Re: [Phys-l] H. Sapiens

["Dr. Richard Tarara" <rtarara@saintmarys.edu>]

The 'Horseman' argument for ultimate population control keeps coming up, but 
it is illuminating to look at some recent examples.  The current yearly 
population increase is about 70 million.  How many people died in all of 
World War II?  How many in the flu pandemic of the early 1900s?  The Tsunami 
a couple years ago killed less than the equivalent of half a percent of that 
year's growth.  While food supplies will limit ultimate growth, and it is 
'possible' for a very lethal but relatively long gestation disease to create 
'black death' type havoc, and while we will never forget how to make nuclear 
weapons no matter how deep nuclear disarmament might go, it remains unlikely 
that any of these factors will make truly significant dents in the 
population (taking > 10% as significant ;-).

Rick

***************************
Richard W. Tarara
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN
rtarara@saintmarys.edu
******************************
Free Physics Software
New multi-input energy simulator--plays similar to the Montana State analog 
computer.
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
*******************************

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "chuck britton" <cvbritton@mac.com>
To: <betwys1@sbcglobal.net>; "Forum for Physics Educators" 
<phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] H. Sapiens


> At 12:00 PM -0500 9/22/10, brian whatcott wrote:
> >   I imagine the granularity of the poll count, gestation time and  life
> > span underlying annual rates of increase of Human populations is so
> > comparatively tiny, that a continuous function is quite suited to the
> > purpose.
>
>
> EACH of the four horsemen has contributed more than one major
> 'glitch' to this 'continuous function' over time.
>
> Just because a function is continuous doesn't mean that it can be
> easily represented by an analytical expression.
>
>
>
>
> To slightly rephrase a previous quote:
>
> ANY population curve is exponential if you look at a small enough piece of 
> it.
> NO population curve is exponential if you look at it over a
> sufficient time span.
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l