View previous topic | View next topic

World population

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

'yorz
1127456.  Fri Apr 03, 2015 4:48 am Reply with quote

According to one of the following horrid pictures, that quote was from Gabor Zovanyi.

overpopulation/overdevelopment

 
vanjeet
1127458.  Fri Apr 03, 2015 5:19 am Reply with quote

gruff5 wrote:
I saw this quote, non-attributed, so I don't know if it's correct.

Quote:
‘If our species had started with just two people at the time of the earliest agricultural practices some 10,000 years ago, and increased by one percent per year, today humanity would be a solid ball of flesh many thousand light years in diameter, and expanding with a radial velocity that, neglecting relativity, would be many times faster than the speed of light.’


This quote comes from the book The No-Growth Imperative by Gabor Zovanyi. In which he cites (141, p198) this example as taken from a calculation done by P C Putman taken from The Economic History of World Population by Carlo M. Cipolla. That's as far as I could get, can't find the last book online.

<edit>'yorz beat me to it.

 
gruff5
1127597.  Sat Apr 04, 2015 10:14 am Reply with quote

Given the way a starting single grain of rice doubling along the squares of chess board explodes in number, it does seem conceivable.

 
PDR
1127599.  Sat Apr 04, 2015 10:30 am Reply with quote

Exponential progressions always get to large numbers quite quickly. Of course in this case it ignores the detail that population will always be limited by other factors like food supply and internet bandwidth.

PDR

 
'yorz
1127607.  Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:28 pm Reply with quote

Food poisoning. Bad TV programs.

 
dr.bob
1127744.  Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:11 am Reply with quote

gruff5 wrote:
I saw this quote, non-attributed, so I don't know if it's correct.

Quote:
‘If our species had started with just two people at the time of the earliest agricultural practices some 10,000 years ago, and increased by one percent per year, today humanity would be a solid ball of flesh many thousand light years in diameter, and expanding with a radial velocity that, neglecting relativity, would be many times faster than the speed of light.’


It's basically a compound interest problem. Find any one of the many compound interest calculators on 'tinterwebs and put in an initial deposit of £2, an annual interest rate of 1%, and set the controls for 10,000 years.

You should end up with a figure of roughly 3.27 x 10^43. Which is quite a lot.

Whether that equates to "a solid ball of flesh many thousand light years in diameter" or not, I'll leave for someone else to deduce.

 
WordLover
1127751.  Mon Apr 06, 2015 5:02 am Reply with quote

.....


Last edited by WordLover on Thu Sep 15, 2016 12:29 pm; edited 2 times in total

 
PDR
1127755.  Mon Apr 06, 2015 5:32 am Reply with quote

Spookily, those numbers would tie in with a model in which there was a single pair of humans (call them Adam and Eve) around 400-500yrs BCE leading to today's population. Wasn't there some bishop or other who claimed this date to have been 414BCE* or similar? Perhaps the fundies were right after all!

PDR

*this is based solely on something said by Frederick March during his prosecution of Dick York in "Inherit the Wind". Why Dick didn't just get his wife to turn them all into toads remains a mystery to this day

 
crissdee
1127764.  Mon Apr 06, 2015 6:40 am Reply with quote

Archbishop Usher iirc, and he narrowed it down to something like 9am, October 12th 4004 BC.

 
PDR
1127770.  Mon Apr 06, 2015 7:50 am Reply with quote

Was that GMT or Judean Daylight-Saving Time?

PDR

 
suze
1127797.  Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:33 pm Reply with quote

It was 6pm rather than 9am!

The basis of Archbishop Ussher's figure was adding up the ages of various people mentioned in the Bible, although modern reckoning is that he missed a couple out.

Rather conveniently, Ussher came to a figure of four thousand years exactly between the Creation and the birth of Christ. But he then added four years on to account for the fact that Jesus must have been born not later than 4BC (because we know that Herod was still alive when Jesus was born, and Herod died in 4BC).

Now, there was a Jewish belief that Creation had happened around the time of the autumn equinox. Because the Jewish day of rest is Saturday, Ussher deduced that the first day of Creation must have been a Sunday. But a Jewish day begins at sunset rather than at midnight, so he went back a further six hours to 6pm, being about the right time for sunset in Israel at the relevant time of year.

 
gruff5
1128060.  Wed Apr 08, 2015 3:33 am Reply with quote

The Bishop was taking the only evidence he had at the time, the Bible, and mathematically using that to calculate the age of the Earth. In the spirit of scientific enquiry, he was just one of many clergymen who helped the cause of reason.

 
cornixt
1128181.  Wed Apr 08, 2015 10:08 am Reply with quote

I'm impressed with his confidence in narrowing it down to such a precise time using only years and vague corresponding historical years as a reference. It's like someone telling me they are middle aged and me saying they were born on 4th May 1973 at 4.35pm.

 
Zziggy
1128189.  Wed Apr 08, 2015 10:31 am Reply with quote

I have a question: I've seen a few religious people on facebook and whatnot saying that the world wouldn't be 'overpopulated' if only we lived in some kind of communist utopia (I'm paraphrasing, but frankly that's what they said. They just phrased it a lot more in terms of Jesus.), i.e. if we spread out all the wealth and food and space and medicine over all the people instead of having a few gazillionaires with absolutely everything. To what extent is this true, does anybody know?

I can see that there's obviously a lot of inequality in the world, but this claim doesn't seem to in any way gel with things I've heard such as 'we're using the resources of the equivalent of three Earths' (though what that means I don't know either - how can we take one Earth and create three Earths' yield? How ... is that possible?)

P.S. as you may have gathered, I am not knowledgeable about this subject ...

 
crissdee
1128255.  Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:47 pm Reply with quote

Errrrrrr.....if everybody got their fair share of everything, wouldn't that mean less people died of curable illnesses? And wouldn't there be less/no war in this Utopia? And of course no AIDS because there'd be none of those godless homosexuals. Seems to me that we would be even more crowded than we are now, even if we used up all the open spaces.

 

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group