What would a setting look like if it was set 500 million years

>>53897179
bump for interest.

I think colony ships would definitely be a thing, but they would not have enough resources to take everyone. Who would go? What would happen to those people left behind?

>>53897179
If FTL travel was ever possible to begin with, then earth was surely abandoned well before that point.

>>53897179
Humans would be extinct or a singularity and life would have evolved on Titan.

>>53897252
When I said impossible, I meant it was physically impossible for it to ever happen.

FTL or not, we'll have likely reached the stars by the end of the millenium. Our closest stellar neighbors are reachable within a lifetime, provided we can get to an appreciable fraction of c.

>>53897179
>500 million years

In 10 million, STL Von Neumann colony ships could colonize every star in the galaxy.

>>53897179
Destructive, hedonistic, and fatalistic. To humanity, extinction is on the clock. Death is staring them in the eye, and is coming closer with every passing second. Every action would be another futile attempt on top of a mountain of them to buy yourself one more fleeting moment before the end. Some would seek drugs and rampant hedonism, some would look inward and embrace the end. Some would flee to the nearest ships and kick them into overdrive to get away from the doom that comes for them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBKZ5bsMwpw

>>53897301
>>53897341
What if it was only 500 years in the future then?

>>53898932
Then the sun wouldn't be expanding.

>>53898961
Assume that, for some inexplicable reason, the sun is still expanding, but human technology has only progressed to what it realistically would 500 years from current day. What then?

>>53897563
I wonder if the title of this album was a reference to Ergo Proxy.

>>53899785
We'd have FTL and it wouldn't be a problem.

>>53897179
humans would live on craftworlds like the eldar

people would drink sunscreen instead of water

all glasses would be sunglasses

you could never touch a seatbelt

>>53899876
FTL only 500 years from now? Are you sure?

>>53899996
Yes.

>>53899785

We would just die then, i know its a boring answer but there's not much to say, the moment the sun starts expanding the earth will burn, so yeah the setting is dead on arrival

>>53900050
Stars dont fucking expand, they burn up silly.

If there are really explodey stars out there its obvious we got some crazy aliums doing it.

There would probably be a few planets in the solar system colonized, but obviously travel between them is a massive commitment and it's still no real getaway from the ravages of the sun.

There's probably either dystopian or anarchic situations going on across the countries as people become desperate for survivability and comforts. Larger governments trying to come up with plans to ensure longterm survival for mankind when the sun truly gets bad, huge projects to be sure.

>>53899785
>>53897179

When I was a kid in the 1980s, I read a sci-fi story about a future Earth where the sun was expanding and cooking the planet. From what I recall, a lot of people had already left, and the ones that remained knew that they were going to die soon.

The parts that really stick in my head are:

>The main characters were a teenage boy, a teenage girl, and the girl's mom. The story was set in the girl's house, and the mom used the last of her sugar and other baking ingredients to make the kids a cake.

>The boy touched the wall behind the couch and it was so hot he had to pull his hand away.

Anybody here know the title of the story I'm talking about?

>captcha is School SCHOOL

>>53899785
Strip mine good old mamma earth for everything she has, build giant fleets of colony ships and the best of mankind would putter their way to the nearest star in hopes of a decent rock to hole up on.

Assuming the emp drive we have TODAY works we could do it if humanity had the willpower. We could also build the space rollercoaster (fuck that space elevator bullshit) to shoot shit into orbit with our current tech.

There would be no fancy hibernation chambers, the grandchildren of the generation to take flight would never see a planet. There would be mass conscription and eugenics planetside, every ounce of manpower would have to go towards mankinds impotent ejaculation into the abyss. Everyone would probably die, but when you're fucked a long shot doesnt look so bad.

>>53900420

Its a short story from Asimov IIRC

While the Sun's radiation increases by almost 10% every billion years which does heat up the planet, its expansion won't be a problem until the late red giant phase, in about 6 billion years.

>>53900633
I like how you or your source just pull numbers out of your ass.

>>53899996
It could happen.

>>53899996
possibly less than that.

>>53900420
>>53900445
Not OP, but these are the sorts of answers I was interested in. Thank you.

File: urth aint free.png (37KB, 853x625px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 853x625px

>>53900974
This nigga gets it

Vodalus did nothing wrong. Death to the Conciliator. Death to the New Sun.

>>53900765
Just open any astronomy textbook discussing stellar evolution or the faint young sun paradox.

http://atoc.colorado.edu/~vanderwb/5810/sol.html

>>53901463
no, it's stupid.

>hubble has been operable for ~30 years
>Hurr durr muh billions of years

File: 1421514482889.jpg (38KB, 362x346px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 362x346px

>>53901713
So what you're saying is the Sun can't be billions of years old because the Hubble was launched in the 90's?

>>53901907
The golden era of scifi right there.

>>53901920
Could be, or it could be trillions, or just hundreds of thousands.

File: 1447642279468.jpg (39KB, 374x347px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 374x347px

>>53901958
Are you aware of the various types of radiometric dating of Earth rocks, Moon rocks and meteorites that all give roughly the same age of 4.5-4.7 billion years, the acceptance of the nebular hypothesis of the solar system (which states that the Sun formed at the same time with the planets) among the scientific community, and that the Hubble among other telescopes can be used to observe the traits of main sequence stars in various stages of their lives, including their age-dependent luminosity:mass ratios, thus providing further evidence for modern theoretical models of stellar evolution?

>>53897179
Bunch of space adapted posthumans living on a dyson swarm made out of the asteroid belt and whatever bits of rocky planets they've been able to shepherd into higher orbits via gigantic solar sails?

The Night Land?

File: Andromeda_Collides_Milky_Way (1).jpg (540KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1280x720px

The Sun won't began its path to a red giant until about 3.75 billion years (liquid water will be impossible by then). Andromeda and Milky Way will collide and merge will collide in about 4 billion years. There's a 50% chance that our solar system is swept out three times farther from the galactic core than its current distance. There's a 12% chance that we are ejected from the new galaxy entirely. Chance of the new galaxy becoming a small quasar, and kills most live on the galaxy with its radiation unknown.

File: jakub-grygier-starlifting-stellar-matter-harvesting.jpg (37KB, 700x393px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 700x393px

>>53897179

It won't happen. Post-humans will turn the sun into a red dwarf, stripping away the hidrogen by starlifting, to make its energy output more efficient, longer lived, and have enough reserves of hidrogen for quadrillions of years.

>>53897179
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying_Earth_(subgenre)

>>53900202
My terminal autism requires me to correct you. The sun will 'burn up' by running out of hydrogen to fuse, at which point it will transition into a super giant, and indeed expand so that the radius is about 1 AU.

>>53897179
The sun will not have expanded anywhere near enough to make the earth uninhabitable in 500 million years.
So take some inspiration from the future is wild if you want to come up with some wildlife.

File: Cabrol-watcher.jpg (881KB, 1875x2713px) Image search: [Google]

881KB, 1875x2713px

>>53903847
My brother of excellent taste.

>>53899876
>>53899996
>>53900018
>>53900821
>>53900935
Assuming the world doesn't go to hell, it will probably be by the end of the century or early next... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White%E2%80%93Juday_warp-field_interferometer

>>53904655

>Alcubierre

You'll get killed by the hawking radiation from a black hole behind the ship and a white hole in front of it.

>>53904604
i couldn't read it tho because I'm not native english speaker and I stumble over that syntax

>>53897179
FTL travel is not necessary to go to other stars.

Fun answer: post humans living in orbitals around brown dwarfs. Perhaps something like biological humanity is preserved as a backwater curiosity in a galaxy filled with superintelligences.

Realistic answer: nothing we can relate to is alive to know or care what's happening on earth

>>53905118
That's because it's being written in the style of the 1700s by someone in the early 1900s who wasn't very good at it.

There is Night Land Retold that fixes this.

>>53905118
>i couldn't read it tho because I'm not native english speaker and I stumble over that syntax
Apparently there's a modern rewrite that doesn't pretend to have been written in Ye Olden Tymes.

Geology student here!

500 million years from now the earth will already have become uninhabitable due to the gradual diminishment of volcanic and geological activity (modern estimates range from 155 million years to 200 million years from now), essentially becoming a dead world like mars.

so, I'd guess you would have to use space Habitats to keep the human peeps alive.

My guess would be that you would have to make them organize all the nations that formed after earth became uninhabitable and make some sort of Ark to escape all the shit thats about to hit the fan

>>53905915
>modern estimates range from 155 million years to 200 million years from now
Can you provide a source for this?
The ones I'm familiar with give much longer estimates.

>>53907992
I'm interested too.
Wikipedia say 1.1 billion years based on geologic activity but their citation for this says nothing of the sort.
What a dog shit website.

>>53905915

That could be another great filter for the development of intelligent life: It never develops in most planets because life becomes extinct once geological activity ceases in smaller planets.

>>53905915
>>53910539

There's no way we aren't well on our way to type 2 civilization in that time. Meaning we should be able to force planets into geological activity if we want to.

>>53905915
Sorry, I am a dumb. By what mechanism do we all just die if volcanic and geologic activity stops? I thought the problem with mars and life was the lack of liquid water.

every 10 years seems to be rapidly slowing down in terms of progress. i think humanity is entering another 500 year period of technological stagnation much like the 900s to 1400s AD.

i expect feudalism to return, and the average person to become a serf to whichever corporate conglomerate owns the land-air-water-space zone they are situated on. people will hire themselves as resources in exchange for water/air purification and access to food and reproduction and life-extension drugs. the entire race will be sterilised to prevent overpopulation. the political system will be marxism with a central AI command and control structure off planet, beaming down instructions to an army of drones, servitors and bio-clones.

probably by the mid 2500s the cat people will rise up and overthrow the AI tyranny. by then i expected unmodified genome humans to be hundreds of years old and in a small minority (maybe 20-30 billion on a 1 trillion soul planet).

>>53910853

No magnetic field, bombarded with radiation, solar wind takes much of the atmosphere.

>>53911209
Ah, that. Makes sense, thanks.

>>53911093
>every 10 years seems to be rapidly slowing down in terms of progress.
>period of technological stagnation much like the 900s to 1400s AD

Ow, my brain. That's some weaponized tier retardation right there.

>>53897179
FTL travel IS impossible. And even if it weren't it would still take so long to reach any other planet that MIGHT be able to support life that it would most likely also be fucked by the time we arrived.

So, in order to prolong our meaningless existence as long as possible the human race colonized the deepest sea bed. They spend all their time and energy developing a stable and reliable method of interdimensional travel. But even here, in the crushing depths that cradle humanity's final hope, there is strife and open rebellion is not far behind.

>>53911567
>FTL travel IS impossible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

>In 2012, physicist Harold White and collaborators announced that modifying the geometry of exotic matter could reduce the mass–energy requirements for a macroscopic space ship from the equivalent of the planet Jupiter to that of the Voyager 1 spacecraft (~700 kg) or less, and stated their intent to perform small-scale experiments in constructing warp fields. White proposed changing the shape of the warp bubble from a sphere to a torus. Furthermore, if the intensity of the space warp can be oscillated over time, the energy required is reduced even more. According to White, a modified Michelson–Morley interferometer could test the idea: one of the legs of the interferometer would appear to have a slightly different length when the test devices were energised.

We're getting there, slowly be surely.

>>53911209
Oh, that nonsense was about the core cooling down and solidifying throughout? That's even further away than the 1.1 Ga estimated minimum for tectonics.

>>53911673
White's warp experiments are as sound as his research on he EMdrive. (Neither actually works)

>>53911093
>every 10 years seems to be rapidly slowing down in terms of progress
Uh... as someone who was born in 1980, the world of 2017 is an amazing sci-fi setting.

Instead of going to the library to look something up and being told by the librarian "Sorry, we don't have that book, but we might be able to get a copy in three months for you to briefly peruse before you have to return it", we have the Internet.

Instead of paying an older boy to purchase a pornographic magazine for you and your friends to share, we have the Internet.

Instead of requiring genuine human contact to go through your daily life, we have the Internet.

My first computer was an "IBM-compatible" machine that ran DOS with a four-color monitor. Now I have piece of glass in my pocket that functions as an expert navigator, a video camera, an audio recorder, the entire repository of human knowledge, a flashlight, and a telephone.

Believe me, as a kid I spent a lot of time wishing that there was some way all the computers in the world could be connected together so all the information on them could be searched through by anyone who wanted to know something.

>>53911380
>>53912011

i can defend my claims:

>widespread adoption/refinement of technology is not theoretical progress, it is material progress.

>1. slowing down progress

theory ended for physics in the 1950s. mathematics has been in decline since the 70s. frontier science today is unrelated fields embracing computers, in biology especially dealing with drug research and sub branches of genetics, this means longer lifespans, it does not mean nuclear fusion, wormholes or teleportation. mathematics, physics and engineering from the 1930s which became computing in the 1950s which is approaching a physical limit in the 2020s.

>2. previous stagnation

'the dark ages never happened' is a recent and possible revision of history of the middle ages, but it is well accepted that the renaissance period starting in italy in the 1400s and the sudden burst of creativity, invention and rediscovery in the following 300 year period culminating in the scientific enlightenment of the 1700s is a useful delineation from the previous age.

>900-1400:
the decline of the roman empire, the viking conquests of the british isles, the failed crusades in the holy land, the mongol hordes, the 100 years war. bleak times to be alive, unless you really liked war and carnage. literacy is very low and so is scientific and artistic progress. gutenberg press 1440 changes the world and gives birth to everything we see afterwards from statecraft to a christian diaspora, the age of discovery, rise of the british empire, colonialism, founding of america.

if you could choose to be born 900-1400 or 1400-1900 it's not hard to choose. you could argue 400 AD to 1400 AD is all bad, but fun stuff is happening in china and the middle east preserving previous human knowledge from antiquity.

1900-2400 is likely to be another trash era, with some technological totalitarian system enslaving humanity until a new revolution in thinking is made. i understand this is not a popular opinion.

>>53905491 >>53905627
Got a link?

>>53912130
No. No the original Night Land can be gotten for free because it's past the 100 year mark.

Night Land Retold isn't that old yet.

>>53912128
Whilst obvious, easily comprehensible breakthroughs in the sciences are past for now, it's been a continual progression of gains. There's no decline at all, shit just keeps going.

All historical the shit you listed did fuck all to retard technological progress unless you only look at western europe, and even during that time there were steady advances in everything from the design of ploughs allowing for greater crop cultivation that made the roman-era methods look like shit to metallurgy making huge advances in the amount, quality and size of pieces of metal capable of being crafted. Even the bubonic and pnemonic plagues did fuck all to slow technological advance.

The whole concept of the renaissance as as sudden burst of innovation has been out of date for decades because it's simply revisionism and ignorance of the advances that were continually being made. It's as useless a concept as the dark ages; that shit ain't dark and has not been for ages because research happened.

Your understanding of history is ludicrously outdated and limited.

>>53912443
> because it's simply revisionism and ignorance

Eh...sort of. I mean, it is, but in fairness it's revisionism that was cooked up by the Europeaners themselves at the time. To the 1400s European mindset, Rome was the pinnacle achievement of mankind, even if all of their achievements had properly speaking been long surpassed (for example, Roman engineering was held as the best even though buildings like the Sistine Chapel or Notre Dame were far and away better than anything the Romans themselves could have built).

>>53912128
>theory ended for physics in the 1950s. mathematics has been in decline since the 70s.
So by your logic, getting to the last chapter in a novel means that you're losing the ability to read? Because you seem to be saying that "increasing breadth of knowledge" is synonymous with "progress", which obviously isn't true.

File: Hob_Gadling_001.jpg (136KB, 356x713px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 356x713px

>>53912443
>All historical the shit you listed did fuck all to retard technological progress unless you only look at western europe, and even during that time there were steady advances in everything from the design of ploughs allowing for greater crop cultivation that made the roman-era methods look like shit to metallurgy making huge advances in the amount, quality and size of pieces of metal capable of being crafted.

I feel like this would be a great thread to post the Hob Gadling story.

>>53912011
i will add that the things you mention are in a sense betraying your world view, and undermining your argument. shallow surface level material pleasures mean an increased addiction cycle and a decrease in tolerance for challenging or difficult situations. self-control now decreases, social norms including basic civility (which has become a pain in the ass to you) break down to the point of open conflict and violence.

>Instead of requiring genuine human contact to go through your daily life, we have the Internet.

most people throughout history would consider this isolation a living hell.

>spent a lot of time wishing

major companies and governments rely on this platform and will continue to encroach upon it in order to insure themselves against systemic failure.

perspective is important. in the early 1900s most educated people could quote you some aristotle, shakespeare, give you some latin, geography, world history, and basic arithmetic. this was considered standard 6 years of education, and people were proud to read the newspaper and had informed political opinions based around basic rights, class struggles and self-interests.

in the 21st century most people are educated. they can tell you about celebrities and sports and political figures and world events. they have a wide range of hobbies and passions, they work a complex job with interesting tools and might even be very articulate and verbose in their dialogue.

but they are stupid. shallow. materialistic. hedonistic. depressed. alone. afraid. people without a clear understanding of the past facing an uncertain future balanced on a hair trigger, ready to explode.

>>53912443
i don't disagree with you, so what's the problem? thin reading comprehension? i greentexed my entire point in one sentence, you didn't even need to read the whole post.

>>53912654
no, they need new theories. the novel has no last chapter.

>>53912950
>most people throughout history would consider this isolation a living hell.
I think most people would have been able to extract the intended humor from that statement.

>people in the past were better because they knew Latin
Oh, I see. You're one of those types that thinks learning to write script is important. Good luck with your new buggy-whip startup company!

>>53897179
Look up Now And Then, Here And There.

>>53911093

the number of patents filed per year is constantly rising.

i know it's fun to get old and bitter and say "nobody ever seems to invent anything cool these days, i wish kids were useful human beings like i was!" but you're objectively wrong.

>>53912950
People in the past were equally "stupid. shallow. materialistic. hedonistic. depressed. alone. afraid."
Perhaps if you had a clearer understanding of 'the past' without your rose tinted glasses on, you wouldn't fall into the trap of the argument for modern degeneracy

>>53913151
>>53913075
>>53913012
>>53912950
Anyone have that "Then and Now" image of how in the Middle Ages, everyone was noble and pure, but then in the later Middle Ages, everyone was riddled with vices?

>>53913012
are you sure im the one out of touch with reality? do you think people are particularly satisfied in the present climate? is the rise of fascism and marxism just a passing fad? kids larping as nazis and bolsheviks for fun because hippies are passe?

>>53913075
what about social mobility? we won't need money when we all have food widgets right?

>>53913179
>do you think people are particularly satisfied in the present climate?

I guarantee that if you transported someone from 1817 to 2017 and gave them a while to get over the culture shock, they would enjoy having access to indoor plumbing, forced-air heating and cooling, healthcare more advanced than "leave a window open in the winter to help sick people rid themselves of bad airs", and cheap worldwide transportation.

They'd probably think it bizarre that health care is so expensive only the richest Americans can afford it. And that's lauded as a good thing.

>>53897179

My completely random guess would be that 500 million years is more than enough time for humanity to figure out how to manipulate climates in an extreme sense. The atmosphere will be adapted to continually deflect an ever greater amount of solar energy to keep earth stable until the point where it becomes impossible, and then mankind will move underground, leaving a massive array of solar collection on the surface for energy needs, since there'll be no shortage of solar energy. It will be something like keeping "spaceship earth" alive underground, but 500 million years is a long, long time to figure these things out through massive engineering projects.

Assuming the earth isn't destroyed wholesale by the sun's expansion phase, the trend will eventually reverse, and mankind will eventually return to the surface to rebuild its ecosystem with projects to capture to a now diminishing supply of energy. The only absolute limitation is an inability to create energy from nothing, so earth still dies eventually, but it's a very long ways out even on cosmic time scales.

>>53905915
All us sci-fi nerds talking about FTL and astronomy, and then geology snaps back to reality, oh there goes gravity, mom's spaghetti

>>53899876
daily reminder that FTL is impossible
Or at least you can pick two of Causality, Relativity and FTL.

>>53913464
Not really. Remember, microwave generators create a thrust vector while not acting on any medium at all.

>>53913464

But locality is already a myth? What if causality is too?

>>53913553
>But locality is already a myth? What if causality is too?

Yeah true. The explanation of the FTL problem that made it click for me was on Atomic Rockets, and they have an extract from one of the Xeelee books (?) about how messy warfare is when FTL allows you to fuck with causality

>>53913500
How does the EM drive change anything? Even if it is proper reactionless? It would just be another means of propulsion, it would still be relativistic right?

>>53913631
Wem don't know why it works, anon. That's my point. It's reactionless, yet it generates thrust. That's supposedly impossible according to physics as we understand it. So, obviously we're missing some stuff. therefore, you can''s say what is or is not possible. Because obviously, we don't know enough to state that unequivocally.

Just like non-phosporus based life forms are supposed to be impossible, and then someone accidentally creates bacteria that uses arsenic as part of it's DNA instead of phosphorus, proving the entire concept incorrect.

File: labour_productivity_canusa1.png (13KB, 1366x652px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 1366x652px

>>53913075
>the number of patents filed per year is constantly rising
This is an awful measure of technological progress.
A much better one is labour productivity since that is what most technology is used for, to help people in their work.
Unfortunately the labour productivity seems to support the other guys side more than yours.
Especially for the last 5 year productivity has been very stagnant.

File: thus of ould, thus now.jpg (438KB, 600x742px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 600x742px

>>53913174

>>53914042
You know how they calculate labour productivity? By measuring how much money it produces.
It's actually a non-measurement. It doesn't count value (because how the fuck would you do it) but prices. This is why a cashier living in Berlin is 4 time more "productive" than a cashier 100 km to the East, in Poland. Not because he scans shit 4 times faster.

>>53912950
>i don't disagree with you,

You absolutely do because you're espousing amazing amounts of bullshit combined with horrifically outdated bullshit to boot.
Seems like you need to work on your reading comprehension. And read some decent history books written within the past 50 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_and_First_Men

>>53913553
>But locality is already a myth
WHAT
WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN

>>53911093
>i think humanity is entering another 500 year period of technological stagnation much like the 900s to 1400s AD.
An alternative scenario that actually corresponds to reality is current social problems keep getting worse.

>>53897301
We can't get to an appreciable fraction of C and we never will. This issue is always completely ignored in otherwise hard scifi settings, it's just handwaved that somehow we can magically accelerate ships to 80% of light speed.

>>53921516

The lovely world of quantum shenanigans.

>>53921800

But we can. We only need a Dyson Swarm producing industrial-class, proton-sized black holes, as power source for ships.

>>53913764
Fyi the bacteria thing actually turned out to be incorrect, but you're right that IF the EM drive works, it works. Currently it's still subject to intense scrutiny and a lot of skepticism

>>53921800
Just like we'd never be able to fly or warm ourselves without fire or cook our food with invisible light or etc.

>>53899785
Then we send colony ships off planet. Some religious nutjobs and poor people stay behind, and die due to an increasingly dangerous and inhospitable environment.

>>53921858
dumb popsci faggot

>>53921801
Oh that locality. I thought you were talking about the principle that the laws of physics are the same everywhere.

>>53921819
>proton-sized black holes
Wouldn't those evaporate basically instantly?

File: Black_Hole_Propulsion.jpg (27KB, 636x247px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 636x247px

>>53922149

Kugelblitz. It would weight about 600 billion kg, or two Empire State buildings,
which would be roughly the size of a single proton. Such a black hole would radiatie nearly 160 petawatts in form of Hawking Radiation, which is roughly the equivalent of 10,000 times today's world power consumption. And it would evaporate in around 3 and 1/2 years. Any smaller and it evaporates too quickly. Larger and it radiates too weakly and too massive to feasibly accelerate the ship an the black hole. Assuming we can catch most of the radiation, this amount of power accelerates us to .1C in just 20 days and even faster in the remaining lifespan of the black hole.

It's a 100% matter-energy conversion, and infinitely escalable. We would need powerful lasers feed by a partial Dyson swarm, but from there. You can easily have a type III civilisation in a single solar system with that kind of energy production and efficiency.

>>53922149

10% of the sun's energy output focuses into a single atometer would produce a black hole that last 3,5 years.

File: 1478907622725.jpg (55KB, 479x361px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 479x361px

>>53922332

>>53922384

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kugelblitz_(astrophysics)

>>53922399
Oh I thought you said kegelblitz.

>>53922399
>>53922384

>>53912128
>mathematics has been in decline since the 70s.
If you look at the Hilbert problems, yes, none of them has been solved since 1970.

But in the last 20 years, we've had a proof of Fermat last theorem, of the Poincaré conjecture, of Kepler conjecture, and we might even have a proof of the abc conjecture.

Mathematics is currently in one of the most important period of its history, and this without including all the new fields computer science is opening.

>>53922332

>Such a black hole would radiatie nearly 160 petawatts in form of Hawking Radiation, which is roughly the equivalent of 10,000 times today's world power consumption.

Holy Fuck.

>>53915840
pointless ad hominem aside, i would ask why are you bothering? you are unable to discuss the topic critically with any coherence.

>someone makes a claim you disagree with
>you KNOW it's wrong
>begin with dismissive ridicule
>frustration builds to the point you are reduced to monosyllable communication
>WRONG, READ A BOOK, IDIOT

what outcome do you expect to occur when you engage in this behavior?
an escalation and conflict
being ignored
an apology because you are upset?

>weaponized tier retardation
>no decline at all
>simply revisionism and ignorance
>useless a concept
>ludicrously outdated and limited
>espousing amazing amounts of bullshit
>horrifically outdated bullshit
>read some decent history books

the entire content of your replies to this point have been,
technology always continues to improve over time.

to which i add: at different rates.

what you failed to grasp is that there is a clear distinction i am making, between improving technology and changing the paradigm so a whole level of improvements within a new domain can be made. did i at any point say rome had better architecture? or that somehow the greeks were superior? or that europe is the centre of world history? or that ploughs stopped improving?

i merely pointed out that it was better being born after the printing press than in the 500 years before it and gave justifications. that the core sciences were coming up with more important fundamental discoveries in the 20th century than after it. being able to live till you're 100 so you can now work with widgets until you're 80 doesn't seem like much of an improvement on quality of life.

imagine for a second if i replied to you how you replied to me, lmao.

you even disagreed that we were disagreeing because you were too busy explaining how right you are to even consider you might have misunderstood what i was saying.

what if you are wrong?

>>53922734
sure computer modelling is allowing for a whole new type of proof theorem. have you looked into homotopy type theory? it has the potential to rewrite the foundations of the entire field.

this might be splitting hairs, but is progress beyond human comprehension still progress? what are the direct applications of knowledge you cannot understand the meaning of? you need to build the machines to build you the new tools that can exploit these new vistas. but those machines are built by a committee of machines.

you're dangerously close to removing the need for any human engagement. or forcing humans to augment themselves with machines to be able to understand future advances. when your "reinforced machine learning neural networks with probabilistic trimming techniques" can maximise the search space of _creativity_ better than you ever could, what's the point of doing science? at best you become a passive participant, offering some top level instruction. we are maybe a few decades away from that, the application for AI as a general purpose learning machine simply means human obsolescence from most activities, politics, economics, war, arts, science.

at least that's the promise. im not quite convinced, looks like another failed utopia shaping up to hurt a lot of naive people.

>>53904655
>Harold White manipulating warp-fields with his laptop

Oh that sentence is just so.... great.

>>53912443

You're right that technological progress did continue after the fall of Rome. But it's pure revisionism to then claim that the Dark Ages were not a thing. By everything we measure a society's power by; military, population, trade etc, things went backwards. Living standards decreased for most people, armies shrank to smaller than they'd been under Rome, cities grew smaller as well. Rome was a city of 1,000,000 people; that wouldn't be matched again in Europe until London more than 1000 years later. The Roman legions had a decent chance of defeating medieval armies right up until firearms start showing up in noticeable quantities. Pollution decreases after Rome falls as industry decreases. Shipwreaks decrease.

This was a period of comparative decline. Yes, technology continues to advance, but that's not the only measure by which we could classify the period as a Dark Age.

>>53901713
>anon understands literally nothing about astronomy yet feels the need to post about how wrong everyone else is in astronomy thread
If the only thing you knew was that you knew nothing, you'd know more than you currently do.

>>53923025
Jesus fucking christ on a bike you're moron.
Go back to school already.

File: 1490647999616.png (6KB, 415x416px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 415x416px

>>53912950
>shallow surface level material pleasures mean an increased addiction cycle and a decrease in tolerance for challenging or difficult situations
>in the early 1900s most educated people could quote you some aristotle, shakespeare, give you some latin, geography, world history, and basic arithmetic
>n the 21st century most people are educated. they can tell you about celebrities and sports and political figures and world events
>but they are stupid. shallow. materialistic. hedonistic. depressed. alone. afraid.
wow! i agree so much! us 15 year olds sure appreciate how shitty the modern day world is, huh? i wish i was born in the early 20th century, when everything was RIGHT and WHOLESOME xD

enjoy your reddit gold!

>>53923551
>Rome was a city of 1,000,000 people; that wouldn't be matched again in Europe until London more than 1000 years later.
The reason because Rome was a city of one million was because the Roman Empire flat out looted the rest of the empire for foodstuffs so the emperors could bribe the populace. By the third century, as Rome as not as important to the empire anymore, the population declined. Further more, the Imperial Period was heavily characterized by technological stagnancy.
>The Roman legions had a decent chance of defeating medieval armies right up until firearms start showing up in noticeable quantities
Base on what, exacly? There was multiple improvements in terms of tactics, and more important to the discussion, in terms of military technology, such as better metallurgy, equipment, and siege weaponry.

https://mikejay.net/man-of-the-year-million/

>>53927404
these are not mutually exclusive:
>the past was horrible
>people were better educated

having a wide breadth of useless knowledge does not substitute for a narrower breadth of useful knowledge. do you think all information and collected human knowledge is relative?

>the design a nuclear waste recycler is equally important to developing strategies to eliminate inherent systemic minority and gender bias

equally important?

File: 1408976475450.png (414KB, 530x464px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 530x464px

>>53928171
The layman knows way more about maths and sciences than ever before you fucking reprobate.

>>53923105
Wel, about progress, most computer used in maths/science are just here to compute things that are too long and boring for humans.
This works well for verifying proofs (because you "just" have to check everything is alright), or when the problem can be stated in a decidable system (and still, complexity issue arise).

Then, you have all the fuss about artificial intelligence, but neural network, at their basis, are juste tools to find an approximation to a continuous function. That's very good, but I'm not sure that (for example) all mathematics can be described as an approximation of such functions, contrary to a little thing like Go. Maybe all interesting problems might be described as such approximations, but in this case, I'm not sure that interesting theorems would be so interesting from a mathematical point of view...

For Homotophy Type Theory, I want to read some things about it when I can. I'm about to begin my PhD in a field between maths and CS (I'm still hesitating between verification or expressiveness of formal languages), and it would be very nice to know more about HoTT, even if it isn't directly relelvant to my field.

>>53928229
ur dad's a layman.

File: angrilyfixesbowtie.jpg (28KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 600x600px

>>53928334
you take that back right fucking now gayhead

>>53928229
eh, people are still failing ordinary level maths. In the first world the class divide is quite thin in some places (not in america though), but stupid people are still stupid. No matter how free education you give people a certain demographic will never make use of it, and initiatives like no child left behind only dumb down everyone's experience to lower the barrier for entry for fuckboys who couldn't give less of a shit.
Everyone is going to college, but the majority are getting in with 200 pt leaving certs and "studying" gender studies or politics, while not going to a single lecture. And in order to bell curve these courses it's easy to pass without putting in a modicum of effort.

I don't think it's the worst at this point, but the education inflation is a bubble that will burst, leaving the majority of the ever expanding population completely unable to get a job.
We need fewer people.

>>53928383
ur regular dad lay's your weekend dad.

>>53928519
>we need fewer people
No, we need UBI. You're probably correct about higher education being in a bubble, but with the current rate of technological progress, you'd have to kill off an appreciable portion of the population to have enough jobs for everyone. Of course, a smaller population will likely progress at a slower rate, too, since you'll have fewer people to innovate.

>>53915066
The only way you could say measuring labor productivity has no value is if value has absolutely no relation to prices.

>>53921800
The issues with accelerating to, say, 80% of c are huge, but far, very, very far from unsolvable.

You need a electromagnetic plasma shield and antimatter reactors. Also either a colony ship or people able to withstand 3 g for an appreciable amount of time.

Difficult? Yes. Technological marvel, achievement of human science? Yes. Impossible? Don't be a moron.

File: citation needed.jpg (13KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 400x400px

>>53928171
>the skill to design a nuclear waste recycler is equally important to developing strategies to eliminate inherent systemic minority and gender bias

>>53904487
It will have become too hot for life as we understand it today to survive and would have expanded slightly.

>>53900475
>Its a short story from Asimov IIRC
Well, I'm a little closer to figuring it out now than I was before

Thanks anon!

>>53921800
It's 100% physically possible. You just need to keep dumping energy into the system and about 95% of the speed scales linearly with the energy input, it's only at really high speeds you get weird with time and acceleration.
We can already get small particles to 99% of c with little effort, it really isn't far fetched that we'll someday get to that speed in spaceships, especially in long-hauls, but saying we'll never get to, say, 50% is ridiculous. Unless humanity goes into another proper dark age and then wipes itself out I consider it unimaginably unlikely we won't ever get out of the solar system.

File: tenbillionyears_nowthen_herethere.png (242KB, 1439x1080px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1439x1080px

>>53913018

>>53903847
>>53904604
Shame the book introduced so many interesting things and just glossed over them. Left with more questions than answers.

>>53905915
So soon? Didn't know the planet was so close to dying.

File: fabian_southwest_watcher-3-1000-1000-100.jpg (412KB, 647x1000px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 647x1000px

>>53912130
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Night-Land-Story-Retold-ebook/dp/B004GKNM3W
the audio books preety good

>>53936585
My understanding is that 500 Ma is a lower bound, but it might be longer.

>>53899785
Then we play a different setting because this setting sounds retarded

>>53900420
Certainly not that story, but I remember a short story in the kid's horror compilation "Road Weenies" where a girl finds a machine that prints out coupons that "happen" in real life (50% off and the day feels shorter). She tries to make her own coupon but presses the wrong button: "Fire Sale, Everything Must Go". The story ends with it getting hotter.

File: (2013) The Wind Rises~Kaze Tachinu (720p Blu-ray 8bit Dual Audio) [NoobSubs] [14C83088].mkv_snapshot_00.12.09_[2017.03.11_11.15.15].png (1MB, 1280x692px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x692px

>>53921800
This got me wondering, what limits how close to c we can get?

Let's assume an extreme example - a ship that consists entirely of acceleration matter. The most energy we can get out of that is by annihilating it so we'll be assuming some kind of antimatter reactor/engine. Let's call the efficiency with which we can turn the mass into kinetic energy of the ship 'n'. Keeping in mind that we'll need an equal amount of mass for deceleration, we get equivalent kinetic energy to the energy released from annihilation times efficiency.

K = nmc^2

The kinetic energy K can be expressed as (γ-1)mc^2, giving us:

(γ-1)mc^2 = nmc^2
=>
γ-1 = n

Where γ is equal to 1/(sqrt(1-(v/c)^2))

So to be able to reach 0.8c you'd need an efficiency of around 0.67 which seems doable. In reality, though, you'd need near perfect efficiency to keep the waste heat from destroying your ship. The high fraction of c you get comes as a bonus.

>>53937873
Adding: Some additional running of the numbers gives me that something can't propel itself beyond sqrt(3/4)c ~= 0.866c while maintaining enough mass to decelerate. I wonder if I made a mistake somewhere or if I actually stumbled across the theoretical space travel speed limit within the given constraints.

>>53897179
WE LAUNCH A CRUSADE ONTO THE SURFACE OF THE SUN AND SLAY WHATEVER DARES TO THREATEN US