Reason: The Feasibility Filter
Common Sense Reasoning Using an Argument from Contradiction and Implausibility
Introduction
How do we know when a claim is reasonable or absurd? One of the simplest but most effective reasoning tools is The Feasibility Filter—a method for evaluating claims based on real-world constraints.
This method categorizes problematic claims in two ways:
1. Contradiction by Known Physical Reality – If a claim contradicts well-understood principles of causality, force, material properties, and logistics, it must be rejected.
2. Implausibility by Estimation – If a claim does not directly violate physical laws, we quantify the effort required and compare it to real-world examples. If even the most generous assumptions make the claim highly improbable, it fails the Feasibility Filter.
Unlike abstract theoretical arguments, this method relies on explicit assumptions, upper and lower bounds, and comparisons to known real-world efforts. Below, we examine cases where mainstream explanations fail basic feasibility tests.
Category 1: Contradictions with Known Physical Reality
Some claims are not just improbable—they are physically impossible given what we know about materials, force, and causality.
1. The Baalbek Trilithon – Moving 1,000-Ton Stones Without Modern Equipment
Claim: Three 800- to 1,200-ton limestone blocks were moved and lifted into place using ropes, wooden rollers, and human labor.
Defining Assumptions
Assume a smooth, level surface for best-case rolling conditions.
Assume perfect rope harnessing with no friction loss.
Assume workers could exert force at full efficiency for sustained periods.
Feasibility Calculation
Friction Force on Rollers: Even with ideal lubrication, force required to move a 1,000-ton block on wooden rollers exceeds tens of thousands of Newtons.
Human Pulling Force: A fit person can generate 300-400 N of force pulling a rope.
How many people would be needed?
Even with 20,000 people pulling, they would not overcome static friction before movement starts.
Comparison to Modern Machinery: The largest mobile cranes today struggle with 500-ton loads, meaning primitive technology could not have managed twice that weight.
Verdict
Fails the Feasibility Filter because no known mechanical system available at the time could handle the forces involved.
2. The Colossi of Memnon – Transporting 720-Ton Statues on Wooden Barges
Claim: The Colossi of Memnon were transported 650 km on wooden boats down the Nile.
Defining Assumptions
Assume calm waters with no unexpected currents (best-case scenario).
Assume wooden hulls could support a perfect load distribution.
Assume ideal log rollers for loading onto the barge.
Feasibility Calculation
Buoyancy Requirement: A wooden barge must displace 720,000 liters of water to stay afloat.
Structural Integrity: The weight would require a wooden hull thickness far beyond ancient shipbuilding capabilities.
Loading Problem: Rolling a 720-ton statue onto a boat without it snapping in half is unrealistic.
Modern Comparison
No documented ancient wooden boat has transported a fraction of this weight.
Modern metal barges transporting such loads require steel reinforcement.
Verdict
Fails the Feasibility Filter due to structural constraints of wooden boats and load-bearing issues.
Category 2: Implausibility by Estimation
These claims are not physically impossible but become absurd when estimated in terms of time, effort, and available tools.
3. Derinkuyu Underground City – Excavating Millions of Cubic Meters by Hand
Claim: This multi-level underground city, 60m deep, was dug with primitive hand tools.
Defining Assumptions
Assume 1 worker removes 0.01 cubic meters of rock per day (generous estimate).
Assume 1,000 workers worked continuously for centuries.
Assume rock removal was perfectly efficient (no wasted effort).
Feasibility Calculation
Volume of removed rock = millions of cubic meters.
Debris Removal Problem: Even if 1,000 workers dug daily for 500 years, millions of tons of excavated rock must be accounted for—yet no dumping sites are known.
Modern Comparison
Similar underground excavation today requires heavy drilling machinery and still takes decades.
Verdict
Not physically impossible, but implausible without unknown excavation techniques.
4. Large-Scale Ancient Gold Extraction – Processing 1 Ton of Gold with Primitive Tools
Claim: Ancient civilizations mined and processed tons of gold using only hand tools.
Defining Assumptions
Assume 5 grams of gold per ton of rock (generous estimate).
Assume 100 workers process 1 ton per day each (ideal efficiency).
Assume no ore is wasted or lost in processing.
Feasibility Calculation
To extract 1 ton of gold requires processing 200,000 tons of rock.
At 100 workers processing 1 ton/day each, this would take over 5,000 years for just 1 ton of gold.
Modern Comparison
Industrial mining uses chemical leaching, blasting, and mechanical crushing to extract gold at high efficiency.
Even with modern machines, processing tons of gold ore is a massive endeavor.
Verdict
Highly implausible at claimed scales unless unknown processing methods existed.
Summary
The Feasibility Filter divides questionable claims into two categories:
1. Direct Contradictions with Common Understanding of Physical Reality
Baalbek Trilithon → Forces required are beyond known mechanical capabilities.
Colossi of Memnon transport → Buoyancy and structural integrity fail under basic analysis.
2. Implausibility by Estimation
Derinkuyu excavation → The scale of excavation and debris removal is implausible.
Ancient large-scale gold extraction → The effort required far exceeds realistic limits.
By stating clear assumptions, defining upper and lower bounds, and comparing claims to real-world efforts, the Feasibility Filter exposes flaws in mainstream explanations. Despite its power, this reasoning method is routinely ignored in academia.
In a world filled with dubious claims, this reasoning tool must be used far more often.
Yeah, it is called back of the envelope calculation .. sadly lost art nowdays, everybody believes what they are told instead of doing simple calculation.