The End of Science

[Da Blob]

I am contemplating contacting the people I know in government to tell them to stop funding research in Pure science and switch everything over to Applied science.

Now that the Higg's Boson has been discovered there is nothing left to research, from the subatomic physics to the astrophysics of the universe, everything that can be discovered has been already been discovered. It is time to stop spending money looking for stuff that is not there. According to science everything that can be explained, has already been explained.

So, we seem to live a rather small universe when it comes to possibilities. Personally, I am a bit disappointed. I guess the only thing left to do is to see if the science we learned has any practical value, to see if the knowledge of the Higg's boson can improve a single miserable life - considering we let some children starve in order to fund the research, it only seems right that it should be used to help others to live.

 

[dala]

From 1874:

"When I began my physical studies [in Munich in 1874] and sought advice from my venerable teacher Philipp von Jolly... he portrayed to me physics as a highly developed, almost fully matured science... Possibly in one or another nook there would perhaps be a dust particle or a small bubble to be examined and classified, but the system as a whole stood there fairly secured, and theoretical physics approached visibly that degree of perfection which, for example, geometry has had already for centuries."
- from a 1924 lecture by Max Planck (Sci. Am, Feb 1996 p.10)


From ca. 1875:

"Sometimes I really regret that I did not live in those times when there was still so much that was new; to be sure enough much is yet unknown, but I do not think that it will be possible to discover anything easily nowadays that would lead us to revise our entire outlook as radically as was possible in the days when telescopes and microscopes were still new."
- Heinrich Hertz as a physics student


From 1888:

"We are probably nearing the limit of all we can know about astronomy."
- Simon Newcomb, early American astronomer


From 1894:

"The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote.... Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals."
- Albert. A. Michelson, speech at the dedication of Ryerson Physics Lab, U. of Chicago 1894


From 1900:

"There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement" - Lord Kelvin


From a bit earlier:

"So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone could find hitherto unknown lands of any value." - Spanish Royal Commission, rejecting Christopher Columbus' proposal to sail west.

 

[Fukyo]

I hope this is a joke...

 

[NinjaSurfer]

I am contemplating contacting the people I know in government to tell them to stop funding research in Pure science and switch everything over to Applied science.

Now that the Higg's Boson has been discovered there is nothing left to research, from the subatomic physics to the astrophysics of the universe, everything that can be discovered has been already been discovered. It is time to stop spending money looking for stuff that is not there. According to science everything that can be explained, has already been explained.

So, we seem to live a rather small universe when it comes to possibilities. Personally, I am a bit disappointed. I guess the only thing left to do is to see if the science we learned has any practical value, to see if the knowledge of the Higg's boson can improve a single miserable life - considering we let some children starve in order to fund the research, it only seems right that it should be used to help others to live.

I share your sentiments on that.
I also question 'wasting' billions/trillions of $$$ on sending stuff into space when we have otherwise homeless and starving people on land.
Maybe we can justify space travel and exploration bc it has produced inventions which offset the gigantic costs, like velcro? but when's the last time you've used velcro?
Let's put a robot on Mars while children go homeless and starve!

I'm sure that I'm being somewhat ignorant of the value of our NASA space program, but I would like to see the other viewpoint put forth because I'm not swayed very much at our disproportionate allocation of resources at the moment (in the U.S. at least).

 

[Meer]

Applied science... like, bombs and jet fighters?

 

[Deleted member 1424]

I share your sentiments on that.
I also question 'wasting' billions/trillions of $$$ on sending stuff into space when we have otherwise homeless and starving people on land.
Maybe we can justify space travel and exploration bc it has produced inventions which offset the gigantic costs, like velcro? but when's the last time you've used velcro?
Let's put a robot on Mars while children go homeless and starve!

I'm sure that I'm being somewhat ignorant of the value of our NASA space program, but I would like to see the other viewpoint put forth because I'm not swayed very much at our disproportionate allocation of resources at the moment (in the U.S. at least).

Yeah...... attack NASA, but not the defense budget.
Fund war, but not knowledge!

Spoiler

 

[TriflinThomas]

Yeah...... attack NASA, but not the defense budget.
Fund war, but not knowledge!

Spoiler

I think it's worse that our country uses hundreds of billions of dollars in political races when that money could go towards actually helping our country.

 

[NinjaSurfer]

Yeah...... attack NASA, but not the defense budget.
Fund war, but not knowledge!

Spoiler

oh it wasn't an all inclusive rant;

I have much to say about 20% of our GDP going towards warships and missiles as well; it's somewhat of a brainwash to have it all labeled as "defense" when it would be more aptly called national wartime offense; but whatever, label is a label;

there's no easy fix because relieving our "defense" budget would somewhat cripple the nation as it would relate to a massive collapse of jobs; I'm sure that someone with a better macro understanding of economics could explain how the U.S. "needs" scary things in the world in order to keep up the pretense of this massive need for a "defense" budget; however, completely choking out the budget is not the solution;

 

[nanook]

i disagree with the argument about starving kids. those are not caused by science. please. do i have to explain?

well, i think others said roughly the same.

 

[NinjaSurfer]

i disagree with the argument about starving kids. those are not caused by science. please. do i have to explain?

well, i think others said roughly the same.

no one suggested that science causes starving kids
but please explain what's on your mind anyways

merely that if we have limited resources, billions of dollars could be diverted towards practical uses like curing social problems such as hunger and homelessness versus on space exploration (and missiles)

I do also consider that starving science related ventures has a negative long-term effect so it is not the easiest calculation by any means; I'm sure the situation is much more complicated than I am presenting it; at least I am aware of my own ignorance, and that's fine by me; I'm going to go try to improve my tetris score now.

 

[nanook]

you don't use up one stash of valuable items (the little money your granny has for living) to fix a shortage (in your drug stash) caused by something worthless (a thief), you discard the worthless cause (the thief). its a matter of style. i wonder if im advocating some introverted thinking here. cuz style is a somewhat subjective meta value. but i think Te has values too. might also be a perception value, actually. (visualisation, symmetry)

 

[Da Blob]

I do think it is a matter of priorities, financially and philosophical. We value the lives of convicted murderers so much in this country we spend $3 million dollars on each of them, but nothing on his or her victims. We spend trillions of dollars on devices to kill people and a tiny fraction of that to heal them. In fact, seemingly Americans would rather invest in means to kill foreigners than heal their neighbors.

Personally, I get so tired of arguing with those who proclaim man-made Science as their savior and their unimaginative 4D models of reality as the only possible universe. Where is the hope of science? We use science to fulfill the dark desires of the human heart: build weapons and use them against the weaponless, oppress, spy, generate misinformation, use drones to do our murdering for us.

Some see technology as a champion, but human history destroys that illusion, it will be Dark Techno-Lord commanded by an elite few who sit at its controls, as a instrument of utter oppression.

What are the firepower limits of the next Hitler/Stalin/Mao and where is the rationality that will control the next irrational monster that rises out of the ranks of the mentally disturbed?

The ascent of Man is ended, the descent of Man begins...

 

[NinjaSurfer]

you don't use up one stash of valuable items (the little money your granny has for living) to fix a shortage (in your drug stash) caused by something worthless (a thief), you discard the worthless cause (the thief). its a matter of style. i wonder if im advocating some introverted thinking here. cuz style is a somewhat subjective meta value. but i think Te has values too. might also be a perception value, actually. (visualisation, symmetry)

I don't think your analogy makes sense
In your analogy, the granny's living stash is supposed to be more important than my drug stash
in real life-- are you suggesting that space exploration supersedes proper shelter and nourishment?

I'm not at the moment suggesting "how" to use the funds-- for example, I'm not proposing to take the money we spend on NASA and buy food... that would be giving the man a fish, not teaching him how-to-fish; instead, divert the funds into job training or job growth... something along those lines; then when the economy stabilizes, re-divert funds back to the space program;

here's a better analogy

would you choose to feed your kid or take him to his violin lessons if you only had $100 left for the month?

The way we shoot missiles into space and stockpile them in other countries is akin to us taking our kid to his private lessons before he is properly fed.

 

[nanook]

In your analogy, the granny's living stash is supposed to be more important than my drug stash

no it isn't more worth, both are of equal worth but less worth than the thief. but my analogy put's you into the challange of deciding between lazy egocentricity and love. without your drugs you feel like dying, but without her stash, your granny feels like dying (starvation/craving). do you make someone suffer, whom you hold dearly, because they are innocent in nature, or do you choose to fight someone who has deserved it? (wasn't even aware of how my intuitive understanding of "style" is moral)


i have the impression that you differ from me in the assumption of whether there is a real thief involved in our world. if this were simply a matter of dividing given resources between good or better aims, i'd agree that kids are more valuable than science.

but my integral values are about categorical supporting everything that has a positive developmental nature, such as kids and science, and to categorically discard things that have a detrimentrial or truly superfluous character, such as thiefs. if all thiefs are gone (not talking about gassing anyone, talking about taking out of effect) and there are still starving kids, we can talk about sacrificing science. (i'd say, there won't be starving kids, plus science generates wealth for the kids, around corners)

 

[snafupants]

I am contemplating contacting the people I know in government to tell them to stop funding research in Pure science and switch everything over to Applied science.

Now that the Higg's Boson has been discovered there is nothing left to research, from the subatomic physics to the astrophysics of the universe, everything that can be discovered has been already been discovered. It is time to stop spending money looking for stuff that is not there. According to science everything that can be explained, has already been explained.

So, we seem to live a rather small universe when it comes to possibilities. Personally, I am a bit disappointed. I guess the only thing left to do is to see if the science we learned has any practical value, to see if the knowledge of the Higg's boson can improve a single miserable life - considering we let some children starve in order to fund the research, it only seems right that it should be used to help others to live.

That assertion is incorrect.

 

[Da Blob]

Hmm! Afterthought

Would it not be ironic, that the last scientific discovery right before we fall into the Dark Ages of the third millennia, would be that a society of mankind needs a god to survive? That somehow faith in a higher power gives an adaptational advantage to the faithful over the faithless?

 

[NinjaSurfer]

no it isn't more worth, both are of equal worth but less worth than the thief. but my analogy put's you into the challange of deciding between lazy egocentricity and love. without your drugs you feel like dying, but without her stash, your granny feels like dying (starvation/craving). do you make someone suffer, whom you hold dearly, because they are innocent in nature, or do you choose to fight someone who has deserved it? (wasn't even aware of how my intuitive understanding of "style" is moral)

in your analogy then, fighting is irrelevant, as the thief (and the stolen stash of drugs) is a sunk cost and we should not spend good money chasing after bad; the thief is long gone and "fighting" a thief is unlikely to produce a return greater or equal to the resources expended to "fight" the thief; thus we should evaluate our position and make do with the best of what we've got; in the future, we can invest in a better home security system like Brinks or buy a safe; but for now, maybe we divide the existing cash 50/50 between grannies food and my weed allowance

 

[NinjaSurfer]

That assertion is incorrect.

they forgot about the Higgs-Boson-Boson-Boson, particle. Trace Buster Buster anyone???

 

[nanook]

as the thief (and the stolen stash of drugs) is a sunk cost and we should not spend good money chasing after bad; the thief is long gone

you can't just reinvent my metaphor can you??? no, the thief is still there around the corner, holding all the value in his fat pockets. besides this is actually a process, where the thief steals a little bit, every day. you could steal it back from you granny everyday, or put out the thief.

btw i have just inserted two paragraphs in the previous post #14. i think i have said all i wanted so say. (haven't slept, can't take in and evaluate other scenarios of yours)

 

[Proletar]

you don't use up one stash of valuable items (the little money your granny has for living) to fix a shortage (in your drug stash) caused by something worthless (a thief), you discard the worthless cause (the thief). its a matter of style. i wonder if im advocating some introverted thinking here. cuz style is a somewhat subjective meta value. but i think Te has values too. might also be a perception value, actually. (visualisation, symmetry)

Your analogy makes sense.




IF WE ARE CURRENTLY BEING ATTACKED BY MARS.

 

[NinjaSurfer]

you can't just reinvent my metaphor can you??? no, the thief is still there around the corner, holding all the value in his fat pockets. besides this is actually a process, where the thief steals a little bit, every day. you could steal it back from you granny everyday, or put out the thief.

btw i have just inserted two paragraphs in the previous post #14. i think i have said all i wanted so say. (haven't slept, can't take in and evaluate other scenarios of yours)

I would kill the thief,
go to prison for it (bc laws are fucked up like that),
and the gov't would be supporting my prison time
thus placing more strain on the economy

it is easy to ignore starving when you're not the one starving

 

[nanook]

@Proletar: it's the reptilian shapeshifters

i'm not the one who is ignoring the thief, who causes kids to starve/crave.
(you realize, that you, the craving junky of my metaphor, are essentially the kids, who are deciding between getting what is theirs from either their granny or from the martians?). just saying, leave granny science out of it.

 

[NinjaSurfer]

@Proletar: it's the reptilian shapeshifters

i'm not the one who is ignoring the thief, who causes kids to starve/crave.
(you realize, that you, the craving junky, are essentially the kids in my metaphor, deciding between getting what's yours from either your granny or from the martians?). just saying, leave granny science out of it.

the granny should be taken off life support then because she is useless to society, and the drugs should be given to me because it supports my creativity which in turn produces entertainment for the masses like Southpark and Nirvana hits like "Smells Like Teen Spirit," Granny and The thief it is too bad for them.

 

[Tetr]

According to science everything that can be explained, has already been explained.

Where do you take this from? Yes, the Higgs boson was the missing part of the standard model, but it hasn't been confirmed that it completes it - the puzzle may still expand. It still doesn't explain gravity for example.

Now I'm basically just reciting the minute physics guy, so watch this instead.

 

[SandMizzle]

According to science everything that can be explained, has already been explained.

What are your sources?
And isn't that exactly what is said before every new and great discovery? I would be a bit careful, aren't there any open questions anymore?

 

[Da Blob]

What are your sources?
And isn't that exactly what is said before every new and great discovery? I would be a bit careful, aren't there any open questions anymore?

Sources! We don't need any bleepin' sources

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqomZQMZQCQ

My lament has more to do with the prostitution of science by those who pimp the truth for political/philosophical purposes:

re: God? We don't have to seek no bleepin'God, we have the Higg's boson as a god.

If there is no actual use for Science, pure only in memory, except to provide fodder for propaganda, then I say, "Put the poor bitch out of her misery, she has suffered enough misuse as it is"

aren't there any open questions anymore?

That's a good question in and of itself. However, I would suggest that the greater question is, "How is continuing research in subatomic physics, astrophysics or another 'pure' science going to improve the life of one single human being?" The exception being of course, those individuals who make a livelihood, from providing the luxury of useless scientific trivia or propaganda, neither of which are pure.

Where do you take this from? Yes, the Higgs boson was the missing part of the standard model, but it hasn't been confirmed that it completes it - the puzzle may still expand. It still doesn't explain gravity for example.

Again, I don't know if humans actually will ever have all the pieces. I was being rather darkly sarcastic, a tone of voice difficult to communicate on a computer screen. I was provoked by the proclamation of the Higg's boson as god... Everything we 'know' is necessarily a chimera and being one of the principle puzzle pieces by our very existence, any puzzle we claim to consciously solve is not solved if the place where consciousness fits into the puzzle is left vacant.

 

[Architect]

You've moved from the 'puzzled' category to the 'probable idiot'

The U.S. probably spends more on diapers than it does on fundamental science.

 

[Affinity]

http://www.sac.edu/AcademicProgs/Sc...Pages/Benefits-of-the-NASA-Space-Program.aspx

And that's just from the space program. Just cause you are unable to see an imminent benefit or one that is tangible, does not mean it will not lead to greater knowledge or understanding.

 

[BigApplePi]

The Higg's Boson may be the missing ingredient in getting nuclear fusion to work. We must continue our efforts ... in the name of energy and tax savings.

 

[warryer]

Oh this thread.

 

[Architect]

The Higg's Boson may be the missing ingredient in getting nuclear fusion to work.

No unfortunately it has nothing to do with fusion, unless you are kidding?

 

[redbaron]

You've moved from the 'puzzled' category to the 'probable idiot'

Probable is a little too generous in my opinion. I would say confirmed.

 

[BigApplePi]

No unfortunately it has nothing to do with fusion, unless you are kidding?

Are you serious? Have you ever known me to kid about anything? What would it take to get a laugh from Architect?

To me humor functions to contrast uncertainties ... unless one is so omniscient that there never is uncertainty.

 

[Architect]

Are you serious? Have you ever known me to kid about anything? What would it take to get a laugh from Architect?

As I posted elsewhere crude humor - slapstick and the like will give me a belly laugh.

In real life my given humor is, probably typically (for an INTP), intellectually witty and biting. Usually short sentence one offs, my INFJ loves it, but few others understand my jokes.

Your bit was a light dose of irony, nicely played (I wasn't sure) but hardly worth a laugh I think (no offense).

What passes for humor at my workplace is a mini drama around some small bit of irony, or rather sarcasm. Somebody will make a statement, somebody else says "OHHHhhh no, that doesn't happen HERE', then everybody gleefully repeats this back and forth while obviously enjoying their wit.

Fucking Sensors.

 

[Agent Intellect]

That's a good question in and of itself. However, I would suggest that the greater question is, "How is continuing research in subatomic physics, astrophysics or another 'pure' science going to improve the life of one single human being?" The exception being of course, those individuals who make a livelihood, from providing the luxury of useless scientific trivia or propaganda, neither of which are pure.

When asked by British parliament what practical use there could possibly be for electricity, Michael Faraday replied "One day sir, you may tax it." In hindsight, my takeaway point is that there is no foreseeable way to judge the usefulness of a new discovery.

You say we should cease pure science so that more people can live. I'd ask, if we ceased pure science, would this even be a world worth living? Isn't refusing to make any new discoveries killing a fundamental part of what it means to be human?

 

[Da Blob]

So out of curiosity, what are the possibilities of utility of the Higg's boson (besides fusion)?

Will it make FTL travel between stars feasible? I mean if we could shed Higgs at will, it would make acceleration towards the speed of light so much easier, for mass would not increase with velocity if it were being shed by a Higg's repeller or whatever... Of course a Higg's Propeller would be quite useful, as well...

 

[Architect]

So out of curiosity, what are the possibilities of utility of the Higg's boson (besides fusion)?

Nothing so far.

However if we hadn't found it, then the standard model would be wrong, and that would have led in new directions, which would have taught us all sorts of new and useful things pretty quickly.

Look, when Einstein came up with General Relativity in 1907 it had no appearance of usefulness. He turned gravity (an un-useful force in that sense) into geometry (something less useful). Guess what? We need to take GR into account for getting super accurate GPS signals. It's used in many, many other places to account for discrepancies in measurements that we wouldn't know how to correct without GR.

I doubt anybody in 1907 would have predicted that this crazy theory would be necessary for a future system of low orbit satellites which we use to tell us where we are on the planet to within a foot or two.

 

[nexion]

I think it's worse that our country uses hundreds of billions of dollars in political races when that money could go towards actually helping our country.

Such is the way it is.

The ascent of Man is ended, the descent of Man begins...

There has always been both ascent and descent. I remember having very vivid ideas years ago about how the light that man wanted to shine across the universe has all but burned out. But truthfully, I suspect it's always been like this. Man just doesn't, and never will, have much light to shine to begin with. But still he builds his cities and empires, and ceaselessly seeks to gather more knowledge, perhaps in the delusion that he can make man's light burn a little brighter, desperate to find something of permanence, or perhaps something which might prove to him that mankind is a benefit to the Universe and to himself and that it is worth existing.

But he will not.

 

[Da Blob]

I agree to a certain extent, but then perhaps we were not designed to generate Light, but merely to reflect it...

 

[nexion]

I agree to a certain extent, but then perhaps we were not designed to generate Light, but merely to reflect it...

If that is so, then man has done quite a poor job of that as well.

 

[BigApplePi]

So out of curiosity, what are the possibilities of utility of the Higg's boson (besides fusion)?

Da Blob. The fusion thing was a poor joke. Sorry. The only thing I know fusion and Higgs have in common is the evasiveness of their discovery.

 

[kantor1003]

I was provoked by the proclamation of the Higg's boson as god...

If that's the case, I think it's nothing to worry about. "The God particle", as far as I know (and I could be mistaken), was just an unfortunate name coined by science popularizers to make particle physics a tad more interesting read for the layman.

Still, it's interesting that it got that name. I'm sure it's not far fetched, considering your background and views, for you to interpret this as man's need to have some sort of a God figure (science replacing god). It's an interesting area to explore, or line of thought to pursue, I'd presume, but personally I think, at least in this particular case, that it's more the grandeur of the word "God" that makes it a suiting analogy for the way in which most scientist regard the Higgs boson.

 

[Da Blob]

Da Blob. The fusion thing was a poor joke. Sorry. The only thing I know fusion and Higgs have in common is the evasiveness of their discovery.

No problem and who knows, once we learn how to manipulate the Higg's (if that is even a remote possibility) it could indeed be utilized in the process of fusion. I really haven't thought that much about it for I don't think it will happen anytime in the near future (I least I hope it doesn't - for if history is any indicator, there are people at this moment losing sleep trying to devise new ways to kill other humans using the Higg's)

If that is so, then man has done quite a poor job of that as well.

Sad but true. I wonder how few humans actually performed up to design specifications?

If that's the case, I think it's nothing to worry about. "The God particle", as far as I know (and I could be mistaken), was just an unfortunate name coined by science popularizers to make particle physics a tad more interesting read for the layman.

Still, it's interesting that it got that name. I'm sure it's not far fetched, considering your background and views, for you to interpret this as man's need to have some sort of a God figure (science replacing god). It's an interesting area to explore, or line of thought to pursue, I'd presume, but personally I think, at least in this particular case, that it's more the grandeur of the word "God" that makes it a suiting analogy for the way in which most scientist regard the Higgs boson.

Yep! The Standard Model hasn't received a lot of good press and actually this thing has the stink of a PR campaign for they knew the Higg's was there at the 3 sigma level for a long time, but according to professional standards they could not officially announce it, until they had enough data to confirm its existence at the 5 sigma level.

 

[Madoness]

I am contemplating contacting the people I know in government to tell them to stop funding research in Pure science and switch everything over to Applied science.

Now that the Higg's Boson has been discovered there is nothing left to research, from the subatomic physics to the astrophysics of the universe, everything that can be discovered has been already been discovered. It is time to stop spending money looking for stuff that is not there. According to science everything that can be explained, has already been explained.

So, we seem to live a rather small universe when it comes to possibilities. Personally, I am a bit disappointed. I guess the only thing left to do is to see if the science we learned has any practical value, to see if the knowledge of the Higg's boson can improve a single miserable life - considering we let some children starve in order to fund the research, it only seems right that it should be used to help others to live.

Have you ever heard of the famous quote from Bill Gates?

640K ought to be enough for anybody.

If we have left it there.....

 

[Da Blob]

Have you ever heard of the famous quote from Bill Gates?



If we have left it there.....

No...
Glad you still visit this place.... I was afraid the Thought Police had finally caught up to you...

 

[Thurlor]

How surprising that science becomes equated with 'god'.

Surely only luddites want to abandon scientific research (whilst maintaining access to the rest of the products of science that make their lives comfortable).

Pointing out that things like accurate gps rely on an understanding of General Relativity (discovered by science) is pointless as these short-sighted individuals seem to want a life without modern technology. Why old tech is better than modern tech I don't know.

There are so many people in this world that we could easily carry out all the research we want. Imagine how many hungry and homeless could be fed and housed if the world's sports/entertainment budget was redirected. Why target science and not frivolties.

If you believe that not enough effort is being put into 'local' issues then why aren't you trying to fix things yourselves. It's like the labourer complaining that a doctor they know decided to quite medicine in favour of a pleasurable occupation. WTF. If it is such an issue why doesn't the labourer go to medical school and become a doctor?

 

[Affinity]

Here's an idea, lets all become farmers so we can cure world hunger... not!

 

[Jah]

When did money become a resource ?

Money are symbols of value, not an actual resource.



Anyway, Consider trying to get people away from their guns before you pry away at science.
What's your national budget for Airport Harassment (security-check) again ?



What do you really value, and why aren't you then, personally, spending your money in that direction ?


(oh, right, that's what people are supposed to be voting for in democracies... just remembered how that was supposed to work.)

 

[Pizzabeak]

When I was a small child I always thought this science shit was the most important thing ever. I don't see why we wouldn't be pouring monies into the research, and I don't see why money is an issue; that's dumb. Money sucks, it would be totally ideal if science-anything was free to do.
And if this is it, that sucks. All I want is the ability to travel (at least) near light speed.

 

[defghi]

The ideas that it is a choice between feeding people and making scientific progress, and that scientific progress is at a limit, show complete ignorance of what technology actually is.

Progress creates the tools for prosperity, those tools create additional progress, and so on and on and on, and on a logarithmic scale no less. Thinking that progress will end, or that it won't continue to help feed more people, not only requires a complete break from logic, but also contradicts all data and trends.