Contrary to common belief, both the Earth's human population and its economic output have grown faster than exponential, i.e., in a super-Malthusian mode, for most of the known history. These growth rates are compatible with a spontaneous singularity occuring at the same critical time 2052 +- 10 signaling an abrupt transition to a new regime. The degree of abruptness can be infered from the fact that the maximum of the world population growth rate was reached in 1970, i.e., about 80 years before the predicted singular time, corresponding to approximately 4% of the studied time interval over which the acceleration is documented. This rounding-off of the finite-time singularity is probably due to a combination of well-known finite-size effects and friction and suggests that we have already entered the transition region to a new regime. In theoretical support, a multivariate analysis coupling population, capital, R&D and technology shows that a dramatic acceleration in the population during most of the timespan can occur even though the isolated dynamics do not exhibit it. Possible scenarios for the cross-over and the new regime are discussed. Nottale, Chaline and Grou have recently independently applied a log-periodic analysis to the main crises of different civilisations. It is striking that these two independent analyses based on a different data set gives a critical time which is compatible within the error bars.
=> millionfold scale-up of mechanical frequencies ~~
I don't know why you keep asking me to write about nanotechnology... I don't have anything cogent to say about it, or maybe I do... Why don't you write a diary about it so I can react to it? Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
There is no way to know how fast population and economic output has grown for most of known history because we have no idea of what the economic output of Rome (say), neither do we know what the population of Rome was - and our sources for Roman history are surprisingly good.
Second, don't trust single-run multivariate state analysis of dynamic environments.
Third, physicists should stick to rolling their balls down inclined planes and stop trying to foist the simplicities of physics on everyone. ;-) A doo run-run-run, a doo run-run
How to Build a Time Machine
Rotate 90 degrees from the Space/Time Temporal vector and voila! reenter at any point you wish.
(Isn't n-dimensional Geometry wonderful?)
I submit this is the kind of thinking K and his merry band use to make their argument.
For the record: I don't think physics is simple. A doo run-run-run, a doo run-run
Everything is simple if you ignore the complexity.
Nothing is 'mere'.