Free energy memory

[pedrodelavega]

The birth rate drops with standard of living and education.

Do you mean the birth rate drops with the increase in the standard of living and education?

[Ahmed]

Sen-no-sen, thank you for this excellent synthesis!
I am not as severe as you with regard to the work provided by this student: it is already well above the usual platitudes and her analysis of the logics at work is well understood, at least up to a certain point. Indeed, as soon as the author moves away from an honest compilation of "good authors" concerning the historical aspect and that he tries his hand at foresight, he goes completely astray because he does not succeed in doing so. get out of a too narrow view of the mechanisms involved.
Indeed, if the economy could get rid of an expensive factor of production (and it will succeed, in one form or another, if it has the time ...), it is not the fact to make obsolete whole sectors of the energy sector, certainly painful for the big majors of the sector, which would dissuade the whole of the actors concerned to take the step!
As you rightly point out (and I do not fail to do it too when the opportunity arises), it is quite revealing that our societies fear so much a possible "energy crisis", when the real problem is, since the beginning of the industrial coal revolution, the excessive availability of energy and the non-limiting productive factor that it represents.
The author is content to assert that a "free, infinite and gratuitous" energy would immediately emancipate men, but does not add anything to this idealistic vision: he confines himself to opposing it to the current situation, hoping that 'a reversal of means (?) would lead to a reversal of goals ...

Janic, you write:

in the context of a sober and efficient development ... That too is utopia

Anything that does not exist can be accused of utopia, in this case it is the only realistic option, although unlikely ...

[eclectron]

The birth rate drops with standard of living and education.

Do you mean the birth rate drops with the increase in the standard of living and education?

Won!
Too much simplicity is not good either, fortunately the brain fills the holes!

The birth rate decreases with the increase of the standard of living and the birth rate decreases with the increase of the level of education, to be more precise.

[Ahmed]

Eclectron, you write:

Oil is much more convenient to mine and use than coal.

What the author explains is the logic of switching from one energy to another: at this precise moment, the new fuel is no more practical to use than the old one since the infrastructure and the equipment are not are not in place; moreover, this energy factor is not the only constraint for manufacturers and that of the cost of labor is more impactful. Our time, by ideology, levels with enthusiasm these aspects because it wants to bring everything back to technical questions which would be, in essence, supposed "neutral". Carefully study the history of these periods and you will realize that things are more complex than what we are led to believe.

Further:

It's the intelligence of the use we make of energy that is the problem.

Certainly! In the first analysis you are right, however the deep reason of this incapacity (which concerns first, notes the good, the most educated nations!) Is to put in relation with the determinisms which animate us and not a lack of wisdom or of conscience, completely inadequate moral categories as explanatory factors.

[eclectron]

Certainly! In first analysis you are right,

neither in the first analysis nor in the last, I am right.
it is a fact pure and hard, there is nothing to add, except to look for reasons to be released from any responsibility of the fact.

Of course we can continue to take Man for an irresponsible being and consider that putting him in the hands of the power of abundant energy, makes him a destructive being.
And therefore, in order to avoid destruction, you have to turn off the energy tap.

It is simply an infantilizing position towards Man that leads to the status quo.
"Man, you are stupid, and you will stay. "
This is not an exit from the top.
It's a step backwards (yes, you are several and not just a little! ) preach: 1850, horse, paddlewheel ... solar bonus.

The education of consciences is the guarantee of a more interesting life and therefore a guarantee of a better life.
Energy and the destruction of the environment are only revelators of our ignorance.
It is on the ignorance and on oneself that one must advance, not by turning off the tap to return to 1850 with 5 Md of human beings in more than at that time.

[Janic]

Janic, you write:

as part of a sober and efficient development ...

That's also utopia

Anything that does not exist can be accused of utopia, in this case it is the only realistic option, although unlikely ...

Of course without utopia (so not yet realized) the world would not evolve. Free energy by being part of it obviously! (Although I do not like this free term, nor does it evolve by the way, it is so badly used.)

is to be put in relation with the determinisms that animate us and not a lack of wisdom or consciousness, moral categories completely inadequate as explanatory factors.

Rather not only explanatory! The release of the usual cultural moral constraints, opened a limitless path that refers to antiquities which more or less (even badly) limited this flight.
The perceptible return to the religious (by the pendulum effect), even with all its faults and risks of overflow as daesh now, shows that when these notions of wisdom and conscience are largely lacking, they lead the decision-makers towards indecision and the excess of bad decisions precisely.

Eclectron hello too

The birth rate drops with the increase of the standard of living and the birth rate decreases with the increase of the level of education, to be more precise

Both are usually (or mostly would be more accurate), related. The end of the birth restriction policy in China has not revived the production of children, parents (usually in urban areas) preferring to favor the existing child than to share the financial means acquired. This poses a big problem for old people who may end up without subsistence.

[Ahmed]

Eclectron,you write:

it is a hard fact, there is nothing to add ...

A fact does not mean anything in itself, it must necessarily be placed in its context and we must explain how it is significant or not. Fans of "pragmatism" are only supporters of conservatism ...

Further:

Of course we can continue to take Man for an irresponsible being and consider that putting him in the hands of the power of abundant energy, makes him a destructive being.
And therefore, in order to avoid destruction, you have to turn off the energy tap.

Where do you get this deduction? I wrote that access to an infinite source of energy would only amplify current problems and, contrary to what you think, I am convinced that only a lucid will to resist determinism represents the right way out but we are far from it!

And even:

It's a step backwards (yes, you are several and not just a little! ) preach: 1850, horse, paddlewheel ... solar bonus.

You forget the cave and the candle, in your anthology!

[sen-no-sen]

It is important to repeat, and to repeat again that it is too full of energy, and not are lack that constitutes a danger for the biosphere, and not the opposite !!!

Absolutely not, and it's important to repeat it and repeat it!
It's the intelligence of the use we make of energy that is the problem.
In fact it is rather the lack of intelligence of our actions and the ignorance of their consequences which is problematic.

Only in a world populated by teddy bears!

Intelligence is directly correlated to energy dissipation.

Intelligence is the ability of an entity to solve problems in order to colonize a future and maximize the dissipation of energy.
Beware then, the intelligence is born in the duality, do not wait for such an entity to put an end to it.

Note that ecological problems are directly or indirectly attributable to industrialized countries, populated by "the greatest brains in the world".
Most primitive peoples simply do not have a vocabulary for "pollution"*.


Intelligence tends naturally (because of the second principle of the thermo) towards the exponential increase of its capacities.
This one is thus invariably translated by a transformation of its environment.
From an objective point of view, we should not even talk about pollution, but rather evolution of our environment**.

To think that more intelligence would solve the problems seems to me still only a simplistic remark ... intelligence tends to superimpose problems to problems (Lucifer's principle) ... it is indeed what is happening now ...

This is a problem of education and awareness of our actions.

You speak rightly of conscience of our actions.
It is indeed towards consciousness that we must turn.
Outside a "conscious" human society would not open yet another pandora's box knowing that this one would certainly be fatal."Genius sometimes consists of knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle

The abundance of energy (clean) is not a problem in itself, on the contrary would be rather a problem in less.

Energy abundance is everywhere, as I mentioned everything is free in nature and in abundance.
The problem does not lie in the abundance in itself but in the exploitation of this abundance, nuance!
Off the on-unit defenders believe that it would be possible to exploit energy at zero cost or almost,it's a trickery.



* It is necessary to differentiate the individual intelligence from the collective intelligence, thus the majority of the primitive peoples are of an individual way endowed with an intelligence often superior to the average city-dwellers (because of their multidisciplinary capacities), on the contrary the intelligence of group that they develop (the primitive society) is much weaker than at home, which explains for example that some of them is managed to cross the ages without disappearing.

** The term pollution is actually very misleading because from a point of view meta-historical we do not pollute our environment, we transform it unconsciously.
This transformation aims to bring about the necessary retro-actions for our own transformation in the context of an amplifying and totalizing technological evolution ...

[eclectron]

Eclectron,you write:

it is a hard fact, there is nothing to add ...

A fact does not mean anything in itself, it must necessarily be placed in its context and we must explain how it is significant or not. Fans of "pragmatism" are only supporters of conservatism ...

The fact is that the energy is present in abundance: sun, matter (E = mC²), fluctuation of the vacuum or other source not known to date. It is not the energy that is missing on Earth and in the universe.
energy is not the first problem since it is present whether man is there or not.
Another fact, the man is present on Earth and uses energy for his needs of comfort of life.
And lastly, We have problems that we ask ourselves, for lack of intelligence, or clairvoyance as you want, facing the use of energy.
The problem is the man and his little head and not the energy.
FYI, I am not a defender of pragmatism as you understand it, which leads to cynicism, I would be rather idealistic, (who seeks the ideal).

Where do you get this deduction?

of the :

.. I am convinced that only a lucid desire to resist determinism represents the right way out

If this is not the case, specify what you mean by "resist determinisms".

[Ahmed]

On the first point, obviously the abundance of energy is a problem only because men are guided by unfortunate determinisms: we agree on this point!

"

Ahmed wrote:
Where do you get this deduction?
hence: ".. I am convinced that only a lucid will to resist determinism represents the right way out."

So it is not by a simple limitation of access to energy that the problem could be solved: again, we are largely in agreement. As for determinism, I invite you to read carefully the response of Sen-no-sen.