Thread: Tell me why this wouldn't work.

Universal time? How is that supposed to work? Time is relative! Relative to whatever timeframe you pick...

Originally Posted by ColdCrisis

Universal time? How is that supposed to work? Time is relative! Relative to whatever timeframe you pick...

It's 11:27 AM here, also there.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

It's 11:27 AM here, also there.

Are you trolling me? This is just complete nonsense! If you are serious about it then get some intelligence!

/me thinks you are suggesting genocide.
What's wrong with diversity?

Gravity influences time thus an earth minute can be more than a thousand years in the gravity well of a neutron star -> I (on earth) could live through years,have children,build a house,eat a mahagony dining table and you (over there) still wouldnt have finished your drink.

So the term universal doesn't even work here! Also if you suggest global than 1 AM means sunset in Tokyo and 1 AM means early morning in Berlin. The 12/24 hour day was invented to keep track of how much daylight is left...Your system would complete ruin that!

Originally Posted by Evolventity

/me thinks you are suggesting genocide.

Not at all, why would you think this?

What's wrong with diversity?

It's not efficient enough to sustain humanity.

Originally Posted by Cold Crisis

Gravity influences time thus an earth minute can be more than a thousand years in the gravity well of a neutron star -> I (on earth) could live through years,have children,build a house,eat a mahagony dining table and you (over there) still wouldnt have finished your drink.
So the term universal doesn't even work here! Also if you suggest global than 1 AM means sunset in Tokyo and 1 AM means early morning in Berlin. The 12/24 hour day was invented to keep track of how much daylight is left...Your system would complete ruin that!

Are you suggesting the sun dictates when we eat, what we do and why we do it?
Alaska

Seems to me that you worship the Sun, Cold Crisis. Can you tell me why I'd think this about you?

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Are you suggesting the sun dictates when we eat, what we do and why we do it?
Alaska

Seems to me that you worship the Sun, Cold Crisis. Can you tell me why I'd think this about you?

Indeed i am suggesting that!Some body funtions are controlled by light that falls into your eyes and indirectly also reactions inside your skin.
For example Vitamine D is generated during sun exposure. I don't think you are going to have a good life without it.So i suggest humans should be out during day.
We live during the day and sleep during night. Its quite obvious why... (In case you question this -> i don't think its easy to see in the dark)



I don't worship the sun and i have no idea why you would think that...

Originally Posted by ColdCrisis

Indeed i am suggesting that!Some body funtions are controlled by light that falls into your eyes and indirectly also reactions inside your skin.
For example Vitamine D is generated during sun exposure. I don't think you are going to have a good life without it.

A universal goal doesn't mean we all have to work/sleep at the same time, though. Why would you think a universal time would be any different? Are you suggesting that because a clock says it's 12:41 PM on this side of the globe and is light outside, that 12:42 PM and dark on the other side of the globe means we all adhere to the same schedule? If we did away with PM/AM, would you still have a problem with a universal time, then?

i suggest humans should be out during day.

As do I.

We live during the day and sleep during night. Its quite obvious why... (In case you question this -> i don't think its easy to see in the dark)

That's not what I'm questing, though.

I don't worship the sun and i have no idea why you would think that...

Then would you like me to tell you why I think this, again?

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Not at all, why would you think this?

I think it's a one way to achieve that. I don't know why that's the first thing that came to my mind. Maybe I'm demented? Welp.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

It's not efficient enough to sustain humanity.

Sounds good to me.

Originally Posted by Evolventity

I think it's a one way to achieve that. I don't know why that's the first thing that came to my mind. Maybe I'm demented? Welp.

Can you think of another way, one that's not so demented?

Originally Posted by Evolventity

So what are you trying to say?

Diversity can only take our species so far before our genetic code becomes too mutated. It works fine in smaller populations, but my concerns aren't confined to an individual level.

I understand that without these mutations our species couldn't exist as it does now, but I also believe that as vital as the mutations are to our evolution, they are redundant if never given an opportunity to fully develop.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

If we did away with PM/AM, would you still have a problem with a universal time, then?

A. Universal is a big word,it means "all across the universe" which does not work...you should use the word global
B. In my normal life i dont even use AM PM -> 24 hour day
C. It would confuse the entire world because 09:45 isnt morning anymore everywhere,its then also afternoon and midnight and so on

Then would you like me to tell you why I think this, again?

Yes!

Originally Posted by ColdCrisis

A. Universal is a big word,it means "all across the universe" which does not work...you should use the word global

I assumed that was given.

B. In my normal life i dont even use AM PM -> 24 hour day

Then what time do you use, Military?

C. It would confuse the entire world because 09:45 isnt morning anymore everywhere,its then also afternoon and midnight and so on

So the problem isn't with universal time itself, it's with how its presented.
How about 13 o'clock untill 24 'o'clock and then start over at one as usual?
Or if 13 o'clock sounds too funny, then what would you suggest?

Yes!

Your internal clock is set by the schedual of our sun, that's how.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

So the problem isn't with universal time itself, it's with how its presented.
How about 13 o'clock untill 24 'o'clock and then start over at one as usual?
Or if 13 o'clock sounds too funny, then what would you suggest?

Well 99% of the people here in germany use the 24 hour format
My favourite shows usually start at 15 o'clock and some at 20...
Every opening time,every tv programm,every schedule,even roadsigns are in this format here

Just because you americans can't get over the fact that something outside the US exists (Sorry but honestly,as if the 24 hour format is such a novelty)

Also its not military,even my 10 year old niece says that

Sounds efficient. So if the world used this time keeping, it would be universal.
Universal time solved. Which one you want to iron out next?

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Keep your responses simple, please.

Good one.

One belief

As long as it's a belief system that can limit, refine and diversify itself, I have no problems with this.

One race

I think that in the long run, this is the only way to get rid of racism. I think it's a good idea. Again so long as it contains a lot of diversity.

One goal

Now you're getting silly. A unified belief system would already be selecting a cohesive group of goals to achieve.

One language: written/spoken

I could go either way. I feel that there should definitely be a standard language and that everybody should grow up knowing it. I think that some people would be sad to lose so many living languages but oh well.

You won't be able to eliminate the technical languages though. Unless you want to get rid of technical pursuits.

Universal time

Sounds silly. What harm does it do to have to convert between timezones?

Universal heath

Sounds good. Any ideas?

Monetary value of life, and all thereof is zero[/list]

Not sure that I understand what you're saying here.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Keep your responses simple, please.

• One belief
• One race
• One goal
• One language: written/spoken
• Universal time
• Universal heath
• Monetary value of life, and all thereof is zero

Interesting stuff.

One race? What would that one race be, and what would be done with the other races?

One belief? Ha ha, good luck with that. Try getting any two people to agree on everything. Also, do you mean one belief concerning each issue, or just one belief at all? Which area of opinion would that concern?

One goal? Doesn't achieving a goal usually involve achieving goals on the way? Also, what area would the goal concern? If the one goal is peace among nations, what happens to curing cancer and raising one's children? (for example)

One language? Which language? How do we prevent it from evolving in more than one direction? Do we ban the other languages?

Universal time? How will people communicate when they need to be at work or when a concert starts? Does the policy include days, months, and years?

Universal health? As in government insurance? That involves a long list of pros and cons. How do we get every nation on Earth to have it?

Money is worth nothing? Survival becomes about hunting and farming?

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

• One belief
• One race
• One goal
• One language: written/spoken
• Universal time
• Universal heath
• Monetary value of life, and all thereof is zero

Those things wouldn't "work" because none of those factors can be reliably dictated or controlled (as horrific historical efforts to do so have demonstrated), and they're not likely to homogenize on their own. We could maybe declare it 10:00 everywhere, but that would probably be less useful than knowing that 10:00AM in any timezone is mid-morning.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Diversity can only take our species so far before our genetic code becomes too mutated. It works fine in smaller populations, but my concerns aren't confined to an individual level.

I get that you're not making any great effort to be coherent, but come on. What is "too mutated?" It's all mutated. If we didn't speciate when it took months to cross an ocean, we're not going to now that we can get around the globe in half a day. And genetic diversity within a species is an asset; it makes epidemics, climate shifts, and other big changes survivable. Cultural diversity likewise increases the odds that someone within a population will have the tools to overcome any challenge (or heighten any experience).

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Those things wouldn't "work" because none of those factors can be reliably dictated or controlled (as horrific historical efforts to do so have demonstrated), and they're not likely to homogenize on their own.

All those have done is show that nobody smart enough or with the necessary good will to do it has tried. There's no result of the form "this cannot be done". It seems that most of the people that have even made an attempt at that sort of thing were power hungry, blood thirsty dictators so I hardly think that we have a representative sample.

It seems as if English is becoming the standard world wide language. So that is at least homogenizing on it's own.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

All those have done is show that nobody smart enough or with the necessary good will to do it has tried. There's no result of the form "this cannot be done". It seems that most of the people that have even made an attempt at that sort of thing were power hungry, blood thirsty dictators so I hardly think that we have a representative sample.

Realistically speaking, how could we achieve one race without genocide? Most people are not interested in interracial mating. People of a race tend to be most attracted to people of their race, so humanity itself will never become its own melting pot that melts all of the races together completely. How could we achieve one belief (about each issue?) or goal (in each area?) without fascism? If the topic of imaginary number realism, the level of altruism involved in U.S. foreign policy, or the three best bands of all time comes up, is there any way to get the whole world to agree with you or me? We can't even agree with each other. Force is the only way, and even then it would just be what people say and not what they really think.

Let's test this out. Let's try to get everbody in this thread to take precisely the same position on the original post. If we can't even do that, the world project is hopeless.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Realistically speaking, how could we achieve one race without genocide? Most people are not interested in interracial mating. People of a race tend to be most attracted to people of their race, so humanity itself will never become its own melting pot that melts all of the races together completely.

This is tricky. However we cannot say that it can not be done, we can only say that we don't see how to.

How could we achieve one belief (about each issue?) or goal (in each area?) without fascism? If the topic of imaginary number realism, the level of altruism involved in U.S. foreign policy, or the three best bands of all time comes up, is there any way to get the whole world to agree with you or me?

For the first one we can use whatever force is necessary to prevent people from lying to kids. The same goes for creationists. As for U.S. foreign policy, somebody that was in a position to do these things would already be stepping beyond the boundaries of countries and would probably have already dissolved them all anyways.

I think that a diversity of musical tastes makes the world a better place and see no reason to enforce that on people.

Let's test this out. Let's try to get everbody in this thread to take precisely the same position on the original post. If we can't even do that, the world project is hopeless.

Again, you're confusing "we don't know how to do this" with "this can't be done".

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

This is tricky. However we cannot say that it can not be done, we can only say that we don't see how to.

Like the existence of God, I consider it an outlandish concept. I am never 100% convinced of anything. However, my belief is that outlandish concepts that are without convincing evidence are false. Belief is not the same as 100% knowledge.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

For the first one we can use whatever force is necessary to prevent people from lying to kids.

Well, the law makers of the world police state(s) will have to all agree on the matter (eventually at least), specifically with your side, and that would involve getting law makers to understand such an issue. Then there will have to be 100% success with the police state tactics.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

As for U.S. foreign policy, somebody that was in a position to do these things would already be stepping beyond the boundaries of countries and would probably have already dissolved them all anyways.

Yeah, I think that's what it would take just to get people to lie about what they think. Getting everybody to honestly agree is a many times bigger challenge.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I think that a diversity of musical tastes makes the world a better place and see no reason to enforce that on people.

But you agree that it can't be done?

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

Again, you're confusing "we don't know how to do this" with "this can't be done".

The exercise would highlight the variables that make such a goal impossible. It can't be done because people don't know how to do it. Again, that is my belief. There is an insignificant chance that an alien unicorn could come to Earth and shoot magic beams that make us all agree with each other, etc., but it is an outlandish concept. So, my belief is that such agreement is impossible. Perhaps the creation story is true and an alien magic beam made it appear illogical to us, but the probability is insignificant. Hence my belief.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

One race? What would that one race be, and what would be done with the other races?

It doesn't exist yet. All other races would become this new one.

One belief? Ha ha, good luck with that. Try getting any two people to agree on everything. Also, do you mean one belief concerning each issue, or just one belief at all? Which area of opinion would that concern?

Where spiritual enlightenment and atheism come together in perfect harmony. Do you think this is possible?

One goal? Doesn't achieving a goal usually involve achieving goals on the way? Also, what area would the goal concern? If the one goal is peace among nations

One race is one nation. How would you feel about space exploration as our unified goal?

what happens to curing cancer and raising one's children?

Nothing happens to it, why would you even think this?

One language? Which language? How do we prevent it from evolving in more than one direction? Do we ban the other languages?

The language doesn't exist yet because the race doesn't either. There wouldn't be any languages to ban, because they would no longer exist having been replaced by this new language.

Universal time? How will people communicate when they need to be at work or when a concert starts? Does the policy include days, months, and years?

I'll see you at the concert at this time. How is that confusing?

Universal health? As in government insurance? That involves a long list of pros and cons. How do we get every nation on Earth to have it?

With only one race I'd imagine it would be quite easy.

Money is worth nothing? Survival becomes about hunting and farming?

That's what it is now, why would removing the monetary system sudenly change things?

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

It seems as if English is becoming the standard world wide language. So that is at least homogenizing on it's own.

Having a shared language is not the same thing as having only one language. I'll take the rest of your post ironically, because sanity.