Undiscovered technology that would have changed the world

[Rajqawee]

At the question
what place should man have in his environment?
he must have his place, see occupy the place where no being can live permanently and must respect the beings around him, that's why he has a brain to be able to adapt

To what extent human societies must modify their environment (in the physical sense)
Clean energy allows us not to put ourselves in danger and also those around us, I am thinking of animals, and I forgot on the subject that I launched, that this energy would be usable here on earth and elsewhere, because having a infinite energy (sustainable), interstellar travel becomes possible to conquer other spaces, and if already occupied, go where the human can make his hole without disturbing anyone.

All of this seems logical to me.

Your two paragraphs are mutually exclusive. You cannot have infinite energy, use it (therefore, almost infinitely too) without modifying the environment in an extreme way.

[Christophe]

Given the level of corruption* and stupidity in our current society, this will never happen...

* well proven by the covid crisis…

[humus]

The destruction of the World in the current context is not a possibility: it is in progress... Wisdom would not change anything within a framework which does not lend itself to it.
Finding another mode of social organization remains very difficult, because of the conditions that result from the current situation, such as demography, for example...
The covid parenthesis showed nothing at all except what I described in the thread "Understanding the world we live in?"...
It would be interesting to know the position of Elman46 on the subject...

Well then I would have had to write 1) and 2) for people to understand that I wrote 2 small paragraphs separate.
The destruction is in progress but its level is still bearable by the biotope. The proof we are still there.

"Wisdom" is obviously in a different context than the current one, hence my separate paragraphs.

"The covid parenthesis didn't show anything at all" well, the shutdown of the economy is possible without damage, thanks to monetary infusions.
Admittedly, this solves nothing on the merits, but it shows that the intangibles of the past (growth, debt) can be upset when humans take over.
See the Blast video on the incompatibility between democracy and neoliberalism.

[humus]

Using any form of energy means transforming the environment. Not in the "biological environment" sense, in the physical sense.
This is, in fact, the definition:
"In physics, energy is a quantity that measures the capacity of a system to modify a state, to produce work resulting in movement, electromagnetic radiation or heat."

Absolutely.
There is a difference between not being limited in the amount of energy and using all the energy potentially available like a nag.
Currently the capitalist system, growing by nature, cultivates greed and the feeling of precariousness in the employee.
If capitalism has unlimited energy at its disposal, it will lead to disaster.
except to deport the problem in space and on other planets / asteroids resources.

Personally, I prefer to rely on an awareness of humanity (which is underway at the grassroots level), concerning the fragility of ecosystems, and concerning the absurdity of growing to grow.
Nothing obliges us to use an energy potential to its maximum, except the lack of intelligence or a bad economic system, which amounts to the same thing.

[Ahmed]

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Humus, because there was a certain ambiguity in your message... That we are still there (but in a psychically already transformed form) proves nothing, except that this destruction is exercised preferentially (but not exclusively) against non-beings. humans.
I do not doubt that it is the human who holds the controls, only that he is only the executor of a scenario independent of his conscious will. A proof of this is precisely that the "intangibles of the past" have only been shaken up in appearance, since it was only to preserve the essential: to avoid mass mortality which would have called into question the fundamentals of the economy. .

I fear that "awareness", although necessary, is completely insufficient to counter a blind mechanism to which we are all subject, whether we are for or against...

[humus]

Is this a joke?

Not at all

The tens of billions injected into support for businesses, their employees, businesses, the self-employed affected in their activity, have you forgotten them?
"it without clashes", it is the result of "whatever the cost".

Negligible amount that could have been saved

I am self-employed, I had no drop in activity, yet I received a (low) reimbursement of charges during the first confinement...will understand.

[humus]

if not that this destruction is exercised preferentially against non-human beings.

I heard it that way.
Non-human beings on whom our life depends.
What I mean is that if we are still here strumming, there are still enough non-human beings to ensure our survival.
The world biotope takes quite a blow, 6th mass extinction, but it still holds the shock.

I do not doubt that it is the human who holds the controls, only that he is only the executor of a scenario independent of his conscious will. A proof of this is precisely that the "intangibles of the past" have only been shaken up in appearance, since it was only to preserve the essential: to avoid mass mortality which would have called into question the fundamentals of the economy. .

Absolutely, but the proof is that what was taboo yesterday is no longer. It's going to be hard to defend austerity now, hard to defend the inequality machine.

I fear that "awareness", although necessary, is completely insufficient to counter a blind mechanism to which we are all subject, whether we are for or against...

Glass half full or glass half empty?
No one can know, it depends on us, on what we think and on our actions that flow from our thinking.
It is what we are in the present that writes our future.
That's why I abhor defeatist speeches, they etch a rotten future.

[sicetaitsimple]

The tens of billions injected into support for businesses, their employees, businesses, the self-employed affected in their activity, have you forgotten them?
"it without clashes", it is the result of "whatever the cost".

Negligible amount that could have been saved

I am self-employed, I had no drop in activity, yet I received a (low) reimbursement of charges during the first confinement...will understand.

"Negligible quantity", you're right....
If you haven't had any downtime, good for you. But there are many who have had very sharp declines in activity, or even reduced activity to zero in the so-called "non-essential" sectors over long periods of time. Do not generalize your personal case.

[elman46]

At the question
what place should man have in his environment?
he must have his place, see occupy the place where no being can live permanently and must respect the beings around him, that's why he has a brain to be able to adapt

To what extent human societies must modify their environment (in the physical sense)
Clean energy allows us not to put ourselves in danger and also those around us, I am thinking of animals, and I forgot on the subject that I launched, that this energy would be usable here on earth and elsewhere, because having a infinite energy (sustainable), interstellar travel becomes possible to conquer other spaces, and if already occupied, go where the human can make his hole without disturbing anyone.

All of this seems logical to me.

Your two paragraphs are mutually exclusive. You cannot have infinite energy, use it (therefore, almost infinitely too) without modifying the environment in an extreme way.

You're right, that's why I made it clear that once installed on earth and having modified the environment, but for good, energy used without pollution with its use, I specify, unless for you use fossil fuels fine, it's time in the meantime for humans to go and settle elsewhere, I would add something else, but that should be the subject of another questioning with another subject .

[Obamot]

Hello people
If at all times it is authorized to do so here, here is the question that I have been asking myself for some time and I expect answers from you, if you will, here is the question.
"What would become of our society, if suddenly a major invention by its simplicity of application, allowing the production of electricity permanently, abundant, non-polluting and "free" (free, apart from the fact of the purchase of the machine producing it and its maintenance) came to dethrone coal, oil and nuclear power, wind and solar power and hydraulics, all these sources of energy, being more or less financed by banks, on the scale planetary?"
I remind you once again, this question having more to do with the economic or social impact and not with the possibility or not of the existence of such a technology.
Please be broad-minded,I await your answers.

Would your broad-mindedness be ready to accept that it exists (the day when...?)

And welcome here...!