Why a world climate court will probably fail
Much as I would like to see Anthony Carmona’s idea of a global environmental court come to fruition, I fear the precedents suggest it would fail. We already have an International Criminal Court to prosecute war crimes and related offences, but nations that commit these often simply refuse to accept its jurisdiction. Sadly, any global environmental court will fail for exactly the same reason (8 March, p 17).
Hoping the timescape cosmos proves correct (1)
Not long ago, I posed the following question to an online seminar: “The age of the universe is stated as 13.8 billion years, but in whose frame of reference is this true(8 March, p 26)?”
It wasn’t selected for discussion, but I know the standard answer is that time passes at the same rate on the largest scale of the universe. But does it, really? I have always thought this answer, based on the cosmological principle, too convenient, especially when stated in terms that it must be so or else we couldn’t solve the equations of general relativity. I, for one, am hoping that David Wiltshire’s timescape idea 鈥� which posits that time passes differently in parts of the universe, potentially resolving the problems of dark energy and the Hubble tension 鈥� will be vindicated.
Hoping the timescape cosmos proves correct (2)
The timescape hypothesis, said to explain the apparently increasing rate of expansion of the universe by assuming that the flow of time can vary spatially across the cosmos, raises another interesting question: is time a fixed constant during the life of the universe?
If the speed of time could vary over the age of the universe and were now slowing, this would also make it seem as if the expansion of the universe is accelerating.
Hoping the timescape cosmos proves correct (3)
There are interesting links between the timescape hypothesis and an earlier article published in 快猫短视频, “The past appears to run slower” (8 July 2023, p 11). The non-linear behaviour of the deep past suggests that assumptions about the age of the universe could be erroneous.
Let's put mirror life fears to the test 鈥� safely
Much of the worry about “mirror life” seems to be predicated on the assumption that our immune system wouldn’t recognise it. I’m not convinced. But we can test this since, as your story tells us, we can already synthesise proteins with a mirror-image structure to the ones in our bodies. It would be simple enough, and totally safe, to see if these artificial proteins can elicit an immune response. If they can, maybe our fears are overblown (1 March, p 34).
Futurists really do need a clearer crystal ball
Rather than just sometimes, futurism almost always prevents us from seeing what is actually coming next. No futurists predicted geosynchronous satellites, remote control mechanical manipulators, mainframe computers, handheld personal electronic assistants etc. Some current technologies 鈥� including all of my examples 鈥� were suggested by science fiction writers, but sci-fi isn’t futurism (8 March, p 18).
In the 1950s, futurists claimed we would be zooming around in flying cars by the 80s. They have been claiming for the past two decades that we will be sitting in a fully autonomous car without a steering wheel within five years. Now they say that large language models are a panacea to our woes, while what this type of artificial intelligence is really doing is filling websites with hallucinations.
Frankly, if someone is described as a futurist, then their predictions are probably less likely to prove true than those of an economist.
On the search for the oldest working code (1)
It struck me when reading your article “Hunting for the oldest code” that we may have found an excellent use for artificial intelligence. Can older coders who know the old programming languages pass their knowledge to AI systems before they depart this mortal coil? With the dependency on legacy systems you discussed, we would be very glad if they did (8 March, p 34).
On the search for the oldest working code (2)
Matthew Sparkes’s evaluation of our reliance on old code is spot on. I imagine organisations ought to think about software support agreements they are paying for, as it is likely that some companies collecting annual fees no longer have the available expertise to solve any problems arising. All code is broken. When we are lucky, it is decommissioned before the vulnerabilities manifest and are exploited.
On the search for the oldest working code (3)
The idea that “we’re still using decades-old code” comes as no surprise to those who have worked for long-established computer firms. One example is IBM’s CICS software, first released in 1969. It still supports a majority of online banking, insurance, stock trading and credit card applications, as well as applications in other industries and government, with very high reliability and performance.
The best way to think about long-lived software is to view it as essential infrastructure, akin to the Roman roads and 19th-century railways that many of us still travel on. Although they must be continuously maintained and improved, these systems use recognisably similar technology and follow the same routes. Why should software be any different?
For advantages of round buildings, look to the roof
In the report on ancient building shape, there was no mention of the critical relationship between the roofs and walls. The roof of a rectangular structure provides strength to ensure the walls stay upright. Such a roof requires strong structural elements and robust materials such as timber or stone before it can be clad with other things, such as thatch (8 March, p 14).
A circular structure may well be inherently stronger, thus requiring a simpler, less structural roof that uses easily available local resources, such as reeds or palm fronds or similar, which can also be easily replaced when damaged. This may explain why the evidence of early settlements has generally revealed round buildings.