Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
2. I agree that it's optimistic.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:35 PM
Nov 2012

Any time creativity is added to the mix, we get more outputs of various sorts for the same inputs. Of course some of those outputs are inevitably energy/material-consuming, so there's a positive feedback loop driving consumption. I think the process would be slowed but not stopped by a static population.

I don't quite follow your first point. Yes, if we run out of materials or energy to satisfy growth in {1} or {2} (e.g. not enough infrastructure or food) that will act to limit population. I don't see how that would act to bound {3}, which consists essentially of the outputs of human creativity. It would be slowed, as I said above, but I don't see any guarantee that it would be stopped. Of course, if a Liebig Limit is encountered in any of them, "rien ne va plus."

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Super-linear scaling and ...»Reply #2