Why UNLIMITED Exponential Growth of Pigeons would DESTROY the Universe!

[Steel]

4 minutes ago, Green Baron said:

No. The model v=s/t is for every day use in a car the right one. It is not the right one for running a clock in a satellite that needs exact time. He can blame only himself for not knowing about the right choice or knowing it but ignoring it.

I would argue that there is no such thing as the wrong model for a situation, either your model is complete and thus can be used in any situation, or it is incomplete and therefore technically wrong! But that is just how I like to look at it!

[LN400]

"Right one" only means it is just as complicated it has to be to give useable results but it will not give precice results. As such, I'm not even sure if "THE Right One" is known by any human. Then again "more or less", "give or take", we've been basing everything on the acceptance of those and we still managed to get to where we are today.

[Green Baron]

 

5 minutes ago, Steel said:

I would argue that there is no such thing as the wrong model for a situation, either your model is complete and thus can be used in any situation, or it is incomplete and therefore technically wrong! But that is just how I like to look at it!

But it is not how science works. A model is very rarely complete, as insight advances many are overthrown or reworked. It can only be good for given situation, and every scientific model comes with an description what it is made for, from and by whom.

 

4 minutes ago, LN400 said:

 .... I'm not even sure if "THE Right One" is known by any human. ...

I never stated that. But the collection of tools known to (many, not all) humans is good enough to master most situations quite well. Absolutism is not science, it is the realm of belief.

But this touches metaphysics and i have spent enough time here.

[LN400]

Another detour and this time over the useage, or rather misuseage, of words like "exact".

A video that I watched, about a geometric solution to a problem, using only a compass and unmarked ruler, had words like "EXACT position", "EXACT speed", "EXACT course" etc in huge red letters across the monitor. Exact? With a compass and unmarked ruler? Would be a world shattering sensation if one could get exact results  Then again, I tend to get real nitpicky about wordings when words are spelled in capital letters. Only Death of Discworld fame is allowed to use capitals like that.

 

/detour

Edited May 5, 2017 by LN400

[ProtoJeb21]

@Steel @Green Baron @kerbiloid

I have a solution for the whole pigeons becoming star thing.

Pigeons are mostly made of the elements oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon, and phosphorus. There are other substantial contents of metals and other gases such as silicon, calcium, etc. However, the main bulk of the pigeon's mass would be the five elements I mentioned first. Because of the large quantity of water in all living things and by definition a pigeon, about a third of its mass could be hydrogen. This may seem like a lot but it isn't enough to create a star. In order to fuse these heavier elements the pigeon sphere would have to grow to at least 1.5-2 solar masses. But it's likely that the pigeon sphere could condense into a huge solid object. After and hour it would be 64,000 times the mass of Earth - definitely large enough to force itself into an actual sphere. The pressures from this odd object of oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc. could generate enourmous heat in the core, which would slowly radiate outwards. In other words, it may become a FROZEN STAR. But within minutes it would gain enough mass to properly fuse oxygen and nitrogen, before becoming so large that it goes supernova. That would blow off a huge amount of its mass, setting back the process of exponential growth or maybe even stopping it altogether.

[kerbiloid]

We definitely need a formula binding their population rate to population density.

Maybe even we can find a critical mass, below which the process gets not self-sustained.

[Green Baron]

I am sorry, i personally have difficulties pretending science could explain a fantastic scenario. For all i know about stellar and biological evolution (which in the first case isn't more than anybody else here, for the latter, as i once studied palaeontology maybe a tiny bit more), may brain refuses to try so without me keeping my selfconfidence intact. Or, in other word, i would feel uncomfortable doing so.

But, of course, if you find a solution, i will happily read it :-)

[Nuke]

math

not even once

[insert_name]

Unlimited exponential growth of anything will destroy the universe, nothing to be surprised by