Progression of Early Hominids: Homo Habilis to Man on the Moon

  • Thread starter Thread starter Imparcticle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponential
AI Thread Summary
Early hominids, such as Homo Habilis, created basic tools like hammers from sticks and sharpened rocks, demonstrating minimal technological advancement over millions of years. In contrast, Homo Sapiens have experienced a rapid increase in technological progression, particularly over the last century, transitioning from a time without computers and cars to a society heavily reliant on them. The discussion raises questions about quantifying this progression and the reasons behind the accelerating pace of development, suggesting it may reflect evolutionary processes. The theory of punctuated evolution is introduced, positing that after environmental disasters, surviving species evolve rapidly to fill available niches, leading to periods of rapid advancement followed by slower evolutionary rates. The conversation also highlights concerns about future environmental challenges, predicting significant declines in biodiversity and commercial fish populations, which could lead to increased competition and further evolutionary changes in humanity.
Imparcticle
Messages
572
Reaction score
4
Early hominids such as Homo Habilis made their own tools. Take a hammer, which was constructed using a sturdy stick and sharpened rock. This simple (compared to modern advancement) technology, among many others, was used for millions of years and there was little or no improvement of the hammers. Eventually Homo Sapiens came along and as we progressed, over thousands of years, our rate of progression increased. Only 100 years ago, we were not dependent on computers/cars. Now, 100 years later, we are. In only 30 years (i believe), scientists were able to send the first man to the moon.
Is it possible to quantify our progression? Why are we progressing faster and not slower? Is this evolution in action?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Vinge's singularity

Imparcticle said:
our rate of progression increased. Only 100 years ago, we were not dependent on computers/cars. Now, 100 years later, we are. In only 30 years (i believe), scientists were able to send the first man to the moon.

Is it possible to quantify our progression? Why are we progressing faster and not slower?
Got the singularity?
 
Imparcticle said:
Early hominids such as Homo Habilis made their own tools. Take a hammer, which was constructed using a sturdy stick and sharpened rock. This simple (compared to modern advancement) technology, among many others, was used for millions of years and there was little or no improvement of the hammers. Eventually Homo Sapiens came along and as we progressed, over thousands of years, our rate of progression increased. Only 100 years ago, we were not dependent on computers/cars. Now, 100 years later, we are. In only 30 years (i believe), scientists were able to send the first man to the moon.
Is it possible to quantify our progression? Why are we progressing faster and not slower? Is this evolution in action?

One modern theory of evolution is call punctuated evolution. The idea is that after an environmental disasters occur such as an ice age, the surviving animals rush to fill in the suddenly available environmental niches and evolve much more quickly. Once all the niches are filled, evolution slows to a crawl as some kind of equalibrium is achieved between all the different species.

Humanity was just about the only surviving hominid out of dozens to survive the last ice age. Like the evolution of the first animal that ate plants, the environmental niche we have found for ourselves is unique and we have no competition. However, we are still a very young species only a mere 100,000 years old.

Within twenty years the oceans are estimated to no longer be comercially fishable, within fifty every wild land animal larger than a dog is estimated to be extinct. Nature has her own ways of achieving equalibrium, and after the next catistrophic event perhaps there will be more competition.
 
Similar to the 2024 thread, here I start the 2025 thread. As always it is getting increasingly difficult to predict, so I will make a list based on other article predictions. You can also leave your prediction here. Here are the predictions of 2024 that did not make it: Peter Shor, David Deutsch and all the rest of the quantum computing community (various sources) Pablo Jarrillo Herrero, Allan McDonald and Rafi Bistritzer for magic angle in twisted graphene (various sources) Christoph...
Thread 'My experience as a hostage'
I believe it was the summer of 2001 that I made a trip to Peru for my work. I was a private contractor doing automation engineering and programming for various companies, including Frito Lay. Frito had purchased a snack food plant near Lima, Peru, and sent me down to oversee the upgrades to the systems and the startup. Peru was still suffering the ills of a recent civil war and I knew it was dicey, but the money was too good to pass up. It was a long trip to Lima; about 14 hours of airtime...
Back
Top