Do Humans Have What it Takes to Thrive in the Universe
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 лип 2024
- May 25, 2022
Dr. Sandra Faber (University of California, Santa Cruz)
Do Humans Have What it Takes to Thrive in this Universe?
In this thought-provoking talk, cosmologist (and National Medal of Science winner) Dr. Sandra Faber takes a look at our cosmic origins, the future of the Earth as a habitable planet, and what humans need to do to thrive in the long-term future. She draws some sobering conclusions from the laws of physics and the sustainability of our present-day use of energy and resources. And she provides some clear guidelines on what we will need to do, as a species, to continue living on Earth for as long as our durable planet can provide an inviting home for us. - Наука та технологія
That was a very interesting talk, not what I expected, especially the part about the use of non renewable resources.
The analysis of electric vehicles needs to be reexamined, they are rechargeable.
The next Ice Age will solve a lot of problems.
Until then I refer you to Destertec, Stanfords new wind map, and the power of ocean currents. In 1900 a person could ride a trolley from Boston to Chicago. Please examine the extensive railroad system we once had in the USA in 1900. Everyday i read about advances in solar power, batteries, and fusion. Plans are underway to decentralize the power utility system which will increase its efficiency by a factor of 2 or 3. We currently waste a 30 or 40% of the power we produce. What I do agree with is that there have been approx 800 generations of humankind and 650 of those generations were spent in a cave. We do need to find away to settle conflicts between ourselves by a method other than bashing one another with a rock (or nuclear bomb) to the head.
Yes, we do have what it takes to thrive in the universe, because we already do that. We are all in the universe right now.
I would like to point out that even socialism aspires to economic growth, so do not blame that on capitalism. Whenever humans build something, it is normally so that they have more of something. Eventually the cost of maintaining what you have will consume all your resources and so no further growth is possible unless you can innovate by replacing the old with something new which is more productive. Innovation is easier in the capitalist system because capitalism requires a free market which encourages free thinking.
Great talk and, as always, very interesting topics discussed. Some comments mention opposition to the presenter's ideas about our economy, or that astronomy has nothing to do with economy, but I think that astronomy can offer us a great and wise perspective into the long-term evolution of all aspects of humanity. It would be a waste not to even consider what lessons astronomy has to offer us.
Where ever you go all you hear is them singing the hymns in their cathedral.
:-)
Why do we need to be important...live long enuff and you will realize WE dnt matter
Because humans are egocentric.
Darn. I was hoping to hear a lecture on humans and space travel. Instead on got a bunch of I know everything, liberal, tripe. Then I hear, oh, maybe I don't know everything. Give me 100 million and I'll put a bunch of other people who don't know and we'll figure it all out for ya.
Capitalism is a cult.
Listening to this nonsense actually made me stupider
Worst lectures in this series this far.
She talking about a profound evolutionary process of a planet full of life and a technological civilization, together with one of the greatest challenges facing us so far. It might not be sparkling and glittering with pictures of nebulea, but it's hugely important to talk about.
@@k.t.k.9781 Still one of the worst in my opinion.
@@k.t.k.9781 No, she was making a poorly reasoned criticism of private property and a thinly veiled advocacy for socialism. Humanity is on the precipice of great challenge and opportunity. Reviving the murderous and devastating ideologies of the 20th century is not a good plan.
@@DG-mk7kd Speaking of murderous and devastating ideologies. I would put capitalism and imperialism right at the top. Conquistadors included. Oh, I forgot, we brought them the benefits of clergy.
@@michaelandrewbeer If the property rights (capitalism) of the aboriginal populations had been respected the european immigration to the new world would have been very different. If the property rights of africans had been respected, their labor would not have been forcefully socialized for the good of the community (slavery)
I think is is very pretentious for an Astronomy event to have an extensive criticism of Capitalism. She was wrong. Capitalism is human nature. It is not a system to install or prevent. Santa Cruz is filled with small businesses that act in Capitalism. They know how it works.
A University Professor is several steps removed from things which are produced that anyone wants. I like these lectures, but I believe very few would attend if they had to buy a ticket.
She might stick to what she knows, which is to interact with other academics. This can come up with interesting ideas. They might not have anything to do with reality. The stores on Pacific Avenue struggle with the reality of what people want and will pay for. Academics are removed from this reality.
I regularly attend your Astronomy lectures. I don't accept your criticism what you know little about. Try directly earning your living by serving those directly who pay you. That would gain you an understanding of Capitalism. Until then I'll appreciate you keeping your sharing to a field you might know something about.
I'll gladly listen to an Astronomer tell us about the Stars. I don't want their opinion of Agriculture or any other topic they knows nothing about. This lectures content on Capitalism was grossly incorrect. It shows little understanding of human behavior in the filed of actual economic activity. People don't act the way you suggest. Attempts to alter human to a more "Socially Responsible" way end badly.
There's a real "shut up and dribble" energy in your comment. Try being more open-minded and understand that scientists are educated in areas beyond their specialized disciplines. A major recommendation of the speaker was that we would benefit from more diversity of thought and interdisciplinary discussions when addressing our shared challenges... and yet, here you are, prescribing that this brilliant individual "stay in her lane." Not at all helpful.
@@graceb5513 This particular scientist should get out of her lane and study some history, particularly the myriad anti-capitalist projects of the past couple centuries. It is not coincidence that the most productive and efficient technologies have been developed in capitalist economies; while the most devastating environmental and social tragedies have been enacted under the banner of anti-capitalism
@@graceb5513 I came for the Stars not the environment. If I go to a music concert and they want to stop that partway and show us a TV news report on Sports I'd say it was not what I went there for.
I welcome all opinions. I don't welcome a "We know better" speech. We all have an opinion. Some are less informed and that is fine.
She had a specific agenda which I feel did not reflect human nature. That is my opinion in response to hers.
@@DG-mk7kd I agree.
@@DG-mk7kd It seems to me the most successful "system" has been during the ice age. To call that capitalism is ludicrous. All anthropology shows that cooperation is as widespread as competition. Some of these writers conflate capitalism, competition, and greed and then shrug and call it human nature. Rubbish. We live in a country with advanced capitalism and people are starving and the economy needs a constant state of war to survive. This is a successful system? if you check the various "happiness" surveys, the Scandinavian countries with their social programs are always at the top. The U.S. is somewhere in the middle. It took hundreds of years to go from feudalism to mercantilism to capitalism to our present state and included stealing the resources of half the world. Why shouldn't it take hundreds of years to develop a viable alternative?
The presenter makes fundamental errors.
No system other than capitalism has shown long term stability. Pre-capitalism relied upon high infant mortality and frightening levels of disease and violence for a quasi stable equilibrium, and socialism inevitably collapses into horrifying economic, environmental, and social breakdown.
The presenter also assumes that technology cannot solve the current crop of problems which is a more flawed than the assumption that such problems can be solved. With current levels of superconductor, nuclear, and automation humanity could reduce orbital launch costs to insignificance and from that steadily move to colonize the solar system. With reasonable improvements to these technologies the task becomes simple. For a colonized solar system, K2, the most intractable problems of today become trivial concerns.
Capitalism has only existed for a few hundred years at this point, and grew parasitically with technology rather than driving it, destroying millions of lives in the process. If you're looking for long term stability, look elsewhere. Humans cooperated successfully much, much longer, and it is our modern lack of it which makes life miserable today. Capitalism is insanely short sighted; being utterly unconcerned with any future beyond the next election or quarterly earnings report. It has survived this long only because it is the favored economic system of our most successful psychopaths. They currently drive us into the incipient global extinction event known as the Anthropocene, all in pursuit of greater numbers of little green pieces of paper with imaginary value.
Capitalism is not a long term viable system. It is a recent cult of greed and delusion. If all of humanity is a horse, then capitalists are ticks who have sucked so much blood that they think they're cowboys and should choose the horse's direction and fate.