[HN Gopher] Universe 25, 1968-1973 (2022)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Universe 25, 1968-1973 (2022)
        
       Author : firstSpeaker
       Score  : 59 points
       Date   : 2023-01-08 15:20 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.the-scientist.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.the-scientist.com)
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related. Others?
       | 
       |  _1960s Mouse Utopias Led to Grim Predictions for Future of
       | Humanity (2015)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28572253
       | - Sept 2021 (49 comments)
       | 
       |  _What Was the Mouse Utopia? (2017) [video]_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21366270 - Oct 2019 (6
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Doomed Mouse Utopia That Inspired the 'Rats of NIMH'_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12504271 - Sept 2016 (103
       | comments)
        
       | carapace wrote:
       | I saw a documentary about Kowloon Walled City. It was
       | nightmarish.
       | 
       | > Kowloon Walled City was an ungoverned and densely populated _de
       | jure_ Imperial Chinese enclave within the boundaries of Kowloon
       | City, British Hong Kong. Originally a Chinese military fort, the
       | walled city became an enclave after the New Territories were
       | leased to the United Kingdom by China in 1898. Its population
       | increased dramatically following the Japanese occupation of Hong
       | Kong during World War II. By 1990, the walled city contained
       | 50,000 residents[1] within its 2.6-hectare (6.4-acre) borders.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
       | 
       | Fortunately, it was razed. There's a nice park there now. I sure
       | am glad we're not mice!
       | 
       | Between Kowloon and the Yukon there's a sweet spot of population
       | density. (Yukon is one of the least populated but still nice
       | places on Earth. Fewer than ~45,000 people in ~450,000km2.)
       | 
       | We have plenty of room on Earth. We could construct an artificial
       | continent in the Pacific Ocean with a nice crinkly coastline and
       | everyone could live at the beach.
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | > We could construct an artificial continent in the Pacific
         | Ocean with a nice crinkly coastline and everyone could live at
         | the beach.
         | 
         | I'm from that crappy little country that makes islands for
         | other countries: outside of the continental shelves I highly
         | doubt that you could reclaim land unless you feel like living
         | at the bottom of a very, very deep hole in the ocean and
         | somehow I don't think that's the proposition that will get
         | people enthusiastic. Plenty of visitors already freak out when
         | they learn that NL is in many places more than 10 meters below
         | sea level, and that's with relatively mild coastal weather. If
         | you were to create a dike 100's of meters high (and where would
         | you get the material without making the hole even deeper?) it
         | will end up as something that would qualify as the biggest man
         | made structure without the slightest competition, including the
         | Great Wall.
         | 
         | This is engineering on a scale that is currently as far as I
         | know impossible.
        
           | aliqot wrote:
           | Curious how large a floating structure must be to defeat wave
           | motion that threatens to pull it apart.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | It would have to be stupendously large if you ever want to
             | build inside it using ordinary building materials,
             | otherwise it will be like living on a permanent earthquake.
        
               | carapace wrote:
               | Yeah, I wouldn't try to hold back the ocean, I mean more
               | like a floating island the size of Texas or so. But
               | really fractal/crinkly, so there's lots and lots of
               | coastline on the "interior" of the island. The outer edge
               | would buffer storms and high seas.
               | 
               | I have no actual idea if this is possible or not.
               | (IANAEngineer or anything like that, just a weirdo on the
               | Internet.)
               | 
               | You start with the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. That's a
               | lot of _carbon_ floating on hydrogen and oxygen and salt.
               | You collect the salt, melt it, use that to oxidize the
               | GPGP trash. (Molten Salt Oxidation[1]). Plastic is
               | converted to _synthesis gas_ ( "a mixture of hydrogen and
               | carbon monoxide"[2]). Exothermic reaction.
               | 
               | Now you need a way to convert the syngas to struts and
               | glue. (I have some ideas on that but they're even
               | nuttier... In any event, syngas is pretty useful stuff.)
               | 
               | Use the struts and glue to make large structures out of
               | "octet" truss (space-filling tessellation of octahedrons
               | and tetrahedrons) and just float on top of the water.
               | Imagine an upside-down Frisbee shape with walls roughly
               | 100m tall and a diameter of two or three kilometers. That
               | would be a small prototype.
               | 
               | Really the main motive would be to perform a kind of
               | _stunt_ just to get people to realize that we _can_ build
               | very large structures now.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_oxidation
               | 
               | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syngas
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | I think you'd be better off building something like that
               | _above_ the ocean with the whole thing supported by piers
               | anchored very deep. Otherwise sooner or later your
               | structure will meet that one wave that it can 't deal
               | with and then it's game over. But even something
               | supported by piers would be an amazing feat of
               | engineering by our current standards, even a typical
               | drilling platform that is embedded in the continental
               | shelf is - up close - something to behold. What you are
               | talking about is many, many orders of magnitude more
               | complex, both from a materials science perspective as
               | well as the engineering itself. The sea is a formidable
               | enemy for anything that you intended to float on top of
               | it, in the longer term if you don't sidestep the problem
               | you'll end up with your structure as a submersible. One
               | of the problems is that moving water is incredibly
               | destructive, I've seen 8 cubic meter concrete blocks
               | thrown about like confetti during a bad storm at the
               | coast, and that's nothing compared to what you have to
               | deal with on the open ocean.
               | 
               | Have a look at that first image:
               | 
               | https://www.alipobiolog.nl/wplog/natuur/na-de-storm-2/
               | 
               | That's what left after the impact of a 2x2x2 meter
               | concrete block. These are used to reinforce the piers
               | near IJmuiden, where I used to live and the force of the
               | impact of the water will dislodge those blocks from the
               | asphalt in which they are embedded and throw them over or
               | onto the pier itself. That's approximately 15 tonnes and
               | I have no idea how much force it would require to break
               | them free from their surroundings.
               | 
               | Then there is the problem of anchoring your structure.
               | All of the air on the Western side of a floating
               | structure would impinge on the height that the whole
               | thing extends above the sea, turning it into a gigantic
               | sail. Before long your structure would start to move and
               | the mass may work against moving in the beginning, but
               | once it picks up speed the whole thing turns into a giant
               | moving obstacle, eventually crashing into the shore
               | somewhere.
               | 
               | If you don't want that you'll have to expend a fair bit
               | of power or anchor it to the seabed somehow, and to
               | withstand such force will require a lot of engineering.
               | This will need to be maintained as well to offset it
               | coming loose in places.
               | 
               | On the whole I think the easiest way would be to take an
               | ocean liner and stick it somewhere at an anchor but even
               | that isn't going to be very pleasant without forward
               | motion to counteract a storm (you want to be heading into
               | a storm under power, not float around in it).
        
         | hungryforcodes wrote:
         | It looked really interesting actually. I'm sorry I never had
         | the chance to go there.
        
           | carapace wrote:
           | It was nightmarish.
           | 
           | The scene that stayed with me the longest was a person
           | working. She was in a space the size of a small closet. There
           | was a small pot of soupy dough and three hot plates. She
           | scooped dough and poured it on the plates. When they were
           | cooked she removed them and put them on a stack. Then she did
           | it again. The narrator said she worked like that for fourteen
           | hours every day, making _mu shu_ pancakes for the restaurants
           | in the city (Hong Kong.) That was it. That was her whole
           | life. Slaving like a robot.
           | 
           | It's good that they destroyed it.
        
             | twic wrote:
             | After they destroyed it, she presumably did the same job
             | somewhere else, with better electrical safety but higher
             | rent. Her job wasn't created by the walled city, it was
             | created by the economic order of Hong Kong.
        
       | firstSpeaker wrote:
       | Are there any more recent, more deeply analysed studies like
       | this?
        
         | dmix wrote:
         | I checked Wikipedia and there doesn't seem to be any recent IRL
         | studies on crowding. There was one study [1] in the 1970s that
         | tried to see if over-crowding affected humans similarly. The
         | study found that humans social ability allowed them to cope and
         | organize, avoiding the negative effects. So people probably
         | didn't really see a strong need to continue studying it since
         | it didn't translate well to human social issues.
         | 
         | I'd imagine if you wanted to study crowding and the effects of
         | excessive unwanted social interaction (minus the moral issues
         | of killing mice or recruiting humans), you could study some
         | over crowded prisons.
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://nihrecord.nih.gov/sites/recordNIH/files/pdf/2008/NIH...
        
           | Aperocky wrote:
           | > Others turned to the laboratory. The psychologist Jonathan
           | Freedman recruited high school and university students to
           | carry out a series of experiments that measured the effects
           | of density on behavior. He measured their stress, discomfort,
           | aggression, competitiveness and general unpleasantness. When
           | he declared to have found no appreciative negative effects in
           | 1975, the tide began to turn on Calhoun's utopia.
           | 
           | This is the only paragraph I was found in reference, and I
           | find the reasoning extremely weak.
           | 
           | Calhouns mice are a generational study, the human study
           | obviously did not involve nearly as much time, and it's
           | doubtful whether the space are as crowded as the mice study
           | was.
           | 
           | Submariners have well documented health issues and
           | recuperation after spending long period of time on cramped
           | spaces, and a submarine is arguably more spacious than what
           | the mice have been subjected to. Not to mention the simple
           | fact that nobody (hopefully) had to start a family on a
           | submarine, or a prison per replied comment.
           | 
           | Conducting similar study in humans is impossible given the
           | obvious cruelty and ethic concerns, but if I have to guess
           | the outcome are going to be no better than the mice study.
        
             | dmix wrote:
             | Here is the relevant text from the source:
             | 
             | > Making the leap from mouse to man, however, was not so
             | simple. "This is where it gets controversial," Ramsden
             | said, describing how other scientists tried to replicate
             | Calhoun's results in human populations.
             | 
             | > "How do you map Calhoun's pathologies onto human society?
             | How do you measure sexual deviancy? [Researchers] chose
             | venereal disease, illegitimacy and divorce. That stirred up
             | some controversy. How do you measure breakdown in maternal
             | behavior? They chose public welfare and child assistance
             | rates." Others turned to the laboratory. The psychologist
             | Jonathan Freedman recruited high school and university
             | students to carry out a series of experiments that measured
             | the effects of density on behavior. He measured their
             | stress, discomfort, aggression, competitiveness and general
             | unpleasantness. When he declared to have found no
             | appreciative negative effects in 1975, the tide began to
             | turn on Calhoun's utopia.
             | 
             | > Freedman's work, Ramsden noted, suggested that density
             | was no longer a primary explanatory variable for society's
             | ruin. A distinction was drawn between animals and humans.
             | 
             | > "Rats may suffer from crowding; human beings can
             | cope...Calhoun's research was seen not only as
             | questionable, but also as dangerous."
             | 
             | > Freedman suggested a different conclusion, though. Moral
             | decay resulted "not from density, but from excessive social
             | interaction," Ramsden explained. "Not all of Calhoun's rats
             | had gone berserk. Those who managed to control space led
             | relatively normal lives." Striking the right balance
             | between privacy and community, Freedman argued, would
             | reduce social pathol- ogy. It was the unwanted unavoidable
             | social interaction that drove even fairly social crea-
             | tures mad, he believed. Culture and upbringing also play
             | key roles in adapting to environment, others suggested.
             | 
             | > Further studies of space design seemed to prove this. One
             | such study compared students living in two different styles
             | of college dormitory--corridor versus a suite style. Those
             | in the corridor perceived the environment as crowded and
             | exhibited increased stress levels. Those in the suite
             | style, where the dormitory was partitioned into a series of
             | separate communal areas, fared better, even though the
             | level of density was similar, Ramsden said. "By comparing
             | the two, [researchers] were able to provide evidence both
             | of pathology and its amelioration through more effective
             | design.
             | 
             | > "Calhoun's studies remained influential in places,"
             | Ramsden concluded, "but for the social sci- ences more
             | generally, it seemed that simply associating Calhoun's
             | rodent universes with pathology instead of its amelioration
             | was an opportunity considered too attractive or per- haps
             | too convenient to miss."
        
               | Aperocky wrote:
               | Right, this is a very opinionated interpretation of the
               | result and I'm not sure if I can agree with it.
               | 
               | This manual distinction are performed without a
               | equivalent study and are just assuming people will cope
               | fine when it happen.
               | 
               | In fact in the Calhoun's study mice did continue to live,
               | they just chose not to start families - effect that are
               | already seen in lesser degree in much of the world.
        
             | 867-5309 wrote:
             | >Continuing to study this in humans are impossible given
             | the ethical concerns and obvious cruelty
             | 
             | many non-Westernised cultures survive in cramped living
             | conditions. they submariners were not accustomed to it and
             | so suffered more
        
       | optimalsolver wrote:
       | *in mice.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | plibither8 wrote:
       | Fredrik Knudsen did an amazing video on the "Mouse Utopia
       | Experiments": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgGLFozNM2o
        
       | nickdothutton wrote:
       | There are 2 kinds of people. Those who have discovered universe
       | 25 and those who have not. Once you do however, there's no going
       | back.
        
         | 082349872349872 wrote:
         | TIL why Carousel happens at 30 in the world of Logan's Run.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | machina_ex_deus wrote:
       | Any modern replication? With all the replication crisis
       | everywhere, and this research being extremely narrativistic, are
       | there any modern experiments affirming these conclusions?
       | 
       | It literally ran once and in the same environment, and only the
       | last findings were taken? How do we know it's not just some
       | specific genetic defect that propagated? Did they reintroduce new
       | genes into the gene pool? Some other failure of the experiment?
       | There wasn't even a control group in this entire thing, it's
       | closer to a bedtime story than science.
       | 
       | I'm extremely cautious about making broad assumptions with so
       | little data.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-08 23:01 UTC)