How many people might ever exist, calculated

[@peppermint_8]

I'm glad Earth has almost reached 8 billion subscribers! this is such a huge milestone

[@Dark_Peace]

Idk, the content isn't that great. I'm gonna unsubscribe.

[@Tubeytime]

@@Dark_Peace Once you do, you can't re-subscribe ever again. Please consider your decision carefully.

[@takenname8053]

@@Tubeytime Sure you can, just use a different account

[@chocomilkfps1264]

@@takenname8053 we will watch your career with great interest

[@henrik.norberg]

Too bad most subscribers are trying to DDOS the Earth 😕

[@sabiancoomber-nickerson5830]

Wow. I always liked the idea of leaving the world a better place than when you found it, but I never though about how that improves the lives of potentially quadrillions of people.

[@Lishtenbird]

On the flipside, it can have the exact opposite effect on other-minded people - "if I'm such a tiny speck in the global population ever, then my actions don't matter, and even if they do, others will easily fix them in the future anyway".

[@archae10]

Butterfly effect, my friend.

[@DeathSugar]

@@archae10 one can say the birth is the only butterfly in here in comparison.

[@victorlevoso8984]

@@Lishtenbird Well, those people should realize that that's not the case if we fuck up the future permanently.

[@doodleplayer4014]

I do like the idea that once the Earth goes to crud, that we could leave before we die, but the more likely possibility is that billionares will get to mars or something and charge people to go there.

[@LordMarcus]

One point I think is important to make, when you mention the predicted time span over which a mammalian species might exist, that doesn't necessarily mean _people_ have stopped existing, just that _homo sapiens_ becomes a common ancestor for those species-and it could indeed be plural "species", especially without FTL travel-whose people will exist 1,000,000 years from now.

[@dalstein3708]

However, the evolution into a new species is less likely if there are no isolated populations, as is the case for Homo Sapiens. So we would have to have a large carastrophe. Or undertake interplanetary space travel.

[@LordMarcus]

@@dalstein3708 Yeah, that's primarily what I meant if we never develop faster-than-light travel. Even if we only ever inhabit the Sol system, the further out humans go, the more likely speciation will take place.

[@dalstein3708]

@@LordMarcus The funny thing is, if you take the possibility of new species into consideration, then entire question (= how many humans will ever exist) becomes irrelevant.

[@inyobill]

I knew someone would make this point.

[@inyobill]

@@dalstein3708 even without isolation, genetic drift can cause speciation, and where adaptive pressures have been minimized, they are not zero, and over the longer times discused, the population will evolve.

[@LunarcomplexMain]

I was really hoping to notice the Sun model get bigger as the 1,000s of years went by, but then thought, oh wait that wouldn't nearly be enough time, then you went ahead and covered it anyway lol, pretty awesome.

[@SBerTtube]

Well, it's not a scaled model anyways...

[@rahko_i]

The final thoughts at the end reminded of a great insight someone thought: When in science fiction people travel to the past, they are always so worried that even the the most tiniest change there could drastically change the present, but why aren't we worried about the our most tiniest choices in the present having the same effect in the future?

[@andrewharing2637]

Because there is no set future for us to go back to. The reason why it might be bad to change the world by doing a tuny thing isn't that that world is definitely worse; it's that you wanted to go back to your family andfriends, and they all won't exist in a different world.

[@TaliyahP]

Well it's mostly because for a backwards time traveller the concern is paradoxical. If they change the past then the world that results, the world that the traveller exists in, no longer exists and therefore the traveller couldn't exist. There's a lot of bad things we could go back and change for the better if we had the technology, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

[@rahko_i]

@@TaliyahP Sure, but that's beside the point. Think it like this, from the perspective of the people of the past: if the future us someday in the future would invent time travel and then come to this day, they would be very concerned about changing their past (our present), because it would change their present (our future). But why aren't we now just as concerned about our future? Or in other words, why weren't they concerned about the very same thing when they actually lived in that time? Because they had that power to change the future all along. It's just that when we haven't actually seen the future, we don't take it so personally. If we could see and live the future, then we would feel like we lost something, if the future changed. Can't miss something you never had it, right?

[@luka3796]

You can't know for sure if your choices are ultimately good or bad for the future. For example black death was For the people of that time the worst thing imaginable, but it ultimately resulted in better working conditions for peasants because workforce became much more sparce which eventually lead to the abolishment of feudalism.

[@the_bottomfragger]

I get what you mean however there are simply very random (at least in our perception) coincidences that can change the course of entire lives and even societies that one couldn't possibly causally connect before they happen. That is incredibly scary if you have one single timeline that you want to preserve, it's not as scary if you're just trying to strive for one of the many timelines where the future is your definition of better than the present or other timelines. That being said, I get what you mean, we do shape it in some way and it's the only thing we can strive towards. For example, the string of events that had to happen for me to meet my girlfriend is extremely long and complicated and starts with something completely unrelated that I said yes to years before that. Yet at the same time, the general mindset to accept random opportunities greatly increased my chances of meeting her. Maybe this comment was interesting, just had to write some of my thoughts for myself just as much :)

[@everrettbreezewood3665]

Being so early in the history of humanity gives us a crazy amount of influence. As time goes on and the populations increase, your likelihood of becoming a legend decreases dramatically. Just think how Aristotle, Hannibal, David, and Ramses are viewed as great heroes, even though compared with today there are probably many with equal or greater skills/accomplishments. Compare this with the Bonapartes, Churchills, Washingtons, and Maos that pop up today. The heroes keep getting rarer and rarer, but also greater and greater as the competition for titles increases. Just how powerful with the "great men" of the future be? Edit: 76 comments and counting; wow. Let this be a testament to how easily KZbin commenters can artificially insert motive into a mild academic preponderance. Please note that I'm calling these people "great," not "good." By "great" I mean significant/famous; the kind of person you can read a book about and 90% of literate people are familiar with. Very few people reading the comments actually had to Google who Mao was. I'm also not insinuating anything about how people become "great." Whether this is by circumstances or by their own ability doesn't matter. Each of these people have had influences across centuries and will continue to influence as long as humanity remains in roughly its current state. There are more famous people than ever, but most are forgotten within a decade. Will Donald Trump, Taylor Swift, and Pope Francis stand time? All I'm saying is that if they do, they will be statistically less impactful than someone living at the time of Newton, Ghengis Khan, or Columbus.

[@mewblue3997]

I'm pretty sure the Kool Aid man has the power of an eldritch being already

[@dylanauntiecrafters3278]

There are already too many people on earth, in the future there will be a lot less celebrities

[@alessiobenvenuto5159]

Can't wait for Emperor OmegaChad the 160th, Destroyer of Galaxies

[@strongback6550]

Heroes aren't rarer, it's simply that the western world has decided to topple statues instead of erecting them and to burn books instead of writing them. We censor speech instead of writing songs glorifying greatness . The wealthiest criminals seek anonymity instead of flaunting their power and influence. It's true that due to fears of atomic hellfire the borders aren't being redrawn in same way as during days of old, but Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan were exceptional even for their time. Heroes however, still exist in man if you know where to look. I personally believe that eventually people will grow bored of fabricated entertainment and seek something genuine. The moment you do, there's plenty of people doing actual work who deserve statues even if they are unsung and do not receive any facetious honors.

[@kreoniz]

I tend to think that greatness depends not so much on the feat itself, but on how much effort you put into it. For example, learning calculus is easier than discovering it from zero, building computer in the past is harder than with current knowledge, etc.

[@bobbob1278]

YESSS FINALLY. HE'S BACK TO SAVE ME FROM BOREDOM

[@maddoxmonteza]

yes

[@Nulley0]

Ross Ross

[@saininsa98]

Yes

[@nobodyknows662]

Yes

[@theanalyzer0]

bruh this ash shii idk why this is even on my recommended

[@LordMarcus]

I remember when population approached 5b. Projections were wildly out-of-touch, they were saying something like 10b by 2000 and 15b by 2015. EDIT: 5b instead of 6b.

[@General12th]

_Some_ projections were like that, mostly by fear-mongering organizations with an agenda to scare you. Based on UN POPULATION DIVISION ISSUES ‘WORLD POPULATION PROSPECTS: THE 2000 REVISION’, the UN predicted the population would grow to maybe 11.9 billion by the end of the century. It turns out humanity arrested its population growth substantially in the last twenty years. Now we're destined for 10.4 billion at most.

[@G00DLORD]

But 6 billion happened in 1999

[@TheLetterB123]

@@G00DLORD exactly, they were saying that they were alive then, and the predictions then were inaccurate

[@LordMarcus]

@@G00DLORD You're right, I should have said 5 billion, when I was still in school in the mid 80s.

[@JKenny44]

It's pretty insane how quickly the population has started to level off. It makes one question if it was entirely natural. We know it wasn't natural in China for example, it seems logical that Western governments would've had a similar agenda.

[@henaadlakha]

Thank you. It is thrilling to even try to find precise questions that are pertinent to the context even if we know that our answers might be not close to the truth because they are based on too many unproved assumptions--this beautiful video did it very well.

[@unreachablesecretary]

This, it doesn't matter if it'll inevitably be innaccurate, seeing the process itself and some estimates is really valuable too

[@laurencehtet2361]

I'm not sure if you'll see this but I just found about this channel. Thank you for the longevity and effort you put into the videos. I will be watching everything that have been uploaded so far and will be watching whatever's being uploaded. You're awesome!

[@arturonotari8235]

This is literally the 3rd channel that make a video of this specific topic today. And I'm suscribed to all of them.

[@MasterNox]

Kurzgesagt, Rational Animations and yourself all made similar videos today! I love the differing viewpoints and ways to look into our future, very insightful. Keep up the good work!

[@bpansky]

sean carroll also interviewed the guy who wrote that book on his podcast the other day. wonder what's up

[@TheMisterDarknight]

yeah lol

[@WanderTheNomad]

I don't know about Rational Animations, but Kurzgesagt and Primer are both sponsored/partnered with the same people for the videos released today.

[@mostm8589]

@@WanderTheNomad Rational Animations's video is also based on the same book, they are also an awesome channel in general. So yourself a favor and subscribe to it.

[@gibenameplox]

To be frank it's really feeling like a cult worship. Like, the ideas are interesting but in the end it so strange to just accept the status quo in favor of the future and accept the technocracy that hurts people in the present and near us while focusing in the ones far and that don't even exist.

[@MootPoot]

Always a great video man, appreciate the work you put into each video.

[@Spinosaurus8080]

This is the earliest Primer video I've every been to!

[@umerqureshi1606]

Amazing video! Always look forward to your videos. Don't stop making these

[@MrScorpianwarrior]

As someone who, less than an hour before you uploaded this, watched "The Last Human" by Kurzgesagt, I am impressed by how similar your math it. He actually used the exact same book to base his video on, which makes me wonder if this is in the book...

[@ckv954]

The video description means that what you say is probably true

[@mostm8589]

Don't forget Rational Animations's latest video, also based on the same book. All 3 videos (Kurz, Primer, & RatAnime) came out very close to each other and talking about the same rough idea.

[@imanukeyourface3210]

@@mostm8589 They're all basically sponsored productions where the video IS the advertisement, in this case for the book. I'm sure the actual production scriptwriting etc for the vid was in the hands of the channels but yeah the videos are basically long book ads

[@AdSoyad-rp1vm]

​@@imanukeyourface3210 lmao, so it was all just an ad? And l wonder if the author is the same one from "what do we owe to each other" which l heard from The Good Place and it got stuck in my mind. Was the good place also a reeeeally long book ad?

[@martibuxeda7558]

I hope in the future there's people like you helping us understand such interesting thematics! Thanks so much!

[@NoUploadsOnThisChannel]

This is one of my favorite videos of all time. Keep it up, Primer!

[@someoneelse2106]

Saw that book on the Kurzgezaght latest video too. Seems obvious that we have some very smart people trying to help steer our future. I hope they choose the right direction, and if it is correct that we follow along.

[@stickworldanimated9545]

Ok

[@noodlein10]

I've binged this whole channel and just now come to the realization that this is the last video

[@triehe]

Damn my initial guess of “around 25 probably?” was WAY off

[@talentlesscommenter1329]

Damn bro, I thought it was like 6 people.

[@pyramidteam9961]

yeah its probably closer to like 112

[@tree427]

42.

[@irchonite1953]

@@TheNewNormX Damn, 46? I only know like, 15 people, so I figured that over DOUBLING that amount would be ludicrous. Granted, I knew my knowledge was limited, so I assumed it would be 22 give or take 8 billion.

[@beinzheans3918]

my answer of "at least 1" is correct!!!!!

[@sixtenwidlund4258]

Yes a new primer video!!!!, it has been so long!!

[@YLLPal]

I'm so happy to see you delving into longtermism explainers. I still find it hard to grasp just how big the future is.

[@forr35t]

This is one of those channels that I immediately click on a new video for. Absolutely top-tier content, the effort put into these videos is crazy.

[@AHappierWorldYT]

Very interesting video! Love the way you're using your channel to promote the book's important ideas. We loved the book too :)

[@calook1334]

You always make me feel so smart. Thank you!

[@SamTheTurt]

It's not often this king uploads, but when he does, it sure is a surprise.

[@Paraselene_Tao]

This is one of the best channels ever made, and I'm sad I haven't subscribed until tonight.

[@conando025]

If I had a nickel for everytime that Book was advertised to me today I'd have two nickels. Which isn't much but it's weired that it happed twice

[@EzioAuditoredaFirenze]

Good reference

[@xxGreenRoblox]

Bad reference

[@penguinchess]

Always a great day when Primer uploads. Thanks for another amazing video!

[@dungeonsanddragons7334]

Dude Kurgestat, Rational Animations, and Primer all coming out with basically the same video at the same time is insane!

[@math1183]

Yeah, I noticed that too. Maybe it was planned...? But there is no name dropping for the other channels

[@totallynotgad]

They all have the same ad as well? Maybe a sponsor of some sort

[@RobertoDeMundo]

Kurzgesagt

[@TeaRm34paRt]

@@RobertoDeMundo Bless you.

[@RazorbackPT]

It's a planned promotional campaign from the Effective Altruist community. It's also the cover of Times magazine this week and the author is doing a lot of interviews in popular podcasts like Sam Harris' Making Sense and Sean Carrol's Mindscape. I'm glad they have the resources to pull this off, their message is vital at this moment in time.

[@danthiel8623]

Imagine 40 thousand years later archeologists look back at earth and giggle at Warhammer 40k

[@icantthinkofaname8139]

Your animations has improved a ton since your first video…

[@diestormlie]

Wanted to say that I found your videos yesterday (THE ALGORITHM was finally good for something) and I very much enjoy your videos and your blobs!

[@LeannLeannProduction]

As the starman pointed out in the 1985 Sci-Fi movie “Starman”, our species is still so very young, with a lot of potential left. We need to make the most of our potential and “grow up”. If not for our current population’s sake, then for the future’s. This video really shows us how many people depend on us here, now, to do that. Thank you for crunching the numbers! I’m equally fascinated by these ideas you talked about, so I look forward to more videos on this topic!

[@Cyranek]

looking forward to future people looking at what I create like its hieroglyphics

[@Sans_the_Comedian_Master]

These videos about population tell us how unpredictable the future really is.

[@TheSentient_Potato]

I came into this expecting to be left feeling sad. I left feeling hopeful and optimistic for the potential humanity has.

[@wesinator123]

EXCELLENT podcast series called "The End of the World with Josh Clark" that deals extensively with existential risks and was probably made with the help of some people in the sources used in this video. Extremely interesting, informative, and not at all as depressing as a title like "The End of the World" would lead you to believe. The episode focused on Biotechnology, which came out in 2018 I believe, is particularly worth a listen with how prescient it was about what would happen in the very near future with the COVID pandemic.

[@potatonite2340]

Seems interesting

[@quinton1630]

And since Chuck said “prescient”, it’s time for listener mail!

[@One.Zero.One101]

I think water is the precious resource that everyone will be fighting about. The earth is full of water, but drinking water is harder to get. Once rivers and subterranean sources dry up, humans are gonna get savage.

[@desyntax]

Babe, wake up. A new Primer video has been uploaded.

[@ckq]

This Will Mccaskell guy is setting the narrative for the YT videos I watch recently

[@Alb410]

OK, but the Purple Blob being thanos is now canon.

[@catfacecat.]

Where has this man gone?

[@myla2495]

The container and earths animation is so satisfying

[@Bangaudaala]

"But fortunately for us, blobs don"t have fingers!" 3:20

[@lordbeetrot]

Thank god

[@mr.mikeygaming3723]

Almost done binge watching all of primers videos. Stumbled across them today and couldn’t get enough of them.😂

[@RGC_animation]

Kurzgezagt recently made a video exploring how many people could be born if we do go intergalactic, and If I remember correctly, it is in the Octillions, which is 10,000,000,000,000 bigger than 100 Quadrillion.

[@kuhluhOG]

@Jul W yeah, especially because it's quite likely that we would start to become different species after a while

[@archiehenderson9529]

@@kuhluhOG Kurzgesagt took this into account, they started modelling people rather than humans (seemingly with the assumption that no other life will be found).

[@hallojava2458]

Actually, the Solar System and the galaxy as a whole could (and definitely would) support far more people than 10 billion, making the 127 millions births/year number absolutely useless. Therefore, the actual number is orders of magnitude higher.

[@kuhluhOG]

@@hallojava2458 well, the video assumes that we will not colonise other planets expeditions? sure, that's definitely going to happen colonising other planets? we don't know yet for sure if that's going to be possible

[@MirrorscapeDC]

@@kuhluhOG while we are not sure if we can terraform planets, it is almost certain we can build artificial habitats that can support extraterrestrial life. we have most of the necessary technology and it really only depends on if we can maintain an ecosphere outside of earth.

[@jaredcramsie182]

A moment of silence for all the people watching in low quality, as they will be unable to see pluto.

[@jaredcramsie182]

At 7:44

[@nitzan3782]

4:15 I think this doesn't take into effect the massive strides we've made in postponing, preventing or outright reversing aging on the cellular level. The lifespan will increase dramatically once these become commonplace, or as commonplace as applied revolutionary medical procedures are today.

[@dg34895]

This is why I think the UN should use their short-term population projections (30-50 years) and limit the practical applications of long-term (70-80 years) projections for their projects. Nobody knows what is going to happen in the medical field in 80 years, so any specific demographic projections that far into the future may turn worthless at some point. We already saw the UN massively miscalculate the demographic transitions of Asia and Africa, underestimating the speed of the first one and overestimating the speed of the later in the 80s. So I would take any projections about the span between 2080-2100 with a grain of salt.

[@elliottjacobson3120]

This is a video with everyone inside it. It makes me feel special

[@Q27Forever]

Bro it’s been 9 months we need more videos

[@brodiecampbell-b9o]

This was posted 8 months ago when I'm watching please come back we love your vids

[@gaiusjuliuscaesar-wg1hy]

And when the world needed him most, he vanished

[@gilodis23]

Absolutely love your videos Primer, thanks for all the content!

[@Mutual_Information]

Given the debate surrounding longterm-ism, this might **literally** be the most important question to answer.

[@MerlinSchmid]

Thanks for the well made video!

[@revolver265]

I find it funny that within two hours both Kurzgesagt and Primer mention the same book. Good to have uplifting content that reminds us we're important to the people in the future and that we're at a critical juncture for humanity (climate change, nuclear war, human rights, pandemic) as more of the world develops rapidly, while we're stuck in the current horribleness of the world situation right now.

[@anthonyg6083]

thinking about things like this make me have thoughts about how our lives don't have a lot of meaning

[@schonnj]

I seriously can't imagine what technology and human society will look like in a hundred years, let alone when the sun is about to die. Assuming we don't either kill ourselves, are exterminated by an theoretically possible advanced alien race, or are wiped out by a astronomical disaster like a comet or meteor strike, the possibilities are endless.

[@conor.brennan]

just picked up "what we owe the future" on audible, excited to give it a listen! thanks for the recommendation

[@VividNightz]

1:08 its crazy how we are just so little of the percentage of all the humans that have ever existed on this earth

[@UltraLightSP]

0:34 "Doing it 16 hours per day, not including breaks to eat or go to the bathroom" -- I didn't think it was THAT type of reproduction video

[@guy-]

Bro💀💀💀

[@Mizai]

never expected the next video being so quickly

[@tmforshaw9]

Watching this video right after Kurzgesagt's new doomerist video is a breath of fresh air. So nice to see someone providing positive things we can do instead of just showing how bleak things have gotten or could be

[@botronas6039]

What positive CAN we do?

[@realfangplays]

Kurzgesagt also has a lot of positive videos. They just provide many different views of a situation. Not that you were saying otherwise but just wanted to put it out there. In fact, their video The Last Human is very similar to this one.

[@KingMagenta]

I thought there was a collab at first lol

[@Hex...]

Kurzgesagt have also released a video that covered this very same topic. But I see what you mean about the breath of fresh air, a lot of their futurism and cosmology stuff can be a bit depressing.

[@oyuyuy]

Kurzgezagt did this exact video less than 2 months ago.

[@xXxINeedHelpxXx]

YESSSS I AM SO HAPPY RIGHT NOW YOU'RE BACK

[@jasonb111222]

8 billion and not a single one loves me ☠

[@reecopeaco1004]

I do I mean that in a good way

[@RogerHase]

Relatable

[@reecopeaco1004]

@@RogerHase I love you but not in a weird way

[@RogerHase]

@@reecopeaco1004 👉👈🫣👉👈

[@Limeci]

You have finally updated the channel!

[@pavlov4289]

"All humans die one day" Queen Elisabeth : 🌚

[@ALFRED_SHOOK]

So what you're saying is that paying my taxes doesn't matter in the big scheme of things. Thanks Primer!

[@LammyOW]

V The “I miss Primer” Button

[@armoredman10]

Despicable.

[@Bill_W_Cipher]

6:37 In 1 billion years, I'm pretty sure its safe to assume that if humans survive that long, we will have a way to stop the sun from boiling the oceans.

[@garrylarry890]

82 years is already Australian lifespan, but there are probably loads of countries that are like, 50 or 60, but to get 82 for the entire world… it’d be a big achievement.

[@donaldhobson8873]

With 1000's of years of medical progress, it is bizzarely low. This seems to be a world where less happens in the next million years than happened in the last thousand. It is a crazy amount of normal.

[@Caaro99]

@@donaldhobson8873 82 is the average meaning there will be countries with possibly 100 as their average lifespan with countries also bringing the average down. Also, medicine and tech can only do so much to prevent aging which causes eventual organ failure and death. There is a biological limit to humans, we can’t surpass it unless we evolve somehow.

[@donaldhobson8873]

@@Caaro99 You really think there is no possible medicine that can turn off aging? Why? Turning off aging seems possible, at least if we are going to the level of significant genetic modifications.

[@carso1500]

@@Caaro99 We already have some technologies that can potentialy slow aging down, it seems doable that we will be able to lenghten our lifespans considerably this century let alone in a million years, there could be people alive today that will live to see the sun become a red giant (if we don't starlift it before that for more resources for our artificial matrioska worlds or what not) People 100 years ago through that we would take millions of years to invent flight

[@ET-yc4wb]

@@donaldhobson8873 I beg to differ. More happened in the last decade than in the previous 1000's of years. I'd say your in a bit of a rush. The industrial revolution only happened a few centuries ago, and we created the first computer in less than a century ago. We reached space around 60 years ago. We had mass-produced computers in the palm of our hand less than 2 decades ago. Additionally, of course, anything "seems" possible. Everything is easier said than done. Going past the speed of light seems possible, traveling to another dimension seems possible.... The fact is, "turning off" aging is virtually impossible; chemically, medically, and physically. Even if we somehow do get to that point (maybe in a couple million to billions of years of human advancements), we wouldn't get there just by suddenly stopping aging, no, we would get to a point of no aging by making ourselves immortal, and immune to all diseases, viruses, instant repair of damaged tissue, no possibility for any inconveniences. So you see, what you're basically suggesting is: "You really think there is no possible medicine that can make you a virtual god? Why? Becoming a god seems possible..."

[@michaelsami6409]

Wow finally you begin to upload again

[@IyeMRealer]

We miss your videos

[@centaur900]

I read this title as "How many people NEVER exist" and was intrigued. But actual theme still good enough

[@undefined40]

7:50 Extra points for remembering Pluto

[@kncle]

This video was not only mathematical, but philosophical. A mix that is rare and beautiful

[@DiamondRoller37]

To be fair, it seems pretty darn likely that if humans inhabit more solar systems or even galaxies that we are as good as safe from ever becoming extinct since it would take quite a lot in so many places all to happen at the same time

[@melonid1750]

Creating a humanity backup on another hard drive.

[@maxime3648]

If we colonize space, humanity will most likely split itself into different species as the travel times would make it impossible for people to breed outside of their communities... In a sense it would be the end of humanity as we know it

[@ovencake523]

@@maxime3648 weird af to think about unless somehow we find a way of getting around the infamous speed of light limit

[@FootageFactory]

@@maxime3648 I was going to say somewhat the same thing. I believe if we figure out how to branch out beyond out solar system, then galaxy, I believe we will find another barrier akin to time and dimensions for us to branch off into. Even though it may be Time for my to take my foil hat off, I’m not too far fetched.

[@DiamondRoller37]

@@maxime3648 That’s very true, like the Galapagos Island finches

[@ZoveRen]

Technically, if we successfully colonize, for example, Mars, in the next 100 years, we quite literally become nearly immortal as a species

[@dazcarrr]

can't wait for the simulation where the blobs try and escape the dying solar system

[@MrKohlenstoff]

So cool that you made a video on that topic!

[@1furious]

On the point of population growth, the graph you yourself provided plus many others widely available showcase that countries meeting these thresholds of standard of living and economics etc don't actually gravitate and stabilise at about 2 children per woman, but go below this. Without getting into anything political, the totality of the population growth for countries in North America and Europe is going to be driven by immigration from countries with positive population growth and lower economic power / quality of life. Basically all of these North American and European countries, plus several other highly Westernised countries like South Korea and Japan, are at sub-replacement fertility levels. So once the existing human material from earlier and more fertile generations burns itself out, there would be massive population decline, at least of native populations. But as the quality of life in these more fertile regions of the world (mostly Africa, projected by the UN to have over 4 billion people by 2100 (nearly half of the total world population predicted for the time)) goes up and potentially matches or even excels that of the West (which may well decline in quality of life with fewer people actually existing to sustain the systems that enable it), a global population decline until resources become abundant again or quality of life and its paradoxically anti-natal consequences reduces is likely to occur.

[@Srynan]

You are so amazing and these videos give me so much hope to keep going. Thank you!

[@windozeee]

Using 10.4 per year is a bit misleading as, as you said, 10.4 billion is the projected PEAK population (according to the United Nations). If you look at the graph you showed at 4:23, the data actually shows a negative trend after the world population reaches 10.4 billion.

[@aevans2564]

Yep, there’s also a lack of any any resource use factor. We are smashing through resources at an alarming rate already. And are needing to do so to support a population of 8bn. The planet doesn’t have the energy sources required to sustain even this population with this level of consumption for much more than another decade or two at best.

[@Nosirrbro]

@@aevans2564 The planet has the energy sources easily, the problem is we aren’t using the sustainable energy sources that we need to be because choosing the unsustainable path is better for short term profits. There’s nothing humans need to do that can’t be powered by the sun, and the sun is gonna keep going on for a long time. For a more short term compared to the sun but still really long term power source we can also use the radioactive materials on the earth to power ourselves for quite a while

[@aevans2564]

@@Nosirrbro - if you take the IEA’s estimates for Uranium, there’s enough energy in Uranium to power our human energy use (at current levels) for between 8-12 years. And building the infrastructure required to use it is going to take 20 years minimum, and make no one any money. So nuclear is a dead idea. While there is and can be energy taken from the environment in a low resource use way, like Photovoltaics and wind. Standing up and manufacturing plant and equipment is not a zero resource use proposition. All of that also requires resources. There’s no financing in nature, if you want to build a solar panel, you can’t borrow the future output of that panel to create the panel, you need to find the upfront capital resources and energy needed to build it. Right now we do all of that with fossil fuels, and the mining of and refining of metals required for manufacturing and manufacturing processes themselves all also rely on fossil fuels. And we haven’t limited our resource use in any way, basically as soon as the energy return on energy investment for oil becomes negative or too low to gain a return on, all industries halt. so we’re pretty screwed.

[@qwertyuiopaaaaaaa7]

@@aevans2564 You’re taking a very techno-determinist view of the future. There are two factors that we can change, one is energy supply, which you have detailed. The other is energy demand. Changes in energy use and cultural values can distribute resources more equitably among people. Now, is that the most realistic scenario given our current trajectory? No. The most likely ecological outcome now is climate apartheid leading to eco-fascism in the global north. But hey, I think it’s important to note that the problem isn’t “natural,” it is cultural. We have the capacity to change our future if we have the political and moral will to do so.

[@donniebirb]

Man this video got pushed under the algorithm. I'm a subscriber and I only seen this 4 months ago

[@erichelps1347]

Caveman blob. Cyborg blob..... THANOS BLOB...!!

[@oanaalexia]

In the year of my birth we were 5,7 billion people. 35 years later and we're going to be 8 B. Makes my head spin.

[@tenshiharuno1184]

I just love how math of all things helped me to overcome existential dread Thank you very much for this video 🌹

[@luxterna1106]

you know what will always be my biggest regret ? I am not not, and will never be, able to see what we will become, My existence is brieve, and I will never get to see all of that future that seems so incredible. Humanity is a fascinating subject, a fascinating and grandiose story I would be able anything to see to its end.

[@StrongHeartGaming]

I love how this explanation can be applied almost fully as the justification of the human race in Warhammer 40k xD . Anyway good job with this video ! I love what you're doing ^_^

[@jsbarretto]

I would love to see a video on 'The Limits to Growth' and the World3 model: I think it would suit this channel very well!

[@IamNotaRealBoy1]

Rest In Peace

[@Ti_tao]

It’s so great to see smb who really thinks the humanity just may live so long. Thank you.

[@combeevee]

9 months and counting... does anyone know what happened?

[@CubingAnarchy]

love the video, thank god tom scott taught us about compression tho, made the video quality drop in the middle less jarring

[@KidarWolf]

The fascinating thought for me regarding all of this is: at what point of future human evolution would we be defined as a separate species to our ancestors? As evolution is an incremental process, the point of speciation can be very hard to pin down with any certainty.

[@user-vw4xp5nt9f]

i'd just guess when the average population of our time couldn't create viable children with the average population of the future

[@carso1500]

Evolution is too slow, at one point we will take direct control of it

[@camerongray7767]

Once mars is terraformed, eventually it will have the same amount of people living there as there is on earth

[@timothymclean]

3:05: Note that the Malthusian Trap is a simplified version of reality. Now, if we can't figure out some way to live in space, we _are_ limited to a finite carrying capacity*, but that carrying capacity depends on a wide range of factors that Malthus didn't consider. To take a simple example: Even without changing available technology, trade can greatly increase the carrying capacity of a region, since it allows sub-regions to specialize in the crops that grow best there (rather than needing to grow _everything_ you need within a day's walk of home). *Technically I guess we're still limited to a finite carrying capacity if we _do_ figure out how to live in space, it's just a carrying capacity large enough that we'll likely run out of stars and other energy sources before we reach it.

[@Ergzay]

The Malthusian Trap is more than just simplified, it's outright wrong for all useful purposes. It's a fiction that doesn't line up with reality.

[@Axl_K]

Like, I pondered on this question literally a week ago while I'm traffic....played with a few numbers in my head and came to conclusions that there are more people dead than there are alive today...

[@Aconspiracyofravens1]

you can extend the lifespan of a star using starlifting, this also frees up a few dozen earths worth of material, so minimum would likely be around 10-1000 times higher, provided humans only decide to live on planets, and only in the solar system (might happen if aliens get the other systems first, or if colonisation just is not super attractive with so many people already you add a couple dozen orders of magnitude if they decide to colonise milkdromeda And you can multiply these numbers by around 100-100000000000000 if they decide to build matrioska worlds or oneil cylinders/any other orbital habitats and you can add an arbitrairily large amount if mind uploading becomes common (say, high scientific notation numbers), which is both unlikely and likely in roughly equal proportions, and it could really go both ways. The variation exists due to the uncertain continuation of moores law With transhumanism, lives lived would go down but total lifespan lived by all humans combined would slightly increase Anyways, it is unlikely that only earth is colonised, and that the population stays stable forever, eventually arcologies would crop up and mess up these numbers.

[@thezipcreator]

) you forgot a paren

[@shrpdrts]

Or we pollute the planet so much we all just die within a few decades.

[@feynstein1004]

Fellow Isaac Arthur viewer? 😃

[@LordKosmux]

Wouldn't it be crazy to discover that all universe civilizations older than us, like from GLASS-z13, are death and the newer are still in an initial stage of evolution? Imagine travelling to an exoplanet and watching some primitive species struggling for life...

[@EpicMiniMeatwad]

Hard to imagine even a billion years would be enough for humans to invent something amazing enough to extract resources from the core of a star.