Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / October 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Open the pod bay doors Hel.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
rick_sobie@hotmail.com - 30 Oct 2007 03:20 GMT
http://www.imagebam.com/image/6bbe8c625707

What would the population of the universe be, if mankind left the
earth, and the current population curve continued? Anyone know?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Population_curve.svg

Lets say 1 billion years from now.
Don Stockbauer - 30 Oct 2007 05:05 GMT
On Oct 29, 8:20 pm, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:
> http://www.imagebam.com/image/6bbe8c625707
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Lets say 1 billion years from now.

No use worrying about what won't happen.  Intelligent civilizations
communicate, not colonize.
rick_sobie@hotmail.com - 30 Oct 2007 05:55 GMT
> On Oct 29, 8:20 pm, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> No use worrying about what won't happen.  Intelligent civilizations
> communicate, not colonize.

Is this a conspiracy of silence here?

The math is too difficult? No link available which has the graph?
rick_sobie@hotmail.com - 30 Oct 2007 10:21 GMT
>> On Oct 29, 8:20 pm, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
>The math is too difficult? No link available which has the graph?

Ok so I did some of the math myself, for one thousand years time, the
population growth rate based on the rate of growth from 1950 to 1999

And so if the growth rate stayed the same as that from 1950 to 1999 by
the year 3000 the population would be
46,558,346,913,302,666 people.

46 quadrillion 558 trillion 346 billion 913 million 302 thousand 666
people

And I arrived at that figure by taking the population of the world in
1950 and the population in 1999 and the factor is 2.2 times more people
every 50 years.

So thats a thousand years, in a million years, humans would outnumber the
stars, and a billion years, they would outnumber the quarks.
Probably long before that as I only did the math for 1000 years and
already it would be an astronomical number.
rick_sobie@hotmail.com - 30 Oct 2007 11:36 GMT
On Oct 30, 4:55 am, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:

> > On Oct 29, 8:20 pm, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> The math is too difficult? No link available which has the graph?

What is the number of the beasts?

6.66 billion?

Six point 3 score 6 billion?

"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of
the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six
hundred threescore and six."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_beast
rick_sobie@hotmail.com - 30 Oct 2007 22:01 GMT
On Oct 30, 4:55 am, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:

> > On Oct 29, 8:20 pm, rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> The math is too difficult? No link available which has the graph?

Ok so I did some of the math myself, for one thousand years time, the
population growth rate based on the rate of growth from 1950 to 1999

And so if the growth rate stayed the same as that from 1950 to 1999 by
the year 3000 the population would be
46,558,346,913,302,666 people.

46 quadrillion 558 trillion 346 billion 913 million 302 thousand 666
people

And I arrived at that figure by taking the population of the world in
1950 and the population in 1999 and the factor is 2.2 times more
people every 50 years.

So thats a thousand years, in a million years, humans would outnumber
the stars, and a billion years, they would outnumber the quarks.
Probably long before that as I only did the math for 1000 years and
already it would be an astronomical number.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.