Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Science & Technology
1000 years old?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John" data-source="post: 20623" data-attributes="member: 14"><p><strong>1000 years old?</strong></p><p></p><p><span style="color: black">I ran by this article the other day. I thought of how many more advancements this, if became possible, could lead to. Please read: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4003063.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4003063.stm</a></span></p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>However, several other assertions came to mind. First, if people could live for say 800 years, then how would science adapt. For example how much more could Einstein have taught us? Would he even have tried to expand our understanding of everything so diligently? What I am wondering is, "If time became less significant, would we work as hard, be as ambitious for strive so far as we do with less time?"</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p><span style="color: black">It is a common theme of man that time is precious and should not be wasted. However, if time became abundant, then perhaps the philosophy would double back on itself as the universe. Wasting time, lower ambitions for the first 400-500 years might be common. Thereby this would slow the advancements in science and technology altogether.</span></p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p><span style="color: black">Or would man aspire to do more? Having reached what we now consider to be semi-immortality would we strive to reach farther and faster? Consider the possibilities of space exploration that could be achieved with longer life expectancies. Currently a round trip ticket to Mars, with no layover or time to research, is around 3 years. An average astronaut is around 35+ years of age. This means that of their remaining years 10% of their life, assuming they went to Mars, would be spent on a boat in space. Though many would volunteer, the rewards vs. the cost are hardly worth the venture. Ergo, we are trying to find ways to launch mid-space. Now, expand that life expectancy. Given we have adequate resources; the astronaut would be more likely to spend a longer tour of Mars. The time away would seem as nothing.</span></p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p><span style="color: black">What are your thoughts on the impact of science on science; what is the impact on semi-immortality on societal advancement?</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John, post: 20623, member: 14"] [b]1000 years old?[/b] [color=black]I ran by this article the other day. I thought of how many more advancements this, if became possible, could lead to. Please read: [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4003063.stm]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4003063.stm[/url][/color] [color=black] [/color] However, several other assertions came to mind. First, if people could live for say 800 years, then how would science adapt. For example how much more could Einstein have taught us? Would he even have tried to expand our understanding of everything so diligently? What I am wondering is, "If time became less significant, would we work as hard, be as ambitious for strive so far as we do with less time?" [color=black] [/color] [color=black]It is a common theme of man that time is precious and should not be wasted. However, if time became abundant, then perhaps the philosophy would double back on itself as the universe. Wasting time, lower ambitions for the first 400-500 years might be common. Thereby this would slow the advancements in science and technology altogether.[/color] [color=black] [/color] [color=black]Or would man aspire to do more? Having reached what we now consider to be semi-immortality would we strive to reach farther and faster? Consider the possibilities of space exploration that could be achieved with longer life expectancies. Currently a round trip ticket to Mars, with no layover or time to research, is around 3 years. An average astronaut is around 35+ years of age. This means that of their remaining years 10% of their life, assuming they went to Mars, would be spent on a boat in space. Though many would volunteer, the rewards vs. the cost are hardly worth the venture. Ergo, we are trying to find ways to launch mid-space. Now, expand that life expectancy. Given we have adequate resources; the astronaut would be more likely to spend a longer tour of Mars. The time away would seem as nothing.[/color] [color=black] [/color] [color=black]What are your thoughts on the impact of science on science; what is the impact on semi-immortality on societal advancement?[/color] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Science & Technology
1000 years old?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top