Undiscovered technology that would have changed the world

[elman46]

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.

What do you call "without damage"? a huge debt, and people manipulated as not possible to inoculate themselves with a product just out of a lab, when normally it takes years to do, all this certainly, with consequences of very long side effects term whereas there are already some which are declared every day.
Well I know this is not the subject I started, will you tell me, but a healthy human using only energy that does not pollute, his health can only be better to fight against viruses or bacteria when they show up, if their immune systems are in good condition.

[elman46]

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.

You know the proverb never 2 without 3, go see in 2009 how the H1N1 crisis happened and compare with what is happening right now with Covid19, it's much worse now and yet the media talked about it in 2009 describing point by point the deception, the vaccination which at that time had not worked, whereas the type of vaccine was classic, with an inactivated virus, and yet it has just happened again but this time with a brand new vaccine, out of labs, before, theoretically to see it available for sale within 5 years and again, if its effectiveness is proven and its mild side effects, which for once, this one, the messenger RNA, is far from the case.
But again, this is not the subject that I launched, to deepen the thing.

[sicetaitsimple]

The guy who repeats over and over "this is not the topic I started", but who produces 5 lines with each post to talk about vaccines....
Should know....

[Obamot]

If you had followed the fact that: VIRUS = ECOSYSTEM! Talking about it in a thread on energy is far from out of place!

See the Blast video on the incompatibility between democracy and neoliberalism.

There is incompatibility because the narrative around “country ratings” on the capital and sovereign debt markets, acting as financial pressures imposed by neoliberalism, and which leads de facto to a form of constraint exerted on political programs, and in particular in this way, confiscates de facto democracy in the prospects of its accomplishment, due to the very conditions imposed.

[elman46]

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...!

No, especially not, in 1775 the Academy of Sciences made it clear that such a thing could not exist and even banned the word perpetual except for the secretary. .
I don't know if flying was good too specify or go to the moon or even go and put things on mars to check if we can fly, or approach the sun and still try to deflect an asteroid and many other things .

[Obamot]

Sorry if you're not ready then, because such a power source does exist (relative to v/1st post)

This is thermodynamic solar.

https://www.ademe.fr/expertises/energie ... odynamique

[Ahmed]

Thermodynamic solar remains a set of devices complex enough to be out of everyone's reach, so it does not correspond exactly to the initial statement...

[Obamot]

Not necessarily... It's just that no industrialist has yet been interested in it (well, until then, in the 2nd video, it starts) Moreover, the question is badly posed, the reasoning is to start from the idea of ​​an “energy mix”.

And they are getting smaller and smaller (and the mastery of optimal layouts is progressing)

Even smaller:

[Ahmed]

It's still quite a mess, very dependent on lots of technologies, not very user-friendly, in the sense ofIlyich...

[Obamot]

Only the “ORC” module which converts heat into electricity requires a “heavy” industrial process. Looking at the images, the rest, the parabolas, are quite conventional.

But above all, I was waiting for you to tell us that it would be better first to get out of the dilemma of debt and the current paradigm based on abstract values, to move towards a more virtuous society....?

And we would fall back on a political problem (as with Desertec). It makes you pessimistic.