I live amongst the wealthiest people in the world. The futility of attempting to change the mind of someone who is a conspicuous consumer is counterproductive. Nature will self correct when it is sufficiently stressed.
Great conversation. Wide-ranging and deep. Thank you for exploring those taboo third rails of unsustainable economic growth, overshoot, and overpopulation. Love the ‘sharpening one’s sword’ wisdom at the end.
I’m listening to the end of this video while picking up Roy Scranton’s We’re Doomed. He would be a great interview with an eye to the military effect on our mass extinction, whichever one we’re in.
It's a gift to be able to hear from such an unsung legend in the environmental movement. I worked as a canvasser for Greenpeace in the 90s and I really didn't know much about this history. It's is enlightening. The conversation between you two shows a depth of spirit, caring and perspective. I would love to hear from both of you what a viable solution would look like.
All social and ecological movements will fail until we provide universal access to meet everyone's needs. It is simply impossible to care for the environment or people and keep our competitive edge required to keep our job or our market share. Solution: change our culture so as to make meeting everyone's needs our priority. As an individual all we have to do is prosocialise: 1. Advocate altruism 2. Organise it with Free Collaboration Networks (like libraries, public toolsheds, food sharing, carpooling, etc) 3. Teach others to prosocialise. Any individual will greatly improve their community and the world if they do this consciously 30 min a week. In a year they will see huge improvements.
When you say "everyone," I assume you mean only humans. To oblivion for everyone else. Regarding humans, how many do you know who believe they have enough? What is the end of "everyone's needs"? Who decides when everyone -- all the humans that is -- have enough? There is no escaping the fact of biological and physical limits. Our altruism can not stop at the edge of our species, and to attempt this would be a huge mistake, even for us.
"When Alexander saw the breadth of his domain, he wept for there were no more worlds to conquer." Some people live and breath conquest, and they always want more; more domain, more wealth, more power, more status, more, more, more. The modern world seems to be broken into two main groups: conquerors and aspiring conquerors.
There is also a group, and not a small group, that don't want to conquer anyone, and who just want to enjoy a decent, modest, peaceful life. Thos are my personal heroes.
Fantastic interview. Great to hear these conversations. They are incredibly motivating for me to keep the candle burning in fighting the fight and to build alliances in my professional circles to ensure the ecological narrative gets heard. Interesting thought this all triggers...is the mainstream Environmental Movement really a Left Wing movement? Or rather, do we actually really have a Left Wing movement in our society? All I see is that what differentiates Left/Right these days is that they get angry at different things on TV whilst they all eat their UberEats....i know its more complicated, but it seems like energy blindness (as Nate puts it) gives us a fake distinction between left/Right, where in fact, we could reframe the debate as Materialists vs Ecologists or something...
I still remember the horror of the sinking of the "rainbow warrior" the greenpeace ship by french agents the punishment was never enough but in the end nuclear testing at Muraroa was stopped .. thank you greenpeace and all the others that got together including David Lange and the nz people...
I love that Rex said something will survive the Mass Extinction. I hold hope that small mammals will survive and re-fill vacant niches in 10 million years to become amazing fauna (and flora). I feed the birds in my yard with 6 bird feeders. I will try to play with my dog more. My dog will play until he is exhausted.
I am curious why people don't continue talking about the real problem....the Price System. It's well defined and understood. It's characteristics are dependent on growth...which is the problem ecologists acknowledge. Technocrats were right from the beginning. We are destroying our resource base for this short term high energy blip in human history with no real solutions to poverty and homelessness still! We literally could simplify every aspect of our energy converting system to be sustainable and high quality but that means we need a new social system. Why aren't people discussing new social systems?
Assuming there is only one "real problem" -- or one simple solution -- is usually a mistake. All challenges for humanity now are complex, wicked, non-linear, systemic problems, and when I say "systemic" I don't just mean the myriad of human systems, but also the complex ecological systems that support everything humanity achieves. In any case, yes, re-orgainizing human economic systems can be part of improving some problems, but history also shows us that ideologies about re-organizing human society can also be a huge problem. This -- overcoming ecological overshoot -- isn't simple.
@@RexWeylerMusic Well if the goal is to have a steady state or degrowth state then there would have to be social and cultural changes. Different social organizing systems will need to be brought up and discussed legitimately because the current system cannot be modified to achieve steady state or degrowth. Unless you can somehow abstract growth and prices towards attention monitoring and shift people towards low wastage behaviors....which seems like something from a dystopian novel. The price system is the problem and it's not an oversimplification stating such things. We are literally using faith as a mechanism of manipulating people and resources and trying to science our way through technical problems with that faith - prices.
Yes, of course, the system will have to change, no matter what, because the ecological foundation of the entire civilization is decaying and collapsing. My point is that there is not just one problem, there exists a complex network of problems, of which human rights, economic systems, energy systems, are all parts. Nevertheless, ecology is also a part of this complex network, and human overshoot of the ecosystem is as close as we can get to a fundamental problem. That will have to change, no matter what, and will change, either by some wise human choices, or the default collapse of society. We cannot stop efforts to harmonize human-ecosystem problems, while we try to solve the human justice problems.
@@RexWeylerMusic You obviously led an epic life :) I think education is key going forward. Could you get Bill Rees to make a long lecture on ecological footprint? How amount of sustainable resource extraction, sustainable amount of pollution etc are calculated. Maybe explain why 30-50 % of Earth must be turned into nature reserves. This is important for people that are starting to internalize that our planet is finite. Because what does that practically mean? They need clear answers to how much can be consumed. On the energy front, Julia Steinberger and that gang are doing good work to quantify a good life related to energy consumption, and how this translates to what we can expect of individual consumption. We need the same detail for ecological footprint. If people realize we have hard limits to resource extraction and pollution it is more probable they understand why controlled degrowth is needed. With hard limits, even though calculations will never be perfect, it will be much easier to advocate against wealth accumulation. And if the hard limits are enforced, then any personal consumption above the mean implies that someone else get less.
The problem with what you're saying is even if you correctly identify the problem/s and than get it out to the masses it takes only a small minority of powerful people to derail corrective improvement efforts to preserve their wealth and power base. So, unless you reach a critical mass of people willing to apply ample pressures against the powers that be such efforts falter. Even with mass efforts things usually go sideways as history is rife with grand ideas for better governance or societies that usually flare out in dictatorial excess, genocide and subjugation. Of note, all historic efforrs to date were well below current population levels and were largely unsuccessful. The efforts applied from post WWII to current times are I think, undeniably during the most fertile times such efforts could have been attempted and even these efforts have had limited or hit and miss success at best. We save a species here or there but increasingly more go extinct. We've battled poverty and famine yet more people are starving to death than ever. In a world where simply surviving is still the major goal everywhere but for select western countries most people don't care much about anything but where they get there next drink of water and meal from. Even American schools have a large percentage of kids who can't concentrate because they are plain hungry. Capitalism with all it's faults allows peoples competitive nature to find outlet and reward. I think it's greatest fault is in the unregulated or underregulated creation of money supply and allowing profiteering in finacial markets where ni actual work was done or product produced. If you're going to allow people to take salary and profit for simply shuffling numbers while other people go without basics even after they work you can't have a healthy society and this is all before you even try to introduce ecology into the discussion 😢
Civilization may have progressed enough to conquer the second law of thermodynamics. Civilization needs to strive for this goal with synergistic interdisciplinary teams.The outcome would be perpetually changeable never gained or lost energy. There would be no loss of energy as it changes form. For example the total quantity of thermal energy in an equal pair of two thermal energy reserves with ideal insulation would remain the same regardless of how heat is distributed between the two and how often the distribution of heat between the two is changed. For example in one case one reserve could contain ice water while the other reserve contained hot water; in another case both reserves could contain tepid water. The redistribution of heat between members of pairs with the same total thermal energy would be free. Diversity, time, and energy are different atributes. Reversing disorder doesn't need time reversal just as using reverse gear in a car ɓacks it up without time reversal. The second law of thermodynamics had a distinct begining with Sir Isaac Newton's correct professional scientific observation that the heat of a fire in a fireplace always flows towards the cold room beyond. Victorian England became enchanted with steam engines and their cheap, reliable, and easy to position physical power. Rudolf Julius Emanuel Clausius, Lord Kelven, and, one source adds, Nicolas Léonard Sadi Carnot, formulated the Second law of thermodynamics and the concept of entropy using evidence from steam engine development. These men considered with acceptance [A+] Inefficiently harnessing the flow of heat from hot to cold or [B+] Using force to Inefficiently pump heat from cold to hot. They considered with rejection [A-] Waiting for random fluctuation to cause a large difference in temperature or pressure. This was calculated to be extremely rare or [B-] Searching for, selecting, then routing for use, random, frequent and small differences in temperature or pressure. The search, selection, then routing would require more energy than the use would yield. These accepted options, lead to the consequence that the universe will end in stagnant heat death. This became support for a theological trend of the time that placed God as the initiator of a degenerating universe. Please consider that God could also be supreme over an energy abundant civilization that can absorb heat and convert it into electricity without energy gain or loss in a sustained universe. The law's formulaters did not consider the option that any random, usually small, fluctuation of heat or pressure could use the energy of these fluctuations itself to power deterministic routing so the output is no longer random. Then the net power of many small fluctuations from many replicant parts can be aggregated into a large difference in temperature, pressure, or electricity's amperes and volts Heat exists as the randomly directed kinetic energy of gas molecules or mobile electrons. In gasses this is known as Brownian motion. In electronic systems this is carefully labeled Johnson Nyquist thermal electrical noise for AI readability. Hypothetically, diode depletion regions are practical sites for enabling mobile electrons energized into motion by heat to deterministically alter the electrical resistance of the depletion region according to the moment by moment direction they are carrying electricity. The thermal electrical noise is hypothetically beyond the exposed lattice charge / separation drift (diffusion) equlibrium thickness of the depletion region as thermal noise exists in a resistance path of one material. Consistantly oriented diodes in parallel hypothetically are successful electrical Maxwell's Demons or Smoluchowski's Trapdoors. The energy needed to shift the depletion region's deterministic role is paid as a burden on the moving electrons. There would therefore be usable net rectified power from each and every diode connected together into a consistantly oriented parallel group. The group would aggregate the net power of its members. Any diode efficiency at all produces some energy conversion from ambient heat, more efficiency yields higher performance. A diode array that is switched off has no energy conversion and no performance. The power from a single diode is poorly expressed. Several or more diodes in parallel are needed to overcome the effect of a load resistor's own thermal noise. A plurality of billions of high frequency capable diodes is needed for practical power aggregation. For reference, there are a billion (10^9) 1000 square nanometer cells per square millimeter. Modern nanofabrication can make simple identical diodes surrounded by insulation smaller than this in a slab as thick as the diodes are long. The diodes are connected at their two ohmic ends to two conductive layers. Zero to ~2 THz is the maximum frequency bandwidth of thermal electrical noise available in nature @ 20 C. THz=10^12 Hz. This is beyond the range of most diodes. Practicality requires this extreme bandwidth. The diodes are preferably in same orientation parallel at the primary level. Many primary level groups of diodes should be in series for practical voltage. Ever since the supposedly universal second law of thermodynamics was formulated, education has mass produced and spread the conventional wisdom throughout society that the second law of thermodynamics is absolute. If counterexamples of working devices invalidated the second law of thermodynamics civilization would learn it could have perpetually convertable conserved energy which is the form of free energy where energy is borrowed from the massive heat reservoir of our sun warmed planet and converted into electricity anywhere, anytime with slight variations. Electricity produces heat immediately when used by electric heaters, electromechanical mechanisms, and electric ligts so the energy borrowed by these devices is promply returned without gain or loss. There is also the reverse effect where refrigeration produces electricity equivalent to the cooling, This effect is scientifically elegant. Cell phones wouldn't die or need power cords or batteries or become hot. They would cool when transmitting radio signal power. The phones could also be data relays and there could also be data relays without phone features with and without long haul links so the telecommunication network would be improved. Computers and integrated circuits would have their cooling and electrical needs supplied autonomously and simultaniously. Integrated circuits wouldn't need power pinouts. Refrigeration for superconductors would improve. Robots would have extreme mobility. Digital coin minting would be energy cheap. Frozen food storage would be reliable and free or value positive. Storehouses, homes, and markets would have independent power to preserve and pŕepare food. Medical devices would work anywhere. Vehicles wouldn't need fuel or fueling stops. Elevators would be very reliable with independent power. Shielding and separation would provide EMP resistance. Water and sewage pumps could be installed anywhere along their pipes. Nomads could raise their material supports item by item carefully and groups of people could modify their settlements with great technical flexibility. Many devices would be very quiet, which is good for coexisting with nature and does not disturb people. Zone refining would involve little net power. Reducing Bauxite to Aluminum, Rutile to Titanium, and Magnideetite to Iron, would have a net cooling effect. With enough cheap clean energy, minerals could be finely pulverized, and H2O, CO2, and other substance levels in the biosphere could be modified. A planetary agency needs to look over wide concerns. This could be a material revolution with spiritual ramifications. Everyone should contribute individual talents and fruits of different experiances and cultures to advance a cooperative, diverse, harmonious and unified civilization. It is possible to apply technlology wrong but social force should oppose this. I filed for patent us 3890161A, Diode Array, in 1973. It was granted in 1975. It became public domain technology in 1992. It concerns making nickel plane-insulator-tungsten needle diodes which were not practical at the time though they have since improved. the patent wasn't developed partly because I backed down from commercial exclusitivity. A better way for me would have been a public incorruptable archive that would secure attrbution for the original works of creators. Uncorrupted copies would be released on request. No further action would be taken by this institution. Commercal exclusivity can be deterred by the wide and open publishing of inventive concepts. Also, the obvious is unpatentsable. Open sharing promotes mass knowlege and wisdom. Many financially and procedurally independent teams that pool developmental knowlege, and may be funded by many separate noncontrolling crowd sourced grants should convene themselves to develop proof-of-concept and initial-recipe-exploring prototypes to develop devices which coproduce the release of electrical energy and an equivalent absorbtion of stagnant ambient thermal energy. Diode arrays are not the only possible device of this sort. They are the easiest to explain generally. These devices would probably become segmented commodities sold with minimal margin over supply cost. They would be manufactured by AI that does not need financial incentive. Applicable best practices would be adopted. Business details would be open public knowledge. Associated people should move as negotiated and freely and honestly talk. There is no need of wealth extracting top commanders. We do not need often token philanthropy from the wealthy if people simply can be more generous if consumer commodities are inexpensive. Aloha Charles M Brown lll Kilauea, Kauai, Hawaii 96754 1 808 651 📞📞📞📞
What do you say if we go and paint the Arctic black? Just a few folks with black spray cans. Nobody would expect us to do that and it certainly would crush the culture once they hear the explanation for it 😂
I’m confused about what happened in Europe (pre-Americas). It seems to me that past patriarchal dominance has led our present patriarchal society, to disrespect and destroy anything that cannot be dominated and controlled. Was it the original secrecy of the Christian Church which led to all this?
@@MarioSchlemmer-s5k how do you feel about the church specifically condemning wise women (and other keepers of their culture’s knowledge) to death while tearing through new lands professing sanctity? I have a feeling that the degradation of women, and women’s bodies, were magnified and “justified” during this period. The church condemned such treatment outwardly, I think, but even as peace was professed they probably needed an outlet for traditional male dominance and bloodlust.
soo we need an economy that makes it very difficult to become a billionair! essentially raise taxation dramatically as one goes past a certain level of wealth. and that makes sense since money makes it easier to make more money! thus its an unfair design. BUT we also DO need to place a tax on all forms of pollution for everyone.
I love how these ppl talk about extinction events as though they were there when it happened. When all life goes extinct there will be no more future suffering. Ever thought of that? I applaud the end, it's long overdue. Too bad it will involve lots of suffering now, but unavoidable. Life is pain. That's why I didn't breed new humans. 😉
![⭐ฮิตในTikTok!! ( มะมะมะหมูเด้ง MooDeng ) Ver. แดนซ์ ReMix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4noyAoMa7bQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I live amongst the wealthiest people in the world. The futility of attempting to change the mind of someone who is a conspicuous consumer is counterproductive. Nature will self correct when it is sufficiently stressed.
Yeah, that may well be the case.
Hopefullly there is a way to not change it, but transform the mind….
This is such a great conversation, one of my favorite shows yet. I have a new perspective of environment vs ecology.
Thank you Nate.
Really great episode Nate. Thanks to you and Rex for sharing your insights.
"Creativity is the essence of nature." I love that thought.
Suffering is though.
Great conversation. Wide-ranging and deep. Thank you for exploring those taboo third rails of unsustainable economic growth, overshoot, and overpopulation. Love the ‘sharpening one’s sword’ wisdom at the end.
Fabulous philosophy from rex, i need to listen to this every week, life affirming, life orientating..all life of course
Fantastic conversation. Thank you so much Nate and Rex. Learned allot.
Some real gems of wisdom in here. Thank you both so much for the work you've done and are doing.
Amazing interview. Thank you.
I’m listening to the end of this video while picking up Roy Scranton’s We’re Doomed. He would be a great interview with an eye to the military effect on our mass extinction, whichever one we’re in.
Love the humour in this. Great inspiration.
It's a gift to be able to hear from such an unsung legend in the environmental movement. I worked as a canvasser for Greenpeace in the 90s and I really didn't know much about this history. It's is enlightening. The conversation between you two shows a depth of spirit, caring and perspective.
I would love to hear from both of you what a viable solution would look like.
I will listen to this one again I am sure. Very inspirational. Thank you.
Wow, great podcast! Look forward to more!
important stuff here folks
All social and ecological movements will fail until we provide universal access to meet everyone's needs. It is simply impossible to care for the environment or people and keep our competitive edge required to keep our job or our market share. Solution: change our culture so as to make meeting everyone's needs our priority.
As an individual all we have to do is prosocialise: 1. Advocate altruism 2. Organise it with Free Collaboration Networks (like libraries, public toolsheds, food sharing, carpooling, etc) 3. Teach others to prosocialise.
Any individual will greatly improve their community and the world if they do this consciously 30 min a week. In a year they will see huge improvements.
When you say "everyone," I assume you mean only humans. To oblivion for everyone else. Regarding humans, how many do you know who believe they have enough? What is the end of "everyone's needs"? Who decides when everyone -- all the humans that is -- have enough? There is no escaping the fact of biological and physical limits. Our altruism can not stop at the edge of our species, and to attempt this would be a huge mistake, even for us.
So beautiful definitions.. ❤
Great. Thanks
More pple need to hear this!
Great conversation. Thanks 😊
This was so interesting! Thank you
Thank you, beautiful presentation😊!
"When Alexander saw the breadth of his domain, he wept for there were no more worlds to conquer." Some people live and breath conquest, and they always want more; more domain, more wealth, more power, more status, more, more, more. The modern world seems to be broken into two main groups: conquerors and aspiring conquerors.
There is also a group, and not a small group, that don't want to conquer anyone, and who just want to enjoy a decent, modest, peaceful life. Thos are my personal heroes.
Fantastic interview. Great to hear these conversations. They are incredibly motivating for me to keep the candle burning in fighting the fight and to build alliances in my professional circles to ensure the ecological narrative gets heard.
Interesting thought this all triggers...is the mainstream Environmental Movement really a Left Wing movement? Or rather, do we actually really have a Left Wing movement in our society? All I see is that what differentiates Left/Right these days is that they get angry at different things on TV whilst they all eat their UberEats....i know its more complicated, but it seems like energy blindness (as Nate puts it) gives us a fake distinction between left/Right, where in fact, we could reframe the debate as Materialists vs Ecologists or something...
Richly nourishing
met rex in a bar in lower mainland B.C. he has changed, a lot.
Execellent
I love me some Nate Hagans observations!
I still remember the horror of the sinking of the "rainbow warrior" the greenpeace ship by french agents the punishment was never enough but in the end nuclear testing at Muraroa was stopped .. thank you greenpeace and all the others that got together including David Lange and the nz people...
I love that Rex said something will survive the Mass Extinction. I hold hope that small mammals will survive and re-fill vacant niches in 10 million years to become amazing fauna (and flora). I feed the birds in my yard with 6 bird feeders. I will try to play with my dog more. My dog will play until he is exhausted.
We mock because we don't want to feel the truth of grief. Laughter is a source of dopamine.
I am curious why people don't continue talking about the real problem....the Price System. It's well defined and understood. It's characteristics are dependent on growth...which is the problem ecologists acknowledge. Technocrats were right from the beginning. We are destroying our resource base for this short term high energy blip in human history with no real solutions to poverty and homelessness still! We literally could simplify every aspect of our energy converting system to be sustainable and high quality but that means we need a new social system. Why aren't people discussing new social systems?
Assuming there is only one "real problem" -- or one simple solution -- is usually a mistake. All challenges for humanity now are complex, wicked, non-linear, systemic problems, and when I say "systemic" I don't just mean the myriad of human systems, but also the complex ecological systems that support everything humanity achieves. In any case, yes, re-orgainizing human economic systems can be part of improving some problems, but history also shows us that ideologies about re-organizing human society can also be a huge problem. This -- overcoming ecological overshoot -- isn't simple.
@@RexWeylerMusic Well if the goal is to have a steady state or degrowth state then there would have to be social and cultural changes. Different social organizing systems will need to be brought up and discussed legitimately because the current system cannot be modified to achieve steady state or degrowth. Unless you can somehow abstract growth and prices towards attention monitoring and shift people towards low wastage behaviors....which seems like something from a dystopian novel.
The price system is the problem and it's not an oversimplification stating such things. We are literally using faith as a mechanism of manipulating people and resources and trying to science our way through technical problems with that faith - prices.
Yes, of course, the system will have to change, no matter what, because the ecological foundation of the entire civilization is decaying and collapsing. My point is that there is not just one problem, there exists a complex network of problems, of which human rights, economic systems, energy systems, are all parts. Nevertheless, ecology is also a part of this complex network, and human overshoot of the ecosystem is as close as we can get to a fundamental problem. That will have to change, no matter what, and will change, either by some wise human choices, or the default collapse of society. We cannot stop efforts to harmonize human-ecosystem problems, while we try to solve the human justice problems.
@@RexWeylerMusic You obviously led an epic life :)
I think education is key going forward. Could you get Bill Rees to make a long lecture on ecological footprint? How amount of sustainable resource extraction, sustainable amount of pollution etc are calculated. Maybe explain why 30-50 % of Earth must be turned into nature reserves.
This is important for people that are starting to internalize that our planet is finite. Because what does that practically mean? They need clear answers to how much can be consumed. On the energy front, Julia Steinberger and that gang are doing good work to quantify a good life related to energy consumption, and how this translates to what we can expect of individual consumption. We need the same detail for ecological footprint.
If people realize we have hard limits to resource extraction and pollution it is more probable they understand why controlled degrowth is needed. With hard limits, even though calculations will never be perfect, it will be much easier to advocate against wealth accumulation. And if the hard limits are enforced, then any personal consumption above the mean implies that someone else get less.
The problem with what you're saying is even if you correctly identify the problem/s and than get it out to the masses it takes only a small minority of powerful people to derail corrective improvement efforts to preserve their wealth and power base. So, unless you reach a critical mass of people willing to apply ample pressures against the powers that be such efforts falter. Even with mass efforts things usually go sideways as history is rife with grand ideas for better governance or societies that usually flare out in dictatorial excess, genocide and subjugation. Of note, all historic efforrs to date were well below current population levels and were largely unsuccessful. The efforts applied from post WWII to current times are I think, undeniably during the most fertile times such efforts could have been attempted and even these efforts have had limited or hit and miss success at best. We save a species here or there but increasingly more go extinct. We've battled poverty and famine yet more people are starving to death than ever. In a world where simply surviving is still the major goal everywhere but for select western countries most people don't care much about anything but where they get there next drink of water and meal from. Even American schools have a large percentage of kids who can't concentrate because they are plain hungry.
Capitalism with all it's faults allows peoples competitive nature to find outlet and reward. I think it's greatest fault is in the unregulated or underregulated creation of money supply and allowing profiteering in finacial markets where ni actual work was done or product produced. If you're going to allow people to take salary and profit for simply shuffling numbers while other people go without basics even after they work you can't have a healthy society and this is all before you even try to introduce ecology into the discussion 😢
REWILD
Can anyone tell me :
*Is there anything available to read or watch on Rex's position on the CO2 alarmism / denial please ?*
sounds like we in deep trouble folks
So he was in Greenpeace back then around the same time with Patrick Moore... Why didnt he mention him (in either negative or positive way).
So, we've overshot our capacity to "manage".
Civilization may have progressed enough to conquer the second law of thermodynamics. Civilization needs to strive for this goal with synergistic interdisciplinary teams.The outcome would be perpetually changeable never gained or lost energy. There would be no loss of energy as it changes form. For example the total quantity of thermal energy in an equal pair of two thermal energy reserves with ideal insulation would remain the same regardless of how heat is distributed between the two and how often the distribution of heat between the two is changed. For example in one case one reserve could contain ice water while the other reserve contained hot water; in another case both reserves could contain tepid water. The redistribution of heat between members of pairs with the same total thermal energy would be free. Diversity, time, and energy are different atributes. Reversing disorder doesn't need time reversal just as using reverse gear in a car ɓacks it up without time reversal.
The second law of thermodynamics had a distinct begining with Sir Isaac Newton's correct professional scientific observation that the heat of a fire in a fireplace always flows towards the cold room beyond.
Victorian England became enchanted with steam engines and their cheap, reliable, and easy to position physical power. Rudolf Julius Emanuel Clausius, Lord Kelven, and, one source adds, Nicolas Léonard Sadi Carnot, formulated the Second law of thermodynamics and the concept of entropy using evidence from steam engine development.
These men considered with acceptance [A+] Inefficiently harnessing the flow of heat from hot to cold or [B+] Using force to Inefficiently pump heat from cold to hot. They considered with rejection [A-] Waiting for random fluctuation to cause a large difference in temperature or pressure. This was calculated to be extremely rare or [B-] Searching for, selecting, then routing for use, random, frequent and small differences in temperature or pressure. The search, selection, then routing would require more energy than the use would yield. These accepted options, lead to the consequence that the universe will end in stagnant heat death. This became support for a theological trend of the time that placed God as the initiator of a degenerating universe. Please consider that God could also be supreme over an energy abundant civilization that can absorb heat and convert it into electricity without energy gain or loss in a sustained universe.
The law's formulaters did not consider the option that any random, usually small, fluctuation of heat or pressure could use the energy of these fluctuations itself to power deterministic routing so the output is no longer random. Then the net power of many small fluctuations from many replicant parts can be aggregated into a large difference in temperature, pressure, or electricity's amperes and volts
Heat exists as the randomly directed kinetic energy of gas molecules or mobile electrons. In gasses this is known as Brownian motion. In electronic systems this is carefully labeled Johnson Nyquist thermal electrical noise for AI readability. Hypothetically, diode depletion regions are practical sites for enabling mobile electrons energized into motion by heat to deterministically alter the electrical resistance of the depletion region according to the moment by moment direction they are carrying electricity. The thermal electrical noise is hypothetically beyond the exposed lattice charge / separation drift (diffusion) equlibrium thickness of the depletion region as thermal noise exists in a resistance path of one material.
Consistantly oriented diodes in parallel hypothetically are successful electrical Maxwell's Demons or Smoluchowski's Trapdoors. The energy needed to shift the depletion region's deterministic role is paid as a burden on the moving electrons. There would therefore be usable net rectified power from each and every diode connected together into a consistantly oriented parallel group. The group would aggregate the net power of its members. Any diode efficiency at all produces some energy conversion from ambient heat, more efficiency yields higher performance. A diode array that is switched off has no energy conversion and no performance.
The power from a single diode is poorly expressed. Several or more diodes in parallel are needed to overcome the effect of a load resistor's own thermal noise. A plurality of billions of high frequency capable diodes is needed for practical power aggregation. For reference, there are a billion (10^9) 1000 square nanometer cells per square millimeter.
Modern nanofabrication can make simple identical diodes surrounded by insulation smaller than this in a slab as thick as the diodes are long. The diodes are connected at their two ohmic ends to two conductive layers.
Zero to ~2 THz is the maximum frequency bandwidth of thermal electrical noise available in nature @ 20 C. THz=10^12 Hz. This is beyond the range of most diodes. Practicality requires this extreme bandwidth. The diodes are preferably in same orientation parallel at the primary level. Many primary level groups of diodes should be in series for practical voltage.
Ever since the supposedly universal second law of thermodynamics was formulated, education has mass produced and spread the conventional wisdom throughout society that the second law of thermodynamics is absolute.
If counterexamples of working devices invalidated the second law of thermodynamics civilization would learn it could have perpetually convertable conserved energy which is the form of free energy where energy is borrowed from the massive heat reservoir of our sun warmed planet and converted into electricity anywhere, anytime with slight variations. Electricity produces heat immediately when used by electric heaters, electromechanical mechanisms, and electric ligts so the energy borrowed by these devices is promply returned without gain or loss. There is also the reverse effect where refrigeration produces electricity equivalent to the cooling, This effect is scientifically elegant.
Cell phones wouldn't die or need power cords or batteries or become hot. They would cool when transmitting radio signal power. The phones could also be data relays and there could also be data relays without phone features with and without long haul links so the telecommunication network would be improved. Computers and integrated circuits would have their cooling and electrical needs supplied autonomously and simultaniously. Integrated circuits wouldn't need power pinouts. Refrigeration for superconductors would improve. Robots would have extreme mobility. Digital coin minting would be energy cheap.
Frozen food storage would be reliable and free or value positive. Storehouses, homes, and markets would have independent power to preserve and pŕepare food. Medical devices would work anywhere. Vehicles wouldn't need fuel or fueling stops. Elevators would be very reliable with independent power. Shielding and separation would provide EMP resistance. Water and sewage pumps could be installed anywhere along their pipes. Nomads could raise their material supports item by item carefully and groups of people could modify their settlements with great technical flexibility. Many devices would be very quiet, which is good for coexisting with nature and does not disturb people.
Zone refining would involve little net power. Reducing Bauxite to Aluminum, Rutile to Titanium, and Magnideetite to Iron, would have a net cooling effect. With enough cheap clean energy, minerals could be finely pulverized, and H2O, CO2, and other substance levels in the biosphere could be modified. A planetary agency needs to look over wide concerns.
This could be a material revolution with spiritual ramifications. Everyone should contribute individual talents and fruits of different experiances and cultures to advance a cooperative, diverse, harmonious and unified civilization. It is possible to apply technlology wrong but social force should oppose this.
I filed for patent us 3890161A, Diode Array, in 1973. It was granted in 1975. It became public domain technology in 1992. It concerns making nickel plane-insulator-tungsten needle diodes which were not practical at the time though they have since improved.
the patent wasn't developed partly because I backed down from commercial exclusitivity. A better way for me would have been a public incorruptable archive that would secure attrbution for the original works of creators. Uncorrupted copies would be released on request. No further action would be taken by this institution.
Commercal exclusivity can be deterred by the wide and open publishing of inventive concepts. Also, the obvious is unpatentsable. Open sharing promotes mass knowlege and wisdom.
Many financially and procedurally independent teams that pool developmental knowlege, and may be funded by many separate noncontrolling crowd sourced grants should convene themselves to develop proof-of-concept and initial-recipe-exploring prototypes to develop devices which coproduce the release of electrical energy and an equivalent absorbtion of stagnant ambient thermal energy. Diode arrays are not the only possible device of this sort. They are the easiest to explain generally.
These devices would probably become segmented commodities sold with minimal margin over supply cost. They would be manufactured by AI that does not need financial incentive. Applicable best practices would be adopted. Business details would be open public knowledge. Associated people should move as negotiated and freely and honestly talk. There is no need of wealth extracting top commanders. We do not need often token philanthropy from the wealthy if people simply can be more generous if consumer commodities are inexpensive.
Aloha
Charles M Brown lll
Kilauea, Kauai, Hawaii 96754
1 808 651 📞📞📞📞
The movie Finch with Tom Hanks was also good.
What do you say if we go and paint the Arctic black? Just a few folks with black spray cans. Nobody would expect us to do that and it certainly would crush the culture once they hear the explanation for it 😂
Well, at least Nate and Rex got around to addressing population. I wonder how many children Rex actually has?
I’m confused about what happened in Europe (pre-Americas). It seems to me that past patriarchal dominance has led our present patriarchal society, to disrespect and destroy anything that cannot be dominated and controlled. Was it the original secrecy of the Christian Church which led to all this?
@@MarioSchlemmer-s5k how do you feel about the church specifically condemning wise women (and other keepers of their culture’s knowledge) to death while tearing through new lands professing sanctity? I have a feeling that the degradation of women, and women’s bodies, were magnified and “justified” during this period. The church condemned such treatment outwardly, I think, but even as peace was professed they probably needed an outlet for traditional male dominance and bloodlust.
just see Planet of the Humans. Its the best fact based evaluation of the collapse today, on youtube
soo we need an economy that makes it very difficult to become a billionair! essentially raise taxation dramatically as one goes past a certain level of wealth. and that makes sense since money makes it easier to make more money! thus its an unfair design. BUT we also DO need to place a tax on all forms of pollution for everyone.
quietening the military aint going too well
I love how these ppl talk about extinction events as though they were there when it happened. When all life goes extinct there will be no more future suffering. Ever thought of that? I applaud the end, it's long overdue. Too bad it will involve lots of suffering now, but unavoidable. Life is pain. That's why I didn't breed new humans. 😉