In Just 60 Years, Neoliberal Capitalism Has Nearly Broken Planet Earth

[NNadir]

41. I'm not generally reported as being "civil." That's a new one, but thanks...

Nonetheless I think you're taking the concept of "heat death," a little too far.

(That said, Boltzmann did commit suicide, but I don't think his discoveries of the statistical mechanical basis of the second law had much to do with it. I also don't think he was making a statement about population growth. It is said that he had classical clinical depression, a tragedy, for sure, for science as well as for his family.)

To state that the difference between nuclear energy and so called "renewable energy" is merely a "turf war" strikes me a vast over simplification of clearly different approaches that are distinctly relevant to the future of the human race. Now it may prove true that the human race is psychologically incapable of making good choices at the right time, but such an outcome is clearly not deterministic.

The extent to which we are experiencing heat death is a choice, not a technological, or for that matter, a physical imperative.

If one is speaking of entropy, energy density is an important concept. I have calculated that a human being living at an average continuous power consumption of 5000 watts - about twice average per capita global power consumption right now - would need to fission, in his or her lifetime, about 100 grams of plutonium. Given that more than 50% of the world population now lives under appalling conditions, this is an excellent moral argument for increasing, as opposed to decreasing, average power consumption. The hundred grams of plutonium is very different than the amount of dangerous natural gas, dangerous coal, or dangerous petroleum one must consume for the same result, or for that matter, the amount of steel one must refine to build wind turbines. Given that the uranium supply of the planet is essentially unlimited because of the macroscopic geochemical cycle, I'm not going to sit up at night worrying about the second law, so much as I'm going to worry about stupidity.

The universe is very far from the predicted "heat death," as one can see from both the local and universal distribution of the elements and the binding energy curve of nucleons. At least on a cosmic scale, the universe is still essentially pure hydrogen, with the rest of the periodic table being essentially a set of minor impurities.

If I see a young person who has figured entropy out, and is losing sleep over it, I advise them not to worry. Life is not so long that it will matter, or better put, need matter.

It is physically possible to reverse entropy if one has access to energy, so long as one has a heat sink. This is the basic principle behind every common industrial metal refined from an ore, or for that matter, an old fashioned ice tray in an electric freezer. The planet has been a stable radiating heat sink for billions of years, mostly, with some fluctuations, including some involved with explosively growing species, the "disaster" of oxygen releasing photosynthetic organisms being one such case. The current problem before humanity - and my cynicism aside I'm rather fond of humanity overall - is that it has disrupted the heat exchange properties of the planet, and this is entirely a function of not substituting nuclear energy for all other forms of energy, a task that is clearly feasible in the golden age of chemistry, if not simple and easy. (My opinion is that most things worth doing are not simple and easy.)

With all due respect, I still think you're attaching too much metaphysics to a physical concept.

Have a great weekend!