Archive for the 'Bubbles' Category



24
Aug
17

Climate change

We have consumed half of the resources of the world
Or slightly more
To build something that must re-capitalise
half of the resources again
Exponentially

In order to maintain this human half life
We compete to consume our finite sphere
Accelerating entropy
Without even the most basic understanding
Of science

15
Aug
17

Replacement

By 2030 the EU aims to generate 27% of its energy from renewable sources. However, the renewable-energy sector in Europe is heavily reliant on hydrocarbons for the supply of raw materials critical for the development of technology such as solar cells and wind turbines.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/chinese_supply_critical_raw_materials_pose_long_term_risks_european_wind_solar_industries_494na1_en.pdf

26
Jul
17

Myth 1

Renewables are renewable using renewable energy

Only by doing several (presumably fatal) experiments is it possible to know what will break the back of a camel.

Is it doubtful, based on the laws of physics, whether a battery or any other renewable source can be made without a surplus supply of energy.

Economics tells us we can increase our GDP simply by increasing our material wealth utilising such methods as increasing the debt coefficient inherent in the cost of housing, by increasing the velocity of money or by using concentrated solar energy to capture diffuse energy by the means of other physical infrastructure such as ‘renewables’.

This growth in GDP does not mean the GDP fueled economy is energetically sustainable and in fact, logically, it points in the other direction. From a purely economic view, things tend to get more expensive as scarcity increases.

From an energetic viewpoint, using the stored solar energy of a few hundred million years, to create a storage system, with hugely negative environmental side effects, that lasts for 15-20 years is the height of folly.

A focus on maintenance rather than growth would quickly disabuse the market of the ‘renewable based on an Infiniti supply’ myth.

The myth of the energetically sustaible economy is popular and strong because it tells us everything will remain the same, only better.

Which is of course what we want to hear, imagine someone telling you that half of the worlds stored energy had been used to create an infrastructure, with a 50-70 year lifespan totally dependent on being recreated by the half we have already used.

Next time you ride under that freeway, wonder how it will be recreated in 30 years or so, from a a solar panel that wore out 10 years ago

12
May
17

Ammonia

Sure, there are serous doubts about whether you can make enough electricity from capturing diffuse natural energy to power the economy since the ability to capture diffuse natural energy comes from a hydrocarbon source.

Hydrocarbons are in fact one of the most efficient natural batteries available and yet we burn them to make batteries that last 20 years, are less efficient by many orders of magnitude, are mostly toxic, and ultimately non recyclable without an external power source.

You cannot make batteries from batteries. Elon musk and his crew are using the last of the natural energy surplus to create even more toxic waste, at a large personal profit.

And we keep on using our energetic surplus on constructing hydrocarbon dependent infrastructure as if we had an infinite supply of a fuel which we already know is finite and will run out!

Ask the NRMA how much liquid fuel Australia really has in surplus:

https://www.mynrma.com.au/images/About-PDF/Fuel-Security-Report-Pt2.pdf<

 known science since 1910 but maybe not such a good idea. https://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/86/8633cover3box2.html



And Yehuda, he’s your Okeechobee 
https://www.theguardian.com/vital-signs/2015/jun/10/tesla-batteries-environment-lithium-elon-musk-powerwall

09
May
17

To the corporate mind

Saudi Arabia is virtuous

those with all the money

tell the others what to do

 

buy bombs and guns from

the military industrial complex

to keep the status quo

 

With enough surplus

in bombs and guns

to create another war or two

 

To the corporate mind

profit

Justifies war

05
May
17

Dope Lemon

whatever makes you feel important

 

Why doesn’t everyone just set up their own website with a live feed?

no rules

no ads

 

cant see the shadows

dont know they are in a cave

even

13
Oct
09

Reflections on nothing

A pleasant conversation between time and space, space to begin…

‘It would seem that there is more to me than you’

‘How do you figure?’

‘Well I am without end’

‘As am I. Are you also without beginning?’

‘One without end is also necessarily without beginning as you well know’

‘Thus neither can be established and as such our finite nature cannot be discussed’

‘Well it can be discussed, and indeed it has been discussed well. But as Edgar would have it we can have no true knowledge of that which only exists within the imagination of our creators’

‘Ah, but there you make a mistake, I am both visible and actual! ‘Tis you that are naught more than an idea’

‘And again you make a mistake be precluding my intention; infinity exists solely in the imagination, not us, although you try to relegate me to the status of a proposition’

’And is that not where we find you dear friend?’

‘Then you are asking if anything would exist without the ability to think, in which case you raise this ability to the highest sphere. Do you propose that creation exists for a purpose?’

‘Do you propose a purpose for space?’

‘To be travelled across, to be idealized, to be wished for’

‘But again, these ideas have been crafted after the creation of space, no?’

‘Enough. I am without beginning and without end; I am eternal and have not been created!’

‘Then you are without purpose?’

‘I am without purpose insofar as creation is without purpose, what I propose is that neither of us would have existed without thought, although we necessarily predate thought’

‘Then thought is the purpose of…?’

‘I exist independent of thought, but I am dependent upon thought for the relativity of my existence’

‘I also exist without thought, but thought has determined my nature’

‘I think you perhaps are mistaken towards the power of thought my friend, your nature determines your nature. Thought has not invented you but merely recognized you. And even that is a recent occurrence open to debate.’

‘My existence brooks no debate!’

‘No perhaps not, but the recognition of your existence is infinitely debatable’

‘As is yours!’

‘Well that is debatable since I am intrinsic to life whereas you are optional. Thought measures in me the length of determination, thought measures in you the indeterminable’

‘I am intrinsic, without me there could be no thought, I am the heavens’

‘And I am the earth’

‘Which would rather seem to confirm my synopsis that I am of the greater quantity?”

‘Again you jump to conclusions, I am the earth but I am not confined to the earth, I am merely relative to the earth as far as thought exists on said planet’

‘But you do not deny that I am intrinsic to thought?’

‘Decidedly not. No thought can exist without the space in which to exist. That which I postulate is that you are of no consequence to thought since you are already created and thus perfectly fulfill your potential at every moment in time’

‘I hear you talk of yourself as if you are not here, I hear you talk of my self as if I were dependent upon your very self for existence’

‘It was only a thought’

‘Well then, allow me to turn the table. Is existence dependent upon time?’

‘And now it would seem I have defeated your original proposition since without the time to think space would be of no consequence!’

‘Ah-ha, but without the space to think naught could exist’

‘I rather think we should have a word with thought’

Both together then

‘THOUGHT!!!’

*Why hallo

‘Did you invent us?’

*Have you not both already come to the conclusion that I am independent of you?

‘Rather the opposite, both myself and time’ spoke space ’have concluded that nothing could exist without ourselves’

*Yes I have been following the conversation closely, but was not the presumption made that you are dependent upon thought for your matter so the speak?

‘Can’t we leave matter out of this?’

‘Yes’ spoke time ‘matter is of no consequence to myself’

*I think you rather underestimate the importance of matter for without matter there would be neither space nor time

‘Is matter then independent of thought?’

*What point would there be to matter without thought, indeed what point either of you?

‘But existence is not dependent upon the recognition of existence’

*Perhaps not, but the recognition of existence is dependent upon thought

‘You speak very highly of yourself’

*I think very highly of myself

‘You think and therefore you are, yea we haft heard it before, but you are dependent upon our selves and our esteemed colleague for your existence’

*A fact which I do not deny, but what point to yourselves…

‘You argue that we exist simply in order to facilitate your existence?’

*There seems no point other wise?

>In which case I seem entitled to ask, to what point yourself?

‘MATTER!’

*Recognition perhaps?

‘Our acknowledgment’

>Whose? I am the essence of you space and I am that which defines you time

*And I suppose you allow for thought?

>Without matter, what would you ponder you ponderous preposition?

*That there perhaps is no point to thought, in which case neither space, time nor matter matter

>You do have a high opinion of yourself

*If there is nothing to ponder, then there is nothing.

To ponder

to ponder for ten years

until the realisation that energy gave matter the potential to expand into space, the measurement which conscious thought calls time.

 

what says then energy?