Mathematics of Population

[tomcat]

Does this mean people won't feel the effects of weather? Will they not be able to take a walk in the rain without having to take a shuttle there?

I know I for one would not like to live somewhere without easy access to open space - the sounds of birds, the smell of freshly cut grass, a soft, cooling breeze on a hot day, and THE SKY!

Besides, doesn't the idea of cramming everybody in to a cubic 10 miles defeat the whole point of reducing population density?

I think most of us enjoy the Earth's biosphere, trees, waterfalls, and all that.  We were born here; it is nature and we are part of nature.  And, I suspect that in any foreseeable future that the majority of us will continue to live here.  This is, however, the beginning of the Space Age.

The stars are calling us.  Some of us, look up at those tiny dots and feel . . . drawn to them.  It is strange.  Scientists and engineers are challenged by them.  We built telescopes, sent robots, and -- we are next.  The people entering this realm are called "astronauts."

Remember, I am not advocating immediately building 10 mile squares or even 4 mile squares, for that matter.  At present it is enough to begin 1/2 mile pilot projects.  One of the first things is to learn how to make the buildings attractive, to make the buildings satisfy the very cravings that you speak of.  Even in the depths of Outer Space there is beauty.  The stars will shine more brightly.  Colorful rock mountains have beauty.  Technology will enlarge our TV screens giving them resolution indistinguishable from the real thing.  Every condominium and apartment will have them.  Some places will have all their walls covered, I suspect, so that people can be anywhere -- visually at least -- they want to be.

The alternative you speak of, "reducing population density," can mean many things.  Telling people they can't have children isn't a pleasant option, nor a popular one.  It is often disobeyed and, then, what do you do?  You can of course sterilize the "undesirables" but how do they feel about that?  And how are you going to do it?  Force them to wait in lines, or chop their reproductive organs off in back alleys?  To avoid backlash perhaps you stun them so they don't know it happened.  Unfortunately, however, they will eventually 'look down' and then what?  Civil war?  Or, perhaps someday you will 'look down' and . . . well, you get the picture.

There is, of course, the old fashioned 'bury them in the bog' concept.  This works where there are large foreboding bogs, usually located in even larger foreboding swamps.  People just . . . disappear!  But others get suspicious.  They investigate.  They dig up the bogs.  And, they indict and prosecute.  You know how that goes.  To stop population growth and get rid of those many "undesirables" just hanging around, not contributing you know, we really have to have a close knit organization.  Secrecy is important.  And, when someone spills the beans, well, you do what you got to do.  Then their relatives do what they got to do.  Then their relatives do what they got to do.  Kind of like the Hatfields and the McCoys isn't it?  And, sooner or later the Law steps in and arrests everybody, and judges do what they got to do. 

Then, of course, there is out and out genocide.  Build a big propaganda campaign.  Point your finger at the 'undesirables' and hope the 'undesirables' don't bring you down before you gain total, absolute power.  This has been tried.  Sometimes, other countries get involved to stop it.  This is because they know that once this kind of thing takes control of a country that it will continue with the other countries becoming the 'undesirables'.

The 'sneaky' way is probably best -- for a while.  Stealth has many advantages.  But the police are watching, and they aren't as dumb as you think.  Of course, maybe the police have joined a population reduction organization and now Big Brother is really well . . . you know the rest of the story.  It isn't pleasant.

Let's learn how to build these big buildings and continue onward with scientific progress.  It is the best path, really!



///tomcat///

[LEO]

It is indeed an immensely deep subject, and one for which I don't feel I have a perfect answer for. Each solution available at the moment definitely has issues of its own and so while I can agree with you that something *must* be done before the situation gets out of hand, I am not entirely sure what plan of action I would take.

I am no civil engineer, and am unsure of how difficult it would be to engineer such a  superstructure, however I can agree with you that in principal, as long as this matter i thought about long and hard, and any issues are overcome, this superstructure is the best option available to us *at this point in time*, even if it is only as a temporary measure before colonisation of other plants and beyond.

[tomcat]

It is indeed an immensely deep subject, and one for which I don't feel I have a perfect answer for. Each solution available at the moment definitely has issues of its own and so while I can agree with you that something *must* be done before the situation gets out of hand, I am not entirely sure what plan of action I would take.

I am no civil engineer, and am unsure of how difficult it would be to engineer such a  superstructure, however I can agree with you that in principal, as long as this matter i thought about long and hard, and any issues are overcome, this superstructure is the best option available to us *at this point in time*, even if it is only as a temporary measure before colonisation of other plants and beyond.

The problem really is difficult.  There is a geometrical progression at work leading to immense numbers in the not too distant future.  But scientific advancement is undergoing the same progression.  So far science has given individuals more in the current world with the current population than we had back 2 centuries ago.  I believe that this will continue.

And, yes, we must go to the stars.  For some it will be the excitement of new places and new adventure.  For others escape from painful situations on Earth.  But, for mankind it will allow the spread of our population into the infinity of Outer Space.

The contractor that I talked to some years ago about buildings told me that they can build very profitably to 50 stories high.  It is easy.  The overall size of the building other than height doesn't matter because it is just more of the same.  He also told me to allow 14 feet between floors in a skyscraper because of the many things like a/c duct, power cables, sewer pipe, etc. that has to go between the floors.

The Japanese have been thinking of a mile high skyscraper.  But 'mile high' isn't necessary to house unbelievable numbers of people.  50 stories will do.

The expense of such a building, even a 1/2 mile square building, is very considerable.  The amount spent will be returned with profit if people buy and rent.  Initially, however, the government will have to fund the pilot projects to prove that it can be done -- and done profitably.  Take the price per square foot in your area and mulitiply it by the number of square feet in the building.  That is what it will cost.

I'm not sure if $60 per square foot is accurate but here it goes:  In a 1/2 mile square building, 50 stories tall, there are 348,480,000 square feet.  It comes to 20 billion 908 million dollars!  Or, roughly, 21 billion dollars.  Construction would take at least 5 years. 

So, that is a couple of million the first year for blueprints followed by 5.25 billion year until completion in the 5th year.  This building could house 94,000 people in comfort.  That is an average expenditure of $223,000 per person.  This includes, however, the purchase of offices, shopping centers, city services, etc., so it is not the price per condominium.  They would average less than 1/2 the $223,000 figure.

A lot better than 'reduction in population density'. Better than a lot of the so called "solutions."  Worth a shot don't you think?


///tomcat///

[Nik]

Hi, there was a recent Discovery channel program on 'super structures' which dealt with very large buildings.

Ah, yes, Japanese, naturally, but you could license their plans...

Rather than build one cuboid super-box, ideas had shifted.

New notion was 'ring buildings', like a stack of castellated ash-trays. Each basin had a park & lake --evac area plus emergency water supply-- while the rims had rapid-trams, the pillars had mega-lifts and there was ample clearance to fly medivac & fire-fighting helicopters between any rim and basin above...

Idea was that the gaps would allow easy fire-watching and smoke dispersal, the basin undersides could have 'fire-boat' monitors, while the pillar lift-shafts / stairwells were fire breaks for their sections. In case of trouble, you just walk away...

IIRC, you need to dig out an SF book called 'A Torrent of Faces' which covers the unexpected problems of hyper-populations. Amongst other concerns, they needed 'emergency cities' for displaced populations... such as Conventions.

[LunarOrbit]

I saw that Discovery Channel program too. It is a cool idea but I bet there are a lot of things that the designers haven't thought of yet that could cause huge problems.

Here is a page I found about the building:

http://library.thinkquest.org/04apr/00452/development-future.htm

It kind of reminds me of Walt Disney's original plans for Epcot Center, "the land of tomorrow" that never really happened.

[jdbenner]

Speaking of Large buildings to house the world’s population, how is this description of a large city ( The “new Jerusalem” ), A Cube Fifteen Hundred miles on a side, from The book Revelation:

 Re 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Re 21:11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
Re 21:13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
Re 21:15 And he that talked with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof.
Re 21:16 And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.
Re 21:17 And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.
Re 21:18 And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.
Re 21:19 And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;
Re 21:20 The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.
Re 21:21 And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.
Re 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
Re 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Re 21:25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
Re 21:26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

[tomcat]

Hi, there was a recent Discovery channel program on 'super structures' which dealt with very large buildings.

Ah, yes, Japanese, naturally, but you could license their plans...

Rather than build one cuboid super-box, ideas had shifted.

New notion was 'ring buildings', like a stack of castellated ash-trays. Each basin had a park & lake --evac area plus emergency water supply-- while the rims had rapid-trams, the pillars had mega-lifts and there was ample clearance to fly medivac & fire-fighting helicopters between any rim and basin above...

Idea was that the gaps would allow easy fire-watching and smoke dispersal, the basin undersides could have 'fire-boat' monitors, while the pillar lift-shafts / stairwells were fire breaks for their sections. In case of trouble, you just walk away...

IIRC, you need to dig out an SF book called 'A Torrent of Faces' which covers the unexpected problems of hyper-populations. Amongst other concerns, they needed 'emergency cities' for displaced populations... such as Conventions.

Miniature cities for hyperpopulation.  That is exactly what I have in mind.  Thank-you NIK for the information on Japanese ideas and thank-you LunarOrbit for the reference.  

The Japanese have a greater population problem than we do here in the United States.  We are lucky to have the vastness of the rockies and northern states.  But now is the time to act, not wait until we are in the Japanese situation.  New York, Chicago, Denver, Boston, Atlanta, Miami, Dallas-Fort Worth, San Francisco, Los Angles, San Diego are all cities that have spread too far.  They need to go up, go vertical, as soon as possible.  They are all candidates for a miniature city.  Excellent places to begin pilot project 1/2 mile square 50 story buildings.

Now, when I say 1/2 mile square I do not mean they have to be simple 'blocks'.  Good architecture, design, and beauty are absolutely necessary for the miniature city idea to work.  Yes, rings, spires, lots of glass, golf courses, parks, spacious public areas with a beautiful view of surrounding countryside.  All of these things, and more, will be necessary to 'sell' the public on the idea of miniature cities -- make them 'want' to buy into them.  And, make them happy once they do.

Despite hyperpopulation, the future should be better than we have it now.  Bigger and better!


///tomcat///

[Satanic Mechanic]

I have been reading this topic on the side.  If you wish to encourage taller buildings you must give incentives to businesses to build them.  Where I live it is cheaper to make a bigger one floor building than it is to build a two story building of equal square footage.
If cities want taller buildings give the owners/business a tax incentive to go vertical.
Let me give an example:
I recently moved two weekends ago and one of the reasons why I moved was due to property taxes.  My old place was 1278 square feet on a 110' x 50' plot and I paid $2k a year in property taxes.  I moved outside the city's tax "impact" zone (impact zone means it can tax beyond the city limits).  I now own a 3000 square foot house on 11 acres and pay a hell of a lot less than I did in the city.
If cities want more buildings and business they must reduce taxes to encourage growth and give businesses a reason to stay rather than moving operations to rural areas or other cities.

Just my $0.02,

SM

[tomcat]

Speaking of Large buildings to house the world’s population, how is this description of a large city ( The “new Jerusalem” ), A Cube Fifteen Hundred miles on a side, from The book Revelation:

 Re 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Re 21:11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
Re 21:13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
Re 21:15 And he that talked with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof.
Re 21:16 And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.
Re 21:17 And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.
Re 21:18 And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.
Re 21:19 And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;
Re 21:20 The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.
Re 21:21 And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.
Re 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
Re 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Re 21:25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
Re 21:26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

A Cube 1500 miles on a side -- this is bigger than big!

Now, let's see.  1500 miles is 7,920,000 feet.  The square of that is 6.72264E13.  For the height we take 7,920,000 feet and divide by 14 feet to determine the number of floors:  565,714 floors.

Then, multiply the square feet of a single floor by the number of floors:  3.548520265E19.  This gives us total square feet in the Cube.  Now divide by 3700 square feet to determine the number of people meeting the requirement of 3700 square feet per person, with 1000 allocated for personal residence and 2700 for common areas such as stores, hallways, and so forth.  This is 9.590595311E15 people!  Or, put more understandably: 9 quadrillion 590 trillion 595 billion 311 million people!

All of these people -- 1,598,432 times the number of people on Earth -- can live, work, and enjoy life, in comfort, in this Cube!

Perhaps, here, we are being given a template on how to deal with hyperpopulation.  The Cube is described as beautiful, looking like precious metals and stones with pearls for doors.

"And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it . . ."

This is, indeed, a revelation.  As I have mentioned if you rear back at the difficulty of building these big buildings, look at the alternative:  Reduction of Population Density.


///tomcat///

[jdbenner]

I have been reading this topic on the side.  If you wish to encourage taller buildings you must give incentives to businesses to build them.  Where I live it is cheaper to make a bigger one floor building than it is to build a two story building of equal square footage.
If cities want taller buildings give the owners/business a tax incentive to go vertical.
Let me give an example:
I recently moved two weekends ago and one of the reasons why I moved was due to property taxes.  My old place was 1278 square feet on a 110' x 50' plot and I paid $2k a year in property taxes.  I moved outside the city's tax "impact" zone (impact zone means it can tax beyond the city limits).  I now own a 3000 square foot house on 11 acres and pay a hell of a lot less than I did in the city.
If cities want more buildings and business they must reduce taxes to encourage growth and give businesses a reason to stay rather than moving operations to rural areas or other cities.

Just my $0.02,

SM

Good Point, but that is politics not engineering.

[tomcat]

I have been reading this topic on the side.  If you wish to encourage taller buildings you must give incentives to businesses to build them.  Where I live it is cheaper to make a bigger one floor building than it is to build a two story building of equal square footage.
If cities want taller buildings give the owners/business a tax incentive to go vertical.
Let me give an example:
I recently moved two weekends ago and one of the reasons why I moved was due to property taxes.  My old place was 1278 square feet on a 110' x 50' plot and I paid $2k a year in property taxes.  I moved outside the city's tax "impact" zone (impact zone means it can tax beyond the city limits).  I now own a 3000 square foot house on 11 acres and pay a hell of a lot less than I did in the city.
If cities want more buildings and business they must reduce taxes to encourage growth and give businesses a reason to stay rather than moving operations to rural areas or other cities.

Just my $0.02,

SM

Good Point, but that is politics not engineering.

Using urban renewal to start a pilot big building project makes sense.  For one thing, the land is cheap and it is in an existing heavily populated city.  For another, If the city and state really want to renew that section of a city then, perhaps, they would offer incentives such as a tax reduction.

The federal government might, in the case of a federally financed project, offer income tax incentive besides.  It would make sense in the beginning phase of what should become a massive building program designed to prevent overcrowding.

The key to the whole thing, however, is that the building be made attractive to the point that you and I want to buy a condominium and live there with our families.  This is the challenge.

An attractive massively built building should look strong, shiny, and functional.  Escalators and high speed elevators should speed you to your condominium.  The hallways should be wide, spacious, and well lit.  Security at the entrance and at main hallway entrances should give confidence in your personal safty and that of loved ones.  Solid apartment doors with dead bolt locks and electronic security to prevent 'Clockwork Orange' scenairos from happening.

Air conditioning should be optimal from the moment you step into the building, not too cold or too hot, and with the right humidity. 

Condominiums and apartments should be built so that no noise at all can be heard from neighboring units -- none.  Sewer pipes should be sound proofed so that 'water running' sounds don't disturb you.  Once inside your apartment you should feel the 'quiet', there must be no sense of others on the other side of the walls.  This goes a long way in giving a feeling of total privacy, of having a place to come home to -- to get away from it all.

A typical condominium apartment should cost under $100,000 and have 1200 square feet.  Apartment sizes and luxery options would be determined by the free enterprise market, not by the initial conceptual per person square foot calclation.  Those calculations were simply to get an idea as to how many people can be comfortably provided for, not to assign floor space on an individual basis.  That is what Free Enterprise is for.


///tomcat///

[Satanic Mechanic]

Good Point, but that is politics not engineering.

You need the money for the engineering so you will have to dabble in politics/business.  It always comes down to money.

[tomcat]

Space exploration is a fundamental part of the 'mathematics of population'.  Why?  Because mankind needs a frontier. 

We need new challenges as well as room to spread out.  Some people are just cut out for military duty in deep space.  Some are just made to be explorers.  Others are the settler types that really want a 'house on the prarie', or on Mars, Venus, or Pluto.  Mad scientists need to set up their laboratories where no one can spy on them.  Military intelligence needs outposts where no one can find them.  Outcasts need places to run and hide.  And, what better place for a prison.

NASA needs to 'kick it up a notch' and build the SSTP, single stage to the planets, as soon as possible.  They now have 5X rocket fuel -- atomic fuel just developed at NASA's Glenn Research Center -- which should allow the construction of not only a Crew Exploration Vehicle but some really good old fashioned 50's style spaceships.  Mankind has growing pains. It is time to open up the new frontier:  Outer Space.

What will we build for habitats in Outer space?  Why, giant Cubes, of course!  In the weightlessness of space the height of the construction will not be limited by gravity.  So, a Cube becomes the best, easiest structure to build.  Spheres are a little better volume and pressure wise but waste a lot of space with sloping walls and are more difficult to construct.

In Outer Space a 1500 mile Cube would be just the tiniest of dots, an imperceptible -- that is, well stealthed -- 'nothing' on a radar screen.  And, 9 Quadrillion people in spacious comfort isn't bad for a start on the . . . population problem.


///tomcat///

[spacecat27]

I'm having a flashback.... anyone here old enough to remember a song called "Everyone's Gone To The Moon"?  I think the singer was Jonathan King- it came out in the mid to late '60's as Apollo was gearing up.... and it was a forlorn song about a guy lookng around a deserted Earth because, well- everybody had gone to the moon!  Actually most of us living back then pretty much assumed that by this distant year of 2005- there would be several large cities on the moon- we also figured there would be some sizable cities built on and under the oceans.

While people who have grown up or thrived in a concentrated urban environment might not mind living in one of tomcat's super-cubes... I certainly would not.  Of course I don't dispute that population growth and urban sprawl are real problems.  When I first moved to this little county in Florida in 1972, its population was around 40,000 and you could count the number of traffic lights on two hands.  Now, it is over 200,000 and there is a traffic light on almost every corner.  It's not fun anymore.... and on very rare occaisions if I go back to the greater New Jersey / Pennsylvania area where I lived as a kid, it's totally unrecognisable and fields and forests I played in are long, long gone.

'Going vertical' is not necessarily a solution, except in large cities where things are already tending toward the vertical- but even there, you want to be able to preserve historical landmarks and existing unique architecture.  Suburban expansion and road congestion are not so much a result of population growth as they are products of American automobile-mania and typical zoning laws.  Relief can come from urban planners thinking a little more 'European.'  That is, ALLOW shopkeepers and small business owners to live in apartments over their establishments and get rid of the zoning laws that now force them to live in the suburbs and commute... and design a public transit infrastructure that is efficient, unobtrusive as possible, clean and economic so people will actually WANT to use it.  Needless to say, excessive commuting is not only aggravating, but a MAJOR waste of energy resources.  Excessive transport is another problem- locally I've seen trucking companies put 18-wheelers on the road to deliver a few boxes that could have fit in a small van or station wagon.
Overall, we need to reverse this trend of widely separating our homes and work places except in cases where absolutely necessary.  If I worked in a strip mine or oil refinery- obviously I would not want it next door to me- but when gasoline goes over six bucks a gallon I wouldn't mind being able to bicycle to it.

Our cities are thick and growing thicker, but we're not to the point of having to build super-cubes yet (Japan's getting there and I'm aware of the SkyCity proposal which is still based on not-yet-existing material and logistic technologies).... but for all our over-crowdedness humans still only occupy about 10% of the planet.  Personally, I'm still waiting to go to work on those underwater cities.

[tomcat]

I'm having a flashback.... anyone here old enough to remember a song called "Everyone's Gone To The Moon"?  I think the singer was Jonathan King- it came out in the mid to late '60's as Apollo was gearing up.... and it was a forlorn song about a guy lookng around a deserted Earth because, well- everybody had gone to the moon!  Actually most of us living back then pretty much assumed that by this distant year of 2005- there would be several large cities on the moon- we also figured there would be some sizable cities built on and under the oceans.

'Going vertical' is not necessarily a solution, except in large cities where things are already tending toward the vertical- but even there, you want to be able to preserve historical landmarks and existing unique architecture. 

Overall, we need to reverse this trend of widely separating our homes and work places except in cases where absolutely necessary.  If I worked in a strip mine or oil refinery- obviously I would not want it next door to me- but when gasoline goes over six bucks a gallon I wouldn't mind being able to bicycle to it.

I thought we would be more advanced too.  In the 50's and 60's our engineers were conjuring up marvelous visions of the future.  In fact, there was a movie -- 2001 a Space Odyssey-- a big ring space station with artificial gravity that never materialized.  Included was the HAL 9000 computer, an artificial intelligence computer so sophisticated it had psychological problems.

Certainly the 1500 mile Cube, or any need for it, is a long way off.  I am advocating 1/2 mile square buildings as urban renewal in our largest cities.  They would also serve as pilot city-buildings to develop the engineering necessary to deal with population growth in the future.  The growth will come; it is a geometrical progression.

A byproduct of the city-building concept is the fact that people will not have to commute.  At least not those that both work and live in the city-building.  If free enterprise does the transition then there will be a gradual change, almost imperceptible, over the next several decades.  We are talking here of building these structures, in addition to things already planned, not abruptly stopping work on other projects or bulldozing perfectly good buildings into the ground.

People will not be 'told' to live in the buildings but will want to because they are beautiful, spacious, and apartments will cost less. I foresee vacation cottages co-existing with these buildings and a road system much as it exists today.  In fact, a lot can be said for timeshare vacation cottages.  This would be another 'economic' possibility arising out of a large population, saving money for individuals.

So, I am not advocating the immediate construction of a 1500 mile Cube in Outer Space.  But Japan and China already have a serious population problem.  We will too if we don't act today to stop it.  We need to eliminate the problem, not the population!


///tomcat///