[lorenzo]

There's this news of a 12 year old schoolkid who improves the design of complex 3-D nanotube solar cells, which "provide 500 times more light absorption than commercially-available solar cells and nine times more than cutting-edge 3D solar cells." link

According to some, technological innovation grows exponentially (and there's an exponential factor in this exponential growth). So we see ever more useful inventions ever more quickly succeeding each other. At one point in time, we will reach some kind of a singularity, where the collusion of innovative science & tech fields creates a whole new dimension ("the Singularity"). I agree with the possibility of the emergence of such an event.

But it might suffice just to say that there are now 6.4 billion brains on the planet all working in sync and all creating contexts in which geniuses might arise. One such a genius can change the world, through a particular invention or insight.
The question is: do doomers, who think of planetary socio-economic collapse, ever feel threatened by this under-the-radar presence of genius? Or do they just ignore it and repress it?

Because, obviously, it doesn't take that much for an invention to transform, for example, our energy landscape. And thus the entire doomer-framework would collapse. This doomer-narrative is weak; rational people know this. But the question is: do the doomers know?

[TheDude]

Far out, that kid lives about 20 miles from me.

Carhole had his singularity thread, in case you missed it Lor.

No geniuses prevented past collapses. I'm more interested in reading Homer-Dixon than hoping for nanotubes to save the day. Mere MENSA members have been trying to crack that nut for some time, you know. And in the US we'd still need to build 95 million EVs for all that too-cheap-to-meter electricity to mean anything.

This financial unwind is spreading like positive feedback melting in the Arctic. You have to have capital to build factories to build cars. Or PV panels.

[Carlhole]

Because, obviously, it doesn't take that much for an invention to transform, for example, our energy landscape. And thus the entire doomer-framework would collapse. This doomer-narrative is weak; rational people know this. But the question is: do the doomers know?

You know what it is?

It's that the peak oil theory and this website distill out a particular kind of mindset as measured against ALL the people who learn of the theory. Those whose imaginations are titillated by notions of impending civilizational collapse are more likely to remain here and submit regular posts which assume the inevitability of Doom.

Those who can immediately see flaws in the Doomer perspective drift off elsewhere or they do not contribute. The Doomers, therefore, tend to reinforce one another's thinking on the matter and then it becomes a group dynamic - an Us vs Them thing where "We" are right and "They" are delusional.

It's called Groupthink. Groupthink has been studied in corporations and government because it stifles innovation and creativity. Don't tell me that the neo-Luddite contempt for science and technology around here is stimulating and creative!

But certainly one can find the peak oil idea fascinating and explanatory without leaping to the conclusion that civilisation is about to collapse.

I posted another article yesterday from 321energy on "Peak Oil And Nuclear".

It is just one example of many scenarios that put Doomerism to the lie. But if you post an article like this around here, it's bound to be disparaged in the most off-hand, smirking, juvenile way. It reminds me of a particular cafeteria lunch table I used to sit at in Junior High School years ago.

I think the whole Doomer notion spoils much of the excitement of the peak oil idea. I also notice that the adolescent minds that gravitate to Doom, seem to believe that peer-pressure will bring someone around to their way of thinking. Someone should inform them that peer-pressure doesn't work so well on grown-ups.

[shortonsense]

One such a genius can change the world, through a particular invention or insight.

The effects of singularities are inherently not predictable, but the probability of their occurrence is not.

The question is: do doomers, who think of planetary socio-economic collapse, ever feel threatened by this under-the-radar presence of genius? Or do they just ignore it and repress it?

I spend more time reading through old threads than participating in new ones. Been doing it for awhile now, seriously, everything has been discussed before, so reviewing them is as much fun as current stuff. I have not yet found a single instance where a Doomer allows for any singularity, the effects of which are game changing in a non-Doomerish way.
When you start with the preconception that all roads lead down, and have no internal ability to course correct, singularities simply don't exist in your world view, even if they are obvious to others.

[diemos]

It would be nice to find out what the kid actually did without it being filtered through some clueless reporter.

Since an infinitly good solar cell can only absorb 100% of incident light, and this kid says his solar cell absorb 500 times more light than ordinary cells then we can conclude that ordinary solar cells are at best 0.2% efficient.

Some how I doubt that.

[Carlhole]

It would be nice to find out what the kid actually did without it being filtered through some clueless reporter.
Since an infinitly good solar cell can only absorb 100% of incident light, and this kid says his solar cell absorb 500 times more light than ordinary cells then we can conclude that ordinary solar cells are at best 0.2% efficient. Some how I doubt that.

If you read the comments section, someone had suggested that the kid plagiarized the idea from this Georgia Tech Researcher:
3D Solar Cells Boost Efficiency, Reduce Size

New design uses “nano-Manhattan” carbon nanotube towers
Atlanta (April 11, 2007) —Unique three-dimensional solar cells that capture nearly all of the light that strikes them could boost the efficiency of photovoltaic (PV) systems while reducing their size, weight and mechanical complexity.
The new 3D solar cells capture photons from sunlight using an array of miniature “tower” structures that resemble high-rise buildings in a city street grid. The cells could find near-term applications for powering spacecraft, and by enabling efficiency improvements in photovoltaic coating materials, could also change the way solar cells are designed for a broad range of applications.
“Our goal is to harvest every last photon that is available to our cells,” said Jud Ready, a senior research engineer in the Electro-Optical Systems Laboratory at the Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI).

Still, it's hard to see how the kid was able to win a coveted scholarship worth $25,000 if his idea had already been published last year by a university researcher.

[vision-master]

It's that the peak oil theory and this website distill out a particular kind of mindset as measured against ALL the people who learn of the theory. Those whose imaginations are titillated by notions of impending civilizational collapse are more likely to remain here and submit regular posts which assume the inevitability of Doom.
Those who can immediately see flaws in the Doomer perspective drift off elsewhere or they do not contribute. The Doomers, therefore, tend to reinforce one another's thinking on the matter and then it becomes a group dynamic - an Us vs Them thing where "We" are right and "They" are delusional.
It's called Groupthink.

Ain't you part of the groupthink that ran off Golem? Maybe you should rename it to stoogethink.

[yesplease]

No geniuses prevented past collapses.

Sure they have. We're here, ain't we? I mean, nations and states have definite shelf lives, but as a whole the human race hasn't fallen back to a relative point people commonly bandy about on these forums. If it had, we wouldn't be able to post in the first place.

[Carlhole]

Ain't you part of the groupthink that ran off Golem? Maybe you should rename it to stoogethink.

I thought I dispatched that sh*t-for-brains single-handedly. You mean I can't take credit for it?
I was going to ask Aaron to place a little meritorious twinkle on my PO.com "expert" elan.

[AgentR]

The question is: do doomers, who think of planetary socio-economic collapse, ever feel threatened by this under-the-radar presence of genius?

Not at all; nothing would make me happier than to be wrong.

[MacG]

Nah, I'm not very afraid of geniuses. Idiots can scare me sometimes though.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Do doomers fear geniuses?

No, we don't.

photo She has IQ 156 (about as good as Einstein had) and she doesn't cause fear in me.

Image changed to URL Per COC Violations: 3.1.1 Nudity, partial nudity, or adult content.-FL

[vision-master]

Ain't you part of the groupthink that ran off Golem? Maybe you should rename it to stoogethink.

I thought I dispatched that sh*t-for-brains single-handedly. You mean I can't take credit for it?
I was going to ask Aaron to place a little meritorious twinkle on my PO.com "expert" elan.

Brown-nose

[Nickel]

Since an infinitly good solar cell can only absorb 100% of incident light, and this kid says his solar cell absorb 500 times more light than ordinary cells then we can conclude that ordinary solar cells are at best 0.2% efficient.

You're overlooking the fact that the the paradigms aren't strictly comparable that way. Current cells are two dimensional. These new ones, supposedly, are three dimensional. That is to say, a stone knife might be, for its own considerations, spectacularly efficient for the things it can or is supposed to do. But a steel blade has capacities that stone simply doesn't. For instance -- and I'm no expert -- it sounds like the new cell is capable of converting wavelengths that previously weren't being converted. Ultraviolet light has more energy than visible light, so that might could form part of the basis for his statement. Time will tell, I guess.

[Carlhole]

Since an infinitly good solar cell can only absorb 100% of incident light, and this kid says his solar cell absorb 500 times more light than ordinary cells then we can conclude that ordinary solar cells are at best 0.2% efficient.

You're overlooking the fact that the the paradigms aren't strictly comparable that way. Current cells are two dimensional. These new ones, supposedly, are three dimensional. That is to say, a stone knife might be, for its own considerations, spectacularly efficient for the things it can or is supposed to do. But a steel blade has capacities that stone simply doesn't. For instance -- and I'm no expert -- it sounds like the new cell is capable of converting wavelengths that previously weren't being converted. Ultraviolet light has more energy than visible light, so that might could form part of the basis for his statement. Time will tell, I guess.

It's not exactly clear what the kid invented from the article.

But he DID win a prestigious prize. One can only presume that the judges were aware of all the previously-developed 3D solar cells and awarded the prize based on some improvement that was not explicated in the news piece.

Or, I'm sure someone could track the little bugger down and ask him. Maybe I should email his Middle School's principal for more detail.

[sicophiliac]

Perhaps investing more in medical research might have an enormous return on investment if we manage to enhance our IQs somehow? Maybe targeted stem cell injections into certain parts of the brain might be able to jack up the average persons processing power or genetic engineering for future generations.

[Ferretlover]

The question is: do doomers, who think of planetary socio-economic collapse, ever feel threatened by this under-the-radar presence of genius? Or do they just ignore it and repress it?

A question with rather lopsided choices, lorenzo. Would you be more specific?
-What is your definition of a genius?
-Are you implying that the 12yo of the article is the definitive genius?
-What is your definition of a doomer?
-On what basis do you assume that you know the two choices you offered are the only two possible?
-If you do not agree with any of the many doomer scenarios, why not?

Because, obviously, it doesn't take that much for an invention to transform, for example, our energy landscape. And thus the entire doomer-framework would collapse. This doomer-narrative is weak; rational people know this. But the question is: do the doomers know?

-Please cite examples showing that the transformation of the "energy landscape" is the only criteria necessary for the "entire doomer-framework would collapse" statement.
-Which 'doomer narrative" is weak?
And, lastly (for the moment): If the planet is just brimming with mental giants, pray, do tell why the population of this planet is in the state that it is in now.

[americandream]

It's that the peak oil theory and this website distill out a particular kind of mindset as measured against ALL the people who learn of the theory. Those whose imaginations are titillated by notions of impending civilizational collapse are more likely to remain here and submit regular posts which assume the inevitability of Doom.
Those who can immediately see flaws in the Doomer perspective drift off elsewhere or they do not contribute. The Doomers, therefore, tend to reinforce one another's thinking on the matter and then it becomes a group dynamic - an Us vs Them thing where "We" are right and "They" are delusional.
It's called Groupthink. Groupthink has been studied in corporations and government because it stifles innovation and creativity. Don't tell me that the neo-Luddite contempt for science and technology around here is stimulating and creative!

I think one has to be magnanimous in issues involving ideas and concede that we are all subject to the same "groupthink" dynamic, oerhaps by degree, as the next individual. The soundness of the idea stands up to the scrutiny of cold logioc and thereby redeems itself.

The whole notion of a the terminality of the system stands credited when one notes that the depletion issue is not simply restricted to oil but to every finite resource within a cornucopian context.

However, ideas of terminality that revolve around notions of original sin, some unseen conspiring hand, evil foreigners, unwashed hordes of immigrants, filthy communists, evil capitalists or any other infantile idea simply do not stand up to scrutiny and thats where an analysis of cornucopia's tendencies must be repeatedly brought to bear. Similarly, a naive notion that we may some how invent a remedy for this historically flawed system is equally illogical.

However, combine man's ability to create with our ability to organise sustainably when properly harnessed and yes, I do believe that we are in a position to create a sustainable global civilisation with infinite potential.

[dorlomin]

This whole thread is a blatant strawman. But I do not fear genuises with solutions. I am very wary of obstification and false promises to delay action on dealing with peak oil.

The only thing that makes me a doomer is the endless hope of an easy solution. Such as kids inventing energy sources in there back yard being taken as gospil before its been properly scrutinezed for its energy and economic value.

[Carlhole]

Such as kids inventing energy sources in there back yard being taken as gospil before its been properly scrutinezed for its energy and economic value.

There's no such word as "obstification". But, you know, it really does seem to have all the right stuff for being a real word, doesn't it? It was just mostly a news article recognizing a 12-year-old kid for his winning of a prestigious scholarship. It was $25,000. So it was a human interest story that did not need or want to get technical.

I'm sure the Davidson Fellowship (or whatever it was) will look at what their applicants have actually submitted and will have checked submissions for plagiarism before awarding such a big prize. But if you are really curious - like I said in an earlier post, contact his Middle School's principal and ask for more detailed information.