Buckybomb shows potential power of nanoscale explosives

March 5, 2015 by Lisa Zyga feature
Molecular configuration of an exploding buckybomb. Credit: ACS

(Phys.org)—Scientists have simulated the explosion of a modified buckminsterfullerene molecule (C60), better known as a buckyball, and shown that the reaction produces a tremendous increase in temperature and pressure within a fraction of a second. The nanoscale explosive, which the scientists nickname a "buckybomb," belongs to the emerging field of high-energy nanomaterials that could have a variety of military and industrial applications.

The researchers, Vitaly V. Chaban, Eudes Eterno Fileti, and Oleg V. Prezhdo at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, have published a paper on the simulated buckybomb explosion in a recent issue of The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters. Chaban is also with the Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil.

The buckybomb combines the unique properties of two classes of materials: carbon structures and energetic nanomaterials. Carbon materials such as C60 can be chemically modified fairly easily to change their properties. Meanwhile, NO2 groups are known to contribute to detonation and combustion processes because they are a major source of oxygen. So, the scientists wondered what would happen if NO2 groups were attached to C60 molecules: would the whole thing explode? And how?

The simulations answered these questions by revealing the explosion in step-by-step detail. Starting with an intact buckybomb (technically called dodecanitrofullerene, or C60(NO2)12), the researchers raised the simulated temperature to 1000 K (700 °C). Within a picosecond (10-12 second), the NO2 groups begin to isomerize, rearranging their atoms and forming new groups with some of the carbon atoms from the C60. As a few more picoseconds pass, the C60 structure loses some of its electrons, which interferes with the bonds that hold it together, and, in a flash, the large molecule disintegrates into many tiny pieces of diatomic carbon (C2). What's left is a mixture of gases including CO2, NO2, and N2, as well as C2.

Although this reaction requires an initial heat input to get going, once it's going it releases an enormous amount of heat for its size. Within the first picosecond, the temperature increases from 1000 to 2500 K. But at this point the molecule is unstable, so additional reactions over the next 50 picoseconds raise the temperature to 4000 K. At this , the pressure can reach as high as 1200 MPa (more than 10,000 times normal atmospheric pressure), depending on the density of the material.

Chemically speaking, the scientists explain that the heat energy comes from the high density of covalent energy stored by the carbon-carbon bonds in the C60. Because the NO2 groups initiate the reaction, adding more NO2 groups increases the amount of energy released during the explosion. Choosing an appropriate number of these groups, as well as changing the compound concentration, provide ways to control the explosion strength.

The researchers predict that this quick release of chemical energy will provide exciting opportunities for the design of new high-energy nanomaterials.

Explore further: The origin of organic magnets

More information: Vitaly V. Chaban, et al. "Buckybomb: Reactive Molecular Dynamics Simulation." The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.5b00120

Related Stories

The origin of organic magnets

March 2, 2012

Electrical engineers are starting to consider materials made from organic molecules -- including those made from carbon atoms -- as an intriguing alternative to the silicon and metals used currently in electronic devices, ...

Chemistry in one dimension offers surprising result

March 27, 2012

Due to their unique properties single walled carbon nanotubes have been suggested as a promising material for electronics, optics and in other fields of materials science. When scientists from Umea University and Aalto University ...

Fullerene spheres can be used to slide in the nanoworld

October 3, 2014

"Nano–machines" (around one billionth of a metre in size) of the future will need tiny devices to reduce friction and make movement possible. The C60 molecule, also known as fullerene or buckyball, seemed to many an excellent ...

A sponge-like molecular cage for purification of fullerenes

December 15, 2014

A work in Nature Communications presents a supramolecular nanocage which encapsulates fullerenes of different sizes and allows the extraction of pure C60 and C70 through a washing-based strategy. The work was coordinated ...

Half spheres for molecular circuits

February 16, 2015

Corannulene is a carbon molecule with a unique shape (similar to the better known fullerene) and promising properties. A team of scientists from SISSA and the University of Zurich carried out computer simulations of the molecule's ...

Recommended for you

Designing ultrasound tools with Lego-like proteins

August 25, 2016

Ultrasound imaging is used around the world to help visualize developing babies and diagnose disease. Sound waves bounce off the tissues, revealing their different densities and shapes. The next step in ultrasound technology ...

Nanovesicles in predictable shapes

August 25, 2016

Beads, disks, bowls and rods: scientists at Radboud University have demonstrated the first methodological approach to control the shapes of nanovesicles. This opens doors for the use of nanovesicles in biomedical applications, ...

Graphene under pressure

August 25, 2016

Small balloons made from one-atom-thick material graphene can withstand enormous pressures, much higher than those at the bottom of the deepest ocean, scientists at the University of Manchester report.

Neuromorphic computing mimics important brain feature

August 18, 2016

(Phys.org)—When you hear a sound, only some of the neurons in the auditory cortex of your brain are activated. This is because every auditory neuron is tuned to a certain range of sound, so that each neuron is more sensitive ...

62 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

jerryjbrown
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 05, 2015
let's keep it classified from the military. They have enough methods of destruction. There may be a lot of industrial or even medical applications. Let's blow up cancer with nanoscale explosions!, lol!
derek_botfield
5 / 5 (2) Mar 05, 2015
A lot of power in a small amount of material. Very dangerous. There is the potential for one individual to be extremely dangerous. Keeping it from the military is one thing (impossible!) but keeping it away from more insidious groups is much more important. Is it detectable? Hope so.
Is it difficult to produce - definitely hope so.
gwrede
5 / 5 (3) Mar 05, 2015
Mr Fuller wouldn't have approved.

Seems like there simply is nothing that can't be made into weapons.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (10) Mar 05, 2015
A lot of power in a small amount of material. Very dangerous. There is the potential for one individual to be extremely dangerous.

Yep. Let's keep all people from driving cars.

Seriously: any kind of power concentrating technology can be abused. But it can also be used if the transformation can be triggered in a controlled manner (compact heating systems, one-shot power systems, carbon-carbon welding, etc. )

Let's blow up cancer with nanoscale explosions!, lol!

That is not as ludicrous or far fetched as you might think. The idea to treat kidney stones with micro-explosives is more than 30 years old
http://news.googl...,8958491
t_garr
2.8 / 5 (4) Mar 05, 2015
Oh dear.... I specifically came to this website, at this moment, in search of some "good stuff" and ... well.
I supposed it takes strength of character to say: "no, I'm not going to click on THAT science news story..."
roycehellion
5 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2015
The issue i see here is that to create that in the first place requires a lot of energy...i could understand field use, but industrial application seems unlikely as there are more efficient ways ways, both cost and energy...but further development in this may lead to its use as a precursor or secondary (whatever we use it for) material.
syndicate_51
1.5 / 5 (2) Mar 05, 2015
War, one of the primary motivators of the human psyche. If the military wants a secret they will get it. Perhaps these scientists will experience the same lamentations as Einstien and Oppenhiemer.
Shootist
not rated yet Mar 05, 2015
Always good to have more energetic chemical explosives. Maybe on day we will learn to stabilize some of the more energetic fluorine reactions? Carry on.

I dream of a molten iron mixed with uranium hexafluoride shot out of a fire hose death ray.

And we ought to be able to nuke cancer with it.
altizar
3 / 5 (2) Mar 05, 2015
Nice buckbomb with a thermite kicker.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (8) Mar 05, 2015
We can call it red mercury and use it to construct pure fusion devices... for peaceful and constructive purposes natürlich Like zB project Orion thermonuclear propulsion, creating habitable cavities below the surface of foreign planets, and the surgical removal of problematic oriental cultures. And diverting great rivers and such.
derek_botfield
5 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2015
"A lot of power in a small amount of material. Very dangerous. There is the potential for one individual to be extremely dangerous."

"Yep. Let's keep all people from driving cars. "

Hmmm.... The point was that if it becomes possible for one person to unobtrusively carry an enormously powerful charge - accepting that there is an overall upside to that technology - the downside is very serious because few individuals can have a disproportionate affect on the world. There are great advantages to nuclear power, but there is great concern over the possibility of a suitcase sized nuclear device.

You can misuse a car. You can misuse an explosive. But a concealed, portable, enormously-powerful explosive allows for extreme outcomes.

In days gone by, you needed an army to defeat an empire. Now you can do it with a couple of hi-tech missiles. In the future could a few people do the same with small devices and fear?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Mar 05, 2015
Here's a paper on pure fusion devices I wasn't aware of
http://www.prince...sion.pdf

TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (3) Mar 05, 2015
One of my favorite depictions of the joys of pure fusion weapons was in Directive 51 by John Barnes which involved a 10 meter, 220 ton sphere of lithium deuteride and a lake where Washington DC used to be.
https://books.goo...YQ6AEwCA
alextheaboveaverage
3.5 / 5 (2) Mar 05, 2015
Any implications for use as a highly concentrated form of fuel? Engineering complications aside, this is just a high-energy combustion reaction (please correct me if I'm wrong). Obviously, at this stage, this substance is difficult to create. But I feel like the opportunities for civilian use of this are much more exciting than the military ones.
paulraup
5 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2015
The civilian uses will be exciting, but you haven't SEEN excitement like the military will have with the possibilities...............or the FUNDING, or the CORRUPTION. Sadly, it probably WILL take the military to develop it much further.
Shootist
1 / 5 (3) Mar 05, 2015
The civilian uses will be exciting, but you haven't SEEN excitement like the military will have with the possibilities...............or the FUNDING, or the CORRUPTION. Sadly, it probably WILL take the military to develop it much further.


They promised me flying cars. Where are my flying cars?

Citizens are corruptible. Politicians are corrupt. Bankers and Industrialists are owned by the politicians.

The military is generally not subject to such things, due to its very nature (a single individual only spends a couple of years in any one job and location).
bigmuddie2001
5 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2015
I can see this as the newest personal killing device. Spray food crops with these nano bombs and you could kill an entire army or city or nation without having to fire a single shot.
JRi
4 / 5 (2) Mar 05, 2015
Being unfamiliar with the field, it would have been nice to include comparison to TNT or RDX. Maybe it is int the article itself. Don't know, can't get access to it.
Eikka
5 / 5 (3) Mar 05, 2015
The point was that if it becomes possible for one person to unobtrusively carry an enormously powerful charge


It isn't that much more powerful than typical high explosives. The energy density weight to weight should be similiar to gunpowder, given that the energy comes from oxidizing a carbon molecule. It's the rate of release that is different.

But as far as weapons go, the rate of release isn't necessarily the main point. For example, dispersing fuel-air explosives have much greater area of effect for a given size even though they technically aren't even explosions but simply combustion.

A high explosive can snap a steel girder in half with a tiny amount because the energy is released in a concentrated detonation, whereas a "low explosive" can bring a house down because they make big low frequency pressure waves that make stuff move.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Mar 05, 2015
The military is generally not subject to such things, due to its very nature (a single individual only spends a couple of years in any one job and location)
Bwahaahaaaa

here
http://www.mintpr.../198985/

there
http://www.busine...s-2015-3

everywhere
http://www.csmoni...an-video
El_Nose
5 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2015
all those military guys I know who love playing with C4 are gonna go gaga over this
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Mar 05, 2015
Forgot one
http://www.nytime...tml?_r=0

-Bwahaaaahaaaaaaa
someone11235813
not rated yet Mar 05, 2015
This could revolutionise fry spray.
fixitup
5 / 5 (3) Mar 05, 2015
There are already explosive materials which in minute amounts can create a tremendous release of explosive energies....
petepal55
5 / 5 (3) Mar 06, 2015
The day the first atom bomb was constructed almost guaranteed that at some point in the future mankind would use one in an un-nice manner. Throughout history, this has held true for every discovery made by humanity. So every time someone comes up with a neat idea that might have un-nice uses it will probably be used that way.
Sure it's pessimistic, but that doesn't lessen its veracity.
syndicate_51
5 / 5 (1) Mar 06, 2015
The civilian uses will be exciting, but you haven't SEEN excitement like the military will have with the possibilities...............or the FUNDING, or the CORRUPTION. Sadly, it probably WILL take the military to develop it much further.


They promised me flying cars. Where are my flying cars?

Citizens are corruptible. Politicians are corrupt. Bankers and Industrialists are owned by the politicians.

The military is generally not subject to such things, due to its very nature (a single individual only spends a couple of years in any one job and location).


Generals tend to occupy their post for quite a while. General's are also a known political position besides it's standard military duty. They are just as corrupt as the rest.

I figured they banks and corps were more the masters than the lightning rods that sit in old houses.
Bob Osaka
5 / 5 (1) Mar 06, 2015
This is not science fiction. Devising new and improved ways of killing other human beings is not progress. The world is almost wholly void of reason and such technology make irrational acts easier.
Nobel would be proud, Buckminster Fuller would cringe. Edward Teller would get excited, Einstein would weep.
jimbo92107
5 / 5 (1) Mar 06, 2015
Sounds like a good way to make first stage triggers for smaller thermonuclear weapons. Oh, the joy.
jimbo92107
not rated yet Mar 06, 2015
Maybe it's time that we all became very friendly people...
derek_botfield
not rated yet Mar 06, 2015
To me, it comes down to control and availability. There are technologies that can damage or end humanity. Nuclear, biological, etc. They are big, complex items and require organization and well qualified people to manage them. Once something very powerful becomes small, portable, difficult to detect and then - available (which is difficult to avoid) - it is far less controllable. 9/11 showed what can happen when people are prepared to coldly misuse technology. Scientific advance is unavoidable. Things that can be discovered will be. Science is not the problem. People are. The big test for humanity is can we avoid using our own ingenuity to destroy ourselves based on revenge, greed, ideology etc. Stephen Hawking suggested aggression could be our undoing. Little doubt, it is a major problem.
Jack_Handey
5 / 5 (1) Mar 06, 2015
There is no good that can come of this. There is no constructive use for a 6740 degree F thermomolecular explosion that you can inhale like dust.
Hueight
5 / 5 (1) Mar 07, 2015
"....this quick release of chemical energy will provide exciting opportunities...."

It's more excitement than decent people need.
mreda14
not rated yet Mar 07, 2015
When particles get too small and approach nano-sized dimension such as iron shavings, it start to rotate so fast due to imbalance surface energy and create heat. This is the cause of many fires
katesisco
5 / 5 (2) Mar 08, 2015
This is cavitation by another name. Ever since science discovered that atomic sized bubbles in water blow up to collapse in fractions of a second emitting light energy, every scientists has chased this energy source. Why do you never hear of this research? Because always it has a new name. Because its a free energy source. Because it can be weaponized. Because it would eliminate reliance on carbon energy. Because nations cannot be endebted when this source is controlled. Because, because, because.
Because media rules.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Mar 08, 2015
This is not science fiction. Devising new and improved ways of killing other human beings is not progress. The world is almost wholly void of reason and such technology make irrational acts easier.
Nobel would be proud, Buckminster Fuller would cringe. Edward Teller would get excited, Einstein would weep.
This is not as irrational as religions which force women to make babies until it kills them, thereby creating conditions where killing each other is inevitable.

These religions were designed for conquest. They were designed to outgrow and overrun their counterparts. And until they are destroyed the rational cultures in this world which have achieved a sustainsble growth rate have no choice but to devise weapons to defend themselves.

Because if they don't they too will be overrun. Einstein might weep but he would approve as he was very good at math.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (3) Mar 08, 2015
This is cavitation by another name. Ever since science discovered that atomic sized bubbles in water blow up to collapse in fractions of a second emitting light energy, every scientists has chased this energy source. Why do you never hear of this research? Because always it has a new name. Because its a free energy source. Because it can be weaponized. Because it would eliminate reliance on carbon energy. Because nations cannot be endebted when this source is controlled. Because, because, because.
Because media rules.
Bubble fusion doesn't work. Try google.
Whydening Gyre
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 08, 2015
Bankers and Industrialists are owned by the politicians.

Don't you have that turned around?

Lex Talonis
not rated yet Mar 08, 2015
Install a core of plutonium and dutrium atoms and then add a bucky ball of U235 around that, and then a buckyball of the carbon / nitrogen / oxygen mix and you have molecular nukes.

Eikka
5 / 5 (1) Mar 09, 2015
Bankers and Industrialists are owned by the politicians.

Don't you have that turned around?



They're both the same thing. Politicians get well paying jobs in banks and industry top levels when they retire from politics, and the industry top levels pay for the campaigns of new politicians to replace the old ones.

Whether you're a CEO or a congressman is just a matter of whether you're currently using money to gain politics, or using politics to gain money.
Bob Osaka
5 / 5 (1) Mar 10, 2015
@TheGhostofOtto1923
So you're saying the "rational cultures" should devise weapons to eliminate "irrational religions."
If only there were a powerful orator to sway the masses into believing genocide is a rational choice. Perhaps if you'd be more specific as to who you believe the "rational cultures" and the "irrational religions" are, then you might see that the technology is already sufficient, only thing missing is the political will.
Or how about we just kill the stupid people?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
'Rational cultures' are those which have reached a sustainable growth rate. Their citizens by and large know how to plan for the future and live within their means.

'Irrational religions' are all those which have survived to the present. They have done this by outgrowing and overrunning their enemies. Read Joshua.

Their adherents believe that the best thing that women can do is to make and raise babies. Their gods all teach them to 'give no thought for the morrow' and to trust that these gods will give them whatever they need as long as believers keep making babies and filling up the earth with more of them and fewer of their enemies.

The only way rational cultures can survive is by systematically destroying these virulent, caustic, religionist doomsday machines. This they do by pitting these cultures against one another, which is easy because they all teach bigotry as a holy mandate.

They all teach that people cannot be good unless they believe in their own particular god.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
The most significant outcome of the world wars was the destruction of the religion-based cultures throughout Eurasia which would have prevented the institution of family planning and the ONE BILLION ABORTIONS which have occurred worldwide as a direct result.

This preemptive depopulation dwarfs any other effect you might offer, that these wars had on the course of civilization. The effect is so profound, so overwhelming, as to suggest that it is the reason the wars happened in the first place; and that the wars were Planned and Staged to produce just this Result.

And if we look again with this premise in mind we can begin to identify exactly those cultures which would have resisted the strongest, and which suffered the greatest loss.

Modern wars are demographic exercises, waged with specific Goals to achieve. The End determines the Means. And as the alternative in today's world can be complete and irrecoverable collapse and extinction, the Means is simply whatever it takes.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (4) Mar 10, 2015
This preemptive depopulation dwarfs any other effect you might offer, that these wars had on the course of civilization. The effect is so profound, so overwhelming, as to suggest that it is the reason the wars happened in the first place; and that the wars were Planned and Staged to produce just this Result.

Modern wars are demographic exercises, waged with specific Goals to achieve. The End determines the Means. And as the alternative in today's world can be complete and irrecoverable collapse and extinction, the Means is simply whatever it takes.

A conspiracy, Otto?
Bob Osaka
5 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
@TheGhostofOtto1923
From your description of "rational cultures" it may be supposed that they do not in fact exist. Further arguing that physicists should be complicit in the collapse and extinction of humanity, you doom yourself.
Either you have misread your moral compass, it may be miscalibrated or it is broken. Let's just say we disagree. Don't take that as an invitation to wage a "demographic exercise."
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Mar 10, 2015
'Irrational religions' are all those which have survived to the present. They have done this by outgrowing and overrunning their enemies.
@Bob Osaka
@Otto
all religions are based upon a faith, which is the acceptance of something without evidence, which is NOT RATIONAL period

religions are the codification of rules to control those who are in a faith and subscribe to the tenets of said religious organizations and cause friction/prejudice/judgement

Considering this, then we can logically conclude that there is no such thing as a rational religion simply by default

there CAN be rational people in religion, but again, it is all dependent upon interpretation of the religious rules, which as OTTO has pointed out, are normally about killing off the competition with tribal violence (not love) as OTTO says, see Joshua

if religions were "rational" they would support homosexuality, which has a ZERO abortion rate!
they would be allies!

just sayin
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
rational cultures do not exist
Western cultures have achieved zero growth and are now faced with absorbing the floods of refugees from religion-based cultures. Countries like Italy, Spain, and Greece have had their economies ruined in trying to accomodate this flood.
physicists are complicit in the collapse
??? What physicist teaches that overpopulation is favorable?
dont take this as an indication
I explain to you what's obviously going on. I offer you truth and clarity.

The most immoral thing that Leaders can do is to deny the inevitable and do nothing even when they KNOW the enemy prepares to attack. Overpopulation has been inevitable ever since the advent of agriculture. Countless civilizations have fallen because their leaders failed to Prepare.
Cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
But then a few Leaders got together to discuss their mutual problems. They realized that the people were the eternal enemies of leaders everywhere. And they figured that the best way to resolve their mutual problems was to divide the people up and set them against each other in Manageable and Predictable ways.

They invented religions which were most efficient at doing this, which could cause strangers to hate one another because their very existence threatened their immortal souls.

Luther created the Protestant religion. Shortly thereafter war broke out in Germany. Thirty years later the population had shrunk by 1/3. Leaders on both sides were complicit in ensuring that this war proceed as viciously and as thoroughly as possible.

Muhammud died leaving the latest and most efficient Iteration of modern religion to date, but no clear successor. Sunni and Shiite branches thus emerged, who believed in the same god but were willing to slaughter each other over the details.

Etc.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
"God is in the details." -Ludwig mies van der Rohe

-These Leaders found that their Strategy was an easy sell to others like Them who all had the same insurmountable problems to deal with.

They intermarried and became a Tribe unto themselves. And They soon conquered the world with relatively little effort.
Bob Osaka
5 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2015
@TheGhostofOtto1923
So the Western cultures are the rational ones, with the exception of Germany. And there is an inbred tribe which has conquered the world. And it is immoral for leaders not to prepare for genocide as a means to control population growth...and you are saying you're offering truth and clarity.
Do you ever listen to yourself?

How about: the world is a product of our imagination. It is populated by apes, playing make-believe, pretending they are men. All history is a series of mistaken assumptions predicating current events. Technology has made it easier to kill people rather than live with them and almost all things in nature, including confused, panicky beasts follow the path of least resistance.

Those of us who are capable should be voices of reason rather than cheerleaders for the destruction of our species.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
Overpopulation is a FACT. It has been the single worst detriment to stability and progress. Of course Leaders who came to realize this FACT and the critical danger that posed, would have wanted to do something about it.

Why do you make a moral judgment of me for bringing this FACT to your attention? It would be IMMORAL for leaders to ignore this FACT. And all of history can be interpreted in light of continuing Efforts by Leaders to mitigate the effects of it.

All rulers throughout Europe were related and all could trace their descent from Charlemagne. They frequently waged war against each other. Your history books told you that this was due to greed, pride, and insanity.

But the Result was always a stronger and more stable civilization. This was no accident.

A vast swath from North Africa to the gobi was quickly stripped and desertified soon after the advent of agriculture. The effects of overpopulation were immediate, obvious, and undeniable.
Cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
Ancient Leaders were well aware of the threat of overpopulation. Metous referenced can be found:

"There was a time when the countless tribes of men, though wide-dispersed, oppressed the surface of the deep-bosomed Earth, and Zeus saw it and had pity, and in his wise heart resolved to relieve the all-nurturing Earth of men, by causing the great struggle of the Ilian war, that the load of death might empty the world. And so the heroes were slain in Troy, and the plan of Zeus came to pass."
http://schillerin...ide.html

-The reason for the global flood in the original Sumerian myth was because the gods could no longer stand the din of humanity below.

There are many references in the bible. Perhaps the most obvious is the story of joseph and pharaoh. Famine always follows feast - pops always grow faster than their ability to feed themselves. It did not take a message from god to show Leaders how to profit from this.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
Overpopulation makes war and Revolution inevitable. They will ALWAYS happen. There has until very recently been NO WAY of avoiding them.

They can thus be allowed to happen by themselves and threaten the existence of Stability and Progress, or, like any other human endeavor they can be Planned, Staged, and Managed to contain their effects and achieve the most favorable Result.

Wars among the Greek city states were waged in just this way for 1000 years. The Delphic oracles would tell the Greek kings just who would ally or fight whom. The Result was a strong culture which could resist Persia and eventually conquer the known world.

You might accept that this has happened in simpler times but refuse to see it happening today. Right now the most disruptive elements throughout the Middle East are being compelled to join radicals and obediently throw themselves into the guns of western forces. We have seen this Process in play throughout all of recorded history.
Bob Osaka
5 / 5 (1) Mar 11, 2015
@TheGhostofOtto1923
Yes, overpopulation is a problem, education is the preferred key to solving it.
To those who see overpopulation as a threat to their own survival the logical question becomes: how many do we have to kill to feel safe?
Pre-industrial populations hovered around 200 million for most of the ten thousand years of human history. To return to that number one would need to kill 7.1 billion. Or we could somehow learn to live with one another and face 11 billion at the beginning of the next century.

Were we to discover an ideal means to reach the stars, we would still not have enough people to sent two to each inhabitable planet in the Milky Way.
gkam
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2015
Oh, boy! More killing devices!

Our hateful conservatives must be cheering.

But the facts are much of the world is suffering from zero population growth or less. Higher standards of living mean lower growth, we are seeing, as those above the poverty threshold decide how many children to have.
gkam
3 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
Perhaps those who fear population growth can stop breeding?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
Yes, overpopulation is a problem, education is the preferred key to solving it
Really? These people are already very educated to the fact that anything you have to teach them is evil.

"Boko Haram ("Western education is forbidden"),.. is an Islamist terrorist movement"

-Kids who spend their entire lives studying the word of god in talmud and quran and catechism will be understandably reluctant to accept your secular ideas on birth control.
To those who see overpopulation as a threat to their own survival the logical question becomes: how many do we have to kill to feel safe?
Thats not a proper question. A proper question is how many people will die if wars are left to happen by themselves? More proper questions: Who will these people be? Will the world be able to recover from the devastation? Would you prefer a world where people are reduced to living in pleistocene conditions in isolated pockets around the world?

People decide these issues for you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
we could somehow learn to live with one another and face 11 billion at the beginning of the next century.

Were we to discover an ideal means to reach the stars, we would still not have enough people to sent two to each inhabitable planet in the Milky Way
Humans reproduce in exactly the same way as does a virus. And like a virus they will always tend to produce more of themselves than can be expected to survive to reproduce.

We evolved in the tropics with associated high attrition rates to determine the parameters of this equation. And as we got smarter we systematically eliminated all the natural attritive elements which limited our growth.

And so man became the principal enemy of man and the tribal dynamic - internal altruism coupled with external animosity - became the principal driver of human development. Our history is one of continuous intertribal conflict BECAUSE overpopulation forced us to compete for resources.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (2) Mar 11, 2015
The ONLY WAY humans can live in peace is to limit growth. The west has been able to do this by teaching people to live within their means, and to give women the freedom to do other things besides bearing cannon fodder.

If fundy cultures were to inhabit colonies on other planets they would soon be at war. Because the books say to be fruitful and multiply, and the earth is already full. If they are allowed to continue to exist here, the earth will soon be uninhabitable.

The ONLY REASON the world hasnt seen a nuclear ww3 is because the obsolete religionist cultures which would have made it inevitable by forbidding family planning, were destroyed during the first 2 wars. Communist martial law was established to ensure that they stayed dead.

We are watching these exact same conditions unfold today throughout southern asia and africa. And the same thing will happen to the cultures which are causing them, that happened to those which died during the wars of the last century.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2015
Because THIS is how the world is Run.
gkam
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2015
Why do I get the impression that otto wants to be the one who decides who gets "pruned" for the sake of the rest of us?

Fear not, otto, when people get enough, they stop having so many children. Look up the rates of population growth in the West, the old Soviet Union, and in Europe. They are about at zero now.
Brandon J_ Li
5 / 5 (1) Mar 13, 2015
Why do I get the impression that otto wants to be the one who decides who gets "pruned" for the sake of the rest of us?


Ooooo, ooooo, ooooo I know...............Yes.... and I'm pretty sure this is a clue that he shared in is opening stanza: " and the surgical removal of problematic oriental cultures."

Otto???....................as in Otto Octavius??? Yeah I guess he does sound a bit like Doc Ock - lolz

Yo Doc ole boy will you be so kind as to define these "Problematic Oriental Cultures" for us ?

Do you mean the study of the Middle and Near East as Europeans often mean when they say Oriental Studies or are you using the Archaic broad sweeping American slang that includes or fixates on Asians (usually but not always Chinese (Chinks), Japanese (Japs), Vietnamese (VC Gooks), etc. ?
Can ya answer that for me inquiring minds wanna know ???
gkam
5 / 5 (2) Mar 13, 2015
"Humans reproduce in exactly the same way as does a virus."
-----------------------------------------

Okay, otto, show us how a virus has sex.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.