Life's lucky 'kick start'

BBC News ^ | October 13, 2003 | Dr David Whitehouse

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[asformeandformyhouse]

As a professor, I'm far too well aware that people often try to conceal their ignorance with condescension.

As opposed, I guess, to those who just avoid answering. Cute reply, however. I must assume from your answer that you do know the difference and don't want to concede my point.

We can inquire as to the existence of black holes; if we decide they don't exist, that does not annihilate every black hole in the universe. It just means we were rational but wrong.

Exactly my point. Try and get one of these evolutionary scientists to admit that they may be wrong concerning God's existence and I think you'll see a 'religious' response on their part.

[JethroHathAWay]

What do you mean when you say level one, two or 3. What level are we now?

[JethroHathAWay]

Hi Alamo-Girl! :)

[Alamo-Girl]

Hi there, JethroHathAWay! Hugs!

[Ogmios]

There is a scale by a scientist for levels of civilization, 1 being the most advanced, and level 5 being the least advanced, I am looking for it now so that I can give you specifics.

But basically level 5 are fossil fuelers etc,

Level 4 are fission

level 3 have interstellar travel

level 2 have intergalactic

level 1 can take energy from the universe itself

I am looking for it so that I can be more specific, but I believe those are the basic models for each level, I am probably wrong, because it's been a while since I studied it.

[JethroHathAWay]

I see. Tesla was at level one. Some are at different levels. The way they think I mean. Thanks Ogi

[asformeandformyhouse]

OK, let's have a little fun, how do you know that the Big G God is not a creation of man, just as the Little g gods were?

The big "G" god I speak of is the 'uncaused first cause', as they say. Whether he exists or not is not dependent on man's belief. The big "G" God could be likened to truth. It's the truth, whether you believe it or not. Man has and will create many gods, even to the point of making themselves god. But this in no way hinders God.

[PatrickHenry]

I read a different classification. One of the levels (above us, obviously) would use all the energy put out by their star. Probably they'd build a Dyson Sphere around their sun -- and thus might not be detectable by us.

[js1138]

It's a sign.

[Ogmios]

Yep, I was totally off, totally and completely wrong.

Here's the page, Dr Kaku is the man that edxplains it.

Physicspost

Here is the basic premise of the scales.

Type I – this civilization harnesses the energy output of an entire planet.

Type II – this civilization harnesses the energy output of a star, and generates about 10 billion times the energy output of a Type I civilization.

Type III – this civilization harnesses the energy output of a galaxy, or about 10 billion time the energy output of a Type II civilization.

A Type I civilization would be able to manipulate truly planetary energies. They might, for example, control or modify their weather. They would have the power to manipulate planetary phenomena, such as hurricanes, which can release the energy of hundreds of hydrogen bombs. Perhaps volcanoes or even earthquakes may be altered by such a civilization.

A Type II civilization may resemble the Federation of Planets seen on the TV program Star Trek (which is capable of igniting stars and has colonized a tiny fraction of the near-by stars in the galaxy). A Type II civilization might be able to manipulate the power of solar flares.

A Type III civilization may resemble the Borg, or perhaps the Empire found in the Star Wars saga. They have colonized the galaxy itself, extracting energy from hundreds of billions of stars.

By contrast, we are a Type 0 civilization, which extracts its energy from dead plants (oil and coal). Growing at the average rate of about 3% per year, however, one may calculate that our own civilization may attain Type I status in about 100-200 years, Type II status in a few thousand years, and Type III status in about 100,000 to a million years. These time scales are insignificant when compared with the universe itself.

On this scale, one may now rank the different propulsion systems available to different types of civilizations:

Type 0
Chemical rockets
Ionic engines
Fission power
EM propulsion (rail guns)

Type I
Ram-jet fusion engines
Photonic drive

Type II
Antimatter drive
Von Neumann nano probes

Type III
Planck energy propulsion


Thanks for making me look that up, because I was so far off that it is insane.

And now I am not!! LOL

[PatrickHenry]

Me: "Okay ... then what's your explanation of the "meteor crator" near Winslow, Arizona? No one saw it. Is it forever a mystery?"

You:
Give me a freakin' break! I'm not talking about actual geological record, I'm talking about scientists reaching out with their "beliefs" when they reach the limits of impirical study.

No. No breaks. Sorry. The process for examining the evidence presented to us by the meteor crator is, in principle, the same process (the scientific method) that scientists use for their theories about things which happened much farther in the past.

[Ogmios]

Please see my above post, I was so far off that it is ridiculous.

[JethroHathAWay]

That's okay. Earth is more than zero though I think.

[Old Professer]

Yes, wouldn't it be nice if evolution actually had a goal?

That is the sort of romanticism that allows social husbandry; evolution requires hostility; benignity of environment or social selflessness is anathema to the process. Which is why, I suppose, we see cycles of success and barrenness.

[js1138]

This has aroused my curiosity. What exactly are the limits of empiricle study?

[Old Professer]

What exactly are the limits of empiricle study?

About as far-reaching as expecting people to spell correctly.

[whattajoke]

Those who haven't been able to disprove the scriptures (and let me tell you, MANY have tried)

First of all, when scientists try to make some sense of the Cambrian explosion, they never take the scriptures into account. I'm not exactly clear why we're discussing them, but since you've brought it up (yes, I'm aware it was probably your sparring partner, but let's move past that) but when you say that no one's been able to disprove scriptures, I thought I'd jump in.

"Disproving" scripture would serve no purpose at all. No one is out to disprove Buddhist texts, Pueblo cliff paintings, or the Upanishads either. For those of us who find them all to be nothing more than mere stories and poems by mortal men, we have no problem with them. In other words, who cares? But I must say that, well, changing the chemical properties of water, breaking every known law of physics, logic, and thermodynamics in order to feed a bunch of hungry people, or to cross the Red Sea, and enjoying a final repast a few days after you've been killed are enough for me to be a bit skeptical as to their accuracy.

[js1138]

That's reaching pretty far.

[Ogmios]

As he said, he believes that we are within 200 years of being a type 1, we are at the end of tye 0.

It looks promising anyway, as long as we don't blow ourselves up and commit planetwide suicide in the meantime.