of inert mass -- of inertia -- to complex energies in complex energetic
structures (multi-use or militarial dual use capable), and it will be truly
diversifying weapons of mass destruction that will be expanding to that
frontier to become self-generating and regenerative. Only the barbarous,
savage, Wild reproduces itself imaginatively, creatively and productively
enough to survive blindsiding by the alien, harsh, deadly forbidding
frontier elements. The past is the future, the future is the past, in large
aspect if not small detail (Will Durant, The Story of Civilization and The
Lessons of History. Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
too speaking of the nature of things in general). History and nature will
repeat and reproduce itself. The sheer mindboggling [differentiation] and
diversity and variety and beauty of Nature's Wild Frontiers and all the life
that can handle it, can energetically survive to energetically prosper,
should never be scrutinized too closely. The normal human mind recoils in
absolute horror from the doing.

Never forget that history and nature have always branded "democracy" a
majority tyranny that many minorities emigrate from to escape from to go
their own ways, do their own thing (so to speak), become their own
majorities in opposition to the culture, the religion, the philosophy, the
politic, of the other majority. To be free, really free, of "the majority."
That is what frontier is all about. "Freedom" and "Cosmopolis" and the real
truth of "Civilization" will only be in the new maritime frontier mobilities
between, in the many and overlapping space and time vastnesses, the
"horizons," the choices and chances and escapeways, the "wormholes" or
"rabbit holes," between all the more incredibly diverse -- but all
absolutist tyrannies -- there will be...particularly including the
"democracies." They ("Freedom," "Cosmopolis," "Civilization") will be in no
social, economic or political creation of Man whatsoever. To say they can be
at all is pure self-delusion with eventual inevitable catastrophic
consequences. Power corrupts, super-power corrupts superbly, and absolute
power corrupts absolutely. Fight dragons long enough, you become a dragon:
Stare into the Abyss, the Abyss will stare back into you. Government in
whatever chosen form whatsoever remains a [necessary] EVIL. The bigger it
becomes, the more OVERALL it becomes, the greater grows its reach to and
into people for any reason whatsoever, the more of the proverbial hellish
complication of "bottomless pit" or "blackhole" it becomes...from which no
light can or will escape. And time and the constant of change will never,
ever, permit any lifeform whatsoever to keep it from its inevitable
evolution (its inevitable destiny).

John Savard

GLB

G. L. Bradford wrote:

You did not even begin to comprehend the subject.

That's because I don't even bother to read what you write
(except for that sentence).

Paul

"Paul F. Dietz" wrote:

:Ian Woollard wrote:
:
: Incorrect. The world receives a low entropy source from sunlight and
: radiates away heat energy, representing a high entropy sink. The world
: is thus not a closed system.
:
: You scored nil points.
:
:And now, for extra credit, answer this question:
:
: Is the entropy of the Sun increasing or decreasing?

And the answer is ... yes, the entropy of the Sun is increasing or
decreasing.

Are there more extra points for knowing which? :-)

--
"I was lucky in the order. But I've always been lucky
when it comes to killin' folks."
-- William Munny, "Unforgiven"

Fred J. McCall ) wrote:
: "Paul F. Dietz" wrote:

: :Ian Woollard wrote:
: :
: : Incorrect. The world receives a low entropy source from sunlight and
: : radiates away heat energy, representing a high entropy sink. The world
: : is thus not a closed system.
: :
: : You scored nil points.
: :
: :And now, for extra credit, answer this question:
: :
: : Is the entropy of the Sun increasing or decreasing?

: And the answer is ... yes, the entropy of the Sun is increasing or
: decreasing.

Why not the same?

: Are there more extra points for knowing which? :-)

How could you prove it as the current age of the sun is said to be half
way through its life. The only definition of entropy that makes sense is
two and possibly three, so 'decreasing' is the correct answer, as
definition one makes no sense. Time is all we know about the change in the
sun. We haven't been around long enough to know the energy fluctuation of
the sun as function over time.

entropy
One entry found for entropy.


Main Entry: en·tro·py
Pronunciation: 'en-tr&-pE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -pies
Etymology: International Scientific Vocabulary 2en- + Greek tropE change,
literally, turn, from trepein to turn
1 : a measure of the unavailable energy in a closed thermodynamic system
that is also usually considered to be a measure of the system's disorder
and that is a property of the system's state and is related to it in such
a manner that a reversible change in heat in the system produces a change
in the measure which varies directly with the heat change and inversely
with the absolute temperature at which the change takes place; broadly :
the degree of disorder or uncertainty in a system

2 a : the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an
ultimate state of inert uniformity b : a process of degradation or running
down or a trend to disorder

3 : CHAOS, DISORGANIZATION, RANDOMNESS
- en·tro·pic /en-'trO-pik, -'trä-pik/ adjective
- en·tro·pi·cal·ly /-pi-k(&-)lE/ adverb

Eric

: --
: "I was lucky in the order. But I've always been lucky
: when it comes to killin' folks."
: -- William Munny, "Unforgiven"

(Eric Chomko) wrote:

:Fred J. McCall ) wrote:
:: "Paul F. Dietz" wrote:
:
:: :Ian Woollard wrote:
:: :
:: : Incorrect. The world receives a low entropy source from sunlight and
:: : radiates away heat energy, representing a high entropy sink. The world
:: : is thus not a closed system.
:: :
:: : You scored nil points.
:: :
:: :And now, for extra credit, answer this question:
:: :
:: : Is the entropy of the Sun increasing or decreasing?
:
:: And the answer is ... yes, the entropy of the Sun is increasing or
:: decreasing.
:
:Why not the same?

"The opposite of change is not a lack of change. It is change in the
opposite direction." -- I Ching.

Refer to the general statement of the laws of thermodynamics (as
lately given by Mary), El Chimpo.

1) You can't win the game.
2) You can't break even.
3) You can't quit.

:: Are there more extra points for knowing which? :-)
:
:How could you prove it as the current age of the sun is said to be half
:way through its life.

Why do you think the age of the Sun matters insofar as the answer to
the question goes?

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson