wipeout answers - michigan7 09

8/13/2019 Wipeout Answers - Michigan7 09

1/81

Michigan 7 Week Seniors Wipeout/2012 Answers2009

1

WIPEOUT ANSWERS

Wipeout Answers ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 **Wipeout Frontline**............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Wipeout Frontline [1/3] ............................................................................................................................................................ 4

Wipeout Frontline [2/3] ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 Wipeout Frontline [3/3] ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 Ext Universe Destruction Inevitable ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Ext Alien Intervention ........................................................................................................................................................... 8 Ext Infinite Universes ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 Ext Heat Death K/T Value to Life ....................................................................................................................................... 10 Ext Heat Death Links - Technology .................................................................................................................................... 11 Ext Wormholes Solve Heat Death ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Ext Heat Death Coming Now .............................................................................................................................................. 13 Ext Wormholes Solve Extinction ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Ext Heat Death Extinction .............................................................................................................................................. 15 A2: Heat Death Wont Happen.............................................................................................................................................. 16 A2: Wormholes Not Feasible ................................................................................................................................................. 17

***Wipeout Scenario Answers*** ........................................................................................................................................ 18

A2: Prevents Destruction of Plant/Animal Life ..................................................................................................................... 19 A2: HAARP ........................................................................................................................................................................... 20 A2: HAARP ........................................................................................................................................................................... 21 A2: Inertia Weapons ............................................................................................................................................................... 23 A2: Inertia Weapons ............................................................................................................................................................... 24 A2: Rods From God Defense .............................................................................................................................................. 25 A2: Rods From God Offense ............................................................................................................................................... 26 A2: False Vacuums ................................................................................................................................................................ 27 A2: Time Travel ..................................................................................................................................................................... 28 A2: Time Travel ..................................................................................................................................................................... 29 A2: Time Travel No Tech ................................................................................................................................................... 30 A2: Anti-Gravity Weapons .................................................................................................................................................... 31 A2: Anti-Gravity Weapons .................................................................................................................................................... 32 A2: Proton Disintegration Weapons ....................................................................................................................................... 33 A2: Gamma Weapons ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 A2: Anti-Matter Weapons ...................................................................................................................................................... 35 A2: Anti-Matter Weapons ...................................................................................................................................................... 36 A2: Particle Accelerators ........................................................................................................................................................ 37 A2: Particle Accelerators ........................................................................................................................................................ 38 A2: Particle Accelerators ........................................................................................................................................................ 39 A2: Particle Accelerators ........................................................................................................................................................ 40 A2: Particle Accelerator Black Hole Impact .......................................................................................................................... 41 A2: Particle Accelarators Strangelets Impacts ....................................................................................................................... 42 A2: Particle Accelerator Strangelets Impact .......................................................................................................................... 43 A2: Particle Accelerator Vacuum Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 44 A2: Gold-Gold Collisions In Particle Acceleration A Unique Risk ....................................................................................... 45 A2: Grey Goo Frontline ...................................................................................................................................................... 46 A2: Gray Goo Its Impossible............................................................................................................................................. 47 A2: Gray Goo Its Impossible............................................................................................................................................. 48 A2: Gray Goo Its Impossible............................................................................................................................................. 49 A2: Gray Goo Its Impossible............................................................................................................................................. 50 A2: Gray Goo Its Impossible............................................................................................................................................. 51 A2: Gray Goo Blue Goo Solves .......................................................................................................................................... 52 A2: Gray Goo Wont Destroy Universe (Wipeout Specific)............................................................................................... 53

Nano-Tech Good ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... ....... 54 Nano-Tech Good ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... ....... 55 Nano-Tech Good ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... ....... 56


2/81


2

Nano-Tech Inevitable ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... .......... ........... 57 A2: Quantum Vacuum Mining ............................................................................................................................................... 58 A2: A-Life .............................................................................................................................................................................. 59 A2: A-Life .............................................................................................................................................................................. 61 A2: A-Life .............................................................................................................................................................................. 62 A2: Type-II Civilization ......................................................................................................................................................... 63 A2: Sun Will Explode ............................................................................................................................................................ 64 A2: Sun Will Explode Article (Written by a, and Posted on, Yahoo) .................................................................................... 65 2NC Tech Ban CP Solvency .................................................................................................................................................. 66 **Aliens** ............................................................................................................................................................................. 67

No Aliens General ............................................................................................................................................................... 68 No Aliens General ............................................................................................................................................................... 69 No Aliens General ............................................................................................................................................................... 70 No Aliens General ............................................................................................................................................................... 71 No Aliens Earthlike/Life conditions Rare ........................................................................................................................... 72 No Aliens Earthlike/Life Conditions Rare .......................................................................................................................... 73 No Aliens No Evidence (Fermis Paradox)......................................................................................................................... 75 No Aliens No Evidence (Fermis Paradox)......................................................................................................................... 76 No Aliens A2: Their Evidence Wouldnt Be Noticible....................................................................................................... 77 No Aliens A2: You Anthropomorphize............................................................................................................................... 78 No Aliens A2: Were A Zoo............................................................................................................................................... 79 No Aliens A2: They Hang Out In Interesting Parts Of The Galaxy .................................................................................... 80 No Aliens A2: They Kill Themselves ................................................................................................................................. 81


3/81


3

**WIPEOUT FRONTLINE**


4/81


4

WIPEOUT FRONTLINE [1/3] 1. If extra-terrestrials do exist, they are either not benevolent or not nearbyMatheny, 07 (Jason G., Special Advisor Center for Biosecurity, Ought We Worry About Human Extinction? , 12-6,http://jgmatheny.org/extinctionethics.htm)

The same can be said of sentient extraterrestrials, who, it might be hoped, exist or will exist. Even if we did not care about preserving terrestrial life, the absence of apparent extraterrestrial signals or colonies should worry us. The conditionsnecessary for supporting sentient life may be highly restrictive, making such life a rare phenomenon in the galaxy (Mayr,1995; Ward and Brownlee, 2000). It is possible that humanity is at the leading edge of technology in our region of space. Ifso, we should not assume sentient life elsewhere will develop a civilization capable of space colonization. Extraterrestrials may beoverwhelmed by their own evolutionary hurdles or extinction risks . If we are not at the leading edge, and there are extraterrestrials more advancedthan we are, then they are probably either not benevolent or not nearby. Otherwise, it is hard to fathom why they haventintervened (overtly or covertly) in Earth s affairs to prevent the mass of suffering on this planet. The presence of

preventable misery here militates against the existence of an advanced, benevolent, and nearby extraterrestrial, as itmilitates against the existence of a powerful and benevolent god. If a benevolent, advanced extraterrestrial civilizationexists, then it is probably distant. We would waste some fraction of remaining starlight if we waited for them to reach thisregion of space. We ought to prevent human extinction, then, if only to decrease the opportunity costs caused by entropy(Bostrom, 2003).

2. Destruction of the universe is inevitable its rapid expansion is unsustainable Overbye, 02 (Dennis, New York Times, The Universe Might Last Forever, Astronomers Say, but Life Might NotJanuary 1, http://krauss.faculty.asu.edu/01ENDrev.html)

Now, however, even Dr. Dyson admits that all bets are off. If recent astronomical observations are correct, the future of life and the universe will be far bleaker. In the last four years astronomers have

reported evidence that the expansion of the universe is not just continuing but is speeding up, under the influence of a mysterious"dark energy," an antigravity that seems to be embedded in space itself. If that is true and the universe goes on accelerating,astronomers say, rather than coasting gently into the night, distant galaxies will eventually be moving apart so quickly thatthey cannot communicate with one another. In effect, it would be like living in the middle of a black hole that kept gettingemptier and colder. In such a universe, some physicists say, the usual methods of formulating physics may not all apply.Instead of new worlds coming into view, old ones would constant ly be disappearing over the horizon, lost from view forever. Cosmological knowledge would be fragmented, with different observersdoomed to seeing different pieces of the puzzle and no single observer able to know the fate of the whole universe or arrive at a theory of physics t hat was more than approximate. "There would be a lot of

things about the universe that we simply couldn't predict," said Dr. Thomas Banks, a physicist at the University of California at Santa Cruz. And perhaps most important, starved finally of theenergy even to complete a thought or a computation, the domain of life and intelligence would not expand, but constrict andeventually vanish like a dwindling echo into the silence of eternity. "I find the fate of a universe that is accelerating forevernot very appealing," said Dr. Edward Witten, a theorist at the Inst itute for Advanced Study. That is an understatement, in the view of Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, an astrophysicistat Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, who along with his colleague Dr. Glenn D. Starkman has recently tried to limn the possibilities of the far future . An accelerating universe"would be the worst possible universe, both for the quality and quantity of life," Dr. Krauss said, adding: "All ourknowledge, civilization and culture are destined to be forgotten. There's no long-term future."

3. No impact there are an infinite number of universes. The destruction of one is not significant.Chaikin, 2002 (Andrew, Editor of Space and Science, Space.com, Are there other universes? February 5,http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/5mysteries_universes_020205-1.html)

The irresistible, mind-boggling fantasy comes to just about everyone, sooner or later: What if everything we knew, our whole universe, was just a speck of dust on someone's shoulder? Of course, that's not

an idea astronomers take seriously. But many cosmologists are giving serious thought to a more scientific question: Do other universes exist?At first glance, you can't help but wonder how anyone could have the chutzpah to ask a q uestion like that. We can barely figure out this universe, and now we're wondering about others? Believe it or not,

theorists have an answer. And the answer appears to be, Yes. As unimaginable as that sounds, it comes straight out of the theory ofquantum mechanics , a set of mathematical rules that describe how the universe works on the smallest scales, inside atoms.Quantum mechanics says that matter and energy can appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space, thanks to somethingcalled a quantum fluctuation, a sort of hiccup in the energy field thought to pervade the cosmos. Cosmologists say that aquantum fluctuation gave rise to the Big Bang. And the thing about quantum fluctuations is that they can happen anywhere,any time. And if our universe was born out of a quantum fluctuation, say theorists, then it's possible that other quantumfluctuations could have spawned other universes. There's a reason some theorists want other universes to exist: They

believe it's the only way to explain why our own universe, whose physical laws are just right to allow life, happens to exist.According to the so-called anthropic principle, there are perhaps an infinite number of universes, each with its own set of

physical laws. And one of them happens to be ours. That's much easier to believe, say the anthropic advocates, than a singleuniverse "fine-tuned" for our existence.
http://jgmatheny.org/extinctionethics.htmhttp://krauss.faculty.asu.edu/01ENDrev.htmlhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/5mysteries_universes_020205-1.htmlhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/accelerating_universe_review_000502.htmlhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/accelerating_universe_review_000502.htmlhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/5mysteries_universes_020205-1.htmlhttp://krauss.faculty.asu.edu/01ENDrev.htmlhttp://jgmatheny.org/extinctionethics.htm


5/81


5

WIPEOUT FRONTLINE [2/3]

4. If humans are about to engage in practices that have the potential to destroy the universe, aliens will interveneTough, 86 (Allen, Ph.D. University of Toronto, What Role Will Extraterrestrials Play In Humanity's Future?http://www.ieti.org/articles/1986.htm)In this section we will discuss instant protection, which is often an early-stage type of help . If a human toddler is about to run on to a busy street or fall into a

campfire, we instantly grab the child. Explanations and education can wait for a moment! Similarly, if a promisingcivilization is about to trigger a nuclear holocaust or collide with a giant asteroid, a team of extraterrestrials may takeinstant action to avoid the catastrophe. Such extraterrestrials would unobtrusively monitor t he civilization and act only if needed, probably extremely rarely. They wouldcontinue providing instant protection until it is no longer needed, either because severe dangers no longer exist or because the civil ization becomes able to cope onits own. Putting into place the means for instant protection will often be the first and moat common type of help provided to fledgling and promising civilizations . If an all-out nuclear warwere suddenly about to begin here, for instance, the team of extraterrestrial engineers assigned to Earth would take instantaction. Having been monitoring each nation's code signal for banning a nuclear attack, they might jam those signals orimmediately issue the countermand ("I changed my mind") code. World leaders wo uld thus find themselves unable to launch their missiles. Alternatively, extraterrestrialswith highly developed psychic capacities could probably avoid the launch by monitoring the mental processes of the keyworld leaders and then directly influencing their minds just before they would otherwise order the missiles launched. A third

possible method is to defuse the missiles in flight or have their navigation systems send them far away from the planet. If all of this sounds too far-fetched for you to accept, ask yourself how your great-

grandparents (when they were your age) would have reacted to today's actual nuclear, navigational, espionage, and space capab ilities! If measures for instant protection were in place, they would certainly be used to prevent the extinction of a promising fledgling civilization. The data concerning a"nuclear winter" on Earth indicate that even one-fifth of our present nuclear weapons could possibly eliminate humankindcompletely within a year after detonation. The extraterrestrial team might, or might not, take action if they predicted that atleast a handful of human beings and some basic knowledge would survive. "Our compassion is very long-term," said o ne extraterrestrial at the mockmeetings. "We care about the ultimate destinat ion of humanity, but we do not want to interfere with their present journey unless they are about to eliminate all human life and culture."

5. Avoiding nuclear war is crucial for a transition to a Type I civilizationKaku, 04 (Michio, Prof. Theoretical Physics @ City College New York, Parallel Universes , p. 360-361)

Our grandchildren, however, will live at the dawning of Earth's first planetary civilization. If we don't allow our often brutalinstinct for self-destruction to consume us, our grandchildren could live in an age when want, hunger, and disease no longerhaunt our destiny. For the first time in human history, we possess both the means for destroying all life on Earth or realizing a paradise on the planet. As a child, I often wondered what it would

be like to live in the far future. Today, I believe that if I could choose to be alive in any particular era of humanity, I wo uld choose this one . We are now at the most exciting timein human history, the cusp of some of the greatest cosmic discoveries and technological advances of all time. [end page360] nature, with the ability to manipulate life, matter, and intelligence. With this awesome power, however, comes greatresponsibility, to ensure that the fruits of our efforts are used wisely and for the benefit of all humanity. The generation nowalive is perhaps the most important generation of humans ever to walk the Earth. Unlike previous generations, we hold inour hands the future destiny of our species, whether we soar into fulfilling our promise as a type I civilization or fall intothe abyss of chaos, pollution, and war. Decisions made by us will reverberate throughout this century. How we resolveglobal wars, proliferating nuclear weapons, and sectarian and ethnic strife will either lay or destroy the foundations of atype I civilization. Perhaps the purpose and meaning of the current generation are to make sure that the transition to a type Icivilization is a smooth one.

6. Thats key to rip the worm-hole and avoid the big freezeKaku 04 (Michio, Prof. Theoretical Physics @ City College New York, Discover, How to Survive the End of theUniverse , 12-3, http://discovermagazine.com/2004/dec/survive-end-of-universe)To journey safely from this universe to another to investigate the various options and do some trial runs an advancedcivilization will need to be able to harness energy on a scale that dwarfs anything imaginable by todays standards. To graspthe challenge, consider a schema introduced in the 1960s by Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev that classified civilizationsaccording to their energy consumption. According to his definition, a Type I civilization is planetary: It is able to exploit all the energy falling on its planet from the sun (1016 watts). This civilization couldderive limitless hydrogen from the oceans, perhaps harness t he power of volcanoes, and maybe even control the weather. A Type II civilizat ion could control the energy output o f the sun itself: 1026 watts,or 10 billion t imes the power of a Type I civilizatio n. Deriving energy from solar flares and antimatter, Type IIs would be effectively immune to ice ages, meteors, even supernovas. A Type III civilizationwould be 10 billion times more powerful still, capable of controlling and consuming the output of an entire galaxy (1036 watts). Type IIIs would derive energy by extracting it from billions of stars and black

holes. A Type III civilization would be able to manipulate the Planck energy ( 1019 billion electron vo lts), the energy at which space-time becomes foamy andunstable, frothing with tiny wormholes and bubble-size universes. The aliens in Independence Day would qualify as a Type III civilization. By contrast, ours would qualify as a Type 0 civilization, deriving

its energy from dead plants oil and coal. But we co uld evolve rapidly. A civilization like ours growing at a modest 1 to 2 percent per year could makethe leap to a Type I civilization in a century or so, to a Type II in a few thousand years, and to a Type III in a hundredthousand to a million years. In that time frame, a Type III civilization could colonize the entire galaxy, even if their rocketstraveled at less than the speed of light. With the inevitable Big Freeze at least tens of billions of years away, a Type IIIcivilization would have plenty of time to develop and test an escape plan.


6/81


7/81


7

EXT UNIVERSE DESTRUCTION INEVITABLE

Life could not survive in a cooling, expanding universe even if it could, life would be meaninglessOverbye, 2002 (Dennis, New York Times, The Universe Might Last Forever, Astronomers Say, but Life Might NotJanuary 1, http://krauss.faculty.asu.edu/01ENDrev.html)

Dr. Dyson argued in his 1979 paper that life and intelligence could survive the desert of darkness and cold in a universe thatwas expanding infinitely but ever more slowly by adopting ever slower and cooler forms of existence. Intelligence, couldreside, for example, in the pattern of electrically charged dust grains in an interstellar cloud, a situation described in the1957 science fiction novel "The Black Cloud," by the British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle, who died in August. As anorganism like the black cloud cooled, he argued, it would think more slowly, but it would always metabolize energy evenmore slowly, so its appetite would always be less than its output. In fact, Dr. Dyson concluded, by making the amount ofenergy expended per thought smaller and smaller the cloud could have an infinite number of thoughts while consumingonly a finite amount of energy. But there was a hitch. Even just thinking requires energy and generates heat, which is whycomputers have fans. Dr. Dyson suggested that creatures would have to stop thinking and hibernate periodically to radiateaway their heat. In an accelerating universe, however, there is an additional source of heat that cannot be gotten rid of. Thesame calculations that predict black holes should explode also predict that in an accelerating universe space should be filledwith so-called Hawking radiation. In effect, the horizon the farthest distance we can see looks mathematically like thesurface of a black hole. The amount of this radiation is expected to be incredibly small corresponding to a fraction of a

billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a degree above absolute zero, but that is enough to doom sentient life. "The Hawkingradiation kills us because it gives a minimum temperature below which you cannot cool anything," said Dr. Krauss. Oncean organism cools to that temperature, he explained, it would dissipate energy at some fixed rate. "Since there is a finitetotal energy, this means a finite lifetime." Infinity on Trial Although Dr. Dyson agrees with this gloomy view of life in anaccelerating universe, he and Dr. Krauss and Dr. Starkman are still arguing about whether life is also doomed in a universethat is not accelerating, but just expanding and getting slower and colder. Quantum theory, the Case Western authors pointout, limits how finely the energy for new thoughts can be shaved. The theory decrees that energy is emitted and absorbed intiny indivisible lumps called "quanta." Any computation must spend at least this much energy out of a limited supply. Eachnew thought is a step down an energy ladder with a finite number of steps. "So you can only have a finite number ofthoughts," said Dr. Krauss. "If you want to stare at your navel and not think any new thoughts, you won't dissipate energy, "he explained. But that would be a boring way to spend eternity. If life is to involve more than the eternal reshuffling of thesame data, he and Dr. Starkman say, it cannot be eternal. Dr. Dyson, however, says this argument applies only to so-calleddigital life, in which there is a fixed number of quantum states. Creatures like the black cloud, which could grow along withthe universe, he said, would have an increasing number of quantum states, and so there would always be more rungs of theladder to step down. So the bottom need never be reached and life and thought could go on indefinitely. But nobody knowswhether such a life form can exist, said Dr. Krauss.


8/81


8

EXT ALIEN INTERVENTION

Aliens will intervene on earth in order to prevent long term problems that could result in extinctionTough, 1986 (Allen, Ph.D. University of Toronto, What Role Will Extraterrestrials Play In Humanity's Future?http://www.ieti.org/articles/1986.htm)

Helping us reduce (over time) our worst risks and dangers is a second type of potential help. In the childhood analogy, wemight build a fence or gate so that the child cannot reach the busy street or we might teach the child to stay off the road.Extraterrestrials are very likely to provide this type of help when they cannot handle a future danger cheaply and easilythrough instant protection. They also may provide it when the civilization becomes mature enough to accept and implementextraterrestrial suggestions. As human youngsters: mature, for example, we gradually help them gain more and more of theknowledge, skill, and responsibility necessary for independent safety. There is less and less need for our constantmonitoring, our alert readiness to intervene, and our efforts to safely "child-proof" their home. Three sorts of approachesmight be used to help us, over time, reduce our worst risks and dangers: 1. Advanced extraterrestrials may perform someinvisible action: behind the scenes in order to eliminate certain risks. Human beings might be unaware that extraterrestrialswere influencing certain events, phenomena, miracles, objects, widespread beliefs and feelings, or key decisions of worldleaders. We might not notice if they rendered inoperable the detonation or navigation system of every nuclear weapon at thetime of its installation. We might not realize why our experiments to develop one particularly deadly agent for biologicalwarfare always seemed to fail. We might not know that a giant asteroid or comet abruptly changed course long before

astronomers realized that it was on a collision course with Earth. Highly advanced beings could produce these various sortsof influence in several ways: electronically from a great distance, directly through their presence here in our Solar System,or indirectly by changing the minds or behaviour of certain key individuals.


9/81


9

EXT INFINITE UNIVERSESThere are an infinate number of universes this mitigates their impact.Rees, 1995 (John, astrophysicist and cosmologist; Royal Society Research Professor at King's College, Cambridge, "AnEnsemble of Universes" http://www.edge.org/documents/ThirdCulture/x-Ch.15.htmlI'm also trying to bring into a scientific context the concept of an ensemble of universes, each with different properties.

These ideas are associated with many people, but I'll mention only the Russian physicist Andrei Linde, who proposeschaotic and eternal inflation that is, the idea that new universes can sprout from old ones, or can inflate into a newdomain of spacetime inside black holes. He and others have argued that our universe is just one element in an infiniteensemble. Different universes in this ensemble may be governed by entirely different physical laws, numbers, anddimensions. Some may have very strong gravitational force, some may have no gravity, some may have different kinds of

particles. If that's a possibility, then this concept of an ensemble, which I prefer to call a meta- universe, gives a scientific basis to anthropic reasoning the idea that it's not a coincidence that we find ourselves in a universe where conditions aresomehow attuned for the development of complexity. If all possible universes governed by all possible laws exist, thenobviously it occasions no surprise that some of them will have laws of nature that allow complexity, and then it's nocoincidence and, indeed, inevitable that a universe like ours exists, and, of course, that's the one we're in. Thissuggests the idea of "observational selection," as it were, of universes. I take this seriously. There's an ensemble ofuniverses. Insofar as one can put a "measure" in the mathematical sense on relative numbers of universes, most will

be stillborn, in the sense that there would be no complexity evolving within them. Some, contrariwise, may have vastly

greater potentialities than our own, but these are obviously beyond our imaginings.


10/81


11/81


11

EXT HEAT DEATH LINKS - TECHNOLOGY

Technological advancement is key to Type II and III civilizations only they can create inter-universal wormholesto escape at the end of the universe

Slate.com in 04 (Jim Holt, How Will The Universe End? March 4, http://www.slate.com/id/2143403/entry/2096507/)Tipler's idea of an infinite frolic just before the Big Crunch was seductive to me more so, at least, than Dyson's v ision of a community of increasingly d ilute Black Clouds staving off the co ld in an eternalBig Chill. But if the universe is in a runaway expansion, both are pipe dreams . The only way to survive in the long run is to get the hell out. Yet how doyou escape a dying universe if as little Alvy Singer pointed out the universe is everything? A man who claims to see ananswer to this question is Michio Kaku. A theoretical physicist at City College in New York, Kaku looks and talks a bit likethe character Sulu on Star Trek. (He can be seen in the recent Michael Apted film about great scientists, Me and Isaac

Newton.) He is not the least bit worried about the fate of this universe. "If your ship is sinking," he said to me, "why not geta lifeboat and leave?" We earthlings can't do this just yet, Kaku observed. That is because we are a mere Type 1civilization, able to marshal the energy only of a single planet. But eventually, assuming a reasonable rate of economicgrowth and technological progress, we will graduate to being a Type 2 civilization, commanding the energy of a star, andthence to being a Type 3 civilization, able to summon the energy of an entire galaxy. Then space-time itself will be our

plaything. We'll have the power to open up a "wormhole" through which we can slip into a brand new universe. "Ofcourse," Kaku added, "it may take as long as 100,000 years for such a Type 3 civilization to develop, but the universe won'tstart getting really cold for trillions of years." There is one other thing that the beings in such a civilization will need, Kakustressed to me: a unified theory of physics, one that would show them how to stabilize the wormhole so it doesn't disappear

before they can make their escape. The closest thing we have to that now, superstring theory, is so difficult that no one (with the possible exception of Ed Witten) knows how to get itto work. Kaku wasn't the least bit gloomy that the u niverse might be dying. "In fact," he sa id, "I'm in a state of exhilara tion, because this would force us, really force us, to crack superstring t heory. People

say, 'What has superstring theory done for me lately? Has it given me better cable TV reception?' What I tell them is t hat superstring t heory or what ever the final, unified theory of physics turns out to be could be our one and only hope for surviving the death of this universe."

Humongous atom smashers are necessary to achieve plank energy and open a wormholeKaku in 4 (Michio, Prof. Theoretical Physics @ City Colleg e New York, Parallel Universes , p. 330-332)How can we build a machine capable of leaving our universe, given unlimited access to high technology? At what point canwe hope to harness the power of the Planck energy? By the time a civilization has attained type III status, it already has the

power to manipulate the Planck energy, by definition. Scientists would be able to play with wormholes and assemble

enough energy to open holes in space and time. There are several ways in which this might be done by an advancedcivilization. As I mentioned earlier, our universe may be a membrane with a parallel universe just a millimeter from ours,floating in hyperspace. If so, then the Large Hadron Collider may detect it within the next several years. By the time weadvance to a type I civilization, we might even have the technology to explore the nature of this neighboring universe. Sothe concept of making contact with a parallel universe may not be such a farfetched idea. But let us assume the worst case,that the energy at which quantum gravitational effects arise is the Planck energy, which is a quadrillion times greater thanthe energy of the LHC. To explore the Planck energy, a type III civilization would have to create an atom smasher of stellar

proportions. In atom smashers, or particle accelerators, subatomic particles travel down a narrow t ube. As energy is injected into t he tubing, the particles are accelerated to high energies. If we usehuge magnets to bend the particles' pat h into a large [end page 330] circle, then particles can be accelerated to trillions of electron volts of energy. The greater t he radius of the circle, the g reater the energy of

the beam. The LHe has a diameter of 27 kilometers, which is pushing the limit of the energy available to a t ype 0.7 civilization. But for a type III civilization, the possibilityopens up of making an atom smasher the size of a solar system or even a star system. It is conceivable that an advancedcivilization might fire a beam of subatomic particles into outer space and accelerate them to the Planck energy. As werecall, with the new generation of laser particle accelerators, within a few decades physicists might be able to create atabletop accelerator capable of achieving 200 GeV (200 billion electron volts) over a distance of a meter. By stacking these

tabletop accelerators one after the other, it is conceivable that one could attain energies at which space-time becomesunstable. If we assume that future accelerators can boost particles only by 200 GeV per meter , which is a conservativeassumption, we would need a particle accelerator 10 light-years long to reach the Planck energy. Although this is

prohibitively large for any type I or II civilization, it is well within the ability of a type III civilization. To build such agargantuan atom smasher, a type III civilization might either bend the path of the beam into a circle, thereby savingconsiderable space, or leave the path stretched out in a line that extends well past the nearest star.


12/81


12

EXT WORMHOLES SOLVE HEAT DEATH

Wormholes can be used to escape our universeKaku in 4 (Michio, Prof. Theoretical Physics @ City College New York, Parallel Universes , p. 305-307)The eventual disintegration of our universe into a lifeless mist o f [end page 305] electrons, neutrinos, and photons seems to foretell the u ltimate doom of all intelligent life. On a cosmic scale, we see howfragile and transitory life is. The era when life is able to flourish is concentrated in a very narrow band, a fleeting period in the life of the stars that light up the night sky . It seems impossiblefor life to continue as the universe ages and cools. The laws of physics and thermodynamics are quite clear: if the expansionof the universe continues to accelerate in a runaway mode, intelligence as we know it cannot ultimately survive. But as thetemperature of the universe continues to drop over the theory is so crucially dependent on the creation of the false vacuum,Guth has wondered if some advanced eons, can an advanced civilization try to save itself? By marshaling all its technology,and the technology of any other civilizations that may exist in the universe, can it escape the inevitability of the big freeze?Because the rate at which the stages of the universe evolve is measured in billions to trillions of years, there is plenty oftime for an industrious, clever civilization to attempt to meet these challenges . Although it is sheer speculation to imagine what kinds of technologies anadvanced civilization may devise to prolong its existence , one can use the known laws of physics to discuss the broad options that may beavailable to them billions of years from now. Physics cannot tell us what specific plans an advanced civilization may adopt, but it might tell us what the range of parameters arefor such an escape. To an engineer, the main problem in leaving the universe is whether we have sufficient resources to build amachine that can perform such a difficult feat. But to a physicist, the main problem is different: whether the laws of physicsallow for the existence of these machines in the first place. Physicists want a "proof of principle" -we want to show that, if you had sufficiently advancedtechnology, an escape into another universe would be possible according to the laws of physics . Whether we have sufficient resources is a lesser, practical detailthat has to be left for civilizations billions of years in the future that are facing the big freeze. According to AstronomerRoyal Sir Martin Rees, "Wormholes, extra dimensions, and quantum computers open up speculative scenarios [end page306] that could transform our entire universe eventually into a living cosmos.

Humans in the future can use lasers to create baby universes and escape heat deathKaku in 4(Michio, Prof. Theoret ical Physics @ City College New York, Parallel Universes , p. 327-330)

So far, we have assumed that it might be possible to pass through a black hole. Now let's assume the reverse, that blackholes are too unstable and too full of lethal radiation. One might then try an even more difficult path: to create a babyuniverse. The concept of an advanced civilization creating an escape hatch to another universe has intrigued physicists likeAlan Guth. Because the inflationary civilization might artificially create a false vacuum and create a baby universe in the

laboratory. At first, the idea of creating a universe seems preposterous. After all, as Guth points out, to create our universe,you would need 1089 photons, 1089 electrons, 1089 positrons, 1089 neutrinos, 1089 antineutrinos, 1089 protons, and 1089neutrons. While this task sounds daunting, Guth reminds us that although the matter/energy content of a universe is quitelarge, it is balanced by the negative energy derived from gravitation. The total net matter/energy may be as little as anounce. Guth cautions, "Does this mean that the laws of physics truly enable us to create a new universe at will? If we triedto carry out this recipe, unfortunately, we would immediately encounter an annoying snag: since a sphere of false vacuum10-26 centimeters across has a mass of one ounce, its density is a phenomenal 1080 grams per cubic centimeter! ... If themass of the entire observed universe were compressed to false-vacuum density, it would fit in a volume smaller than anatom!" The false vacuum would be the tiny region of space-time where an instability arises and a rift occurs in spacetime. Itmay only take a few ounces of matter within the false vacuum to create a baby universe, but this tiny amount of matter hasto be compressed down to an astronomically small distance. [end page 327] There may be still another way to create a babyuniverse. One might heat up a small region of space to 1029 degrees K, and then rapidly cool it down. At this temperature,it is conjectured that spacetime becomes unstable; tiny bubble-universes would begin to form, and a false vacuum might be

created. These tiny baby universes, which form all the time but are short-lived, may become real universes at thattemperature. This phenomenon is already familiar with o rdinary electric fields. (For example, if we create a large enough electric field, the virtual electron-anti electro n pairs that constantly pop outin and out of the vacuum can sudd enly become real, allowing these particles t o spring into existence. Thus, concentrated energy in empty space can transform virtual particles into real ones. Similarly, if weapply enough energy at a single point, it is theorized that virtual baby universes may spring into existence, appearing out of nowhere.) Assuming that such an unimaginable density or temperature can be

achieved, the formation of a baby universe might look as follows . In our universe, powerful laser beams and particle beams may be used to compressand heat a tiny amount of matter to fantastic energies and temperatures. We would never see the baby universe as it beginsto form, since it expands on the "other side" of the singularity, rather than in our universe. This alternate baby universewould potentially inflate in hyperspace via its own antigravity force and "bud" off our universe. We will, therefore, neversee a new universe is forming on the other side of the singularity. But a wormhole would, like an umbilical cord, connect uswith the baby universe.


13/81


13

EXT HEAT DEATH COMING NOW

The expansion of the universe is being driven by escalating antigravity forces and will destroy all lifeKaku in 4(Michio, Prof. Theoretical Physics @ City College New York, Parallel Universes , p. 288-289)Scientists, facing the cold laws of physics, must now confront similar themes. Hard data, rather than mythology whisperedaround campfires, dictates how scientists view the final end of the universe. But similar themes may prevail in the scientificworld. Among the solutions of Einstein's equations we also see possible futures involving freezing cold, fire, catastrophe,and an end to the universe. But will there be a final rebirth? According to the picture emerging from the WMAP satellite, amysterious antigravity force is accelerating the expansion of the universe. If it continues for billions or trillions of years, theuniverse will inevitably reach a big freeze similar to the blizzard foretelling the twilight of the gods, ending all life as weknow it. This antigravity force pushing the universe apart is proportional to the volume of the universe. Thus, the larger theuniverse becomes, the more antigravity there is to push the galaxies apart, which in turn increases the volume of theuniverse. This vicious cycle repeats itself endlessly, until the universe enters a runaway mode and grows exponentially fast.Eventually, this will mean that thirty-six galaxies in the local group of galaxies will make up the entire visible universe, as

billions of neighboring galaxies speed past our event horizon. With the space between galaxies expanding faster than thespeed of light, l the universe will become terribly lonely. Temperatures will plunge, as the remaining energy is spreadthinner and thinner across space. As temperatures drop to near absolute zero, intelligent species will have to face their

ultimate fate: freezing to death.


14/81


14

EXT WORMHOLES SOLVE EXTINCTION

Our last hope will be to send nanotechnology through a wormhole to recreate civilization in a different universeKaku in 4(Michio, Pr of. Theoretical Physics @ City College New York, Parallel Universes , p. 338-341)As Stephen Hawking has said, "It seems ... that quantum theory allows time travel on a microscopic basis." If Hawking isright, members of an advanced civilization could decide to alter their physical being into something that would survive thearduous journey back in time or to another universe, merging carbon with silicon and reducing their consciousness down to

pure information. In the final analysis, our carbon-based bodies may well be too fragile to endure the physical hardship of a journey of this magnitude. Far in the future, we may be able to merge our consciousness with our robot creations, usingadvanced DNA engineering, nanotechnology, and [end page 339] robotics. This may sound bizarre by today's standards,

but a civilization billions to trillions of years in the future might find it the only way to survive. They might need to mergetheir brains and personalities directly into machines. This could be done in several ways. One could create a sophisticatedsoftware program that was able to duplicate all our thinking processes, so that it had a personality identical to ours. Moreambitious is the program advocated by Hans Moravec of Carnegie-Mellon University. He claims that, in the far future, wemay be able to reproduce, neuron for neuron, the architecture of our brains onto silicon transistors. Each neural connectionin the brain would be replaced by a corresponding transistor that would duplicate the neuron's function inside a robot.Because the tidal forces and radiation fields would likely be intense, future civilizations would have to carry the absolute

minimum of fuel, shielding, and nutrients necessary to re-create our species on the other side of a wormhole. Usingnanotechnology, it might be possible to send microscopic chains across the wormhole inside a device no wider than a cell.If the wormhole was very small, on the scale of an atom, scientists would have to send large nanotubes made of individualatoms, encoded with vast quantities of information sufficient to re-create the entire species on the other side. If thewormhole was only the size of a subatomic particle, scientists would have to devise a way to send nuclei across thewormhole that would grab electrons on the other side and reconstruct themselves into atoms and molecules. If a wormholewas even smaller than that, perhaps laser beams made of X rays or gamma rays of small wavelength could be used to sendsophisticated codes through the wormhole, giving instructions on how to reconstruct civilization on the other side. The goalof such a transmission would be to construct a microscopic "nanobot" on the other side of the wormhole, whose missionwould be to find a suitable environment in which to regenerate our civilization. Because it would be constructed on anatomic scale, it would not need huge booster rockets or a large amount of fuel to find a suitable planet. In fact, it couldeffortlessly approach light-speed [end page 340] because it is relatively easy to send subatomic particles to near lightspeedusing electric fields. Also, it would not need life support or other clumsy pieces of hardware, since the main content of thenanobot is the pure information necessary to regenerate the race. Once the nanobot had found a new planet, it would createa large factory using the raw materials already available on the planet to build many replicas of itself and make a largecloning laboratory. The necessary DNA sequences could be produced in this laboratory and then injected into cells to beginthe process of regenerating whole organisms and eventually the entire species. These cells in the lab would then be growninto fully adult beings, with the memory and personality of the original human placed into the brain.


15/81


15

EXT HEAT DEATH EXTINCTION

Heat death is coming and will destroy everything

irkovi, 02 (Milan M., astrophysicist, FORECAST FOR THE NEXT EON: APPLIED COSMOLOGY AND TLONG- TERM FATE OF INTELLIGENT BEINGS, accessed using OAlster on 07-20-08)The outlook this paradigm suggests for the future is rather bleak. Universe will not only expand forever, but will do so atever-increasing speed. Gravitationally bound structures, such as galaxies, galaxy clusters and superclusters will becomemore and more isolated in the future. As noticed by several investigators (Rindler 1956; Krauss and Starkman 2000;irkovi and Bostrom 2001), cosmological constant acts to create an event horizon, i.e. closed surface across whichcommunication is impossible at all times. This effectively means that any perturbation larger the size of horizon cannotaffect us. On the other hand, the inexorable rise of entropy will degrade matter configurations in each of the regions foreversurrounded by event horizons, and the state very close to the classically imagined heat-death (e.g. Eddington 1931) willensue. The processes of star-formation and stellar nucleosynthesis, at present the major sources of entropy production, willcease, and the remaining stellar remnants will be slowly degraded by proton decay and gravitational collapse. Even blackholes will inevitably evaporate on tremendously long timescales through the Hawking evaporation. Finally, nothing willremain except the incredibly redshifted thermal photons of wavelengths comparable to the horizonsize, since even the

remaining not annihilated electrons and positrons will be separated by distances far surpassing the horizon size.


16/81


17/81


17

A2: WORMHOLES NOT FEASIBLE

Traversable wormholes in spacetime could be constructed in the foreseeable futureWoodward , 97 (James F., professor at California State University, TWISTS OF FATE: CAN WE MAKETRAVERSABLE WORMHOLES IN SPACETIME?, Foundations of Physics Letters, Accessed using SpringerLink o07-20-08)

How seriously should you take the methods of wormhole production sketched here? Well, there is no "new physics" in any of the foregoing other than possiblythe proposition that inertial react ion forces are produced by a field interaction that is, that Mach's principle obtains. The relativity of inertia (Mach's

principle), however, is widely thought to be true. And experiments show that at least one of the transient source terms thatappears in the field equation derived in Sec. 3 exists in fact. There, I think, is the appro priate seriousness criterion: tangible, corroborable, physical evidence. Andsince such does not yet exist for REM per se, you may not want take all this too seriously. At least until convincing evidence for the pro duction of REM is forthcoming. It may be t hat TWISTs are physically

prohibited [11]. Or it may be that some effect catastrophic repulsive disruption mentioned above for example renders the methods discussed here unworkable in practice. Nonetheless, I think it prudent to point out that, although it is unlikely that some nutty professor will be able to make a TWIST in his/her garagewithout flubbing the attempt, the means necessary to carry through an investigation of this business are relatively modest(orders of magnitude less than the cost of, say, a state-of-the-art particle accelerator). A real prospect exists, therefore, thatsomeone may actually succeed in making a TWIST in the foreseeable future. Unless caution in such an undert aking is exercised especially having anabsolutely foolproof method for closing any T WIST made promptly serious consequences might ensue . Given the nature of our universe, the overwhelming

probability is that the other mouth of a randomly generated TWIST would be formed in outer space. As a friend remarked when Imentioned this to him, this gives an entirely new meaning to Ross Perot's "sucking sound" remark about NAFTA [12]. Actions of breathtaking stupidity might be possible it would seem. Can we make awormhole? I must admit that my sense of reasonableness is offended by TWISTs especially TWITs. G ut intuition (abetted by a little voice that keeps repeating J.B.S. Haldane's famous remark about reality

[13]), however, tells me that with sufficiently clever engineering TWISTs may indeed be feasible. The essential physics of Star T rek may lie within our grasp[14]. So, perhaps in making a TWIT, eventually we will unveil the edge of spacetime (and in the process coax nature into revealing physical evidence of her big TOE) [15]. Surely, could we do that, thatcould be called a TWIST of fate.

Wormholes allow nearly instantaneous travelWoodward, 97(James F., professor at California State University, TWISTS OF FATE: CAN WE MAKETRAVERSABLE WORMHOLES IN SPACETIME?, Foundations of Physics Letters, Accessed using SpringerLink o07-20-08)

Should a traversable wormhole be found it could be utilized in interstellar travel in the most obvious way. Suppose a traveler (say, Elliefrom the above- mentioned novel) wants to y from the Earth to Vega. One could think that t he trip (there and back) will take at least 52 years (by the t errestrial clocks) even if she moves at a nearly light

speed. But if there is a wormhole connecting the vicinities of the Earth and Vega she can take a short- cut by ying through itand thus make the round trip to Vega in (almost) no time. Note, however, that such a use of a wormhole would have hadnothing to do with circumventing the light barrier . Indeed, suppose that Ellies start to Vega is appointed on a moment t =0. Our concern is with the time interval tE inwhich she will return to the Earth. Suppose that we know (from astronomical observations, theoretical calculations, etc.) that ifin t = 0 she (instead of ying herself ) just emit a photon from the Earth, this p hoton after reaching Vega (and, say, reecting from it) will re turn back at best in a time interval tp . If we nd awormhole from the Earth to Vega, it would only mean that tp actually is small, or in other words that Vega is actuallycloser to the Earth than we think now. But what can be done if t p is large (one would hardly expect that traversable wormholes can be found for any st ar we would like to yThat is where the need in hyper-fast transport comes from. In other words, the problem of circumventing the light barrier (in connection with interstellar travel) lies in t he question: how to reach a remote (i.

e. with the large tp ) star and to return back sooner than a photo n would have made it (i. e. in tE < tp )? It makes sense to call a spaceship faster-than-light (or hyper-fast ) if it solves this prolem. A possible way of creating hyperfast transport lies also in the use of traversable wormholes (Krasnikov, 1998 ). Suppose that a travelernds (or builds) a traversable wormhole with bot h mouths located near the Earth and suppose that she can move the mouths (see Fig.1) at will without serious damage to the geo metry of the tunnel (whichwe take to be negligibly sho rt). Then she can y to Vega t aking one of the mouths with her.Moving (almost) at the speed of light she will reach Vega (almost ) instantaneously by herclocks. In doing so she rests with respect to the Earth insofar as the distance is measured through the wormhole. Therefore herclocks remain synchronous with those on the Earth as far as this fact is checked by experiments conned to the wormhole. So, if she return through the wormhole she will arrive back to the Earth almostimmediately after she will have left it (with tE tp ).

Baby universes will support lifeGardner, 07 (James, author and complexity theorist, The Intelligent Universe, Universe, April 4,http://www.urbanhonking.com/universe/archives/2007/04/interview_james.html, Accessed 07-23-08)

Yes, it is a central tenet of my hypothesis that our distant successors will be capable of seeding new baby universes andendowing them with cosmic DNA (i.e., a set of tightly constrained physical constants) that renders the Big Babies bio-friendly, so that the process of cosmic replication can continue indefinitely. An implication of the hypothesis is that ouruniverse was created in the image (metaphorically speaking) of a predecessor universe that possessed that same or verysimilar cosmic DNA. And yes, all extraterrestrial life (if it exists) will have evolved on a common substrate (that cosmicDNA again) and thus will resemble us on some profound level.


18/81


18

***WIPEOUT SCENARIO ANSWERS***


19/81


19

A2: PREVENTS DESTRUCTION OF PLANT/ANIMAL LIFE

Human life is key to preserving all life on earthMatheny 7 (Jason G., Special Advisor Center for Biosecurity, Ought We Worry About Human Extinction? ,12-6,http://jgmatheny.org/extinctionethics.htm)

It was only in the last century, with the invention of nuclear weapons, that the probability of human extinction could beappreciably affected by human action. Ever since, human extinction has generally been considered a terrible possibility. Its surprising, then, that a search of JSTOR and thePhilosophers Index suggests contemporary philosophers have written little about the ethics of human extinction. In fact, they seem to have written more about the ext inction of other animals. Maybe this is

because they consider human extinction impossible or inevitable; or maybe human extinction seems inconsequential compared to other moral issues. In this paper I argue that the possibility of human

extinction deserves more attentio n. While extinction events may be very improbable, their consequences are grave. Human extinctionwould not only condemn to non-existence all future human generations, it would also cut short the existence of all animallife, as natural events will eventually make Earth uninhabitable.

Only humans have the capabilities to prevent asteroid collisions and preserve life on earthMatheny 7 (Jason G., Special Advisor Center for Biosecurity, Ought We Worry About Human Extinction? , 12-6,http://jgmatheny.org/extinctionethics.htm)Animal life has existed on Earth for around 500 million years. Barring a dramatic intervention, all animal life on Earth willdie in the next several billion years. Earth is located in a field of thousands of asteroids and comets. 65 million years ago, anasteroid 10 kilometers in size hit the Yucatan , creating clouds of dust and smoke that blocked sunlight for months,

probably causing the extinction of 90% of animals, including dinosaurs. A 100 km impact, capable of extinguishing allanimal life on Earth, is probable within a billion years (Morrison et al., 2002). If an asteroid does not extinguish all animallife, the Sun will . In one billion years, the Sun will begin its Red Giant stage, increasing in size and temperature. Within six billion years, the Sun will have evaporated all of Earths water, andterrestrial temperatures will reach 1000 degrees -- much too hot for amino acid-based life to persist. If, somehow, life were to survive these changes, it will die in 7 billion years when the Sun forms a

planetary nebula that irradiates Earth (Sackmann, Boothroyd, Kraemer, 1993; Ward and Brownlee, 2002). Earth is a dangerous place and animal life here has dim prospects. If there are 10 12 sentient animals on Earth, only 10 21 life-years remain. The only hope for terrestrial sentiencesurviving well beyond this limit is that some force will deflect large asteroids before they collide with Earth , giving sentients another

billion or more years of life (Gritzner and Kahle, 2004); and/or terrestrial sentients will colonize other solar systems, giving sentients up to another 100 trillion years of life until all stars begin to stop shining

(Adams and Laughlin, 1997). Life might survive even longer if it exploits non-stellar energy sources. But it is hard to imagine how lifecould survive beyond the decay of nuclear matter expected in 10 32 to 10 41 years (Adams and Laughlin, 1997). This may bethe upper limit on the future of sentience. 1[4] Deflecting asteroids and colonizing space could delay the extinction of Earth-originating sentience from 10 9 to 10 41 years. Assuming an average population of one trillion sentients is maintained (which is a conservative assumption under colonization 2[5]),these interventions would create between 10 21 and 10 53 life-years. At present on Earth, only a human civilization would be remotely capable of carrying outsuch projects. If humanity survives the next few centuries , its likely we will develop technologies needed for at least one ofthese projects. We may already possess the technologies needed to deflect asteroids (Gritzner and Kahle, 2004; Urias et al.,1996). And in the next few centuries, were likely to develop technologies that allow colonization. We will be stronglymotivated by self-interest to colonize space, as asteroids and planets have valuable resources to mine, and as our survivalultimately requires relocating to another solar system (Kargel, 1994; Lewis, 1996).

It will be impossible for another species to evolve and achieve the capability to prevent extinctionMatheny 7 (Jason G., Special Advisor Center for Biosecurity, Ought We Worry About Human Extinction? , 12-6,http://jgmatheny.org/extinctionethics.htm)There could be other reasons to not worry about human extinction. For instance, it might be hoped that if humanity isextinguished, another animal will evolve and develop the technologies needed to preserve terrestrial life. This possibilityshould not give us much comfort. Some events, such as asteroid impacts, threaten all animal species, not just our own --there may be no animal that survives to evolve. Moreover, the evolution of a civilization like ours may be a rare event.Another species that evolves to fill our intelligence niche could do as much environmental damage as humanity, and could have aworse ethical system. E.O. Wilson (1978, p. 104), describing species more violent t han humans, re marked, I suspect that if hamadryas baboons had nuclear weapons, t hey would destroy the world in aweek. And alongside ants, which conduct assassinations, skirmishes, and pitched battles as routine business, men are all but tranquilized pacifists. Alternatively, another intelligent species could have a

better ethical system but too few ambitions to develop technologies essential to delaying extinction. Given the (probably) improbable position we find ourselves in, as aspecies with both the technological potential and the motivation to delay extinction, it would be imprudent to trust anotherspecies will evolve and possess the same. Moreover, it would take many millions of years for such a species to evolve.During that time, Earth will be exposed to astronomical risks, and entropy will have consumed resources that couldotherwise have supported sentient life (Bostrom, 2003).

1 2


20/81


20

A2: HAARP

1. Their impact scenarios are empirically denied HAARP technology has been in use since the 1970s and theproject isnt big enough to do any damage.Busch 97 (Linda, February 21, 1997, Ionosphere Research Lab Sparks Fears in Alaska ,Science magazine, writer for theAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science,http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/275/5303/1060?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=weather+manipulation&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=20&resourcetype=HWCIT)

But anti-HAARP skeptics claim that the military has even bigger plans for the project. HAARP's somewhat menacingappearance surely hasn't helped resolve its public-relations problem: 48 21-meter radio antennas now loom behind theGakona facility's barbed-wire fence, and, when completed, the 9-hectare antenna farm will be stuffed with 180 towers. Inhis book, Begich, who is the informal spokesperson for the loosely knit anti-HAARP coalition, writes that all thistechnology is part of a DOD plan to raise a Star Wars-type missile shield and devise technologies for jamming globalcommunications worldwide. Physical chemist Richard Williams, a consultant for the David Sarnoff Institute in Princeton,

New Jersey, further argues that HAARP could irreparably damage the ionosphere: "This is basically atmospheric physicists playing with the ionosphere, which is vital to the life of this planet." Also, he asserts that "this whole concept of

electromagnetic warfare" needs to be "publicly debated." The HAARP critics have asked for a public conference to discusstheir concerns and hear more details about the science from the military. They have written hundreds of letters to Alaska'scongressional delegation and have succeeded in getting the attention of several state legislators, who held legislativehearings on the subject last year. Many scientists who work on HAARP are dumbfounded by the charges. "We are justimproving on technology that already exists," says Heckscher. He points out that the Max Planck Institute has been runninga big ionospheric "heater" in Troms, Norway, since the late 1970s with no lasting effects. U.S. scientists don't have goodaccess because the United States did not join the Norwegian consortium. Also, the United States already operates two othersmall ionospheric heaters, at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico and at HIPAS, operated by the University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, 325 kilometers down the road from HAARP in Chena Hot Springs, Alaska. The HAARP facility,with three times the power of current facilities and a vastly more flexible radio beam, will be the world's largest ionosphericheater. Still, it will not be nearly powerful enough to change Earth's climate, say scientists. "They are talking sciencefiction," says Syun-Ichi Akasofu, who heads the University of Alaska's Geophysical Institute in Fairbanks, the leadinstitution in a university consortium that made recommendations to the military about how HAARP could be used for

basic research. HAARP won't be doing anything to the ionosphere that doesn't happen naturally as a result of solarradiation, says Akasofu. Indeed, the beam's effect on the ionosphere is minuscule compared to normal day-night variations."To do what [the critics] are talking about, we would have to flatten the entire state of Alaska and put up millions ofantennas, and even then, I am not sure it would work." Weather is generated, not in the ionosphere, but in the denseatmosphere close to Earth, points out University of Tulsa provost and plasma physicist Lewis Duncan, former chair of theU.S. Ionospheric Steering Committee. Because HAARP's radio beam only excites and heats ionized particles, it will slipright through the lower atmosphere, which is composed primarily of neutral gases. "If climate modifications were evenconceivable using this technology, you can bet there would be a lot more funding available for it," he jokes.

2. Turn Ozone Depletion

A. HAARP is key to solving Ozone DepletionRembert 97 (Tracey C, January 11 1997, Discordant HAARP; High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program ,E:The Environmental Magazine, coordinator of Co- op America, Editor of Shareholders Action Quarter lyhttp://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1594/is_n1_v8/ai_19192505/pg_3)

So far, proponents of HAARP have concentrated solely on its defensive and tactical military applications, but one patentspeculates that the device would be able to alter "upper-atmosphere wind patterns...so that positive environmental effectscan be achieved...For example, ozone, nitrogen and other concentrations in the atmosphere could be artificially increased."HAARP could also theoretically create rain in drought-ridden areas, decrease rains during flooding and redirect hurricanes,tornadoes and monsoons away from populated areas.


21/81


21

A2: HAARP

B. Ozone depletion causes extinctionGreenpeace in 95(Full of Homes: The Montreal Protocol and the Continuing Destruction of theOzone Layer,http://archive.greenpeace.org/ozone/holes/holebg.html)

When chemists Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina first postulated a link between chlorofluorocarbons and ozone layerdepletion in 1974, the news was greeted with scepticism, but taken seriously nonetheless. The vast majority of crediblescientists have since confirmed this hypothesis. The ozone layer around the Earth shields us all from harmful ultravioletradiation from the sun. Without the ozone layer, life on earth would not exist. Exposure to increased levels of ultravioletradiation can cause cataracts, skin cancer, and immune system suppression in humans as well as innumerable effects onother living systems. This is why Rowland's and Molina's theory was taken so seriously, so quickly - the stakes are literallythe continuation of life on earth.

3. Their impacts are science fiction their authors assume a project 1,000 times more powerful than HAARPCole, 95 (September 17, writer for Fairbanks News-Miner and 5- time published nonfiction author, HAARP Controversy

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/news/fnm995.html)

Alaskan Nick Begich Jr., who recently got a doctorate in the study of alternative medicine from a school based in Sri Lanka, has written and published a new book in which he alleges thatHAARP could lead to "global vandalism" and affect people's "mental functions." Syun Akasofu, director of theGeophysical Institute, said the electric power in the aurora is hundreds of thousands of times stronger than that produced byHAARP.The most outlandish charges about HAARP are that it is designed to disrupt the human brain, jam all communications systems, change weather patt erns over alarge area, interfere with wildlife migration, harm people's health and unnaturally impact the Earth's upper atmosphere. These and other claims appear to be based on speculation aboutwhat might happen if a project 1,000 times more powerful than HAARP is ever built.That seems to be in the realm ofscience fiction.

Wrong HAARP wont cause warming its signals are a million times less powerful than government approvedsafety levelsRozell 97 (Ned, science writer at Geophysical Institute University of Alaska Fairbanks, June 5, Why All the HarpingAbout HAARP? http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF13/1340.html)

Is HAARP dangerous? Well, HAARP signals are one million times less dangerous than government-approved safety levelsfor any electrical signal. HAARP's transmitter currently has a power of 1/3 megawatt, which might be boosted to 3megawatts in a few years, Heckscher said. He compared HAARP's effect on the vast ionosphere to the warming that would

be experienced by the whole Copper River if you dipped in a small electric coil of the type used to warm one single cup ofcoffee. This is why Akasofu describes rumors he's heard circulating about HAARP as dangerous to people or theenvironment as pure science fiction . HAARP could present a pot ential danger to electronic equipment in aircraft that is flying overhead when the transmitter is turned on, but there aresafety precautions against that. HAARP operators not ify the Federal Aviation Administration wit h the HAARP transmission schedule and engineers are installing an aircraft-detection radar at HAARP tofurther ensure the safety of overflying aircraft. This same pro cedure is followed when rockets are launched from Po ker Flat Research Range into the upper atmosphere.

Wrong HAARP wont lead to ionization two reasonsThe HAARP Scientists, 01 (March 14, http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/ion4.html, the scientists who work on HAARPwriting about it on the HAARP website, What Are the Effects of HAARP on the Ionosphere? )

During active ionospheric research, a small, known amount of energy is added to a specific region of one of the ionospheric l ayers as discussed previously. This limited interactive region directly over t hefacility, will range in size, d epending on the frequency of operation and layer height, from as little as 9 km in radius t o as much as 40 km in radius and may be as much as 10 km in thickness. The interactionsoccur only with ionized particles in the layer; neutral (non-ionized) particles, which outnumber ionized particles by 500:1 o r greater, remain unaffected. HAARP is not able to produ ce artificial ionization for

the following two reasons. 1. The frequencies used by the HAARP facility are in the High Frequency (HF) portion of the spectrum.Electromagnetic radiation in the HF frequency range is non-ionizing - as opposed to the sun's ultraviolet and X-rayradiation whose photons have sufficient energy to be ionizing . 2. The intensity of the radiation from the completed HAARPfacility at ionospheric heights will be too weak to produce artificial ionization through particle interactions. The powerdensity produced by the completed facility will not exceed 2.8 microwatts per cm 2, about two orders of magnitude belowthe level required for that process.


22/81


22


23/81


23

A2: INERTIA WEAPONS

1. This is science fiction Smith has no qualifications, cites no research, and a google search using the terms in thearticle has 132 results; their author, and a bunch of teenagers on message boards talking about video games. There

is zero mention of this by any government official this argument would be more credible if they had made it up.

2. Game over Intertia weapons are key to deterrence, they are our only chance at avoiding complete extinction this is their author, and we are the only ones reading the conclusion of his articleSmith 03 (Wayne, Space Daily 4/14, The Ultimate Weapon, http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nuclear-blackmarket-03b.html)

Nuclear bombs are arguably the most devastating military weapon ever deployed by humankind. As a consequence of their development we have ironically enjoyed generations of relative peace on this planet.Everyone is just too frightened to start another world war. However, the holiday may be coming to an end as nuclear proliferation starts to escalate uncontrollably. In the beginning only the US hadaccess to this technology and used it to finally end the greatest war this world had ever witnessed. Right or wrong, nobody can seriously question the total unconditional surrender of Japan as not being adirect consequence of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.Now t he nuclear club is growing towards do uble figures although many o f its new members aren't "officially" recognised. Many nations leadersare unhappy about the way some other co untries have the bomb and they don't.Even t hose in as close proximity to the US as Mexico have expressed grievances over this issue. It is believed that more than acouple of countries are taking matters into their own hands by developing nuclear weapons arsenals secretly.It certainly wouldn't be the first time and a nuclear strike is not so intimidating a threat wheneverybody has the ability to counterstrike. As the number of global arsenals increase so grows the possibility they might in fact be used. Then all hell breaks loose and you can kiss your pension goodbye.We had many close calls during the cold war and can look forward more in the future. It might be the result of international tensions. A flock of birds mistakenly judged b y radar operators to be a first strike.Perhaps a terrorist act or a meteor. One time the Russians mistook a rocket carrying a weather satellite on its way to study the aurora borealis as being a thermonuclear warhead targeted for Moscow.Accidents happen. How do you say sorry for mistakenly decimating a capital city. Is any nation on earth pussy enoug h not to retaliate if it has the means?Something of course needs t o be done but nobodyhas any workable answers. Clearly everyone can't be trust ed to disarm. Not in t he real world. The temptation to hide some warheads would be too great and t he shifts in international power wo uld impact usin quite devastating ways. Conventional wars wouldn't be stymied by the nuclear card any more. What if all the racial tensions, political turmoil and religious zeal that has brewed and festered in its kettle for

past generations proved stoppable only by the nuclear genie? China would probably invade Taiwan for a start.Nukes have made more conventional weapons pale into insignificance and countries like NorthKorea, India, Pakistan and Israel realise the political clout afforded to them by ballistic missiles wit h nuclear warheads attached. It seems to be a vicious circle we can't escape but can o nly watch tighten

around us. Only one weapon can do to the nuclear arsenals of this world what nuclear arsenals have done to conventional arms.Yes, a bigger stick does exist although it isn't much talked about. One that makes nukes a less attractive poor cousin bycomparison .Inertia weapons have that potential. What's an inertia weapon? On a smaller scale, inertia weapons known ascars kill over a million people every year. To nations wanting the ultimate weapon no matter what the cost, a space inertiaweapon is the holy grail. We are no strangers to this horror. It has visited numerous mass extinctions up on us in the past. Some of them responsible for removing up to 95% of life on Eart h inone swift hammer blow. Everybody now knows that the most likely cause for the demise of the dinosaurs was a comet or asteroid striking around 65 million years ago.They also know t hat this created anopportunity for our small furry rat like ancestors to step in and t ake control. In fact its now believed the biosphere of our planet has almost started over from scratch many many times because of such

planetary impacts.There has been much talk of late on how we might detect and even defend ourselves from such a catastrophe in the near future but nobody seems to be asking the next obvious question.Could such a weapon now be wielded by humans? The answer is a definite yes.While a nuclear explosion might destroy a maximum radius of approximately 37km due to the curvature of the earth, a largeasteroid could decimate an entire continent. Asteroids requ ire no replenishment of fissionable elements or other expensive maintenance and there are millions of them within easier reach than the moon.It 's

just like playing billiards. Every object in the universe in accordance with Newtonian laws travels in a straight line unless another force is applied to it.Unlike billiards there is virtua lly no friction in space soan object will maintain any velocity and heading indefinitely. At least until its redirected or something stops it.A spacefaring nation would have no trouble calculating the mathematical solutions for preciselychanging an asteroid's trajectory. Then its a simple matter of nudging it. Push in the right spot and maintain the pressure until your gun is pointed at an appropriate target. This might be achieved in manyways.Reaction mass to drive your inertia weapon could be rocket propellant or the asteroids own mass. Just attach explosives or a few mass drivers. Whoever reaches deep space first will t herefore be facedwith the choice of utilising these 'inertia weapons' and the temptation will be great indeed. A big space rock could wipe out any enemy and the threat alone would equate to political clout beyond humancomprehension.A city can after all be evacuated if a nuclear st rike is threatened, but a country?If a nat ion chose to conquer the high gro und of space then keeping everybody else o ut of it would be all that'snecessary to ensure world dominance. Inertia weapons cannot proliferate unless more than one nation can actually reach them. The race to space could therefore end up being a race for control of the earth

and solar system. I doubt any of this has escaped our leaders, both east and west. Would this be a bad thing? No worse than the first atomic bomb. The fact that it'sunavoidable if we want space travel makes the question absurd. Why wouldn't a space faring nation seize a weapon ensuring it world dominance? Suppose this capability fell into the wrong hands though orwas allowed to be owned by many spacefaring nations. Should that happen we might still see nuclear weapons become redundant and inertia weapons replace them as the newest t hreat to humanity.It wouldmean a new "Cold War" on a scale to dwarf the previous US and Russian one. A nuclear war despite all the bad press is in fact survivable. Not all human life wou ld be eradicated and if all the nukes in theworld were launched then we in the west migh

wipeout answers - michigan7 09

Documents