O'Neill cylinders are basically arcologies in space. They may have multiple cities or villages within, but they are single structures that each provide for all of their inhabitant's needs. The total control over gravity, day length, seasons, and atmosphere that free-space settlements enjoy suggests that space is the best place for an arcology.
I remember back in the 1990's when playing Sim City 2000 and the arcologies became available when your city had hit a certain population. There would be that futuristic/alien sound when the 4 arcologies to choose from and the "YAAAAY!" chant every time one was built. It felt like a real accomplishment when your city got them. Good memories.
Arcologies and megastructures are very fascinating to me. Just the idea that we might be able to build things like that given the proper time, resources, and technology is so awesome!
@@Ech0Chamber Same. It's still a shame we likely won't be around to see it happen, but like you said, we can take comfort in the fact that our descendants could.
@@owenparris7490 Sci-fi's given us many glimpses of that, and it'll continue to until it's no longer fiction. Though we won't take that possibility for granted. It'll be the norm for them, but we can still imagine it with passion.
Well not in this time not with these piss poor resources and not with this technology. The land size required would be massive. This would only work for people who love to live in the cities.
Another real-world example that hits a few points would be the Kowloon Walled City. It wasn't self sufficient but within the walls you had homes, schools, factories, and a ton of everything. Enough that many people could live in there and never leave.
The walled city was possibly the worst city in China at the time, maybe even the entire world. The crime and living conditions were horrendous. There's a reason why it was destroyed after sometime
Sim City taught me at a young age that the "Arcology" or self-contained-city-ship as I always thought of it, was the pinnacle of civilized architecture. I say "ship" because to me, the ideal arcology is so self sufficient and "detached" from the outside environment that it would be the logical starting point for learning how to build truly self sufficient outposts and vessels intended to exist and operate outside of the Earth's biosphere.
As someone that actually lives and works at Arcosanti it's great to see you including the history of arcologies and their origins. A lot of other videos I've seen really just skip over Paolo Soleri's contributions to it and focus solely on the sci-fi versions of arcologies. One thing that I find really common when people talk about arcologies is that they are self-contained and self-sufficient. While they certainly are meant to be self-contained, housing all the living spaces, shopping, commercial, workspaces and other facilities to maintain people's lives and lively-hoods, they aren't necessarily self-sufficient. Even back when Paolo Soleri started designing a lot of his arcologies they all had connections to the world and communities outside the acrology, not just for travel and recreation but for trade. In Paolo Soleri's book on the Lean Linear City he has the lofty idea of a series of arcologies that span the world all connected by travel corridors that allowed people and goods to move between the arcology hubs. Different arcologies on the Lean Linear City would have different focuses in resources gathering and manufacturing that they would then trade with other cities ensuring that all cities were actually dependent on other cities. As for Arcosanti itself, yeah it's been really slow progress over the decades however what has been built is a small fraction of what Paolo Soleri had envisioned for the arcology on the mesa. While the drawings and designs changed over the years the lofty goal of the project was to have a city of 5000 people on just 15 acres of land, a stark contrast to most modern towns that need roughly 1 acre per person once you take into account streets and parking lots that abound in the modern town/city. A decent example of one of the models that Soleri built for Arcosanti can be seen here: images.adsttc.com/media/images/55f8/1691/9644/1e13/ec00/00d5/large_jpg/image-29-2.jpg?1442322058 The dark grey parts of the model represent what currently exists while the rest of the structure around it was sections to be built of the proposed city.
Arcosanti means a great deal to me. I'm kind of amazed to find someone out in the internet who doesn't just know what an Arcology really is but who has actually been a part of the project. I'd be curious to know if you still live there. It's truly the most incredible vision for what the future could offer, and the idea of Arcology as a whole. It boggles my mind that Soleri's concepts haven't been massively invested in and used as a standard to create sustainable cities that could contain the multitudes of our burgeoning population.
Finally someone who agrees with me! So many people talked about Titan being small and boring, but I LOVED exploring the NPA. Just seeing the ruins of humanity’s Golden Age was so cool. And not to mention, I got legitimately freaked out the first time I saw the giant worm/fish thing during the story quest.
I hope that if we ever get titan back it expands more in to the Arcologies as the area itself with the idea of this interconnected system of labs and parks ect just needs to be explored more. Golden age humanity gets brushed over too much tbh
@@ravenRedwake tbh i think that was cooler. it made the arcology not feel so empty, and kept some mystery to it. maybe it's just me but i liked the vibe of being outside in the rain on an industrial platform and then having to delve into the small bit of the arcology we could get to. made it way cooler when you go super deep during forsaken and see the leviathan etc too
Excellent video topic dude. I hope the algorithm is kind to this one as I thoroughly enjoy your takes on these types of real-world applicable sci-fi icons.
I find it interesting that arcologies (at least conceptually) are often a setting for dystopian media. The blocks in Judge Dredd are arcologies housing 50,000 people which are so self sufficient they develop a form of nationalism and go to war with the next building over. Both Rapture and Columbia in Bioshock can be defined as a form of arcology, and both are dystopias in their own ways. One of the more interesting versions of these to me is the New Pacific Arcology in Destiny. It was built on Titan and is a floating self contained city that ultimately was destroyed in the Collapse and overrun by the Hive. It was a very interesting looking destination for sure, and one of the more interesting locations compared to the usual alien worlds you see there.
I think Diaspar from "The City and The Stars" by Arthur C Clarke is my favourite example of an Arcology. I think the biggest thing holding back Archologies is that I think it breeds creative and scientific stagnation. From the prelude of the book: "Diaspar was all that existed, all that they needed, all that they could imagine". Another issue think might arise is the influence the environment has on its inhabitants. If everything around you is utilitarian, would you not feel the same way? Perhaps over time you would feel as much a process of the Arcology as the plumbing around you. That being said I certainly wouldn't call Diaspar a distopia, just from the point of view we have today where we wonder about the universe and the extreme climates and places of Earth Diaspar seems painfully mundane.
In 40K the Thousand Sons original homeworld of Prospero had multiple arcologies that would fit the description. The only city of the planet Tizca had multiple hive city sized pyramids built to house entire sections of the Thousand Sons Legion allowing them to do everything separated from the mortals living in the surrounding city, these Arcologies even had agricultural elements to it as Ahzek Ahriman the Legion's Chief Librarian actually grew his own grapes into the one his cult resided as he considered a life once the Great Crusade would be at an end and Space Marines no longer needed.
KuroiOtori- Good call, mate. Don’t forget about the Arcologies beneath the surface of Calth, where the civilians and Ultramarines both took shelter from the attack of the Word Bearers- the Ultras counterattacked from there and fought them in the tunnels and refuges to eventually drive them off of the planet. I didn’t even think of Prospero for some reason, but you’re totally right 👍🏻 (I’m glad that I waited until I heard the whole video before posting my comment, because I originally mentioned the Underhives too, but then heard him mention them.)
40k is bonkers when it comes to scale though. Plenty of Ecumenoplosis and planets with hives that aren't necromunda. Half the planets in the Imperium have massive sprawling cities, with hives or other mega structure. Though if it was to make any sense with the combatants the field, they would all need to effectively be ghost towns, or those villages built on the ruins of ancient cities. A whole planet with the skyscraper density of Hong-Kong with the population density of Australia. Millions of those planets. Just sayin'.
I don't think anyone would build an arcology if there wasn't a need for it, and the only reason to pack together in such a small space when there's a great big world out there is for protection or conservation, both of which would imply the world is not ideal. Ergo, the presense of arcologies would imply at least some level of dystopia.
Not quite, some instances could be something more. Special projects and such, which end up occurring before reaching that point. And in a setting like Star Wars, you can to a point just keep on expanding to other worlds, leaving a core planet to just become a big city that is supported by outside imports and generates industrial exports or some such. Of course, in Star Wars, the two city worlds we knew much about eventually end up just building ever higher and leaving the ever lower layers to further and further depths of decay. Taris was in comparatively less of such a state when we learned of what went on in its depths (it still had pretty rotten depths overall though), and Correscant's lowest levels are basically no better than the worst areas of Warhammer 40k hive cities.
Or the actual environment of the planet is just to hostile to be available, think Luna or Mars. Their is a lot of world, but all of it is lacking in everything you need to just fiction on a biological level.
The idea is they would produce their own food internally. People would want to live there because the quality of life/provision of services are superior.
@@SpottedHares Which is why Martian or Lunar colonies would never happen. Why bother when you have an already habitable planet for which you are already biologically optimized.
I’ve always been enamored with Sky City 1000, another Japanese mega tall building that was actually planned in the early 90s. It would have housed around 40,000 residents, had 100,000 workers, and been 1,000m tall. The thing I always liked about the design was the series of ‘bowls’ where residences and commercial space would be on the edges while green space would be in the base of the bowl. Even better was the way it was designed to connect to future towers to create a ‘hyper city’.
Nice you mentioned Sim-City 2000 Arcos. Most people don't remember that game. I do a lot of fictional writing, and I have a city like the one in Warhammer, but the inspiration mostly came form Thief Deadly Shadows, with city build on top of city structured much like Honno City in Kill La Kill.
There's also the New Pacific Archology and it's many identical structures across the surface Titan in Destiny 2. It's hard to say if those archologies were 100% self sufficient, but they have massive forests in the centers of them and gardens all throughout their living spaces.
I think Isaac Arthur describes how to go about building and providing enough realism to the concept in his vid about the topic. Tbh I think Arcologies are necessary for the future of all life on earth as he puts in his vid, “overpopulation is a non issue when you have Arcologies”
So, the Tokyo Megacity Pyramid be considered an "arcology". Could classic, turn of the century malls be considered prototype arcologies? Also, I think it's worth pointing out that the biggest flaw with such a structure is the loss of flexibility. The advantage of urban/suburban/rural sprawl is the ability to adapt to the needs of the community, whether it grows, shrinks, or otherwise changes. That ability is lost in a more rigid megastructure.
Prototype maybe, but the issue is that an arcology is theoretically self-sufficient. A mall need constant intakes of goods and materials to their businesses for shoppers to have most/all of their needs met.
Sprawl often gets in the way of that change as much as it helps allow for it. Think of all the denser housing that never came to be thanks to R1 Zoning. 100 acres could be one arcology or it could be 50 houses around a golf course. Vertical building isn't necessarily better, but there is much more risk and more reward. We also need to remember that it is far easier to build one staircase than another block of roads, and utilities.
"Dead" malls could be repurposed into mini-arcologies, with their vast parking lots converted into growing space or more structure. Seems like a better idea than just bulldozing them to make more suburbs, or letting them rot.
@@kevincrady2831 I've been saying that also. If you take away everything from the pavement upward away you have solid bones for a decent arcology. The massive parking lots can stay. Just start building over them. The "zero" level being the bottom of a two story "parking garage" with a second story as a park. Around them and where the foot print of the mall used to be you can make a mixed use campus. It would feel like a really dense college campus with every generation involved.
I think the fundamental issue with arcologies is the adverse effect of population density on mental health. There's a clear correlation between the two, with increased population density leading to an increase in mental health issues, though (AFAIK) causation is still debated and probably really is a combination of factors. Villages probably work, regardless of technical density, because they fall under Dunbar's number. It's also possible that you'd have to count people's work areas into the density, so somewhere like a primarily-agricultural village would have a low functional population density because it's the village proper plus various fields and whatnot. The idea of an arcology is of technical interest to me, but the idea of living in one gives me the heebie-jeebies.
How a city is designed is gonna play a huge part in just how bad (or for some at least, good?) that population density might be, and might also complicate measurements of it too. A mixed use neighborhood in the Netherlands is going to be very different from an American neighborhood with the same population density for example
i lived in poverty in dense cty. i was in a house were 60 people shared 1 bathroom . no joke. long story short. arcology. HELL NO.! high densiy is bad for mental health.
I think similarly. The idea of a (even somewhat) self-sufficient structure is fascinating, but I prefer living in older suburbs and towns over compact high-density housing.
Maybe it's less with the population density growing itself, and more like living in a shithole concrete hell where everyone is either disturbing, an asshole or both, is going to question your life and ruin your psyche
I think most people here are also just fascinated with massive structures. Living on one as you said might not be the most ideal thing especially if there was no need to live on it. But that doesn’t stop us to think what if we build one?
I can't believe you never even once mentioned the most famous arcology to ever be conceived of: the Tower of Babylon. Also I think that there must be some accountability for humanity's need to move from place to place, and to be outside; we are not bug-men who live in pods. There are some things on a metaphysical level that we need that a superstructure can't provide.
Speaking of Arcologies, I wonder if the massive Culture ships from The Culture series counted as arcologies since they are essentially self-sustainable living environments for a population of hundreds of millions of people. By the way, It's good to you back, Eck! I hope you have a wonderful week!
The GSV's are 100% mobile arcologies. One of the novels said that the vast majority of The Culture's population lived on those ships. They are self-contained, have everything from residential to industrial districts, and house huge numbers of people that are not related to the ship's day-to-day operations.
The negative view of arcologies in Sci-Fi is largely due to the fact that our current experience is that population density = crime, urban decay, poverty, and so on. Even in eras when cities were thought of as the home of luxury, the more densely populated areas were typically the poorest. Just consider the fact that people commonly refer to poorer, more dangerous parts of cities “the inner city,” hinting at the truth that these areas are where people are really packed in. A hyper-dense arcology triggers that impulse of judgment, namely that a high concentration of people invariably opens the door to degrading standards of living.
@@Fuckingboredrn Even the super utopia Earth of Star Trek has people spread out with a more typically modern understanding of the space required for healthy living. The vision of arcologies suffers from an overly optimistic view of humanity and it’s ability to associate in large groups without trouble ensuing. The Trek example illustrates that even Roddenberry’s view of humanity’s ills being primarily caused by want (of necessities, goods, services, and luxuries) understood that one of those necessities was enough space to feel like your home is truly yours.
@@anilin6353 I suspect that the psychology of it is that extreme population density creates the illusion of fierce competition for resources or even shortage, even when none exists. This would lead to aggression as the rats would see others as competitors regardless of if there are sufficient resources for everyone. I’m not sure how this would carry over to human beings though. Rat studies don’t really tell us much about ourselves, being that we are not rats and have conscious faculties for reason and such. People can understand that there actually is no shortage and overcome the illusion of competition, whereas rats cannot reason that out. The wrench in the works here is that humans also have the conscious capacity to doubt the veracity of the report that there is no shortage, which may result in varying levels of aggression in a similar situation.
In Shadowrun, where archologies are common, they are a way to seclude corporate workers from the outside world, and also provide a company with a zone of space in which their extraterritoriality (a zone where the corporation has as much power as a foreign embassy) can provide them with the space to conduct themselves as they see fit. it is a reason why they appear in many distopias
I like that you shows footage of Hong Kong in relation to the idea of living in a close community, because I am born and raised there, and the one thing I can compliment about a packed city is the conveniences of having access to a lot of things very quickly, if I want some snacks, utilities, or take-aways, unless you live in an apartment building on a mountain, it is 5-15 minutes on foot. However, when it comes to commuting with our neighbors, my experiences is that unless you meet them on your way down an elevator or on your way back home from school/work, you don't have any business with them (you might even have to put a lot of effort into starting and continuing a conversation). It may be our reserved Chinese culture that were burnt in our mind since birth, but I don't think is that accurate anymore and would like to offer another explanation, poor city planning and stressful living standards. First of all, some districts will have really nice amenities...that's concentrated near where the middle-class and higher-class lives, so if you are living in the poorer part of the district, have fun walking through the noise and smokes with your friends before reaching to a park or something. Two, we do have tiny parks that are scattered in every districts in Hong Kong (there are 18 districts), but not a lot of people go there to rest, especially when most of it is right next to stores and roads, so expect either smokes or cockroaches when you are trying to rest. Also, some parks are properly maintained than the others (depends on if you living in an higher or lower class districts). Three, so where do people go to during the weekends? Commercialized districts which will subject you to even more noise, air pollutions, and materialistic distractions. Okay...Then how about just ask them out to a park? Sure, but with studies or works constantly looming over their head, unless they live in the same district as you do (but even then...), you might as well "book" for a weekend where you "all" can hang out at a park, but they might prefer commercial district because it is more "fun". So, do I hate this place and what I wrote here speaks for everyone in Hong Kong? Nope, it is just that our capitalistic culture makes everything less fun, and I came from a sociology background during college, so I tends to be critical toward these things. We have things setup here in Hong Kong, but they achieved less than optimal results that you sometimes wonder: "What's the point?"
When I hear the definition of arcology, I can’t help but think of the film Logan’s Run. Everything anyone could want under a series of massive sealed domes. The only problem is having to die at 30, supposedly to be “reincarnated” again.
Well, this is spooky. I was just laying out a reading list of arcology discussions and proposals as the first third of my next book will be taking place on a colony world where a new arcology is being constructed. This video is definitely getting added to the bookmark folder for future reference.
The New Pacific Arcology from Destiny 2 is a good modern interpretation of the idea in current pop culture. It was cool to fight through the tight urban spaces at the beginning of the campaign and then to end on the sprawling, country side’esq interior.
It sounds like absolute Hell. No way of seeing the Sun, no room to spread out, too many people to deal with. Humans weren't meant to be crammed into a box for their entire lifespan.
Actually, the best example of an Arcology in Warhammer 40k is the Eldar Craftworld. A self-contained, self-sufficient city ship capable of providing for almost every need for their population. Wraithbone tech also allowing for new construction of structures, weapons, armor, and even Starships for defense. The only resource it doesn't provide are the Soul Stones to protect the Eldar souls from she-who-thirsts; those have to be gathered from specific worlds.
I believe that when you start talking about self sustaining space structures you more or less start getting into the realm of Dyson spheres. I wouldn’t call them either, more of a similarity, like a habitat. Which brings to mind, I would mind if you started getting into Legend of the Galactic Heroes and some of the technology and lore there.
On the topic of the Halo installation, you should talk about orbital structures that could potentially orbit Earth and be an alternative living space for people. And talk about orbital structures like the Halo ring or the structure in the film ‘Elysium.’
I absolutely adore the concept of arcologies. My favorite planet in destiny 2 was Titan because of the New Pacific Arcology, the mission in the tank where Holliday picks you up was my favorite because we got to see this entire forest with a river, lake and waterfall in the distance, all while being inside a superstructure built on top of the methane oceans of Titan. I really wish they kept that planet.
The RU-vid algorithm will not be kind to your video, EL. This is one of my favourite videos that you've made, and I've been watching your videos for 4+ years. Please make more of these.
Everyone living in such a densely packed space would make it extremely easy for state surveillance. I think that 9 times out of 10, an arcology would end in dystopian despotism for that reason
I absolutely love when you discuss things like these. It reminds me when I was younger and my friends and I would argue about utopias and then try to poke holes in each other’s ideas. Good tirms
Something of interest might be the city of Calgary's Plus 15 system, basically it's a system of pedways linking the 2nd floors of most of the buildings downtown, so in a sense they become a single connected structure
I only knew Arcologies as those super tall buildings that passenger jets kept crashing into in Sim City 2000. I didn't know they were based off a real concept until years later. So to see you cover this obscure bit of architecture made my day.
I think space vessels would count as arcologies, and I would also say that modern is military naval vessels are what is truly closest to one. they are huge mega structures built on a person scale, powered by a self contained reactor, and have a very unified social structure. sure they have the issue of sustaining their own food but if you stripped the weapons and planes and other war based equipment from the USS Gerald Ford you would have more than enough space and potential carry capacity to establish thriving farms and ranches. I understand that sustaining the vessel at sea is very expensive and maybe too much wear and tear. however you could dock it inland (be a project on scale with the Panama canal) build a dam and turn the dock into a dry dock, and then burry it at a level where it is essentially floating on land. it would cost waaay less materials to maintain and infinitely less energy than it needs since it's not pushing the nearly HUNDRED THOUSAND TONS of itself people and equipment along over the thousands of miles it travels in a year. it would actually be feasible to decommission an aircraft carrier this way in some practically uninhabitable place like the swamps of Louisiana and turn it into a city.
I agree that a nuclear powered aircraft carrier is probably the closet thing we have right now, while it doesn't meet all the criteria, it does meet some (as you pointed out very well)
The few things holding large ships back is a lack of production. While they can be called floating cities, they lack a capacity stleast now to produce major componants and resources and so must be supported through a supply network. Some minor componants can be produced if the ship has a machine shop but that would mainly be for replacement small parts.
Pretty much anytime you want to make society more centrally planned it's the same. It raises the roof of how good things can go if everything goes well but also lowers the floor of how bad things go when they collapse. Overall collapse becomes more likely as you have more points of failure, the parts that are failing aren't immediately obvious so they can't be addressed quickly, and more and more often the choices that affect a population are being made by more and more distant leaders who don't understand the population.
Anyone interested in megastructures should check out the Science and Futurism channel. Well done Eck, are you building up to doing a video on Corsucant? I think the first time I heard of the idea was from shadowrun. When something that efficient and interdependent fails, it's gonna fall hard. They are designed for a world where nothing ever goes wrong, aka a fantasy.
Edifício Copan in São Paulo is pretty interesting when it comes to the idea of a mini-city in a single building. Originally it had some even more ambitious features, but as with a lot of things in Brazil, cool things tend to be neglected.
For the most part the international space station is sort of like an arcology--it mostly provides its own amenities-- lives with purpose of studying the environment.
Storm light archive Urithiru it consists of 10 semi-circular levels, with each level being 18 stories tall, for a total of 180 floors. At approximately fifteen feet per story, the tower stands just over 2700 feet tall.
I love the concept of archology, But when i think of it actually happening I can imagine the corruption and shortcuts that would be taken by the contractors that work on the project. This would cause it to fail or cause poor living conditions for the poorer people. It has recently been the anniversary of the grenfell tower fire in the UK where so many people died and there are so many other towers built the same way to save money.
There two basic problems with that idea: 1. Self-sufficiency is not defined in detail here, but it is surely not only about services or plumbing and electricity. Most important reason we have so many settlements is that resources (e.g. metals, wood, chemical ingredients) are scattered around the world and without global exchange some activities are simply impossible to perform. The good example is modern agriculture based on chemical fertilizers or just production of computers parts. 2. To build such a large structure is literally working against environment. Every large building exploits far more resources then it gives back and there are many reasons for it starting with technology. It is not clearly explained what technology should be used here, but just from looking at the images building such a complex would drain resources of the whole region or small country. So before it starts to get self-sufficient it would need to destroy a lot of environment around it.
I think this idea is evolving as our ideas of community, cities, and ecology change over time. In the 21st century I think a modern arcology might well be considerably different than what Arcosanti was supposed to be. Especially if we consider them parts of larger cities. As most people live in cities now, I think it is time to revisit the concept and what it means to have a mega structure act as an arcology. I imagine massive structures like the New Century Global Center should be considered arcologies, and if building community was the goal instead of realestate investment, certainly doable. Sustainable modern cities are made of apartments, offices and importantly diverse third spaces. If you can make them really vertical (The Center is 100 M tall) then you are making good use of the horizontal. The Chinese have a concept called a Li. One Li is about 500 meters or a reasonable walk for errands. It's the furthest distance they would plan wells inside city walls for instance. If a car-centric place like North America were to build one, it is still doable. You could put one over an area requiring redevelopment and build it in pieces. Just put the parking at grade and the rest of the building on top. The idea is that if you put Whittier's all side by side. If you shunt heating, cooling, gray water, sewage, stormwater, power through one "utility building" then you could have a far healthier urbanism. If the whole thing is shaped like the Pentagon or has a decent sized park in the middle, then you could have free range kids. Arcologies are a great way to spend a billion dollars that you would probably never see again.
Dredd’s megablocks being hellholes comes from the UK’s failed experiments in high rise housing. Rather than fostering community when they replaced slums, destroyed it. Now whether that’s an inherent flaw in the idea, or simply a flawed execution (the buildings quickly deteriorated, they were already in areas with quite high crime rates) is for wiser minds than mine to discuss.
I think an issue with an Archology is that in a lot of Sci Fi they tend to be owned by corporations, with populations that are often in a sort of indentured servitude. The concept is great but the financing and construction of one would require some kind of megacorp. With that said, the design goals are good and a lot of things we could achieve today. Localised renewable energy production, high density vertical, hydroponics farming, lab grown meat, extensive pedestrianisation and public transport, improved local parks as well as integration of nature elements into building developments. Greater use of sub surface for transport, storage, and industry.
It’s like a giant city in one building, so if a government can help build a city say the richest government on earth, the US, if they wanted to could. At least if we can’t fund it now if in future say the US economy grows and the country doesn’t fall apart then it should have to be a megacorp
Consider the Urban Monads (also called "urbmons" in the story) from Robert Silverberg's *The World Inside* . Although they purported to be "utopian," the stories of several individuals show them for the dystopian future they represent. Although they compact the entire city into large single buildings up to 1,000 stories tall, they concentrate humanity and leave space for land between them to be used as farms, they are not self-sufficient, and the lifestyle of the communities outside the urban monads is impacted by the lifestyle of the people within the urban monads.
I look at such a swimming arcology (the shown drawings) and think that it is pretty much a prototype for bigger spacestations and colonies on other planets, the ideal testfield so to speak to figure things out and improve on them before actually risking lives and resources.
As a real life example of a hive city, or at least the closest we've come, I'd mention Kowloon Walled City in Hong Kong, it was in a legal grey area between British and Chinese rule so no laws where enforced, people lived and set up businesses inside it. 50,000 people in 6.4 acres
They tried an archology, in my city, the Ihme-Zentrum, in the 60s. It's one of the biggest buildings in Europe, but that was exactly it's bane, when it came to maintaining it. Turns out, ownership structures and investing in developing or maintaining it is huge nightmare that swallowed the 3rd or so big real estate investor whole by now. It's pretty cool to walk through the ruins of the building in one part while knowing there are other parts of it that are still inhabited perfectly. At the former promenade floor, they just had to tear out nearly all the walls on that level and several of the promenade balconies and terraces have huge holes or end mid-air.
I think sci fi's tendancy to draw from reality and extract technology rather than sociology is why things like archeologies are so hard to do. It easy to imagine more tech and more metal and more people. Its harder to imagine a different way of thinking and interacting with people/the environment.
Another example of a theoretical arcology (in line with the X-Seed 4000) is the Sky City 1000, also from Tokyo. It was featured on a Discovery Channel show and one of the first examples I remember seeing outside of sci-fi that I thought was real. Went for years thinking it was going to be built, and only just learned recently that the project was from before 1990, and never went further than the planning stages.
The part about "why are they always dystopian" is interesting. One thought is the amount of central authority and resources required to build and manage an arcology. Simply constructing it and maintaining it would require a powerful government, which could be dystopian. Another is that part of the point is that these are self-sufficient, and nobody needs to leave the arcology. This means every part of people's lives can be controlled and monitored by said authority, which again could be dystopian. It would necessitate a planned economy to function, after all if people simply chose to stop working one job integral to the city (farmers, mechanics, etc) it would cause a crisis, and the arcology might no longer be self sufficient. Everyone within the arcology would need to serve a purpose for the arcology, since it's a closed system. Again, that level of control could be dystopian. Even if it did start out not being dystopian and with people having good intentions, it wouldn't be surprising if it slid into something authoritarian in order to maintain self-sufficiency.
So, you hit on a topic I've studied for a long time. Arcologies are not realistic on earth, except during a planetary crisis. To build just 1 could use up all of the resources in North America. A miniature version could work, but even then a population limit would be needed. The best place for it would be the oceans. This would allow for many things needed. Water and materials being the number 1 & 2 items to further an idea of an Arcology. Space is the optimal choice. O'Neill cylinders are a good choice as are Van Braun Wheel. What People miss in my opinion is that when you build in a 3D space, you have much more production space. Example: Berkut oil rig, Schlumberger rig. These are just examples. But realistically the only option I see that would work in the foreseeable future would be an asteroid, like in the Expanse. Material & Ice water all in one. This would be optimal in my opinion.
I have been watching your videos for 3 years now and I learned so much in Star wars and recently Halo lore, and also I enjoyed your battle breakdowns, making me get a Vetter hold on strategic ideas, and I just love this. Better said, I enjoy your vids and we will always support you eck.
I think the last few years proved that the outbreak potential of these sorts of communities are a major hurdle. Long distance space travel faces similar issues.
