At the time of this writing, every person on Earth uses an average of 33 kilos of resources every day, translating to 12 tons of materials per person each year.
And people in the Western world (aka the First World) use up to 74 kilos of resources daily—with over 100 billion tons of terrestrial resources mined each year.
Global material use has more than tripled since 1970, from 30 billion tons to 106 billion tons a year.
This figure encompasses all resources necessary to sustain modern life, including food, water, energy, construction materials, and consumer goods.
That’s right… the fossil energy, bio-mass, minerals and metals, etc. we use every day (whether we realize we’re doing it or not) are materials that must be mined and extracted from Earth.
Fossil energy (powering transportation, manufacturing, and electricity), bio-mass (food, timber, and biofuels), minerals (construction materials like sand, concrete, and glass), and metals (infrastructure, electronics, and consumer goods) together form the foundational resources required to sustain modern civilization.
From manufacturing medicine, industrializing agriculture, powering our cars, and lighting up our entire world, we use Earth’s resources (resources that have evolved over billions of years) to build powerful technologies to improve our lives and live comfortably—technologies that span the modern economy.
If these trends continue, global material consumption is projected to climb to 190 billion metric tons by 2060, requiring a 60% rise in resource extraction.
The global population is projected to be around 10 billion humans around this time.
It’s pretty heavy stuff when you think about it (no pun), and multiplying it out for Earth’s 10 billion inhabitants really puts the magnitude of Earth resources we consume every day into perspective.
This escalating demand raises critical questions about the sustainability of our current trajectory and the role energy plays in what the future could look like.
The Paradox of Progress
“If we keep extracting Earth resources at this rate, will we eventually run out?”
“If certain countries run out of resources, could it result in World War 3?”
These are great questions, and they do not have easy answers.
Most of the predictive models I’ve seen all point to material scarcity and suggest that terrestrial resources will eventually become a closed loop.
Many items we have in abundance now could become more rare in the future, and thus, we are now in a race against the clock.
It’s the old economics problem of scarcity rearing its ugly head yet again, and there may come a point where our growing energy demands will outstrip Earth’s limited supply.
The primary danger is not necessarily human extinction, but escalating competition for energy—arguably the foundational resource driving all others. Without addressing our energy systems, resource scarcity will remain an unsolvable dilemma.
Basic economics tells us: as supply decreases and demand remains the same, prices will increase.
Therefore, as Earth’s resources dwindle, energy will become a lot more expensive. It will be hoarded and used by a select few, inevitably thrusting humankind into conflict to compete over the remaining scraps.
Without enough energy to meet demand, people will starve, governments will impose rationing, and society will be set on a direct path toward entropic collapse.
Our current trajectory of technological and economic growth is accelerating rapidly (potentially mitigating some suffering in the future), but growth in technology is closely linked to environmental degradation, suggesting that unchecked progress may ultimately lead to the destruction of the natural environment.
It appears the more modern our economy gets; ecological destruction appears to rise along the same plot line.
It seems as if the more advanced we get, the faster we destroy ourselves.
So, the standard of living that technology afforded us in the first place is ruined.
It’s quite the paradox.
We simply cannot afford to continue to pull resources out of the ground to power our energy sources.
We need to figure out logical alternatives.
So, what do we do?
A common (and lazy) argument you’ll hear thrown around a lot is that we just need to “focus on carbon emissions” and try to become more “energy efficient.”
It all sounds good in theory, but “energy” is a very tricky efficiency to quantify.
And not only is it a difficult quantification, but I would argue that the phrase “energy efficient” is simply a propaganda term, used carelessly, to present the layman with a feel-good way of describing the massive amount of energy and resources he or she needs to survive each day.
Focusing on altruistic energy initiatives may seem valiant and noble from afar, but up close, we see they still fail to solve the systemic inefficiencies built into our energy infrastructure.
The Great Energy Deception
We have discussed scarcity, efficiency, and zero marginal cost delusion in previous papers.
A few of the prime examples are wind farms and solar.
Here’s the trap a lot of folks fall into: They make the assumption that since the fixed costs of solar and wind technology are expensive, the cost of capturing each unit of energy beyond that will be low. Then, using the same rationalization, they assume that by using 3-D printers and/or various recyclables, people will be able to manufacture clean energy products at near zero marginal cost.
Here’s the reality: Sure, the marginal costs of producing electricity via wind farms are very low, but these giant hardware monstrosities can only be profitable if each kilowatt of electricity produced is priced a lot higher than conventional electricity (e.g., oil, coal, natural gas).
Assuming that 3D printers and recyclable materials will enable near-zero marginal cost production is an overly simplistic rationalization. While it is true that solar and wind technologies have low marginal costs after installation, this overlooks other “un-sexy costs” such as ongoing operational and maintenance expenses.
So, while wind farms can reduce costs in theory, they still incur significant material, energy, and processing expenses.
At the end of the day, wind farms are nothing more than tax credit farms.
To stay in business and keep the power on, these farms need government subsidies and favors.
In layman’s terms, yes, wind power is “zero marginal cost” but it is still high-cost electricity.
This means that in a free market, consumers will probably not choose it, because it is so expensive.
So, the government must force consumers to purchase wind power (at a higher price), making said consumers poorer, not wealthier.
All ‘green energy’ is a net energy loss because it requires diesel engines to create and sustain it.
That said, we are rapidly approaching a critical inflection point that I calculate will hit sometime near the year 2040: fiat devaluation hits bottom, material scarcity peaks, conflict and collapse follow.
As we face these systemic challenges, we approach a pivotal moment in human history—a threshold where current energy systems and societal structures can no longer sustain global demand.
As mentioned previously, new technologies may buy us a few decades, but tech growth is also correlated to ecological destruction and collapse.
So, we are faced with a Discontinuity Dilemma—a turning point where our reliance on finite energy systems collides with the demands of a growing population.
But this dilemma raises a deeper question: are the limitations we face intrinsic to our reality, or are they distortions created by the systems we’ve built?
Exploring this leads us to consider the very nature of reality itself.
Allow me to explain:
There are nearly 3 billion humans on the planet who have no form of energy to cook food.
This deficiency leads them to rely on traditional biomass—such as wood, charcoal, and animal dung—for cooking.
They die early as a result, and the planet’s forests are denuded.
Also, there are 2 billion people without access to clean water.
This deficiency forces their reliance on contaminated water sources, which are major vectors for diseases like cholera, diarrhea, dysentery, hepatitis A, typhoid, and polio.
They die early as a result, perpetuating cycles of disease and poverty.
These deficiencies all lead to deforestation, early mortality, and environmental collapse.
So, on one end of the spectrum, we see first-world resource drain and environmental destruction of one kind; on the other, third-world resource drain and environmental destruction of another.
Both groups tug on each other.
Are you still with me here?
Good.
Now, energy in our current system is wasted on the order of 60+ % of all energy used.
This isn’t just about inefficient gasoline engines—we’re talking about the deeper irony of using coal plants to charge lithium batteries that are made with diesel engines, perpetuating the very fossil fuel dependence the green technologists said they were going to eliminate.
It’s an absurdly inefficient scam dressed up nice and cute as ‘green’ energy.
Even so-called sustainable solutions like solar and wind are usually a net energy loss because they all rely on petroleum-heavy supply chains for their creation, deployment, and maintenance.
But these inefficiencies extend beyond mere energy production—they ripple across other sectors as well—with much of it tied to the minutia of wasted food due to the costs of transport.
The high costs and logistical challenges of transporting food—particularly over long distances—can lead to significant losses.
These inefficiencies result in food spoilage, delays, and discarding of perishable items before they reach consumers, representing not only a loss of food but also a massive waste of the energy, resources, and labor.
Now here’s the kicker: ALL WEALTH on earth is linked to diesel use.
Most people understand Petroleum to be a finite resource, but it is infinitely and continuously created by natural processes in the Earth.
In fact, Petroleum is the third most abundant fluid that Earth creates.
Author’s Note: The dominant scientific consensus and real-world production data support the notion of petroleum as a finite resource, such as is explained in the Hubbert Peak Theory, which is based on the observation that the amount of oil under the ground in any region is finite; therefore, the rate of discovery, which initially increases quickly, must reach a maximum and then decline. In other words, the oil production in any given region follows a bell-shaped curve, peaking when approximately half of the recoverable resource is extracted, after which production irreversibly declines.
For the purposes of this paper, however, we will ‘get spicy’ and work under the assumption that abiogenic oil formation is real and that hydrocarbons are continuously generated deep within the Earth, all governed by geological and spacetime principles that remain far beyond our current understanding.
As such, through the calculated and deliberate creation of artificial scarcity, petroleum has become the bedrock of global wealth. Through this system, all wealth is tied to petroleum-based assets, and petroleum is used as a tool to perpetuate dependency and control.
This system—supported by financial monopolies—is actively destroying lives all over the world, enslaving billions through a calculated framework of artificial energy scarcity.
The central banking system, its main apparatus of control, reinforces the power structure, enabling ‘the man’ to perpetuate a form of energy slavery, exert an iron grip on global wealth, and suppress humanity’s potential for advancement.
These institutions have warped humanity’s collective consciousness, furthering the distortions in our understanding of energy (e.g., green energy is ‘good’ and nuclear energy is ‘bad’) creating a society that not only tolerates external interference, flawed reasoning and deceptive arguments, but actively facilitates and embraces them.
And the acceptance of the ‘greater good’ as material fact by the larger consensus leaves humanity vulnerable to aggressive intrusion into our affairs by otherworldly entities.
These distortions—while appearing normal or natural—are not incidental but the deliberate result of a meticulously designed socio-economic framework.
This framework exists solely to protect the assets that sustain our parasitic financial system—one entirely reliant on the exploitation of controlled energy resources and the manufactured illusion of enforced energy scarcity.
It’s a sophisticated form of systemic parasitism, weaponizing energy to stifle human advancement at every level.
The Discontinuity Dilemma arises as humanity is now confronted with the arrival (and the increasing presence) of UFOs, which many nerds believe are powered by ‘free energy systems’ such as Zero-Point Technology (ZPT) and other exotic technologies like Anti-Matter Reactors and Tachyon Energy Systems that could change our understanding of energy production and utilization.
For the purposes of this paper, let’s assume these UFOs are real and that their presence is intentional.
You could make the case that they are here because of our bad behavior, specifically the development and use of nuclear weapons.
These nuclear detonations disrupt communication and navigation systems on a galactic scale, drawing attention from advanced extraterrestrial entities. This disruption, in turn, is due to a distortion created by those in power—namely, the elites or institutions that control global resources, information, and wealth—who will do whatever it takes to protect their assets, regardless of the consequences.
Their relentless pursuit to protect their claims on these assets perpetuates and exacerbates the very conditions that invite external interference.
Exotic energy systems like ZPT, however, have been understood by humanity for over 100 years but have been systematically suppressed and monopolized by global elites, who treat Earth as their personal asset, enforcing their control invisibility and exploitation over the planet.
So the Discontinuity Dilemma comes down to this:
If we can liberate or relieve humanity from energy scarcity it would unlock an era of unprecedented growth, giving everyone an opportunity to achieve wealth and prosperity.
However, doing so would fundamentally dismantle the entrenched power structures that rely on control and artificial scarcity to maintain their dominance.
Now, I know what you’re probably thinking:
Strange aliens?
Extraterrestrial beings?
Ancient gods?
Conspiracy!
These are all fair points.
But the real question here is: are we asking the right questions?
Unfolding Realities
We don’t know the secrets of the universe; as lowly beings, we perceive reality through the limitations of our senses and consciousness. While this shapes our experience, the underlying universe operates independently of our perception.
But asking the right questions can lead to far-reaching implications.
If the universe is a simulation, then who—or what—built it?
If it’s a projection, where is it being projected from?
And if it’s neither, how do we explain the undeniable strangeness of quantum mechanics, the fine-tuning of physical laws, and the holographic nature of spacetime itself?
I’m not just talking theory here. Evidence from quantum mechanics, string theory, and even astrophysics are forcing us to confront the possibility that reality might be far more layered, participatory, and bizarre than we ever imagined.
As we explore the multi-layered nature of reality—simulation theory, holographic projections, and quantum mechanics—we begin to entertain the possibility of higher-dimensional beings—let’s call them The Watchers—who might be shaping our reality in ways we are only beginning to study and understand starts to look more and more plausible.
UFOs, increasingly documented yet unexplained, may represent tangible evidence of systems that defy our understanding of energy and physics.
Of course, the natural pushback against this hypothesis is to say, “c’mon bro, aliens aren’t real”.
What does it mean for something to be real?
Let’s take the universe, for example.
To answer the question of “realness,” we first need to unpack what it means.
In classical physics, reality is deterministic, objective, and independent of observation. The universe exists as a solid, unchanging machine, running according to the immutable laws of physics, whether or anyone is around to see it or not.
Quantum mechanics, however, upended this view entirely.
At the microscopic level, for example, reality isn’t fixed—it’s probabilistic. Particles don’t exist in definite states until they’re observed. Until that moment, they exist as a wavefunction, a cloud of probabilities describing all possible outcomes.
This is more than just a philosophical curiosity; it’s a demonstrable fact of nature, confirmed by experiments like double-slit and quantum entanglement.
So, if reality depends on observation, is it truly “real” in the independent, objective sense we once thought it was?
Or is it something more fragile—something more like a simulation?
Or maybe the universe is a participant?
We know that the cornerstone of quantum mechanics is the wavefunction, a mathematical object that encodes all the possible states of a particle.
When we measure the particle, the wavefunction “collapses” into a single outcome.
But what causes it to collapse?
Does observation cause collapse?
In the Copenhagen Interpretation, observation is ‘loosely’ defined as an interaction with a macroscopic system—like a measuring device or a detector. But some physicists believe that consciousness itself plays a role. In this view, the universe might only solidify into definite states when a conscious mind observes it.
So, now we can reasonably assume that the following is possible: the universe may not exist independently of observers. The cosmos itself may be participatory, with reality unfolding only in response to observation.
If quantum mechanics suggests that reality is dependent on observation, the holographic principle takes it a step further by proposing that reality itself might be a projection.
Derived from abstractions of black holes and string theory, the holographic principle tells us that all the information contained in a volume of space can be encoded on its boundary. In other words, our three-dimensional universe could be a projection from a two-dimensional surface. Imagine a hologram: the “image” we see in 3D is actually encoded on a flat surface.
This isn’t just a random, abstract idea, or a theoretical fancy. There’s a lot of math in black hole physics and quantum field theory that back it up. If our universe is holographic, then what we perceive as “depth” might be an illusion. Our entire reality could be a higher-dimensional projection.
Author’s Note: Black holes provided the empirical and conceptual basis for the holographic principle (via entropy and information), and string theory offered the mathematical formalism (via AdS/CFT) to generalize and apply the principle to broader contexts in theoretical physics.
But here’s where things start to get weird.
If the universe is a projection, what exists in the dimensions above us?
Could there be beings—The Watchers—inhabiting these higher-dimensional spaces, capable of interacting with our 3D universe?
Is there a dimension higher?
To us lowly beings constrained by three spatial dimensions, a fourth dimension is almost impossible to visualize. But we can use analogies:
- Imagine a 2D being living on a flat plane. It can only perceive length and width. If a 3D object (like a sphere) passes through its world, the 2D being would only see a 2D cross-section—a circle appearing, growing, and disappearing.
- Similarly, 4D beings could pass through our 3D world, appearing and disappearing in ways that seem inexplicable to us.
If you’re not familiar with string theory, it basically suggests the universe has more than three spatial dimensions—10 or 11 in total. Most of these dimensions are “compactified,” meaning they’re curled up at scales too small to detect. But beings evolved in these dimensions might have access to physical laws and phenomena we can’t comprehend such as:
- Dimensional Manipulation:
- A 4D being could observe all of our 3D space simultaneously, much like we can see an entire 2D map at once.
- They could “pop in and out” of our reality at will, appearing as anomalies or unexplained phenomena.
- Temporal Manipulation
- A being with access to higher-dimensional time might experience our past, present, and future simultaneously.
- Their actions could appear to us as precognition, retrocausality, or time anomalies.
- They could intervene in ways that seem to alter historical events or create paradoxes incomprehensible to our linear understanding of time.
- Energy Manipulation
- Beings could harness zero-point energy fields or other exotic forms of energy beyond our technological grasp, appearing to violate conservation laws in our limited framework.
- Sudden, unexplained spikes in electromagnetic activity or localized energy phenomena could be manifestations of their technology.
- Gravitational Anomalies
- They might create localized distortions in space, bending or folding it in ways that allow instantaneous travel (wormholes) or the apparent vanishing and reappearing of objects.
- Large objects might move without a discernible source of force, or gravity itself could behave inconsistently in localized regions.
- Communication Beyond Our Senses
- Using mechanisms that bypass traditional sensory channels (e.g., thought transference) these beings might communicate telepathically or through patterns of synchronicity that we interpret as “meaningful coincidences.”
- Messages may be conveyed in the language of pure energy: light, sound, or other frequencies incomprehensible to human senses might carry information encoded in nonhuman logic.
- The Watchers
- These beings might exist as custodians of the holographic projection, tweaking its parameters or intervening in subtle ways.
- UFO sightings, synchronicities, and paranormal events might be glimpses of their activities.
Consider the simulation hypothesis, for example: in simulation theory, the universe is not fundamental but rather a computational construct, potentially overlapping with the concept of a holographic universe.
In this framework, what we perceive as three-dimensional reality may actually be encoded on a two-dimensional surface, similar to how information in a simulation is projected and rendered.
This idea bridges advanced physics, computational theory, and philosophy, giving us a ‘very spicy’ explanation for the underlying nature of existence.
Evidence supporting this hypothesis aligns with the holographic principle, where the quantized nature of space, time, and energy mirrors the finite resolution of digital or holographic systems.
Quantum phenomena such as wavefunction collapse and entanglement could represent optimization algorithms or shortcuts, designed to simulate complexity while conserving computational resources.
If our universe is encoded on a cosmic boundary, it could be the equivalent of a storage device running a program.
Furthermore, the universe’s finely tuned physical constants, necessary for life, may be the result of deliberate calibration within a higher-dimensional framework, suggesting an advanced intelligence behind the holographic simulation we inhabit.
Taking things a step further, maybe consciousness itself is the foundation of reality?
Maybe reality isn’t just observed by consciousness—it’s created by it.
Physicist John Wheeler once said that observers are essential to the existence of the universe. Reality, he argued, is a feedback loop: the universe creates observers, and observers, in turn, bring the universe into being.
Author’s Note: The Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP), proposed by Wheeler, posits that the existence of the universe is intrinsically tied to the act of observation by conscious beings. In this view, observers are not passive but play an active role in actualizing reality, aligning with concepts in quantum mechanics where observation collapses wavefunctions and shapes the universe’s structure.
So, is the universe real?
If “real” means independent of observation, then probably not.
If “real” means the shared experience of conscious beings within a participatory, holographic framework, then yes.
The better question might be:
What kind of reality are we living in?
Here’s what we know—or suspect:
- Reality might be layered:
- Our 3D universe could be a projection from higher-dimensional space.
- Beings in those dimensions might shape or maintain the projection.
- Consciousness plays a role:
- Whether we’re in a simulation or a participatory universe, consciousness seems to be an active participant in shaping reality.
- We’re lowly beings:
- If reality is layered, we’re unlikely to be at the top. There could be entire hierarchies of existence above us, inhabited by beings operating on principles we can’t yet grasp.
Perhaps the universe is a simulation, or a holographic projection, or a dream of consciousness. Whatever it is, its complexity only makes it even more fascinating and strange.
And whether we’re players, participants, or creators, one thing is clear: reality—whatever that means—is far more extraordinary than we ever imagined.
Now that we’ve cleared that up, let’s circle back to alien dominators and energy:
There are many different layers to the Discontinuity Dilemma, including the stark reality that the existing power structure continues to suppress disruptive technologies, often at the cost of human lives.
This power structure maintains control over governments and the financial industry—both of which will be radically changed once the Discontinuity Threshold is crossed.
UFOs are here, appearing in larger numbers and with greater boldness than ever before.
They are openly demonstrating advanced energy systems right over our heads.
They are plunging into our oceans.
They are flying towards and descending into thunderstorms.
They are congregating by the hundreds and interacting with satellites.
They are generating electromagnetic activity.
They have been filmed engaging in hunter-predatory behavior.
Both governments and corporations have been studying extraterrestrial energy systems for years, yet they persist in denying their existence. Academia also plays a huge role in obfuscating our reality at all levels, much to the detriment of all humanity, individually and collectively.
But it may be too late.
If these extraterrestrials are indeed here, these energy technologies are arriving in their UFOs.
And if these energy technologies are arriving in their UFOs, they will disrupt the human social order.
The existing power structures cannot stop these technologies from penetrating into humanity; they can only delay them, but in so doing, they will only cause more suffering.
But these technologies will eventually catalyze a massive transformation, disrupting the social order as we know it.
Money, governments, and social institutions will be completely upended.
Religions, as we know them, will fade into obscurity.
No one is safe.
Every power structure will feel the impact of this coming transformation—a seismic shift that will uproot the foundations of the entire fiat machine.
And if/when extraterrestrial technologies do arrive to reshape society, they will do so by introducing systems that operate beyond the paradigms of scarcity and centralized control.
These technologies—capable of providing boundless energy and revolutionary efficiencies—will challenge humanity to rethink the very structures that define our economy, governance, and daily lives.
But this disruption also presents an opportunity: by anchoring our economic systems to energy, rather than fiat currency, we could move beyond scarcity-driven models and embrace a future of abundance. This shift would redefine wealth itself, tying it directly to the energy systems that sustain civilization.
In this new reality, we may begin to see the value of energy as a universal currency. A system where energy, not arbitrary fiat, forms the backbone of wealth.
A system that ties monetary value directly to the lifeblood of modern civilization: energy.
And as we anchor monetary value to energy production, we’ll create a system where wealth is tied directly to humanity’s capacity to generate and harness power.
Can Energy Work as a Currency?
An energy-backed currency ties value to a measurable, universal resource, providing a stable foundation for economic systems.
Since energy cannot be created or destroyed, its supply is governed by transformation rather than arbitrary creation, limiting inflation by ensuring currency issuance aligns with actual energy production.
This (in theory) would preserve purchasing power, as the money supply adjusts to reflect real-world energy availability.
Author’s Note: The First Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant over time, but it can change forms (e.g., chemical energy to thermal energy). In other words, energy can’t be created or destroyed—it just changes from one form to another. For example, the energy in food becomes fuel for your body, or sunlight turns into electricity with solar panels. The total amount of energy stays the same; it just moves around or transforms into something else.
Prices would be relatively stable, directly reflecting the tangible cost of energy in producing goods and services, creating a predictable link between economic activity and currency value.
But for a theoretical system like this to truly align with sound economic principles, the value of energy and the currency will need to be determined through some sort of decentralized, market-driven mechanism.
This will ensure competition, efficiency, and innovation remain optimal while preventing manipulation by cronies or bad actors wishing to seize power, which should result in a dynamic and relatively fair economic environment.
Here’s How An Energy-Backed Currency Could Work:
- Tie Currency to Energy Output:
- Each unit of currency would represent a quantifiable amount of energy, such as kilowatt-hours (kWh). This creates an intrinsic value for money, backed by the energy that drives civilization.
- Incentivize Clean Energy:
- Producers of renewable and advanced energy would accumulate wealth directly, driving investment in sustainable technologies like fusion, geothermal, and ZPT.
- Decentralize Markets:
- Localized energy production—microgrids, community solar arrays, and modular fusion reactors—would replace centralized monopolies, empowering communities and individuals to produce and trade energy as currency.
And while it’s fun to lazily throw theory around, it can be difficult to execute such schemes in application.
So naturally, the concept of an energy-backed currency raises some important questions:
- Can this approach fundamentally alter the dynamics of scarcity in the global economy?
- Can an energy-backed currency solve for inflation/devaluation?
- Would an energy-backed currency be less susceptible to centralized manipulation?
While eliminating scarcity is a theoretical concept at this stage, it nonetheless provides a plausible model for redefining value by linking it to measurable energy production.
This approach has the potential to optimize resource allocation, boost technological innovation, and strengthen the resilience of critical infrastructure.
Let’s take a look at how it might work in application:
Using Mars as an example of multiplanetary expansion, the thermodynamic benefits of expanding to Mars are massive.
Assuming the currency is energy-backed, Mars also has a massive financial upside by proxy.
If we can trade current-day fiat for scaled-up energy and compute tomorrow, this financial undertaking makes economic sense.
Even if it cost $1 trillion in investment, we’d gain access to quadrillions in upside (energy, land area, materials, etc.), so the economic upside is massive.
Here’s how Mars could play a role in an energy-backed currency:
1. It Would Establish a Closed-Loop Resource Economy
Mars will require an efficient, closed-loop system to sustain life and manage scarce resources like water, oxygen, and raw materials. An energy-backed currency could incentivize and reward innovation in these systems by tying economic value directly to energy production and resource utilization. This would create an economic framework where energy efficiency and recycling are critical, setting the foundation for a self-sufficient Martian colony.
2. It Would Drive Off-World Energy Innovation
Mars’ extreme environment will require novel advancements in energy technologies, such as compact nuclear reactors, advanced solar arrays, and high-capacity energy storage systems. An energy-backed currency would reward the creators of such systems, accelerating the development of technologies that not only power Martian colonies but also have disruptive, multi-use cases for Earth, like scalable clean energy systems.
3. It Would Support Interplanetary Trade
An energy-backed currency could serve as a universal standard for trade between Earth, Mars, and other planets. Energy, as a universally needed resource, is practical for valuation and exchange. Martian exports, such as rare isotopes or materials manufactured using Martian resources, could be traded for Earth-based technologies or expertise, enabling a dynamic interplanetary economy fueled by energy-backed value.
4. It Could Reduce the Impact of Scarcity
By tying value to energy, we could theoretically minimize the influence of artificial scarcity on the global economy. Wealth becomes a function of energy abundance, incentivizing the development of clean, decentralized energy systems. While this remains untested on a large scale, the model suggests a framework for reducing dependency on finite resources and alleviating systemic pressures.
It sounds crazy, but it could work:
An energy-backed currency intrinsically ties economic value to energy production, creating a direct incentive to scale up energy infrastructure and computational capacity.
By defining wealth through measurable energy output, this model prioritizes investment in high-efficiency energy technologies such as modular nuclear reactors, fusion systems, and advanced renewables, while simultaneously driving advancements in energy storage and transmission systems to reduce systemic losses.
This alignment of incentives fosters a feedback loop where innovation in energy systems pushes economic expansion, which in turn incentivizes and supports further energy and compute scaling.
The interplay between energy and compute is particularly synergistic in this framework.
Scaled energy production directly enables the growth of compute-intensive industries like AI, blockchain, and distributed systems, while the economic valuation of energy promotes the development of highly efficient data centers, decentralized microgrids, and efficient compute platforms.
By incentivizing localized energy production and peer-to-peer trading, this system facilitates resilient and scalable compute networks, both terrestrial and extraterrestrial.
The result will be a self-reinforcing cycle where advancements in energy systems and computational capacity drive one another, leading to rapid and exponential progress and economic growth.
An energy-backed currency would operate as a tangible, commodity-based standard, anchoring value to a universally needed and objectively measurable resource: energy.
This approach supports a market-driven valuation system where energy’s utility is directly tied to productivity and wealth creation. Decentralized energy production and consumption would encourage competition, ensuring that value rewards those who generate and use energy efficiently.
By replacing the arbitrary nature of fiat currency and mitigating inflationary pressures, an energy-backed currency would stabilize economic systems, incentivize building/creating/innovation, and maintain the principle of value alignment which is critical for maintaining purchasing power over long timescales.
Final Thoughts
Humanity stands at a critical juncture.
Our reliance on finite resources and outdated economic models is driving us toward the cliff of ecological and systemic collapse.
Yet, this moment of crisis also presents an unprecedented opportunity.
By redefining the foundation of value—shifting from scarcity-driven fiat systems to energy-backed economies—we could unlock a new era of abundance, innovation, and resilience.
The Discontinuity Dilemma isn’t just about energy—it’s about humanity’s future. At stake is the chance to play the infinite game: the relentless pursuit of knowledge, expansion, and evolution.
There are massive challenges and opportunities lie before us, and the decisions we make now will shape not only the future of humanity but also the very nature of the systems we rely on to survive and thrive.
Decentralized, incentive-based currencies and advanced (exotic) energy systems are the tools that could accelerate our climb up the Kardashev Scale.
Mars, with its untapped thermodynamic potential, could function as more than just a proving ground for energy systems—it could represent the next step in humanity’s evolution.
Expanding to Mars would catalyze the innovation needed to move us up the scale, shifting humanity from a planetary species to an interplanetary civilization.
The decisions we make today will determine whether we embrace this opportunity or remain trapped by the limitations of the present.
Do we cling to the safety of a dark room, content with rearranging the furniture, using only matches to light the way—or do we step outside into the unknown, chasing the light of infinite possibility?
This is the great leap, the crossroads of human ambition.
Some will venture forth, but many will remain behind, hesitant to leave the familiar.
Countless futures lie ahead, each with its own uncertainties.
But one truth is clear: humanity’s destiny is to scale the Kardashev ladder, advancing knowledge and innovation.
We should be accelerating towards that infinity.
Mars is just the beginning.
It’s time to move toward the light.
_______
If you like The Unconquered Mind, sign up for our email list and we’ll send you new posts when they come out.
If you liked this post, these are for you too:
The Physical Degeneration of Man