A theory with no name?

[Rune]

I'm in need of a bit of help.

I've heard this theory that says thatafter a major catastophy the human race wouldn't be able to bring itself back to the way things were before the catastrophy. Due to the fact that our knowledgeas a group has become so complex that no single man can know all he needs to know to bring the society back to its original form.

Do you know who said this or am I being to unclear?

 

[epicstruggle]

I dont know what the name of this theory is. But i have been think about this very situation. Here is what ive come up with:

The last 2,000 years of progress _could_ be recovered in about 50 years. Now this is dependent on what type of catastrophy we have, and how much prep time we get.
With some warning time, we could place certain items into storage that would bring us back to pre-catastrophy lifestyle. We would need books on general tech, science, math, chemistry and the like. We would also need certain tools, machines, and the required powersource.

This is an interesting problem. Anyone want to venture a guess as to how much time we would need to recover from a major disaster.

later,
epic

 

[sytaylor]

If we lost EVERYTHING except knowledge then we'd have to spend long enough just crafting the tools to craft other tools to make the tools to make the machinery to make the tools we use in day to day life.

A chainsaw is a completley different thing all together to a sharpened peice of rock. We'd have to start with the basics, but I feel there is enough combined inteligence around to get us back to where we are... it may indeed be a good chance to re-do lots of things we use without thinking that could be improved (like lights etc).

Edit: As any programmer will tell you starting over on a project will usually yeild a better result than the first iteration with the lessons you have learned.

 

[London Geezer]

Depending on the cataclism of course, if all we have after it happens is knowledge, it will take years and years to get back into shape, just think about having to rebuilt the whole microprocessor industry, to the level it is today. YEARS...
Knowledge is good and all, but in the end we still need to convert that knowledge into somethign real, and getting it up from "nothing" requires a hell of a lot of time.
If then you think that the cataclism would be so bad that we are only left with knowledge, that means that infrastructures to make our lives as easy as they are today will not be there, therefore slowing down progress even more.
We would have to focus first and foremost on making our lives liveable, with infrastructures that are decent enough to be on par to today's ones, THEN we might have to think about advancing our technology to the point it is today.
If you just think about the time and effort it took us over the centuries to make sewer systems, electrics connections, bloody Broadband connections available to a *vast* percentage of the population, then you might be less optimistic about it all.
Without those and other every-day-life things, civilisation as we know it today is not possible, simply because *I BELIEVE* we are at today's level of technology mainly because we made it possible to have "easy lives" compared to 50 years ago. And because *there's many of us on this bloody planet*.
Take that away and we're back to the 17th Century. Lots of "knowledge" but no means (and no will in certain cases) to do something about it. Leonardo though about a "flying machine" centuries ago. He had the "knowledge". Look how long it took to make it possible to fly safely. Same for surgery, and let's not begin to talk about all those jobs and researches that need hugely precise technology.
But i don't think we're in for such a surprise to let us somehow live, and destroy everything else. If something like that happens, then i don't think we would survive at all, or such a small number of people would survive, that even "knowledge" would not be there at all to advance our technology to the point it is today.

 

[pax]

This is unanswerable unless you give specifics as to the catastrophe with relatively precise numbers of people dead and what kind of disaster ect...

The scope of the disaster would define how far back we are thrown and how long it would take for us to recover to present levels...

 

[Rune]

Say after a nuclear war with 75% of the worlds population dead. (I don't know if it is possible just as an experiment)

 

[London Geezer]

Say after a nuclear war with 75% of the worlds population dead. (I don't know if it is possible just as an experiment)

Well in that case, the ground and the environment would be so contaminated by radiation it will be impossible to develop anything for years... So there...
There are just too many variables, and too many assumptions to be made to create a perfect "example"...

 

[epicstruggle]

Say after a nuclear war with 75% of the worlds population dead. (I don't know if it is possible just as an experiment)

First we need to figure out what areas would be spared from major destruction. I would assume parts of South America, Africa, and may be some of the pacific islands would not be directly effected. This is not to say that the nuclear winter that would follow would not cause major problems for these areas.

Lets take Chile as an example, they should be relatively untouched by the war, but they would have a hard time with trading with the rest of the world. So if they depend on others for fuel, electricity, food. they would be in big trouble. If they could survive without importing these items, then they would definetly continue civilization as we know it today.

later,
epic

 

[zidane1strife]

has become so complex that no single man can know all he needs to know to bring the society back to its original form.

Not yet, but in a few more decades it might indeed be possible for a few to equal and exceed the knowledge that we've accumulated. Widespread biotech, and other cheap widespread manufacturing tech, if they become available will bring us across the safety line...

We just have to hope the monkeys leading Nkorea, china, europe, and the rest of the world, don't screw up before then.... or that no mayor asteroid or solar flare, etc occurs...

 

[London Geezer]

We just have to hope the monkeys leading Nkorea, china, europe, and the rest of the world, don't screw up before then.... or that no mayor asteroid or solar flare, etc occurs...

... or super Tsunami, or a new glaciation, or a Supernova close enough to wipe us out, or a black hole coming close enough to knock us out our orbit... But i think the possibility of a dickhead nuking the planet is much much much more likely than any of those...

 

[indio]

The earth is a single point of failure for the human race. I'm sure i read somewhere there is a 50/50 chance that a species ending asteriod collision will occur in the next 400 years. If that is true , all other problems are trivial because it would take all 400 years to develop the technology to find and colonize a suitable planet. That's if it became a world priority were all surplus recources world wide were devoted to the test. At present time no human being has ever stepped foot on another planet and we have no way of detecting planets less than the size of Jupiter outside our solar system.

 

[Citrous]

we have no way of detecting planets less than the size of Jupiter outside our solar system.

This is untrue. We have detected many smaller then jupiter size masses outside of our own solar system. Look up "Lucy"; The recently discovered 4000km diameter diamond.

 

[indio]

we have no way of detecting planets less than the size of Jupiter outside our solar system.

This is untrue. We have detected many smaller then jupiter size masses outside of our own solar system. Look up "Lucy"; The recently discovered 4000km diameter diamond.

hardy har har

I haven't seen Lucy since she was hanging with my friend Al Sid.

 

[MfA]

The earth is a single point of failure for the human race. I'm sure i read somewhere there is a 50/50 chance that a species ending asteriod collision will occur in the next 400 years.

50% chance for 400 years ... we have been pretty damn lucky the last couple of millenia then.

 

[ninelven]

edited

 

[London Geezer]

This reminds me of something I often think of. Consider where technology was in 1904 and where it is today... I wonder where it will be in the next 100 years. The level of accomplishment of man will be simply astounding; however, philosophically we have advanced comparatively little. I mean humanity hasn't even evolved enough to incorporate the truths of Confucius, and philosophical proofs seem to have been all but abandoned in this era in favor of ever changing (and accomodating) politics. Thus, I wonder if the overall arrogance of humanity (if such a thing is quantifiable) will not increase dramatically over the next century.

And if there is anything that is going to slow down progress, it will be human stupidity and complete lack of respect for its own race, focusing conflicts over things like religion and geography. Very very sad.
Still it has to be said, many of the technological advances in the last 100 years were driven by WAR. Which in itself is quite worrying, but it seems to be true.

also, Indio, the 50% chance in 400 is total bulshit, where did you read that? No one knows if and when and how many times earth will be hit by a major asteroid. Giving numbers out like that doesn't seem very realistic to me, other than statistical references based on history. Which we all know doesn't mean much.

 

[jvd]

I would have to say it would take at least 2 generations to go back the way we were .

One generation of trying to sruvive and setting up a food source and the ground techs. While teaching the next generation how to use it and more advance techs.

The second tech to expand the race again and to move everything foward again. And the third generation in which there shouldn't be any fighting for our lives .

 

[indio]

This reminds me of something I often think of. Consider where technology was in 1904 and where it is today... I wonder where it will be in the next 100 years. The level of accomplishment of man will be simply astounding; however, philosophically we have advanced comparatively little. I mean humanity hasn't even evolved enough to incorporate the truths of Confucius, and philosophical proofs seem to have been all but abandoned in this era in favor of ever changing (and accomodating) politics. Thus, I wonder if the overall arrogance of humanity (if such a thing is quantifiable) will not increase dramatically over the next century.

And if there is anything that is going to slow down progress, it will be human stupidity and complete lack of respect for its own race, focusing conflicts over things like religion and geography. Very very sad.
Still it has to be said, many of the technological advances in the last 100 years were driven by WAR. Which in itself is quite worrying, but it seems to be true.

also, Indio, the 50% chance in 400 is total bulshit, where did you read that? No one knows if and when and how many times earth will be hit by a major asteroid. Giving numbers out like that doesn't seem very realistic to me, other than statistical references based on history. Which we all know doesn't mean much.

I can't remember were I read it but it was quite awhile ago.

http://spaceguard.esa.int/NScience/neo/neo-when/impact-num.htm

here's the probablity distribution for asteriod impacts. The last "castastrophic global event" occured 65 million years ago. The frequency rate for objects at that threshhold of destructive force capable of causing extinction is roughly once every 100,000 years . All signs point to being overdue. We know it will happen eventually. The only question is , Will we still have a single point of failure when it does?

 

[London Geezer]

Well, Siberia go a big one at the beginning of the century, does that count? Are we safe for the next 99,920 odd years???

Just kidding, i think these statistical studies are pretty much useless, there is nothing keeping a huge asteroid hovering too close to our sad little blue planet, even if we all start thinking *NO! U're early! Come back in 100,000 years!! STATISTICS say so!!*. The thing ain't gonna magically stop.

Ok i'm getting silly, i think i should go home and die.

 

[Fred]

Let's say there was a catacylsm, and everyone died in science except one physics professor who has a good up to date understanding of the material he learned in college and grad school (as well as a solid level of mathematical understanding). This includes losing all relevant texts and papers.

It would probably take ~50-75 years to get back to what we are used to now. EG to get from pure theory to application, along with all the subsequent tricks to make the applications more industrially efficient, etc.
That also includes any potential theorists reinventing what the proffessor might not know or has forgotten.

The infrastructure would be a huge problem initially, as well as the training. I foresee a sort of exponential progress generally.

Chemistry and computer science follows from quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics. However we'd probably take longer to recreate our current level of mathematical sophistication, as there is no *fundamental* underlying theory really, so all specialists who die are basically lost to us.

The loss of History, literature and art would be proportional to the amount of texts and works lost obviously.

Some people think it would take much longer, but I don't agree. Its remarkable what the human race can accomplish when their mind is set on something.