The impossibility of growth

[Seneca]

The most likely "solution" is horrible to contemplate, but will probably involve losing a large percentage of the earth's population in a couple generations of disease/war/starvation. The black plague wiped out 30-60% of the European population. It's quite possible the world population could be setback 50% just through inadequate preparations or inability to combat a globally spread virus, or make it easier to spread if current systems breakdown during a resource war (or even purposefully permitted to spread by one side in a war).

This is what I worry about. I agree that there is the possibility that we will grow exponentially till our population crashes violently like bacteria in a petri dish.

More disturbing than energy or materials to me is money. As I keep running my compounding calculations I can see the two worlds of finance, linear and exponential, moving apart at an increasing rate...an exponential rate for you mathematicians. I guess it is okay though because we can print (with digital money we don't even need that) more unlike oil or worse, fresh air, soil and water.

Fresh air, soil and water are available for a price. Oil too, but arguably less so.

While crashing population would suck, if that's the worst case, so be it. People still chose to have children during the black plague, and most people chose to live rather than kill themselves. We aren't bacteria in a petri dish, our existence has meaning and value to us.

[Riggerjack]

Eh. The whole Malthusian concept is perfect when most folks find it, as teens. Some folks never develop beyond it intellectually, like some never develop emotionally. When I was young enough, I admired these old folks who were "still cool". Now, they just seem stunted. Human bonsai trees, if you will.

The industrialized world has contained population growth, excluding immigration. As people develop economically, they value smaller and smaller families. Large families get associated with poverty, the surest discouragement society has.

So my best case is that the poorer populations will develop a rich enough economy to leap frog to smaller families and ecological sensitivity(this is a luxury good). More likely, Ebola will get on a plane, or equivalent, and a crashing population with raise per capita wealth to the same point.

The Malthusian endgame seems far less likely in my lifetime. And since I am the end of the genetic line, I guess that's as far as I care about.