NAP's random Science & Technology thread

[Dreamtimer]

Biodiversity means a strong ecosystem which can withstand stress from weather, disease, etc.

Biodiversity matters even in our own bodies. We want healthy colonies of good flora for our digestion, and even for protection from other microbes.

I recall learning about the various pyramids in Mexico and South America and how the people cultivated and encouraged growth of many plants which would thrive at the different levels of the pyramids.

The Iraqi people who live on the water and use the reeds for their way of life are another example of people influencing biodiversity. Certainly they helped to keep the wetlands healthy and the reeds thriving.

American Indians affected the landscape here as well and it was so fruitful that the settlers from Europe proclaimed that the resources here were virtually endless in abundance.


What we've seen is that when we're stupid and shortsighted we screw up our environment. When we're greedy, we screw it up. We waste resources and jeopardize their replenishment.

Modern agriculture is mono-species. That screws up environments big-time. We'll have to learn the hard way.


I don't quite understand your black and white question, BOB. It's not really one or the other. Humans mostly practiced living in harmony with nature because they understood their interconnection. It was undeniable.

Modern societies render us disconnected. We don't hunt or even know the source of our food/goods. We cannot stop destructive practices when we can't even see how we are involved.

And so the lessons will be very difficult for us. And many of us won't make it due to disease and lack of resources because of environmental degradation.

My brother-in-law once told me humans could still survive even if we fell into the slime world where algae was our only food source.

It doesn't sound very pleasant or enriching, such an environment.

[Emil El Zapato]

Biodiversity means a strong ecosystem which can withstand stress from weather, disease, etc.

Biodiversity matters even in our own bodies. We want healthy colonies of good flora for our digestion, and even for protection from other microbes.

I recall learning about the various pyramids in Mexico and South America and how the people cultivated and encouraged growth of many plants which would thrive at the different levels of the pyramids.

The Iraqi people who live on the water and use the reeds for their way of life are another example of people influencing biodiversity. Certainly they helped to keep the wetlands healthy and the reeds thriving.

American Indians affected the landscape here as well and it was so fruitful that the settlers from Europe proclaimed that the resources here were virtually endless in abundance.


What we've seen is that when we're stupid and shortsighted we screw up our environment. When we're greedy, we screw it up. We waste resources and jeopardize their replenishment.

Modern agriculture is mono-species. That screws up environments big-time. We'll have to learn the hard way.


I don't quite understand your black and white question, BOB. It's not really one or the other. Humans mostly practiced living in harmony with nature because they understood their interconnection. It was undeniable.

Modern societies render us disconnected. We don't hunt or even know the source of our food/goods. We cannot stop destructive practices when we can't even see how we are involved.

And so the lessons will be very difficult for us. And many of us won't make it due to disease and lack of resources because of environmental degradation.

My brother-in-law once told me humans could still survive even if we fell into the slime world where algae was our only food source.

It doesn't sound very pleasant or enriching, such an environment.

Whell, I never!

It was the way Anton stated the premise. But what you say does make sense. But on that point, early Humans naturally would not have ventured into areas that had sparse ecosystems for obvious reasons. Frigid weather, desert land (though admittedly probably much less 12, 000 years ago as the Middle East was not arid and I don't believe either was what is now today the proximal SubSaharan area). So, I think Anton strayed a little from his home territory (which is a problem for any scientist, theoretically, a scientist speaking outside of his or her base of expertise has no more validity or credibility than if I do it ... ). I think it would have been more correct to say where biodiversity and humans coexist historically both have become enriched.

[Dreamtimer]

I wonder whether humans really wouldn't venture into badlands. Animals can live in quite harsh environments. They carve out their niche. Humans, being so inventive, are extra good at survival, although we are fragile compared to many wild beasts.

How long have humans really been on earth? Perhaps some evolved to live in the water. Or deep underground.

I don't mean to be contrary, BOB.

[Emil El Zapato]

I wonder whether humans really wouldn't venture into badlands. Animals can live in quite harsh environments. They carve out their niche. Humans, being so inventive, are extra good at survival, although we are fragile compared to many wild beasts.

How long have humans really been on earth? Perhaps some evolved to live in the water. Or deep underground.

I don't mean to be contrary, BOB.

I'm teasing, DT. In my estimation they would have, which is why I'm surprised when I read something that says Neanderthals went extinct partially because they were vulnerable to harsh weather such as in very cold highlands. That doesn't make sense to me because they were highly adapted to mountainous areas. But resources nonetheless would have been sparse due to the natural climate conditions.

[Emil El Zapato]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGJ8W2_ssHM

[Dreamtimer]

Warp drive anyone? Never give up. Never surrender.


Principle of the Alcubierre drive: Spacetime contracts at the front of the bubble (right), corresponding to a warp in spacetime. Behind the bubble (left), new space is created out of nothing, which is equivalent to stretching spacetime. Credit: AllenMcC Wikimedia (CC BY-SA 3.0)

The fact that scientists are dealing with the idea at all today is thanks to a 1994 paper by Mexican theoretical physicist Miguel Alcubierre. At the time, Alcubierre was not just a passionate Star Trek devotee. In his doctoral thesis at the University of Wales College Cardiff (now Cardiff University), Alcubierre also worked on the theory of relativity. Strictly speaking, the theory states that nothing can travel faster than light. But by applying a little creativity, Alcubierre identified an apparent loophole.

Lentz specifically examined the assumptions leading to the negative energy requirements in Alcubierre’s work. Like his colleague, Lentz began by analyzing spacetime, modeling the multidimensional substance as a stack of very thin layers. He found that Alcubierre had only considered comparatively simple “linear” relationships between the equations for shifting one layer onto the next. At this point, choosing more complex “hyperbolic” relations, which typically express rapidly changing quantities, results in a different warp bubble than the one obtained by Alcubierre. It still requires enormous amounts of mass and energy but, according to Lentz’s calculations, only positive amounts. “I was very surprised that no one had tried this before me,” Lentz says.

More at Scientific American

[Emil El Zapato]

Warp drive anyone? Never give up. Never surrender.


Principle of the Alcubierre drive: Spacetime contracts at the front of the bubble (right), corresponding to a warp in spacetime. Behind the bubble (left), new space is created out of nothing, which is equivalent to stretching spacetime. Credit: AllenMcC Wikimedia (CC BY-SA 3.0)






More at Scientific American

I've been thinking about renewing my subscription to Scientific American (I got it by accident before, I was trying to renew Smithsonian and got SA). I'm going to do it now.

[Dreamtimer]

I used to subscribe. My favorite regular was 50, 100, 150 years ago. I think it's now up to 200.

I also have some books they published as a series about three decades ago. One is The Cell. We barely even knew what the Golgi Apparatus was way back then.

(I feel kinda old)

[Aragorn]

Interesting concept...

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bp8fk5rosI

[Emil El Zapato]

Interesting concept...

Oh yeah, I watched this the other day. NASA's refusal to be 'adventurous' after the 'premature' retirement of the shuttle was a big disappointment to me. I probably mentioned this before but around that time NASA put out a request for white papers for a Mars vehicle. In the minds of many, the best design was put forth by James Cameron of Avatar fame. (among others).

[Emil El Zapato]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfGBjJU-BiA

[Dreamtimer]

BOB, you are educating me on Neanderthals. I have a friend who brags about his Neanderthal DNA.

[Emil El Zapato]

BOB, you are educating me on Neanderthals. I have a friend who brags about his Neanderthal DNA.

lol ... gotta know about them there Neanderthals. I like 'em, I think they had better natures than homo sapiens. ... kind of like the split between chimps and bonobos

[Aragorn]

lol ... gotta know about them there Neanderthals. I like 'em, I think they had better natures than homo sapiens. ... kind of like the split between chimps and bonobos

You know, that is actually not such a bad comparison, indeed.

[Dreamtimer]

Bonobos make love, not war. (lots of STDs unfortunately)