This set of posts has convinced me that I need to utilize (once again) the "script" promulgated a few months ago...I mean, really, to argue about the merits of Dr. Bartlett's presentation...thanks again, Prof G, for bringing it up for those who are unfamiliar.

O.K., that works for me...and I will take it simply that I was "oversensitive".

And of course, we are all prone to judging things by our own past experiences (i.e., mistakes :-), I will admit openly to having caught myself out on several occasions by underestimating the impact of the "complex functions"....hope triumphs over experience though, I keep telling myself that the next time, I am going to get it exactly right....presto, early retirement! :-)

Roger Conner Jr.
Remember, we are only one cubic mile from freedom

I was going to point out the irony in Roger's post, but Prof. Goose beat me to it.

One thing he did not point out was Roger's constant referral to the "real world" interfering. What Roger failed to realize was that Dr. Bartlett's entire statement addressed that fact. In fact that was the ENTIRE POINT!

We cannot have infinite growth because reality impinges.

I would also like to point out that Prof. Goose acknowledges a corollary to the proposal by stating that the world is complex. In other words, everything is interconnected. If it were not, then the laws of physics would not apply and we could indeed have infinite growth. Growth without constraint means infinite growth. What are those constraints? Why that would be what everyone calls "the real world."

It is that concept, the concept that our actions do not exist in a vacuum that is hard for most people to wrap their heads around. The economist wishes dearly that the average investor does not strain themselves to think about ALL the variables. He wants that investor to only think about one possible, very happy, outcome -- his swelling bank account. And it is this ability of humans to tune out the inconvenient truths of physics that enables us to do so many truly stupid and venal things. We are simplicity machines. We take complex situations and render them simple so that we might make the most rapid and most fortuitous decisions for ourselves. Now, this selfishness is great if you are out on the plains of the Serengeti wondering if you should run for the tree, then throw your spear at the lion, or throw the spear first and then run for the tree. But, for today's world where decisions can mean today we run a test on the turbine system in Reactor No. 4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station on April 25th, 1986. By the early morning hours, many decisions were made that led to an immense catastrophe. Had this only been the Serengeti, it would have meant one or maybe a few less hunter gatherers.

When the scientist tunes out variables, he or she is taking a calculated risk that their conclusions may not work in the "real world."

When Dr. Bartlett talks about the exponential function, he is stating a mere fact. It is only when people deny the impossibility of infinite growth that decisions are made that lead towards such interesting occasions as Chernobyl.

Yes, it is named after Wormwood. You may want to reference that in the Bible.