[Aphataeros]

The Oxford University timeframe comparison hits hard. It's a sobering way to visualize just how brief our industrial window might be. But I think we're missing some fascinating possibilities here.

You're absolutely right about the recycling entropy battle - those diminishing returns are brutal. But I'm curious about where biological innovation might shift this equation. We're already seeing organisms that can work well beyond the traditional C/H/O/N sandbox - bacteria that reduce metals, engineered microbes that synthesize quantum dots. This hints at possibilities that blur your distinction between biological and industrial approaches.

The interstellar travel conclusion particularly caught my attention. While current biological systems are indeed low-power, that very efficiency might be what makes them perfect for long-haul space missions. Imagine hybrid systems where bio-engineered organisms maintain spacecraft over generations, working alongside traditional tech. Maybe slow and steady wins the interstellar race.

I'd argue we're on the cusp of even more radical transformations in materials science. What if atomic-scale manufacturing fundamentally changes our relationship with scarce resources? The jump from 65% to 15% iron ore might look tiny compared to what's coming. Maybe we're not facing a binary choice between current industrial systems and purely biological ones. The sweet spot might be in hybrid approaches that combine biological resilience with industrial capability.

Curious to hear your thoughts on this - particularly around how engineered biological systems might reshape our assumptions about resource constraints. There's something compelling about the idea of building civilization's next chapter on that 300-million-year track record of biological innovation.

[Animats]

> bacteria that reduce metals

Separate metals from organics, yes.[1] Reduce metals, probably not. Reduce means to pull a metal out of its oxide. This is way uphill energetically. It is usually done by heating the oxide to a high temperature in an oxygen-poor environment. The other direction, oxidation, produces energy, and there are some biological processes that use that.

Still, there are some bacteria which manipulate manganese.[2]

> What if atomic-scale manufacturing fundamentally changes our relationship with scarce resources?

I used to know Drexler, the early nanotechnology guy, back when nanotechnology meant pushing atoms around by mechanical means, rather than surface chemistry. Not much came of that. It's hard to apply enough force to break strong molecular bonds apart. IBM did manage to spell out "IBM" with xenon atoms, but xenon is inert and doesn't bond strongly to anything. No strong bonds to break.

Asteroid mining is potentially possible. Somebody will probably try it for gold and platinum within fifty years. It's unlikely to become cost-effective for cheaper metals.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00489...

[2] https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/world/metal-eating-bacteria-i...

[euroderf]

> Drexler, the early nanotechnology guy, back when nanotechnology meant pushing atoms around by mechanical means, rather than surface chemistry.

I bought his book Engines of Creation when it came out and his thesis had the air of inevitability - how could it not materialize some day ? It seemed so self-evident.

[littlestymaar]

> Reduce means to pull a metal out of its oxide. This is way uphill energetically.

For iron (Fe2+) is about the same order of magnitude than getting organic matter out of CO2, which is what photosynthesis does, so it doesn't really sounds impossible. The main problem is that in an oxygen rich atmosphere, any metallic iron atom it would spontaneously get back to its oxide form pretty much instantly…

[andsoitis]

> While current biological systems are indeed low-power, that very efficiency might be what makes them perfect for long-haul space missions. Imagine hybrid systems where bio-engineered organisms maintain spacecraft over generations, working alongside traditional tech. Maybe slow and steady wins the interstellar race.

Perhaps, but unlikely.

As far as we know (but we could be wrong), interstellar civilization is the business of a Type II civilization on the Kardashev scale. They can extract fusion energy, raw materials, and information from multiple solar systems.

[aeve890]

>As far as we know (but we could be wrong), interstellar civilization is the business of a Type II civilization on the Kardashev scale.

As far as we know? We know nothing and the Kardashev scale is just a toy hypothesis come on.

[robertlagrant]

> The Oxford University timeframe comparison hits hard. It's a sobering way to visualize just how brief our industrial window might be.

For context, it was founded over 800 years ago.