Edge: The Need for Heretics
Locked
 
Administrator
|
This from the Edge: Freeman Dyson talking about the need for heretics
in science: <http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge219.html#dysonf> Interestingly enough, his first shot is at global warming! But the real story is that he want's *young* heretics, not old ones. Plenty of them and they are ignored. Feel fee to volunteer to be either kind. -- Owen |
|
|
Folks,
Well, it's fascinating to watch scientists like Dyson swerve back and forth between 'entertainer' and 'searcher' all the time. What a waste. I guess it's human even if (pardon the rhyme) confunz'n. It's been a very unusually beautiful summer so far in New York this year, hot, clear and dry with everyone out and about and enjoying themselves (well except for the 3" rain in an hour at 7AM one day last week that completely drowned the poor subway system) What Dyson, and most others don't know yet is the new evidence, a simple thing really, turning a standard economic measure upside down. The embodied energy of $1 is about 8000btu's*, consistently in all the economies. That means that as an economic product, dollars are a direct measure of energy use. That simply means that growth in dollars is a direct measure of exponentially growing impacts of exploiting the earth for energy, in nearly direct constant proportion. Of the three main energy sources, fossil, nuclear, and competition for land, which would you recommend for providing exponential increases of energy forever, without consequences? Think about it. That's different than the story we've been hearing from the masters of magic all these years, as we pulled the whole construction of our civilization out of a magic hole in the ground. It turns out the world is what it appears to be, a small blue ball, with a growth compulsion that *all* the great promoters promised would be free, forever, and that turns out to be wrong. *- http://www.synapse9.com/design/dollarshadow.htm see DOE & other ref's Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.???? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 680 Ft. Washington Ave NY NY 10040 tel: 212-795-4844 e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com explorations: www.synapse9.com > -----Original Message----- > From: friam-bounces at redfish.com > [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore > Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 12:19 PM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: [FRIAM] Edge: The Need for Heretics > > > This from the Edge: Freeman Dyson talking about the need for > heretics > in science: > <http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge219> .html#dysonf> > > > Interestingly enough, his first shot is at > global warming! > > But the real story is that he want's *young* heretics, not > old ones. > Plenty of them and they are ignored. Feel fee to volunteer to be > either kind. > > -- Owen > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > |
|
Administrator
|
On Aug 11, 2007, at 8:17 PM, Phil Henshaw wrote:
> ... > Of the three main energy sources, fossil, nuclear, and competition for > land, which would you recommend for providing exponential increases of > energy forever, without consequences? I'm a (modified) nuke kinda guy. By modified, I mean the new sub-critical nuclear reactors which use accelerator technologies to create a dual energy reactor. The safety is obvious: if either device fails, the total system simply goes sub- critical. But the wonderful gain is that they use "spent" reactor wastes to considerably increase their yield, thus emptying the caverns full of nuclear waste. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf35.html http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/1999/venneri.htm Heck, you can even get a book on it on amazon! http://tinyurl.com/25nztp But the trouble is that most folks are terrified of the word Nuclear. (George can't even say it!) But its possibly the most useful of our current high tech energy systems. And the US could be a technology leader in the field if we'd just try. But I think Italy is getting their first, followed by France. Naturally there needs to be a LOT of diversity in energy production. But sub critical systems offer a lot if we can rid ourselves of the political correct disease. -- Owen |
|
|
Yea,... The"re better, but have you juit shot in the dark again or used the equation??
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 21:33:24 To:The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Edge: The Need for Heretics On Aug 11, 2007, at 8:17 PM, Phil Henshaw wrote: > ... > Of the three main energy sources, fossil, nuclear, and competition for > land, which would you recommend for providing exponential increases of > energy forever, without consequences? I'm a (modified) nuke kinda guy. By modified, I mean the new sub-critical nuclear reactors which use accelerator technologies to create a dual energy reactor. The safety is obvious: if either device fails, the total system simply goes sub- critical. But the wonderful gain is that they use "spent" reactor wastes to considerably increase their yield, thus emptying the caverns full of nuclear waste. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf35.html http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/1999/venneri.htm Heck, you can even get a book on it on amazon! http://tinyurl.com/25nztp But the trouble is that most folks are terrified of the word Nuclear. (George can't even say it!) But its possibly the most useful of our current high tech energy systems. And the US could be a technology leader in the field if we'd just try. But I think Italy is getting their first, followed by France. Naturally there needs to be a LOT of diversity in energy production. But sub critical systems offer a lot if we can rid ourselves of the political correct disease. -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org |
|
|
In reply to this post by Owen Densmore
Owen,
To revise my reply on little nukes, saying they are better than the others, but asking if you used 'the forumula'. I might mention what formula I meant. The formula is $1=8000btu. This is a curious complex system fact of enormous significance. What it means, and what I meant to allude to with my quip, was that because $'s measure physical things and their physical impacts, finding a new niche resource does not solve the problem of multiplying impacts all over. Say a little nuke plant has a little less waste. If you increase them exponentially you'll still have exponentially increasing waste. You'll also have exponentially increasing impacts of all the uses that people put the energy produced to. If you look at the whole impact of things you get a better picture than just considering the parts. That's the intent of my $shadow measure, which I again ref below. Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.???? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 680 Ft. Washington Ave NY NY 10040 tel: 212-795-4844 e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com explorations: www.synapse9.com reposted.. The embodied energy of $1 is about 8000btu's*, consistently in all the economies. That means that as an economic product, dollars are a direct measure of energy use. That simply means that growth in dollars is a direct measure of exponentially growing impacts of exploiting the earth for energy, in nearly direct constant proportion. Of the three main energy sources, fossil, nuclear, and competition for land, which would you recommend for providing exponential increases of energy forever, without consequences? Think about it. That's different than the story we've been hearing from the masters of magic all these years, as we pulled the whole construction of our civilization out of a magic hole in the ground. It turns out the world is what it appears to be, a small blue ball, with a growth compulsion that *all* the great promoters promised would be free, forever, and that turns out to be wrong. *- http://www.synapse9.com/design/dollarshadow.htm see DOE & other ref's > -----Original Message----- > From: friam-bounces at redfish.com > [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore > Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 11:33 PM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Edge: The Need for Heretics > > > On Aug 11, 2007, at 8:17 PM, Phil Henshaw wrote: > > > ... > > Of the three main energy sources, fossil, nuclear, and > competition for > > land, which would you recommend for providing exponential > increases of > > energy forever, without consequences? > > I'm a (modified) nuke kinda guy. > > By modified, I mean the new sub-critical nuclear reactors which use > accelerator technologies to create a dual energy reactor. > The safety > is obvious: if either device fails, the total system simply goes sub- > critical. But the wonderful gain is that they use "spent" reactor > wastes to considerably increase their yield, thus emptying the > caverns full of nuclear waste. > http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf35.html > http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/1999/venneri.htm > Heck, you can even get a book on it on amazon! > http://tinyurl.com/25nztp > > But the trouble is that most folks are terrified of the word > Nuclear. (George can't even say it!) But its possibly the most > useful of our current high tech energy systems. And the US could be > a technology leader in the field if we'd just try. But I > think Italy > is getting their first, followed by France. > > Naturally there needs to be a LOT of diversity in energy > production. > But sub critical systems offer a lot if we can rid ourselves of the > political correct disease. > > -- Owen > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Owen Densmore
Owen, I read the Freeman Dyson item you pointed out. What impressed me most
was how much we agreed. Waw! Hywel -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 9:19 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: [FRIAM] Edge: The Need for Heretics This from the Edge: Freeman Dyson talking about the need for heretics in science: <http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge219.html#dysonf> Interestingly enough, his first shot is at global warming! But the real story is that he want's *young* heretics, not old ones. Plenty of them and they are ignored. Feel fee to volunteer to be either kind. -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |