Would depopulating the Earth be such a bad thing?

[Mormolyce]

actually iirc, they have done both (though while A has been proven for a while, B was just figured out fairly recently) some guy managed to make a design that could be feasible with our current power systems and could go to alpha centauri within a few weeks. the only issue they have is that we have yet to figure out how to physically make one (as they put it, we are waiting on the "Manhattan pile moment")
though the original design they had for a warp drive needed Jupiter's power level.

Well I'd love to see a link to this. But no nothing regarding FTL travel via "warp drive" has been proven, in fact without some pretty serious explanation it's hard to see how it doesn't violate several known principles of physics. As I said earlier, the concept of warping space is fairly trivial, all gravitational fields warp space to some extent. The question is, how do you use this fact to move a spaceship faster than light? And how do you warp the space in the first place?

[Elegiac]

Well I'd love to see a link to this. But no nothing regarding FTL travel via "warp drive" has been proven, in fact without some pretty serious explanation it's hard to see how it doesn't violate several known principles of physics. As I said earlier, the concept of warping space is fairly trivial, all gravitational fields warp space to some extent. The question is, how do you use this fact to move a spaceship faster than light? And how do you warp the space in the first place?

I've seen the design, but it requires the use of exotic matter.

[Adam Jensen]

Well I'd love to see a link to this. But no nothing regarding FTL travel via "warp drive" has been proven, in fact without some pretty serious explanation it's hard to see how it doesn't violate several known principles of physics. As I said earlier, the concept of warping space is fairly trivial, all gravitational fields warp space to some extent. The question is, how do you use this fact to move a spaceship faster than light? And how do you warp the space in the first place?

There are two major problems with warp drives (at least, the Alcubeirre drives), and a minor one on top of that.

The minor one, and I say minor because this doesn't require fancy physics to solve, just a new energy source, is that it still requires a mindboggling amount of energy.

Now the major ones:

First it requires negative energy, which I believe requires exotic materials. This is required to form the warping effect. And second, to propel the warp ahead of the ship, you still have to propagate this energy at +C speeds.

But if those problems can be solved, then maybe Carl Sagan is right and we'll travel the stars.

[obdigore]

I've seen the design, but it requires the use of exotic matter.

Donut-shaped exotic matter. I seem to be assuming that Homer is on the research team.

[Zeldaveritas]

Quit throwing around the number 60 billion people with no basis for your number. Whoever claimed 100 billion or trillion based on food production in the US alone is laughably mis-informed.

If you would actually study any academic sustainability you would know that the number is much closer to 10 billion as previously stated. After decades devoted to tackling this problem, currently it is estimated that at current food production rates that the earth's population can rise to 10.5 billion without a decreased standard of living across the board. As an exercise to see how much that can go up, if every person were to go vegan and all farmland was devoted solely to crop production rather than livestock (given its inefficient nature) the world population could rise to 14 billion.

This only approaches it from a food standpoint. Many parts of the world will enter a water and energy crisis before ever approaching numbers close to double the current world population. Expect rationing to dominate future news headlines if we don't actually take a hard look at limiting population growth.

[docterfreeze]

We could probably sustain double the population we have now, I don't see the point in "depopulation"

[endersblade]

As terrible as it may sound, the world would be a better place if a few billion people died off. I'm not saying we should commit genocide or anything, merely pointing this out. Do you think we would be better or worse off with a more sustainable populace?

I'd be the first one to press the button, even if it included killing me off.

The problem is, killing off that many people would only be a bandaid to the real problem, and that's the fact that...ok, trying to dodge yet another infraction...certain groups of people seem to have no limit to the amount of children they're willing to birth, so the population would be right back up to, or beyond, the original number in no time flat. What we need is some sort of control on the birth of children. One couple does NOT need to have 8+ fucking kids. That's just ridiculous. I'm not saying we need to be as strict as China, that whole 'one boy one girl' thing or however they do it, but we need to do SOMEthing.

[docterfreeze]

I'd be the first one to press the button, even if it included killing me off.

The problem is, killing off that many people would only be a bandaid to the real problem, and that's the fact that...ok, trying to dodge yet another infraction...certain groups of people seem to have no limit to the amount of children they're willing to birth, so the population would be right back up to, or beyond, the original number in no time flat. What we need is some sort of control on the birth of children. One couple does NOT need to have 8+ fucking kids. That's just ridiculous. I'm not saying we need to be as strict as China, that whole 'one boy one girl' thing or however they do it, but we need to do SOMEthing.

Eh, 2 kids per household sounds perfectly reasonable to me, after that people just need to learn how to wear a fuckin condom...

[JSStryker]

I think what you meant to say was:
"Finally some common sense!"

Nah Strakha had it right.

[obdigore]

Eh, 2 kids per household sounds perfectly reasonable to me, after that people just need to learn how to wear a fuckin condom...

Actually in first world countries the population replacement level is negative without some sort of immigration, despite the people you see that have 12 kids.

[Elegiac]

Actually in first world countries the population replacement level is negative without some sort of immigration, despite the people you see that have 12 kids.

Those people are outliers. Last I recall, the only Western countries with a positive birthrate were France and the United States.

[obdigore]

Those people are outliers. Last I recall, the only Western countries with a positive birthrate were France and the United States.

I believe the US is just under it, and like almost all other 'developed' countries, needs immigration to maintain population levels. THANKS BABY BOOMERS.

http://www.forbes.com/global/2012/05...-kuan-yew.html

[Elegiac]

I believe the US is just under it, and like almost all other 'developed' countries, needs immigration to maintain population levels. THANKS BABY BOOMERS.

http://www.forbes.com/global/2012/05...-kuan-yew.html

Honestly, I don't blame them. As was said, lots of kids used to be a benefit back in the days where more kids guaranteed labor. These days, they're an expensive luxury.



Personally, I'd rather have the disposable income.

[ranku]

Those people are outliers. Last I recall, the only Western countries with a positive birthrate were France and the United States.

If the US has a positive birth rate, then it is still declining. i remember reading a report in my english 101 that birth rates were barely pushing replacement levels.

[nyc81991]

I've seen data, I've read reports, and the Earth would be better with less people. The old girl is barely keeping up with our over consumption and we're not slowing down.

That is simply a false statement.

[endersblade]

Eh, 2 kids per household sounds perfectly reasonable to me, after that people just need to learn how to wear a fuckin condom...

Well, I certainly agree with that, but I can also understand how strict that comes across. What happens if you have 2 girls? 2 boys? Kinda sucks I guess. If it were up to me, people would get neutered after producing 2 kids of any sex, but I'm not in charge.

[adamegatron]

I think it has more to do with how we live rather than how many of us are here.

[obdigore]

Honestly, I don't blame them. As was said, lots of kids used to be a benefit back in the days where more kids guaranteed labor. These days, they're an expensive luxury.


Personally, I'd rather have the disposable income.

XKCD is always related. Anyway.

We can't let those dirty ruskies win! EVERYONE GET PREGNANT! FOR 'MURRICA!

No but seriously, as women are granted the same status and rights as men, (and tech becomes readily available) you see birth levels drop, especially for the middle class or working professional who has a career and hobbies and money to pursue their interests, as well as not be troubled by having to give up what they want to raise children.

Its why we should make hundreds of clones of each of our most respected and intelligent STEM researchers.

[syn1k]

India does not, and China either lifted or will soon lift theirs.

The demographic transition is going on almost everywhere. Even in Africa, fertility rates are falling. In some countries in the developed world it's far below replacement, with potentially dire consequences for those nations.

over dramatic much?

[Thelxi]

World population problems are only a problem for the dramatic members of the population. We have many thousands of years and technological advancement to ponder and gossip over whether it really is a problem. I will let my great great great great great great great great grandchildren, maybe, worry about it