"Tim Tyler"  wrote in message
news:bjqr5m$1kls$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> John Wilkins  wrote:
>
> : Don't misundertake me... I am *not* arguing for a
cyclical or
> : developmental view of civilisations. Life is just not
that tidy.
> : Societies are dynamic systems, and as such they are
subject to the
> : normal fluctuations and instabilities of dynamic
systems. Considerations
> : of such systems suggest that any dynamic system is going
eventually to
> : fail. Experience suggests that we will eventually
require more energy to
> : maintain the structure than is available at some time,
and that the
> : structure will then collapse into smaller and extinct
subsystems.
>
> Maybe when the heat death of the universe occurrs or the
sun explodes.
>
> The notion that "dynamical systems fall to bits" doesn't
look too
> universal when faced with the phenomenon of life.  Life
shows no
> signs at all of "falling to bits".  When elements of it
fail it
> just sprouts new ones.
>
> There's quite a bit of energy in the solar system - thanks
to the sun -
> and the universe is large and full of energy usable by
living systems.
>
> Running out of energy seems like a problem we won't have
to face for
> a very long time.

Yes; I understand there are also slime molds and some trees
that
have been around hundreds (thousands?) of years...and the
Great Red Spot on Jupiter has not been a newcomer as far as
longevity
is concerned. Sure, one doubts that anything can be eternal,
but
so long as the energy is available, some things can come
darn close I think--many large enough dynamic systems are
remarkably adaptable to sprouting new branches. For humans,
genetic engineering tech available in not too many years
will allow us to
adapt quite well to evolving (and/or alien) conditions
extending individual and species lifetimes to thousands of
years and beyond.

> : Moreover, it is the fate of all but a mere fraction of
species so far
> : tested to fail eventually :-) Why should *we* be any
different?
>
> In a million years there will likely be no trace of
anything recognisable
> as a human being around.  However it seems likely that we
will be
> ancestral to many future living forms.
>
> The reason for thinking that elements from us will stick
around is simple
> - we are the ones with the technology for performing a
number of functions
> living systems are very interested in - such as -
intelligent design and
> space flight.

I'm thinking that a few "human" genes will still be kicking
around even when we are no longer recognizable--heck,
sponges and other primitive species still have a few genes
in common with us, don't they? And for a long time we will
still be carbon-based lifeforms, though maybe that won't
last forever.

> Nontheless, our survival isn't guaranteed.  There are a
number of
> failure scenarios - from large meteor impacts to alien
invasions.
>
> However, it seems that these can be assigned relatively
low
> probabilities - at least in the short term.

And longer too, once we get manage to get that honking-big
asteroid splitting gun working.  :)           ...tonyC

> --
> __________
>  |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim{at}tt1.org
>
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 9/13/03 8:32:35 PM