Author Topic: Future Population (Read 10971 times)

monmarfori · « **on:** June 29, 2009, 08:58:14 PM »

In the year 2050 population would reach 9 billion people.

Bla · « **Reply #1 on:** June 30, 2009, 12:59:47 AM »

That depends on many things. I heard our doubling time was 40 years... But if it's true, and we don't think about any other circumstances than the doubling rate, the graph will look like this:
Okay, I have simplified the numbers a bit...

Year: Inhabitants
2000: 5.000.000
2040: 10.000.000
2080: 20.000.000
2120: 40.000.000
2160: 80.000.000
2200: 160.000.000
...

Isn't it scary? I think it's called exponentional or something.

monmarfori · « **Reply #2 on:** June 30, 2009, 01:35:27 AM »

And it says that it would reach 10.4 billion in 2100. and 11 billion in 2200.

FGFG · « **Reply #3 on:** June 30, 2009, 03:32:22 AM »

The fun thing is that Earth could sustain at our level of technology and consume, only 1 billion people...

Bla · « **Reply #4 on:** July 01, 2009, 03:01:59 AM »

Exactly. Everyone who say "let's just have peace and let's all live in peace, here are ressources enough for everyone..."
Forget that they live in our part of the world where we luckily HAVE enough ressources for everyone, but the other parts of the world don't, so they need to fight for it.

Is it a human right to have children? If it is, is it a human right to get more than two? If it is, then our planet will be in trouble. We need to stop people from getting children! "- He said as a child..."

monmarfori · « **Reply #5 on:** July 01, 2009, 03:21:42 AM »

Just in the year 2300. population would be 9 billion people.

FGFG · « **Reply #6 on:** July 01, 2009, 08:47:07 AM »

I think that we have to stop the growing of the population on a global level (not denying people to have childrens, but allowing them to have 2 sons and adding taxes to families with more childs). Many of the European states are already at "0 growth" (Italy with them), so the most advanced countries are not the problem. It is however very difficult to stop the growing of the thirld world states, as the people there don't have enough education and health to maintain themselves with a low number of children...

hbmp88 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 01, 2009, 04:47:30 PM »

And what if they have a girl?

Anyways the world's population is already at 6 billion.

FGFG · « **Reply #8 on:** July 01, 2009, 04:51:07 PM »

Quote from: hbmp88 on July 01, 2009, 04:47:30 PM

And what if they have a girl?

I didn't want to use the word "children" again and again and again like "again" now

Naru523 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 03, 2009, 05:08:46 PM »

At that time, we will get to Mars.

Bla · « **Reply #10 on:** July 04, 2009, 02:12:26 AM »

Yes Naru523, I think that aswell.

The problem is just... If we say our doubling time is 40 years. Our population will for example reach 10 billion in 2030-2040. Then, if we get to Mars at that time, after terraforming it, it might be able to substain 25% of out 10 billion people. So let's say 2.5 billion move to Mars (I doubt it, but...). Then here are 7.5 billion on Earth. In 2080, there will be 15 billion on Earth and 5 billion on Mars. We will keep needing to find new planets we can live on faster and faster, and one planet will not save us from overpopulation.

Ofc the nature will reduce our population and so on, but wait... Perhaps Mars will be a good planet, so if there is a nuclear war on Earth our species will still survive! Wheee!
Except if they launch nuclear missiles against Mars. Oh nose.

hbmp88 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 06, 2009, 10:28:15 AM »

Just think: The more people the fast our technology will evolve. Then it will be common to own a particle accelerator just like the computer. Then you can turn pooh into food!

Bla · « **Reply #12 on:** July 06, 2009, 12:12:02 PM »

Can a particle accelerator do that? Doesn't it just fire some particles against each other in a vacuum at speeds close to the light?
And then take photos/film it with billions of pics per second?

hbmp88 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 06, 2009, 02:07:18 PM »

It combines elements to form new elements, some of which are edible.

Bla · « **Reply #14 on:** July 07, 2009, 02:44:19 AM »

If we could split an atom into protons, neutrons and electrons and put them together in another way with the protons, neutrons and electrons from other atoms, we could make everything!

Perhaps it could solve the population problem? It would require huge amounts of energy, but we could just make the pollution itself and trash into food.

Ofc, if it doesn't require so much energy that it makes more pollution to turn the pollution into food or new energy.

But wait... If we could turn them into positrons and antimatter, we could make even more energy. Wonder if it's possible. Then I guess we need to do the same trick with quarks...?
Anyways, in the future we might be using fusion power plants, that might give us enough clean power for that.

monmarfori · « **Reply #15 on:** July 07, 2009, 03:15:18 AM »

In some billion years in the future like 3 billion years. the Earth's population will be no more.

Bla · « **Reply #16 on:** July 07, 2009, 06:39:12 AM »

Quote from: monmarfori on July 07, 2009, 03:15:18 AM

In some billion years in the future like 3 billion years. the Earth's population will be no more.

How do you know that?

If we first colonize another planet it will be hard for us to become extinct(?). Then an interplanetary nuclear war would be needed, and launching missiles from Earth to Mars gives lots of time to shoot them down or flee.

hbmp88 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 07, 2009, 11:10:42 AM »

You can't make anti matter with matter unless there is some way to reverse its charge.

Ex.

Matter: 6p+ 6e-

Anti matter: 6p- 6e+

monmarfori · « **Reply #18 on:** July 07, 2009, 02:08:35 PM »

Quote from: Bla on July 07, 2009, 06:39:12 AM

Quote from: monmarfori on July 07, 2009, 03:15:18 AM
In some billion years in the future like 3 billion years. the Earth's population will be no more.
How do you know that?
If we first colonize another planet it will be hard for us to become extinct(?). Then an interplanetary nuclear war would be needed, and launching missiles from Earth to Mars gives lots of time to shoot them down or flee.

But. the Earth's oceans may evaporate.

Bla · « **Reply #19 on:** July 07, 2009, 02:16:38 PM »

Quote from: monmarfori on July 07, 2009, 02:08:35 PM

Quote from: Bla on July 07, 2009, 06:39:12 AM
Quote from: monmarfori on July 07, 2009, 03:15:18 AM
In some billion years in the future like 3 billion years. the Earth's population will be no more.
How do you know that?
If we first colonize another planet it will be hard for us to become extinct(?). Then an interplanetary nuclear war would be needed, and launching missiles from Earth to Mars gives lots of time to shoot them down or flee.
But. the Earth's oceans may evaporate.

Doesn't that depend on our orbit at that time and how the atmosphere is? If the Sun losses it's mass, I guess our orbit will be further away. Also, we might be able to change our atmosphere into be more "effective" in the future.

And yes, hbmp88, that's correct.

Perhaps by turning normal matter into energy and then turning it into antimatter after that.

Wootzor. Wonder if that's possible.

Isn't the chance of energy becoming antimatter only 1/1000000 less than the chance of becoming normal matter? (=The reason why 999999/1000000 of the matter ended up as energy after Big Bang)

FGFG · « **Reply #20 on:** July 18, 2009, 03:56:54 PM »

It could be possible teoretically, but not now. This kind of technology (that it isn't ready yet) will be freely disponible only in hundreds or maybe thousends of years. We have to solve the population problem in every case.

monmarfori · « **Reply #21 on:** July 18, 2009, 10:42:48 PM »

There is possibility that Earth will bring life in the next 1.5 billion years.

atomic7732 · « **Reply #22 on:** July 18, 2009, 11:55:09 PM »

Naru523 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 18, 2009, 11:59:12 PM »

I think he's saying that their would be new life on Earth.

monmarfori · « **Reply #24 on:** July 19, 2009, 02:05:54 AM »

But see the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth
The thing i seen is: The world is expected to continue supporting life for another 1.5 billion years.

Bla · « **Reply #25 on:** July 19, 2009, 06:07:58 AM »

I'm sure that if humans live for 1.5 billion years more, our population won't have problems with Earth supporting life.
We will be an interstellar empire!

Whee.

FGFG · « **Reply #26 on:** July 19, 2009, 07:47:01 AM »

well, we would be at the same point: what if we fill the whole galaxy? we will need another one, and then other 2, 4, 8...

hbmp88 · « **Reply #27 on:** July 19, 2009, 07:44:42 PM »

By the time we fill the galaxy we would have amazing technology and the ability to move on.

monmarfori · « **Reply #28 on:** July 19, 2009, 08:51:13 PM »

If before the expansion of the sun. the collision will occur. Called Milkyway-Andromeda collision. If 2 galaxies merged. and the solar system orbits near the core of the merged galaxy. population would end.

atomic7732 · « **Reply #29 on:** July 19, 2009, 09:14:16 PM »

What I think is wierd is no-one talks about the other galaxies. What will happen to the Triangulum? The Large and small Magelanic Clouds?