A Simple Demonstration Of Earth's Ecological Fragility

Adam Taggart
By Adam Taggart on Mon, Oct 12, 2015 - 4:31pm

Adam Savage from Mythbusters recounts how he was stunned by Buckminster Fuller's simple but elegant demonstration of how fragile the Earth's ecosystem is:

(Source: Business Insider)

Note: If you're reading this and are not yet a member of Peak Prosperity's ResourceWatch Group, please consider joining it now. It's a collection point for news and data on the growing scarcity of key natural resources. Simply go here and click the "Join Today" button.

74 Comments

David Allan's picture
David Allan
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 15 2009
Posts: 105
I'll bust that myth

The earth has an average diameter of 7918 miles (12742 km). The deepest part of the ocean in the Mariana trench is approx 36070 feet (10994 m). The deepest part of the ocean is therefore approx one one thousandth of the diameter of the earth.

Now  that 30 inch, 75cm sphere in the demo has an area 4 Pi r squared = 1.76 sq metre. The volume of water to cover the sphere to a depth of one thousandth of the diameter ie 0.75mm is (approx) 1.3l, which is more than typically respired in a day, let alone a single breath. (a figure of 400ml/day is quoted on quora.com)

Oh what a miserable grinch I am. Nice demo though.

Wildlife Tracker's picture
Wildlife Tracker
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 14 2012
Posts: 403
I will bust your bust

This was actually a very clever demonstration. A great demonstration to make you think, but normal humans can't conceptualize information like that. 

Straight lines are very easy to visualize, so I post the visual below. The deepest part of the ocean is 6.8 miles, but on average the ocean is roughly around 2.3 miles. So roughly the ocean is actually about 1/3 of the red dot presented below in comparison to the black line. The dot is actually already generous in length do to the inability of computers to represent information smaller than 1 pixel size.

 

We really are a fragile little layer on planet earth...

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5752
Apple and Oranges?
davidallan wrote:

The earth has an average diameter of 7918 miles (12742 km). The deepest part of the ocean in the Mariana trench is approx 36070 feet (10994 m). The deepest part of the ocean is therefore approx one one thousandth of the diameter of the earth.

Now  that 30 inch, 75cm sphere in the demo has an area 4 Pi r squared = 1.76 sq metre. The volume of water to cover the sphere to a depth of one thousandth of the diameter ie 0.75mm is (approx) 1.3l, which is more than typically respired in a day, let alone a single breath. (a figure of 400ml/day is quoted on quora.com)

Oh what a miserable grinch I am. Nice demo though.

I heard the tale as saying that his respiration that had condensed on the sphere was equivalent to the depth of the ocean...not the volume.

So let's look at it on that basis.

My math says that a 30 inch sphere is (30*2.54) = 76.2 cm across.

This means if we scale things, each cm = (12,742/76.2) = 167km

Which means that if we scale the Marianas trench to our 30 inch/76.2 cm sphere, it would be (10.994/167) = 0.065 cm deep, or 0.65 mm.

Is that possible?  Could breath condense to slightly more than half a millimeter?  I suppose so.  It seems reasonable (assuming a nice cold sphere and a high humidity index).

Unless I goofed my math...which happens sometimes...

 

Wildlife Tracker's picture
Wildlife Tracker
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 14 2012
Posts: 403
Well if you wanted to cover

Well if you wanted to cover the sphere it would be 0.22 mm because the entire ocean is not 7 miles deep.

Regardless, it does not matter. It's probably in the 80% (good enough accuracy) range. This demonstration would be have been more effective it the gentleman in the video compared the difference between the sphere in the video and our earth. Like the fact that we have an atmosphere and gravitational forces creating our habitat ecosystem, and that is why the moisture would last only a brief moment on the sphere, but has lasted millions of years on planet earth.

The take-home of the video: A slight change in the earth's core temperature would literally evaporate all of us into oblivion.

That was what I was going to say in the last post... but didn't

David Allan's picture
David Allan
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 15 2009
Posts: 105
Perspective

I'm not going to argue the point on this. But here's a direct quote from the clip ' The condensation of his breath is equivalent to the depth of the deepest ocean on earth, on this sphere'. I don't believe that statement is entirely factual and who can resist the opportunity to bust a real-life Myth Buster?!

But the underlying principle is good. And if you really want to get the ecosphere in perspective we can zoom out to the perspective of the solar system... then the galaxy... then the outer limits of the known universe. There is nothing like it ANYWHERE - that we know of.

David Huang's picture
David Huang
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Posts: 76
visual size of sphere

First, I think this is a great example in principle to help conceptualize the fragility of the living skin of the earth.

I'm wondering though why the video uses a sphere considerably smaller than 30 inches.  I realize in the video it isn't a real sphere, just a superimposed computer graphic.  However in relation to the guy it would be in the 6 to 8 inch diameter range.  I make spherical metal objects for a living.  I can tell you with certainty that there is a huge difference in impact between a 6 inch diameter sphere and a 30 inch diameter!

The visual impact of this demo would be vastly more impressive if it was done on a sphere proportionally representative of 30 inches in diameter to the figure!

Part of me is also wondering if this was a misquote of Fuller, and he was actually using a smaller size sphere in his talks.  A 30 inch diameter sphere is also a bear to transport around for a lecture!

jgritter's picture
jgritter
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2011
Posts: 273
Wondered about that myself

A misquote seems possible.  The demo makes much more sense if you start with a 30cm sphere.

If we use a basketball for ease of visualization then 2 miles of ocean divided by 8000 miles of planet times a 25cm sphere equals an ocean depth to scale of .06mm.  So if a piece of printer paper is 0.9mm this would seem to suggest that if the Earth were the size of a basketball the average ocean depth would less then 1/10 of the thickness of a piece of paper.  Ask someone to hold a basketball then tell them that if the Earth were the size of a basketball then the oceans are about as deep as the perspiration on the palms of their hands and the International Space Station is orbiting at about the altitude of their finger nails.

LOL.  Makes one wonder if the price of gold or what Putin is doing in Syria is really all that important after all.

John G

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
Wrong Earth Model

Interesting video and thread of comments here. It serves as a reminder that we always need to care for and respect earth. However, I have to comment about something fundamental which makes "getting the math right" particularly difficult, and that is that the earth model that is being used is wrong.

 

Chris often admonishes economists, environmentalists or "scientists" for not using the correct models in their calculations and projections. The debate over Buckminster Fuller's quote is specious in light of the reality that the earth is NOT a sphere; and therefore, the analogy that breath condensation on a 30 inch (dia) sphere is representative of the depth of the ocean relative to a spherical earth is fantastical.

 

The navigable earth is a circular flat plane (with many peaks and valleys on the land masses, and with bodies of water of varying depth); the north "pole" is at the center of the circle and Antarctica is a circular mass of ice that surrounds and holds in all the earth's oceans.

 

For an accurate (enough) view of the earth, please google "Azimuthal equidistant projection map", or look at the map used on the flag of the United Nations (UN). And for those who like discussion boards, you should check out this one:  ifers.boards.net.

 

For anyone who would like to understand our world better: use an accurate model; seek the truth and start trusting your own observations of the world (e.g. water doesn't curve around a ball, it is flat and in fact any body of water is the definition of flat).

 

And if you were wondering, no, I am not joking.

 

-Peace

Jim H's picture
Jim H
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 8 2009
Posts: 2387
Markreis

Is this a joke, or are you really, really, really serious?

(e.g. water doesn't curve around a ball, it is flat and in fact any body of water is the definition of flat).

Say what?  The ocean layer does indeed curve around the (somewhat flattened) ball that is the earth.  Here is proof.    

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon#/media/File:Horizon,_Valencia_%28S...

 

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
Law of Perspective
Jim H wrote:

You make a lot of good points.. but this is not one of them;

(e.g. water doesn't curve around a ball, it is flat and in fact any body of water is the definition of flat).

Say what?  The ocean layer does indeed curve around the (somewhat flattened) ball that is the earth.  Here is proof.    

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon#/media/File:Horizon,_Valencia_%28S...

 

The image that you provide here actually proves the flatness of the earth and demonstrates the law of perspective (the same law that makes distant lamp posts appear to submerge below the street level). Just think about the Suez Canal... That perfectly flat stretch of water connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea, and is a whopping 120 miles long and no curve.

Time2help's picture
Time2help
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 9 2011
Posts: 2839
markreis

After two posts, I have decided...that I like you.

Michael_Rudmin's picture
Michael_Rudmin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 25 2014
Posts: 851
On perspective and math /Markreis

Markreis, while I admit that from your perspective the Earth is discoid flat, and that your perspective is indeed a valid frame of reference, nonetheless the correct working of the equations of state still yield unacceptable complexity.

In some cases, the complexity requires special solution methods in order to solve for such things as the motion of a free-falling body at any point of the globe as viewed from any other point of the globe. Fortunately, for initial - value problems, we do have such tools as the Parker-Sochacki solution to the Picard Iteration, that make this possible.

However, for boundary problems this is still not solved.

For that reason, it becomes useful to transform the coordinate system of a ball, and to use a spehrical coordinate system. As such, the mathematics becomes doable by standard analytical methods.

That is not to say that the Earth IS a ball, but only to say that it becomes useful to model the earth AS a ball, for the sake of solving the system of differential equations.

It is no different than using a fourier transform to break a voice into its frequency component approximations: the infinite amplitude at certain spots (when you do this) is clear evidence that the model is imperfect; but it is at least useful for certain purposes such as designing a microphone system with passable utility, or designing lossy cell phone codecs.

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
Time2help

Haha, thank you Time2help. I appreciate that. I'm being honest, so there ya go...

(I love Peak Prosperity and the whole approach that Chris and Adam have taken to help improve the world. I've noticed that the people here are on-point with so much that I am super pleased to be a member. This isn't designed to be a truth movement site per se, so I hope I didn't rattle any cages with my post. Similar to the manipulations that go on in markets, politics, religion, etc... so also exist manipulations of people's perceptions; and I brought up probably the biggest one of them all. So be it.)

 

Jim H's picture
Jim H
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 8 2009
Posts: 2387
Truthiness and PP.com

Markreis said,

This isn't designed to be a truth movement site per se,

I very much think of this place as a truth seekers site.  Speaking of truth, those must be some dang big heaters under the disc that make the lava that flows out of volcanoes .. how does that work?  Think of the BTU's involved.....

    hqdefault.jpg

 

Time2help's picture
Time2help
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 9 2011
Posts: 2839
The world is flat

As you compress your timeframe to minimize the past and future, moving closer and closer into the present, markreis point becomes increasingly valid.  Right now, walk outside and look around. For all practical intents and purposes...in this moment...your world is flat.

Unless you live on a hill wink.

This 4D virtual reality simulation is, after all, all in the eyes of the beholder.

Time2help's picture
Time2help
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 9 2011
Posts: 2839
Michael
Michael_Rudmin wrote:

Markreis, while I admit that from your perspective the Earth is discoid flat, and that your perspective is indeed a valid frame of reference, nonetheless the correct working of the equations of state still yield unacceptable complexity.

You seem to lean towards Tuvak, though I confess that it's a pretty close toss up between Tuvak and Spock.

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
Truth and PP.com (Response to Jim H and Post 14)

Well, ideally everybody cares about and seeks the truth, but that has not been my observation of most people's actions. I certainly think that anyone that has landed on the PP site and hung around for awhile cares deeply about truth; and does not like the reality that the financial, political and social (e.g. media) worlds have been manipulated. (And, I wouldn't actually use the term "truthiness" because that seems relativistic, and relativism is also a deception.)

 

Regarding the size of the heaters below the disc, I suppose they'd be about the same size as those at the center of the spinning-at-1000-miles-per-hour ball earth, which zooms around the sun at 66,600 miles/hour, which along with the rest of the solar system zooms through the galaxy at 558,000 miles per hour, which is also whirling through the infinite vacuum of space at 666,000 miles per hour as proposed by the theory that we were taught in school. *  :-)

 

*Source (from top Google search item):  http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/earth/Speeds...

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Online)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
wargames, earth, sphere tesselation

markreis-

Long ago when I was interested in making a earth-sized wargame, I ran into the problem that everyone runs into when trying to solve this particular problem.  And (from what I can tell) everyone gives up and punts.  They end up creating a hexmap (roughly) similar to your projection, with ice around the edges "holding everything in".  This is a disagreeable limitation if you want to (say) have a base in the arctic/antarctic where you base radar or interceptors, or send a flight of bombers "the short way" over the poles.

Requirements of the wargame (and playability, in terms of the player's ability to easily comprehend what's going on, as well as the game designer's sanity) make it so that each hex must the same size as every other hex, and all sides of each hexagon must connect to another hexagon.

Of course, those two requirements plus a sphere make the task impossible.  Which is why everyone punts.

Having never solved the problem, its one of those things that has stuck in the back of my brain, appearing at odd moments to bother me.  So let me ask you - how would you solve the problem of a wargame in which each "land slice" connects to a number of neighboring "land slices", wherein each slice is of the same size and shape?

What shape would you use?  Subdivision of the total surface into equal-sized slices is a requirement.

 

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
davefairtex
davefairtex wrote:

markreis-

Long ago when I was interested in making a earth-sized wargame, I ran into the problem that everyone runs into when trying to solve this particular problem.  And (from what I can tell) everyone gives up and punts.

Requirements of the wargame (and playability, in terms of the player's ability to easily comprehend what's going on, as well as the game designer's sanity) make it so that each hex must the same size as every other hex, and all sides of each hexagon must connect to another hexagon.

Of course, those two requirements plus a sphere make the task impossible.  Which is why everyone punts.

Having never solved the problem, its one of those things that has stuck in the back of my brain, appearing at odd moments to bother me.  So let me ask you - how would you solve the problem of a wargame in which each "land slice" connects to a number of neighboring "land slices", wherein each slice is of the same size and shape?

What shape would you use?  Subdivision of the total surface into equal-sized slices is a requirement.

 

I'm not quite sure I understand the relevance to my original post that the earth is truly flat and not a spinning sphere...

However, if you have to bend all those "land slices" around a sphere it may be impossible. (Even a soccer ball, upon which mankind has spent billions of dollars, includes 20 hexagons and 12 pentagons.) If you had all those "land slices" on a plane (like the earth), you could do it many ways. Check out the appearance of a sunflower face, that's a beautifully solved problem!!!

[Edit: Come to think of it, if you started with a "3-D plane" like a sunflower face that had all identical sunflower seeds, and molded that perfectly well around a sphere, you might come up with the right shape...??? Try it...]

Arthur Robey's picture
Arthur Robey
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2010
Posts: 3936
Logically Jim.

Speaking of truth, those must be some dang big heaters under the disc that make the lava that flows out of volcanoes

Thanks for the segue.  Cold Fusion.  That's why we still have helium. 

(Somebody should draw a graph.) 

David Allan's picture
David Allan
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 15 2009
Posts: 105
A serious question

While my first comment in this thread was really just a piece of fun I would like to ask a serious question.

The question relates to earths fragility so I think it is on topic. The question is about potential nuclear contamination. I believe there are around 438 nuclear power plants in the world and most are in the northern hemisphere. But as air circulates between hemispheres radio-active gas can be distributed around the globe quite fast.

Now as I understand it we (humans) haven't figured out how to safely dispose of radioactive waste - despite having created many thousands of tonnes of the stuff.

Without going into details about precisely how we might find ourselves in the predicament my question is this; What happens in the event of a fairly devastating widespread collapse where infrastructure crumbles and the systems supporting power plants and containing nuclear waste fail?

I realize many nuclear tests have been conducted and bombs detonated where the fallout has dispersed into the wider environment 'relatively' harmlessly. On the other hand some of the effects of Chernobyl and Fukushima were felt far away and over a long period of time. Does anyone know what could be the cumulative effect of hundreds of these events - would it push radiation to lethal levels all around the world? The first tendency is to imagine the worst, but that is just a gut reaction. I would love to read any informed comments.

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Online)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
relevance

Relevance?  There is none!  I had hoped that maybe your way of thinking could help me to solve this annoying problem of mine in a way I'd missed.  I guess I was struck by the simplicity of the approach.

The sunflower approach violates the requirement that each land slice connects to an equal number of other land slices.  Once you get to the edge of the sunflower, that rule is violated.

The soccer ball approach (or "football" as the foreigners call it - heh) violates the requirement that adjacency relationships be identical no matter what land slice you happen to be on.  There might be annoying tactical issues for someone who was in a hexagonal shaped land slice and wanted to attack a pentagonal shaped land slice that do not map to our experienced reality here.

The whole projection concept of yours is really interesting.  Its quite useful as a way of accurately displaying how the world actually is from the point of view of wherever you're at - it assumes you are always at the center.  And...aren't we all at the center of our worlds?

Really a fascinating way to look at things.  Rather than drawing the map as some sort of projection viewed from outside, you draw the map with you always in the center, and everywhere else is drawn as a distance and angle relationship to that center.  In other words, map can't exist without first defining the center point.

In that sense it is kind of like the universe itself.  It requires an observer to collapse probability into certainty.

Things get a little funky if you want to plot a course that involves a complete circumnavigation eventually ending up at your starting point, but if you only want to travel to another particular point anywhere else in the world, this projection is a win.  If you did it using the circumnavigation using waypoints, with each waypoint becoming the new center point, that would work fine.

Observing the motion of satellites might be strange, as they would appear at one edge of the map, travel to the other, and then come back into view on that previous edge again.  Its certainly observed reality, so that's a virtue.  But its strange nonetheless.

I'm not sure this helps me though.  But I liked the projection.  Maybe the answer is, you can't use regular polygons, only angles and distances.  How you represent positions of everything in a database though - that's a bit tricky.

Michael_Rudmin's picture
Michael_Rudmin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 25 2014
Posts: 851
It's actually quite easy: land hex problem

You have to abandon the concept of same size pieces, and then approximate it back in.

First, you divide up the globe as a geodesic dome.

Then, you take the circumference of each piece and define it to be 6.

Then you resubdivide the pieces into hexes.

You modify the pentahexes one of several ways: stretching the boundaries, adding a resource non-transmittable boundary (such as game option changes, or repair area, or timeout zone, or tunnel entrance to other pentahex).

See, your problem you cast as a mathematical one. However, if this is your game, it is really a political/imaginative one.

Michael_Rudmin's picture
Michael_Rudmin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 25 2014
Posts: 851
Time2help

Time2help,

When it comes to truth -- religious truth -- I am certain that there is only one correct truth, and all other versions are going to be flawed. Moreover, those flaws matter.

However, when it comes to science, for the process of science to work, all views must be held to be equally valid or invalid. They are only useful in predicting, moreso or less so. Validity is nothing, utility is everything, and the competition of ideas drives them forward.

when you go out this morning, take a look around you: you will see that -- from your perspective -- the world is discoid flat. Everything else, you learned from teachers contrary to your senses and even your own experimentation.

Markreis seems to be an experimentalist. At some point we may gain some valuable insights from him. Maybe someone here already has.

Michael_Rudmin's picture
Michael_Rudmin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 25 2014
Posts: 851
The question isn't whether radiation would reach lethal levels

The radiation of Chernobyl was far past lethal levels. Farther out--such as in Šilute where I lived, it was at levels that would kill some people, and not kill others, in a kind of random game of Ukranian Roulette.

If we had hundreds of Fukushimas, it definitely would impact our lifespans. As a result, if things were bad enough, we might have people bearing children at 11 (those who were lucky enough) and dying at 22. Or at 16.

As such, baby features would be retained, but other adult features, such asthe particular shape of a fully developed body, might well change. In addition, the genetic damage might well drive some level of giantism.

I suspect that the regression of dinosaurs to chicks, and thence to birds, was similar. Possibly the regression of shelled molluscs to octopi was, too, considering the acidification of the Permian Extinction ocean.

Life would still be possible, just different; and probably shorter.

jgritter's picture
jgritter
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2011
Posts: 273
The Chinese

I'm not sure if this is the place to ask this question, but the theme of the thread seems to be about trying to wrap your head around really big ideas and people interpreting the same information in different ways, so here goes.

Isn't the Chinese supporting Iranian troops in Syria from an aircraft carrier in the eastern Mediterranean Sea a really, really big deal?  Or did I miss something?  Granted that the Chinese and Iranian forces would seem to be a token, so far, but when Russia, China and Iran move into Syria to support a regime that the United States was explicitly trying to over throw and the American response is to withdraw support for our proxies and making a lot of noise about not wanting any trouble from other peoples aircraft pretty much mark the high water mark for American global hegemony?

I feel like the world just ended and no one (at least in the United States) seems to have noticed.

John G.

Arthur Robey's picture
Arthur Robey
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2010
Posts: 3936
Problem solved.

You and I share the same model J Gritter. The petro-dollar just died. 

As for getting rid of nuclear waste,  that's been sorted. Here is a ship with well found life rafts and rendezvous with the deep.

https://www.rt.com/news/318836-nuclear-waste-ship-australia/

Time2help's picture
Time2help
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 9 2011
Posts: 2839
The truth
Michael_Rudmin wrote:

Time2help, When it comes to truth the right way -- the religious truth right way -- I am certain that there is only one correct truth right way, and all other versions are going to be flawed. Moreover, those flaws matter.

Somewhere a Gorilla is chuckling...

Cornelius999's picture
Cornelius999
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 17 2008
Posts: 379
Yes..the only thing in all

Yes..the only thing in all the above comments that made me nervous, was Michael R's use of the word "certain" but that's just all passe, and anyhow ISIS are taking care of that arguement. I don't have enough surplus mental energy to tangle with you multi-diamentional shape shifters - I'm just happy to have enough energy to walk around the block and chew gum.  Ahem..that is, chew the gum on a different day. Mental experiment further reveled that not only could you walk around the block, you could, as it were, block around the walk, without taking a step backwards as it were...and now I discover that I have exerted myself too much in the same day, and must lie down in a darkened room before exerting myself reinvigorated...or not.

Dwig's picture
Dwig
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 5 2009
Posts: 141
Dave: a modest proposal

I'm not sure, but it's possible Bucky Fuller will provide you with a solution to your dilemma.  Check out one of his many fascinating ideas: the Dymaxion Map of the Earth (he uses a triangular tesselation).

Markreis, I doubt that you'd have much sympathy for Fuller's work projection.  I'm curious though: you're no doubt aware of the many satellites that, umm, err, circumnavigate the Earth; what do you make of them and the data, visual and otherwise, that they send down to the surface on a regular basis?

Terry L's picture
Terry L
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 25 2009
Posts: 17
Circulation of air between the hemispheres

From what I've read, the mixing of air between the hemispheres happens, of course, but is not as uniform as you might think. Here's a visual display of such:

If you're interested in ongoing radiation readings in eastern Australia, contact [email protected] and ask to get on his list. Every month he sends out his Southern Hemisphere Background Radiation Report, with an emphasis on Fukushima's legacy.

Terry

Dwig's picture
Dwig
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 5 2009
Posts: 141
The fragility of the Terran ecosystem: a different perspective

Instead of breathing on spheres, I'd like to suggest a different way of gauging the fragility of the ecosystem:

If I remember rightly, the global ecosystem goes back somewhat more than 4 billion years.  In that time, there have been many mass extinction events, including six "major" events (including the latest one, that we're credited with being the cause of).  In every case, this "fragile, diaphanous membrane" rebounded vigorously.  From my perspective, Gaia's a tough old lady, and there's many a dance in the old gal yet.  Of course, it's still a matter for conjecture whether Homo so-called-Sapiens will be part of the dance for much longer.

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Online)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
thanks

Dwig-

Thanks, that icosahedral projection is interesting, probably one of the better ones.  A triangle for a land segment is mildly disagreeable, but no worse than a square, I suppose.  Attacking what would normally be an adjacent bit of property across one of the points requires you to knock off 2 other sectors to get there.  I suppose the same thing is true for every tesselation, even a hex since there will always be a neighbor whose only bit of connectivity is across a point versus a flat area.

I think I'm just too used to hexes.  Anyhow sorry for the digression.  :-)  I have to go think about triangles now.

Cornelius999's picture
Cornelius999
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 17 2008
Posts: 379
Hexes?

I'm thinking of reporting to administration, many of the technical terms being used in these posts as being actually witchcraft terms, straight out of the Manual "Hammer of the Witches" to put the hex on us simpler folk. Sorry..... a weak jest from the geometrically challenged.

Jim H's picture
Jim H
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 8 2009
Posts: 2387
Dymaxion map...

I am glad Bucky's map has come in to the discussion.  It hangs on the wall of my office, and has for 25 years.  A signed copy of Synergetics sits on my bookshelf.  In case my avatar does not give it away, I am a big fan. 

Bucky Fuller was first and foremost a maverick thinker.  He thought deeply about the underlying geometry of nature, from the way atoms arrange, up to planetary scale and beyond.  Nobody was going to fool Buckminster Fuller in to a false view of the earth.. and his conclusion was not that it was a flat disc.  No, he understood it to be spherical, as are many of nature's forms.  Nature tends to seek equilibrium spontaneously.. the path of least resistance.  

Bucky coined the word, "Dymaxion" to describe the vector equilibrium;

    

 

ve.jpg
The Vector Equilibrium, as its name describes, is the only geometric form wherein all of the vectors are of equal length. This includes both from its center point out to its circumferential vertices, and the edges (vectors) connecting all of those vertices. Having the same form as a cuboctahedron, it was Buckminster Fuller who discovered the significance of the full vector symmetry in 1917 and called it the Vector Equilibrium in 1940. With all vectors being exactly the same length and angular relationship, from an energetic perspective, the VE represents the ultimate and perfect condition wherein the movement of energy comes to a state of absolute equilibrium, and therefore absolute stillness and nothingness. As Fuller states, because of this it is the zero-phase from which all other forms emerge...
http://cosmometry.net/vector-equilibrium-&-isotropic-vector-matrix
Bucky spoke of the flat earth idea very specifically in a talk whose transcript is available on the website of the institute that bears his name;

Session 8

 

Part 1

I made a diagram last summer of the trigonometric functions, and I thought I would complete it for you, and in trying to get it run to your head, because I am a little slower at looking at my paper and putting it on the board. But when I finish it, I think it is going to be useful to you. Remember then that we are always starting with Universe and then we're subdividing, so we start with a sphere our geometry begins with a sphere, or at least with a system, and a sphere is simply a high frequency omni-structural system. The sphere is a high frequency structural system all triangulated. And so it would be approximately unit radius, high frequency structural system. And I'm going to go through some of the arguments of the geometries of the early days, about how you play the game of geometry of Egypt and Greece which is really worth our feeling here, because they took for granted a flat earth, so they started on a plane. But if I'm going to play the game, in starting with totality, I've got to say, "What do I have to prove things, and so forth," and I think you're going to find that it comes out really very satisfactorily.

https://bfi.org/about-fuller/resources/everything-i-know/session-8
Bucky's work crossed over from math, physics, and geometry into the more metaphysical, or spiritual realm as well... of the ability of the surface of the vector equilibrium to fold and unfold in a, "jitterbug" motion, it is written;
there is also an instant and infinite exchange of information throughout the entire field, depicted here as the small triangles that are picked up by the larger triangles and carried further up the scale ad infinitum. Each triangle is a packet of information relevant to the fractal scale at which it exists, and as soon as this packet of information reaches its new maximum expansion state, it becomes instantly available to the entire Unified Field. In this way, all information about energy events throughout the entire cosmos is instantly and constantly available to all other energy events in a cosmic feedback loop of individual and unified holographic integrity. This simple dynamic model and its implications as described lend a logical cosmometric explanation to such phenomena as clairvoyance, clairaudience, long-distance healing, quantum entanglement, etc.
http://cosmometry.net/vector-equilibrium-&-isotropic-vector-matrix
And here's an animation of this jitterbug motion

 

Click Image to View Animation

 

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
"Satellites" and Other Visual Trickery

Since the earth is not a globe about which an object can "circumnavigate", it is clear that the images that you allude to are from aerial photographs. (If you want to provide an example capable of refuting me, please do so.) The earth images provided by NASA are clearly CGI, and of poor quality at that. Please compare the multiple NASA images of the earth to see how there are gross inconsistencies in the sizes of the continents and bodies of water and the like, and there are numerous examples of Photoshop manipulations of cloud formations, etc.

In regards B. Fuller, I have the utmost respect for his incredible intellect. But, we have to avoid granting any individual undue veneration. I come from a science background and have an appreciation for the "scientific method", but I also see clearly that Copernicus was wrong (or his work was co-opted), and that is because I can trust facts, measurements and my own observations. Bottom line and above all, we have to use our own mind, body (senses) and spirit to comprehend what's going on here.

[For those reading this thread and think I may be joking, I will humbly suggest investigating the topic (flat earth) with an open mind to truth on your own. Also, in my first post I recommended a board on the topic, and that was:  ifers.boards.net]

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
"Hemispheres" View of Earthly Wind and Weather Patterns

Living as I do on the coast of California, I am as concerned as most anyone about the effects of the Fukushima disaster. I'll add this video link that may help explain the ocean currents and air flow a little better... There are other videos to give you an accurate perspective on earthly weather/ocean/air patterns, but this is a short and interesting one:

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
Veneration of Fuller

As I mentioned above, B. Fuller was a man of truly incredible intellect, I know how brilliant the man was, and I even have a large scale tensegrity model here in my house. However, just because a man is brilliant in a certain capacity (or many capacities in his case) does not mean that they are always correct. The Fuller quotation that you site is certainly not his best effort at using scientific reasoning to describe a globular earth (it's not even very good English). My position is that it is observable fact (and if one uses their own reasoning along with their best observations about the world they will also conclude) that, the earth is flat. Again, recognizing that water will NOT curve around a spinning globe is a good mental experiment for people to start with... And it is my understanding to date that the largest deception perpetrated on humanity is that of the globe earth.

jgritter's picture
jgritter
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2011
Posts: 273
markreis

Just curious as to what your thoughts on World Trade Center building number 7 might be.

John G.

Cornelius999's picture
Cornelius999
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 17 2008
Posts: 379
Well thanks for giving our

Well thanks for giving our poor brain cells another good make or break stretch Markreis, with this tantalizing Flat Earth perspective, if that's the word. But what has me even more concerned, is that the unfortunate man doing the commentary has been flattened as well. You can tell he is very anxious and seriously in danger of swallowing his own head, when he catches up with himself. I'm inclined to recommend valium to slow him down and introduce a slight slur to frequency correct. But you're going to tell me it's all at the wrong speed?

Cornelius999's picture
Cornelius999
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 17 2008
Posts: 379
Too Flippant

That was too flippant of me Markreis. Thanks for the ifer.boards.net address. At first glance it looks fascinating ie. the questions about the curvature of the earth....we've got too few lateral thinkers as it is!

Swampmama3's picture
Swampmama3
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 28 2009
Posts: 72
I hope you jest, Markreis

On the off chance that you are actually serious, then I would have to argue against your idea using your own means.  If one can only determine truth from one's own observation, then I say the Earth is indeed a round-ish ball.   I've been to sea and from the boat I could clearly see the curve of the Earth at the horizon, all the way around.  So for me, my truth is that the Earth is ball-like, and water does indeed curve around it.  If your observation is contrary because you have only been on land with a limited vantage range and have not personally observed the curve, then truth is relative to perspective.  I do not believe truth is relative. 

I hope your humor is just so dry that I can't detect it. 

LesPhelps's picture
LesPhelps
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 30 2009
Posts: 799
Size Is A Secondary Issue

I did the same exercise a while back with a statement about the depth of the atmosphere.  I read somewhere that it was equivalent to two coats of varnish on an Earth Globe.  I did the math and came up with six coats of varnish.

Let's approach this from a different perspective.  First, atmosphere, the "death zone" for mountain climbers is at or above 26,247 feet (8000 meters).  Above that, a climber is dying slowly, or not so slowly.  That distance represents 4.97 miles, a bit further than I drive to the nearest grocery store. Second, ocean, the Mindanano Trench is 34,580 feet (10,540 meters).  That is 6.3 miles, closer driving to my favorite big box lumber store.

The Earth is not an endless, resource, far from it.

But it's not the size that is going to literally kill us in the near future, it's the doublings.  If doublings are coming every 10 years or less (the vertical slope of the exponential curve),  then doubling the amount of available resources only buys you another 10 years to react.  Tripling the resources buys you another 15 years.

A few years back, I did a calculation on population growth.  I calculated, roughly (feel free to do the math yourself), that if the then current population growth rate of 1.3% could be sustained indefinitely, we would overpopulate the entire Milky Way Galaxy in less than 2,500 years.

It's not so much the size as the doublings.

I ran across this quote recently, when I reread "Beyond The Limits To Growth."

"Any population-economy-environment system that has feedback delays and slow physical responses; that has thresholds and erosive mechanisms; and that grows rapidly is literally unmanageable.  No matter how efficient it's economy, no matter how wise it's leaders, it can't steer itself away from hazards.  If it constantly tries to accelerate, it will overshoot."

Ominous indeed.  

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
I'm Really Not Jesting, Swampmama3

Due to the law of perspective, there is a limit to the distance you can see along the flat sea. So, from your location on the sea you can only see so far in all directions to that "vanishing point", and that distance creates an arc (or a 360 degree circle) around you. The curve you perceive is that arc. If however you were to raise your line of sight, like going up in a balloon for instance, you could see further; and in fact you would notice that the horizon line ALWAYS rose to your horizontal line of sight. Once again, this is further proof of the flatness of our earth.

 

While vacationing in Bora Bora several years ago I noticed something interesting. Bora Bora is an atoll with quite a wide lagoon encircling the central island. From the island shore looking out to the reef a huge arc is formed, and if you let your mind imagine it, it could "appear" that you are on a relatively tiny ball. That would be a mind trick though.

 

In previous posts I thought I was pretty clear that I was not joking, so I'm not sure what else to say there. And in no way was I ever suggesting that truth is relative, my belief is the exact opposite. What I am suggesting though is that people trust their own observations to confirm facts, and not allow others to dupe them with nonsense that can be disproved through fact gathering, direct observation and testing, and using sound logic.

 

So, through gathering facts (like the distance of the Suez Canal and the fact that there is no allowance for earth curvature within its 120+ miles), direct observation (like the horizon line will always rise to your line of sight as you ascend in a balloon/airplane or whatever), and logic (like water does not and cannot curve around a spinning ball) you should be left with truth and reality to the extent it can be shown to anyone with an open and alert mind.

 

(I understand the difficulty in grasping such a huge paradigm changing concept, but I hope I have made my points in a clear way. Even with that though, you'd probably be more satisfied researching this beyond this Peak Prosperity thread. I've recommended this site:  ifers.boards.net.)

 

 

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
It's All Good, Cornelius999

I didn't look at your prior comment as flippant, but thanks for the additional comment. :-)

I fully understand how enormously unorthodox it is to consider a globe earth/flat earth deception; but once one satisfies themselves on this, it's very life affirming. The unique importance of life here takes on an even grander meaning.

-Peace

Wildlife Tracker's picture
Wildlife Tracker
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 14 2012
Posts: 403
Oh Okay!

It's a matter of perspective why I can't see China in this photograph. It's clearly not the fact that China is on the other side of what appears to be a spherical object.

I knew everything I learned in science class was all part of a Martian plot to trick the human population to sail off the edge of the earth, so that earth could be theirs! ALL theirs!

Cornelius999's picture
Cornelius999
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 17 2008
Posts: 379
That's a telling paragraph

That's a telling paragraph Les. I believe that its necessary for us to be shocked by the Limits to Growth curve - but not to remain in shock.  These are physical limits. Of course we will try to work around them. We may succeed or fail. But we are only partly physical; we are also partly consciousness. Now is the time when consciousness, and the technologies that are appropriate to it also need development. Where else are we going to hide or thrive - Mars? Prayer and meditation were not without influence in the past. Intelligence agencies have spent millions on psychic powers research. Today " Mindfulness " is the buzz word. Sports coaches know the value of being " in the zone. "  I would like Chris and Adam to think about talking to people versed in this ancient/modern, under- explored Supercontinent.   

I submit that that those most accomplished in the exploration of this realm, were those most revered by many civilizations. By comparasion, we may be a tribe of head-hunting head-shrinkers.  We're sure as hell shrinking the ecosphere.

There's got to be vast undrilled reserves of consciousness out there.  Drill Baby! Drill !

Michael_Rudmin's picture
Michael_Rudmin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 25 2014
Posts: 851
On experimentalism and class

Once, long ago I learned the catenary equation: it's the equation of how a rope or cable, stretched between two points, hangs.

Recently, I was interested in seeing how a 7-wire prestressing cable hung in our casting beds. I had elasticity, tension force, distance between supports, mass per unit length, and so on.

To my surprise, the catenary equation predicted a far greater sag than we were seeing.

I'm not sure if it is due to how the cable is wrapped, or something else entirely -- but I learned something there. Not everything we are taught in school always applies.

Now, that said, maybe there is something I was missing. I don't decry the catenary equation as false; but I do note: you should check things out for yourself as far as you are able, and be open to new ideas. Maybe what you thought was true isn't.

Cornelius999's picture
Cornelius999
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 17 2008
Posts: 379
Again, in relation to my

Again, in relation to my previous post, I need to be clear. I've been, in my fashion trying to practice some elements of a taoist lifestyle for years now.  This has involved cultivating deeper energy flows in my body and uncovering some of the energy hotspots known as chakras. This has involved tai chi, stretching exercises, and self-massage, and some occasional meditation. This has vastly improved my physical health naturally as I believe the ravages of prolonged stress could, otherwise, have killed me by now.

The immediate aim is to establish a firm foundation in the body for further development and for mental and meditational experimentation. If there's any truth to rumours of superpowers or immortality I plan to personally check them out rather than risk a lift in an intergalectic mugger's UFO. 

A nice thing about taoism is, it's all personal experience and experimentation, though of course there's the collegiate, communal assessment of these as well as taoist literature and encycloepidas as well going back generations, maybe millennia. It's less religious or theoretical than buddhism and may even have helped give rise to all the scientific discoveries of China that usually preceeded those of the West.

markreis's picture
markreis
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 1 2009
Posts: 14
The images used to mock my

The images used to mock my prior posts are beautifully illustrative of the imagery used to deceive us since our infancies*.  Given everything from the spinning mobile above our cribs, to the "science" lessons that our grade school teachers gleaned from a publishing house textbook, to the constant and ubiquitous use of terms like "global" and "planet", plus the ever-present fake ball earth imagery in all of our daily lives, it is no wonder that it is nearly impossible for the typical western indoctrinated mind to grasp what is provably correct; and that is that the earth is NOT a spinning ball whirling through space with some delicate atmosphere (zooming around a spinning sphere at greater than 1000 miles-per-hour) immediately adjacent to the infinite vacuum of space. This is an impossibility and among many, many other proofs that negate a ball earth theory.

 

I wish that instead of wasting time with cartoons like those presented,  people would spend a reasonable amount of time digesting and researching the measurable, provable facts that I pointed out before.  I recommended a good place to start in prior posts:  ifers.boards.net.  Additionally, for the sake of improving one's life, anyone may also check into studying themselves so that they might learn how to trust themselves more than mass media and the robot instructors that have "educated" us to date.

 

Finally, I completely understand the difficulty in grasping such an enormous paradigm shifting concept, I really do. I would like to see everyone maintain their mental faculties and beware of those you are told to trust. The same (type of) people who manipulate markets, elections, news stories, packaging labels, etc., etc, are the same ones who have methodically manipulated human perception of where and what earth is for centuries, and they are conducting a grand theatrical performance on the world stage; and people take it for reality. As Shakespeare had his players exclaim in his theater back in the 16th century: "All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages."  And what was the name of Shakespeare's theater again..?**

 

-----------------------------------------------------

 

* The clearly CGI (computer generated image) fake "photo" of the impossible ball earth can be proved fraudulent with very little effort if anyone cares to take a few moments to research it for themselves with an open mind. And let's remember that a religious belief in "NASA science" does not constitute proof of anything other than the depth of social and mental conditioning that has occurred in a particular individual. And btw, take a look at B. Fuller's atmosphere imaged on the artist rendering fake earth presented; it appears a whole lot thicker than a hot-air condensate on a 30 cm sphere to me... Either NASA or B. Fuller have to re-jigger their models.

 

The image of the sailing ships careening over the edge of a waterfall is absurd. Thirty seconds of research into the reality of a flat earth model will illustrate the proper model, which is what I described in my first post here. This is a further example of the power of images to control the minds of people who prefer not to think.

 

The space alien "martian" is also an example of early childhood indoctrination into the concept of a ball shaped "mars" where alien beings might herald from. This is another absurdity that the mass of public has bought into. One plus to the "martian" image though is that it is the most genuine of the three… At least this obvious pretend cartoon is not trying to be anything other than a fantasy that children can be entertained by. The prior two images of the fake ball earth, and the ridiculous fantasy image of the sailing ships are deliberate attempts to create a false image to implant into the sponge-like minds of the public.

 

**Everyone probably know this, but it is/was called the "Globe" theater.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments