Hi Charles,

thank you very much for reading my essay and for your comments on it. Yes perhaps a little history lesson on how the sanctuaries came to be constructed would have helped the story. Others have picked out different details that they would have liked. The story is just a way of talking about problems facing humanity and how they might be overcome, in an interesting way. That you have appreciated the importance of the lessons and the scope of the essay makes me happy, thank you.

Dear Georgina,

I very much like your title, as it seems to be so easy to forget this fact of life. If you have not read 'Wool Omnibus' by Hugh Howey, you might wish to do so. I view it as perhaps a prototype 'sanctuary'. I've given some thought to the idea of sanctuaries in the past, but did not place them underground.

Based on your prior contributions to FQXi, I did not see this one coming. Congratulations on the ability to surprise your friends!

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

    Dear Edwin, I do hope that you got beyond the title and were pleasantly surprised, not disappointed.

    In the evaluation criteria under Interesting, it says "Original and creative... At the same time, the entry should differ substantially from any previously published piece by the author." I have tried to jump those hoops by using an interesting literary style to convey numerous problems and actual or potential solutions.

    "Technically correct and rigorously argued, to the degree of a published work or grant proposal." You may have noticed the very large number of references given for the facts contained in it.

    Under relevant it says "(Note: While this topic is broad, successful essays will not use this breadth as an excuse to shoehorn in the author's pet topic, but will rather keep as their central focus the theme of how humanity should steer the future.)" I have subtly referred to my explanatory framework and not made it the central focus of the essay.

    "Additionally, to be consonant with FQXi's scope and goals, essays should be sure to touch on issues in physics and cosmology, or closed related fields, such as astrophysics, biophysics, mathematics, complexity and emergence, and the philosophy of physics." The image we call the present is written in the light but the material future has not been built is philosophy of physics and I am referring to my explanatory framework for physics. I also talk about the Strange Atractor, chaos and give a reference to the Lorenz center. Other aspects of physics are also mentioned.

    I have also addressed these points listed under Relevant "What is the best state that humanity can realistically achieve?" I have talked about how success is measured. "What is your plan for getting us there? Who implements this plan?" I have talked about the various kinds of future problem solvers "What technology (construed broadly to include practices and techniques) does your plan rely on?" I have talked about bio-mimicry, bio-engineering, and 3D printing to build a 'tool box' of potential solutions to future problems.And constructing self sufficient sustainable biospheres as a prerequisite to space colonization.Control of the environment to promote health ie. simbionts to out compete pathogens and control of lighting and em devices for health purposes. Use of fever and dormant states for treatment of ill health and injury. I have also talked about self healing materials.

    Under interesting it also says "Well and clearly written, Accessible to a diverse, well-educated but non-specialist audience". I believe I have jumped those hoops too as it is possible to read the essay on different levels. Just a simple Utopian tale or a deep consideration of a large number of serious problems that do or may soon affect humanity.

    We were told to be optimistic,and though some people have pointed out that the "Utopian" society is set within a Dystopian world it is predominantly an optimistic view; that a large human population can be sustained with purpose, dignity and a good deal of personal freedom as well as having an improved standard of living and good health. The stark depressing quote of Issac Asimov at the beginning is contrasted with the realization that humanity is beyond price, when the perspective is changed, in the quote by Carl Sagan.

    Kind Regards, Georgina

    Dear Georgina,

    Wow! One can touch hot buttons even in the dark! I can only assume that you felt damned by faint praise. I apologize. Your original entry both meets FQXi specs (as you leave no doubt!) and my own (inconsequential) standards for an essay.

    Whatever set you off was unintentional. You painted a picture. I related it to a similar picture (Hugh Howey) I have encountered in the last year. Mea culpa! Mea culpa!.

    I still love you,

    Edwin Eugene Klingman

    Dear Edwin,

    I am sorry if my reply seems snappy, inappropriate or ungrateful. I just wanted to point out the care taken to match the evaluation criteria and that it is not just a story.

    I'm glad you like the title. I deliberately chose something a little more eye catching than previous years. I hoped it would attract more readers. Mankind has lived through the benign inter-glacial period with steady climate and abundant oil has fueled the green revolution, allowing rapid increase in population. It seems the good times (smooth seas) that mankind is accustomed to will not last forever. The title is implying that we can become 'good sailors' (adapting as required) through experience of harsh conditions and challenges. That seemed to me to fit well with scenario depicted.

    Thanks for taking a look, Georgina

    Thanks for sharing your vision of the future, Georgina. I like the way you measure success for humanity. And I think you are right to stress the importance of sustainability.

    My own view is that the petri dish analogy may be too simple--I have actually written about this elsewhere--but I agree that there are limits to how much we can consume as a species. I suppose I also hope that the future will have more room for difference of opinion than this society seems to. But if there is a lot to debate in your vision, these are definitely debates worth having.

    If you get a chance, I would be grateful for your thoughts on my own essay. Best of luck to you in any case!

    Robert

      P.S., I will use the following rating scale to rate the essays of authors who tell me that they have rated my essay:

      10 - the essay is perfection and I learned a tremendous amount

      9 - the essay was extremely good, and I learned a lot

      8 - the essay was very good, and I learned something

      7 - the essay was good, and it had some helpful suggestions

      6 - slightly favorable indifference

      5 - unfavorable indifference

      4 - the essay was pretty shoddy and boring

      3 - the essay was of poor quality and boring

      2 - the essay was of very poor quality and boring

      1 - the essay was of shockingly poor quality and extremely flawed

      After all, that is essentially what the numbers mean.

      The following is a general observation:

      Is it not ironic that so many authors who have written about how we should improve our future as a species, to a certain extent, appear to be motivated by self-interest in their rating practices? (As evidence, I offer the observation that no article under 3 deserves such a rating, and nearly every article above 4 deserves a higher rating.)

      Aaron,

      Its early days and I expect that, as in previous contests, ratings will change a lot in the last few days of voting.

      Georgina - That's good to hear. This is my first one, so I didn't know about that dynamic. I hope the rating scale I have suggested will be helpful to increase the morale of the entire group earlier than the last few days. Have a nice weekend.

      Hi Georgina,

      Nice choice of format; showing a day in the life seems like a good way of expressing what you're advocating for.

      For what it's worth, I would have benefited from a more detailed explanation of why overpopulation is the most important thing to consider about steering our future; it seems likely to me that advanced technologies will allow us to comfortably support many more people than we do today.

      Best,

      Daniel

        Hi Daniel,

        thank you for reading my essay. It is not population size per se that is the problem but exponential growth. I put a reference to part of a transcript explaining that in the text, corresponding to a hyperlink on the reference page. Here is a link to the transcript

        A. Bartlett, Arithmetic, population, energy transcript

        Here is the full length video. It is also available on you tube as 8 installments

        A. Bartlett, Arithmetic, population, energy video

        If you understand exponential growth you will understand the nature of the problem.

        By the way all of the reference numbers in the text correspond to ones on the reference page at the end of the essay, the majority of which have hyperlinks.

        Kind regards , Georgina

        Thank you Robert.

        I am glad you like the measures of success. You are the first to have picked up on that. In this fictitious society instead of growth of production and consumption, or wealth being measures of success it is the sustainability, contentment, altruism (with corresponding low crime rate), creativity and high culture that are evaluated. This means that not only does the society quantify how it is doing but it is striving to improve on all of those measures.It probably will not be an ideal environment and society to begin with but with the success criteria in mind it can gradually be improved for the benefit of the populus and biosphere.

        Contentment, being one of the success criteria, is taken into account in social planning. This I think addresses the concerns expressed by a number of people that they would not have enough freedom in such a society. There are a number of ways the opportunity to express idea and have them acknowledged can be built in to such a society as well as numerous opportunities for creative expression and experimentation.

        Thanks, Georgina

        Georgina, thanks again for your encouraging comments at my own essay. To reiterate my reply: yes, most people don't think about the basics of why things are made like they are. I think much of the time, it's "custom" rather than "best design", and we need to change that. My essay is of course not just a laundry list of proposals, but a head-on attempt to get at the basis of human mentality (both regarding "awareness" and "will"), and try to use that to better enable more optimal, less hide-bound thinking. I want to be more optimistic than you and most people, about our potential ability to fight nature's urges and habits. We already know that people who believe in and practice willpower (whatever it ultimately is) can exert more self control and eat fewer snacks etc. (altho as we know, relapse is a problem.)

        Reducing stress and bad environmental influences however, does help - we aren't just plugging away with our wills in a vacuum. I have installed orange lights to turn on at night for awhile before retiring, to reduce the influence of the bluish rays that you mention (they reduce melatonin and increase stress chemicals, and are found even in unfiltered incandescent light - fluorescent is even worse.)

        I like the regard for and attention to nature that you express in your essay (as did many other writers - this is to me a good sign.) We are indeed learning better ways of doing things from studying nature - for example, seashells have shown how to make tough armor. Applying such techniques to humans is of course controversial and will require the highest ethical standards and collaboration and consensus. But the world faces such great challenges, so we will probably have to try exotic and possibly radical techniques at some point. Cheers, good luck to you.

        Your title poses a classic belief, that having it too easy ("smooth seas") keeps people from doing their best. Surely much truth in that, and I think that challenges also stimulate and build up willpower (for one reason, since we have to keep plugging away at something and can't give up - yet must remain flexible if things change. Being able to do both is the essence of power of mind.)

        Hi Neil,

        thank you for your comment about attention to nature.In my opinion it has value in its own right as well as being able to teach us many lessons and provide life support and quality of life for humans.

        I think I should differentiate between bioengineering and biotechnology. My fictional society makes use of bioengineering and biomimicry, imitating nature but not biotechnology, the modification of natural organisms. Bioengineering, Wikipedia Biotechnology, Wikipedia Care and consensus is still needed as you point out. However that civilization is not genetically altering human beings or other organisms but using technology to survive, solve problems and improve quality of life. It is not a vision of (artificial) transhumanism but humans living alongside nature and their nature inspired technology.

        Thank you for telling me about your lights. I am touched to think that my essay has made a positive change to your lifestyle, which should improve well being.

        The title is also optimistic, in that when the "seas get rough" we can rise to the challenge and master our circumstances.As Grace's mum says "we are becoming good sailors." You wrote "I think that challenges also stimulate and build up willpower (for one reason, since we have to keep plugging away at something and can't give up - yet must remain flexible if things change. Being able to do both is the essence of power of mind.)" Also the qualities of a good sailor : )

        Regards, Georgina

        Hi Georgina,

        A nice story/essay (Peter Jackson also told his points in story form and I think I've seen one other essay that takes this approach). The essay seems to focus on environmental issues and how (hopefully) we will successful come to grips with them. I was privileged to hear Dr. Barlett talk during the early 1990s while I was at UVA. Amazing and passionate speaker. One point he made that I remember is that in a finite system there is no such thing as sustainable *growth*. You will eventually run out of resources. Which shows that there is still a long way to go in terms of the mind sets of people, governments, companies, etc. They all want *growth* and if the economy, company, etc. is not growing this is seen as a bad sign. But in the end (as your essay argues) we need to find some static equilibrium.

        I also enjoyed the idea of borrowing design ideas from nature (i.e your passive tunnel ventilation used by Prairie Dogs and your future society). I've seen this idea discussed a few time and it seems like a good one and something that people are looking into. I remember a recent "Technology Review" article about natural design and how engineers at MIT and other places were starting to look toward nature to solve some of their problems.

        An optimistic essay. I liked.

        Actually as you have time I had another question. I note in your bio that you have a Biology background. If one thinks about life evolving on other planets (and according to the Kepler mission planets, even Earth sized ones in the stars habitable zone, appear not uncommon) do we know enough about the mechanisms of evolution to say if the life forms that develop on other worlds will be absolutely alien and differ, or is there some idea that given the same basic underlying physical laws evolutions will always proceed down the same (or maybe a few limited) paths? I could easily believe either answer but think we don't know enough to say with authority. For example there are complex systems like weather or evolution of life for which there are attractors (like the Lorenz attractors you mention in your essay). I was just curious and again could believe either answer, but wanted to know if there was any leaning one way or the other.

        Best of luck.

        Doug

          Hi Doug,

          thank you very much for reading the essay and for your positive comments.

          It is fortunate that there are videos on You tube of Prof.A. Bartlett's talk, Arithmetic, population, energy: A. Bartlett talk, this one is full length but it is also available as 8 installments, so we can still appreciate his enthusiasm and very clear explanations.

          Re. evolution of life on other worlds. Firstly there is the question of whether life emerged on Earth independently or whether it arrived on Earth in some way, such as within an asteroid. If it arrived on Earth it is possible that it arrived on other worlds in the same way. Then it might given similar environmental conditions evolve in similar ways. The convergent evolution of the Tenrec shows how very similar forms of Earth life can evolve independently to occupy the same niches.

          The other possibility is that life arose independently on Earth and may arise independently on other worlds, either having the same genetic cipher, from the same "building blocks" or a different one. It has been demonstrated that self replication of non DNA code occurs.Living organisms pass down artificial 'DNA'Having shown that to be possible it can be imagined that DNA is not uniquely able to replicate and that there may be other life forms with a completely different self replicating code. Just as the synthetic DNA is potentially able to produce entirely novel proteins so could alien non DNA code. Completely different biochemistry can be imagined,completely alien, yet perhaps having convergent forms when in similar niches due to similar selection pressures.

          The diversity of Earth life is phenomenal and there are very many strange unicellular organisms, fungi, plants and animals, all sharing the same genetic cipher. Who would have imagined a leafy sea dragon(Wikipedia), or a gulper eel(Take a look at this amazing photo from national geographic) without having seen them or their images? Life is also able to exist in far more hostile environments than we used to imagine possible. Life forms called extremophiles,.(Wikipedia, There is an astrobiology section in that article).

          As I see it life can be one of two kinds, life as we know it sharing the same genetic cipher ( "extended family" ) or life but not as we know it with a different genetic cipher or other means of replication (Non family).

          Thanks for the interesting question, Georgina

          Hi Georgina

          You a have a peculiar writing style, I felt I was reading a nice novel. I found your essay well written and with a deep message; specially, the Asimov and Barlett parts. Although I wonder, if you are offering any particular solution to the problems you touch in your essay.

          I indeed think that more population aggravates problems and degrade human values. In this sense humanity behaves Darwinian, just as you mention in your essay: adapt to the environment. But I also think this is an extreme case when people are desperate for getting food or other basic needs (assuming no natural causes interfere with the current course).

          Sometimes, if you cannot adapt to the environment, you have to change the environment and make it suitable according to your needs. So, this is what humans collectively try to do.

          I also wanted to let you know that I replied to your comments in my thread. The replies are very much related, I think, to some of the issues you discuss in your essay. My view is that the planet can sustain life for at least 20 billion people for many centuries more. In my opinion, the problem is not sustainability but the struggle between nations; the differences in religions and cultures, etc. As long as these differences exist, I do not see how the world will live in peace and harmony. I think there is still a long way to go.

          Good luck in the contest!

          Best Regards

          Israel

            Hi Israel,

            thank you for reading my essay. Re solutions I will list them because there are lots.

            1.Population- halting growth is more important than any absolute number that can hypothetically be supported. A. Bartlett's talk explains why.To overcome this problem there has been social engineering to alter attitudes to procreation and child rearing. Those choosing to dedicate themselves to that role undergo holistic suitability testing and training. The majority of the population are sterilized either temporarily or permanently.

            2.Child abuse and neglect- All children are wanted and nurtured by dedicated parents and mentors. All parents are given training in child rearing.

            3.Resource depletion- Public education on the need for sustainability. Change in attitudes to consumption (The only wealth is life).Change in measures of success from growth in production and consumption to contentment, altruism (and associated low crime),creativity, high culture and sustainability.

            4.Cancer- optimizing vitamin D levels (We have pandemic vitamin D deficiency), Healthy diet,compulsory sleep time. Dimming and then turning off of blue wavelength emitting lights in the evening. Fever therapy (factual) aestivation therapy (hypothetical)

            5.Antibiotic resistance- Use of symbiotic bacteria to compete with pathogens. Fever therapy to fight infections

            6.Climate change and desertification- Allan Savory's method. reintroducing roving herds, trampling and trapping carbon in the ground which if done on large enough scale could ameliorate CO2 rise. Roots stabilizing ground and trampled vegetation giving shelter for fresh germination.

            7.Climate change- wild weather, temperate and sea level rise. Subterranean and sub-aquatic sanctuaries. Temperature is far more stable underground, can avoid storms and still occupy areas that would otherwise be uninhabitable, avoiding mass migration and associated problems.

            8.Prevention of mass migrations-Build sanctuaries for the helpless hoards.

            9.How to prepare for the unknown- find as many solutions as possible already evolved by nature.

            10.How to live happily underground- Appropriate lighting including solar tubes, natural green spaces,nature inspired designs for beauty and interest, fresh air ventilation system.

            11.Meaning of life- People have dedications that they choose not jobs.The whole civilization has purpose hacking the solutions of life and ultimately propagating the tree of life to other worlds.

            12.Personal freedom and quality of life- People can leave if they choose . People choose their dedication and can change it later on if they really want. As creativity and high culture are measures of success, there is plenty of opportunity to fulfill creative urges, starting at a very young age with creative IT, and appreciation of the various arts, as well as science, engineering and IT. Stress relief is valued, forms of meditation, creative expression, time with nature and or with companion animals.

            13. Terrorism and incurable criminality- Exile and protection of the sanctuary by dedicated security forces.

            14. Education- Virtual classrooms but free play times together are scheduled. A lot of free time given for personal study of topics that are interesting to that individual and on creative projects.

            Ongoing public education- Every member of the society is taught the principles on which the society is built, lessons of the past and about the future problem solvers. This is to promote social cohesion through shared values and knowledge. I have replied to someone else that perhaps the populous can decide which affirmation will be broadcast each quarter, so they feel they have some input.

            Re, Changing the environment I cautioned against large geo-engineering projects because there is the potential to cause more harm than intended. The many problems of hydroelectric dams are illustrative. Damage to fisheries and farms by preventing nutrient rich silts to get down stream, silting up of the dam, problems over water supply down stream. Allan Savoy's solution though is to return eroded areas of land back to a state that existed previously, and is entirely natural. I think we have to work with nature and not battle against it with our technology.

            Thanks again, Israel. (I will take a look at your reply on your page), Georgina

            Just thought,

            In regard to education I should also have mentioned the knowledge hubs, repository of human knowledge shared between all of the sanctuaries, to which all people have free access.

            15.Extinctions- some natural ecosystems and genetic material are preserved within the sanctuaries

            Maintaining structures- self healing materials are used. This is new technology but in the fictitious world it is far more advanced.Also for resilience tough natural materials and strong nature like forms are used.

            Manufacturing-by 3D printing and growth