Uechi-Ryu.com

Discussion Area
It is currently Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:07 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 12:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am
Posts: 2713
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3576594.stm

And it seems in the above article they're planning on using what amounts to Wi-Fi. Just like we do with "wireless" internet today.

So once we can teleport we'll just have to figure out how to do that beyond a known linear medium (so using light insteadof signals) and then we'll see how gravity pulls on the light as it bends around time - that'll let us bend it a little extra and "presto" - we'll control time because we were trying to control spatial movement.

Then what will we see? God do you think?

Our grandchildren are going to live very interesting lives.

_________________
Did you show compassion today?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 203
Dana Sheets wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3576594.stm

And it seems in the above article they're planning on using what amounts to Wi-Fi. Just like we do with "wireless" internet today.

So once we can teleport we'll just have to figure out how to do that beyond a known linear medium (so using light insteadof signals) and then we'll see how gravity pulls on the light as it bends around time - that'll let us bend it a little extra and "presto" - we'll control time because we were trying to control spatial movement.

Then what will we see? God do you think?

Our grandchildren are going to live very interesting lives.


Lots of fun speculation. :D

Here's a nice graphic to go with:

http://www.aip.org/png/html/teleport.htm


Acceleration disrupts qt:

http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/660-2.html

Physicists Entangle Photon And Atom In Atomic Cloud:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 174734.htm

Alice falls into a black hole: Acceleration and quantum entanglement:

http://www.physorg.com/news5794.html

_________________
John

I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that
I may learn how to do it. Pablo Picasso


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1205
Dana Sheets wrote:
Our grandchildren are going to live very interesting lives.


I'd go so far as to say "And they'll live forever."

In fact, I'd be willing to lay odds that you and I and the rest of the world have a good shot at it provided we live another 40 more years.
~Via Nanotech.

I offer this:
http://www.foresight.org

But regarding the teleportation issue, this actually isn't new.
Experiments with photon teleportation were conducted with mixed results back in the late 90's.
Teleporting a human being however, would require the computing power beyond what we currently have, even if every single processor on the planet were working together.
This is why quantum computing (The next step) will be spectacular beyond your wildest imagination.

I kid you not, the power of creation and immortality may be within reach of our own lifetimes.

_________________
There's a bit of Metablade in all of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 203
-Metablade- wrote:
Dana Sheets wrote:
Our grandchildren are going to live very interesting lives.


I'd go so far as to say "And they'll live forever."

In fact, I'd be willing to lay odds that you and I and the rest of the world have a good shot at it provided we live another 40 more years.
~Via Nanotech.

This is why quantum computing (The next step) will be spectacular beyond your wildest imagination.

I kid you not, the power of creation and immortality may be within reach of our own lifetimes.


Hold on there wild imaginer :lol: We are apparently a long way from that sort of "creationism." It's like other great breakthroughs, they come with great responsibility and unanticipated possible harm and negative consequences, while we dream only of the positive ones.

For example consider the following from science news: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050319/fob1.asp

Week of March 19, 2005; Vol. 167, No. 12 , p. 179

Nano Hazards: Exposure to minute particles harms lungs, circulatory system
Janet Raloff

Nanomaterials, the current darlings of industry, are showing up in products ranging from cosmetics to electronics. However, new animal studies indicate that inhaling these microscopic spheres and tubes could cause big trouble, especially for workers who manufacture and handle them.

Image

SMALL-SCALE HAVOC. Healthy mouse-lung tissue (left) contrasts starkly with nanotube-laden scar tissue (center, at right). Right image depicts carbon nanoparticles in a clump (at upper right) in a lung air space and moving through tissue to reach the blood cell below.
R. Hunter, Univ. Texas Med. Ctr. (left and center images); Shimada



That message came through loudly in New Orleans last week at the Society of Toxicology meeting, where several dozen reports unveiled details about how nanopollutants interact with the body. Most of the studies focused on the effects of lung exposures because the particles' size—just a few billionths of a meter in diameter—permits them to reach the most vulnerable lung tissue.

John T. James of NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, and his colleagues squirted nanoparticles into the respiratory tracts of mice and then examined the rodents after 1 week and after 3 months. Although sootlike carbon nanospheres caused no harm, an equal mass of commercially available carbon nanotubes wreaked significant lung damage, even killing a few animals.

In one especially graphic effect, immune system cells called macrophages trapped nanotubes but then died. The ensuing inflammation scarred lung tissue by creating patches, called granulomas, that entombed the nanotubes.

James describes the doses that his team used as "not terribly unrealistic." He estimates that at the current federal limit for inhaled carbon, workers could receive equivalent doses, scaled for body size, in 17 days.

Petia Simeonova and her coworkers at the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health in Morgantown, W. Va., also observed particle-rich lung granulomas in mice receiving similar doses of carbon nanotubes. The researchers also measured damage to mitochondrial DNA in the heart and its aortic artery. Mitochondrial damage foreshadows the onset of atherosclerosis.

Mice that had been exposed to nanotubes showed substantial DNA damage that persisted for at least 6 months. Simeonova also reported substantial oxidative damage—another atherosclerosis risk—in the animals' hearts, aortas, and lungs.

At the meeting, Akinori Shimada of Tottori (Japan) University presented the first series of images depicting nanoparticles moving from lungs into blood. Within a minute of contacting a mouse lung's tiniest airways, carbon nanoparticles began funneling through tiny gaps between surface cells and burrowing into capillaries.

There, the negatively charged nanoparticles glommed on to red blood cells, which ordinarily carry a positive charge. If this attachment reverses the blood cell's surface charge, Shimada speculates, it could foster clumping—even clots.

Researchers from the University of Rochester (N.Y.) reported an increased susceptibility to clotting in rabbits that had inhaled carbon nanospheres. The team damaged blood vessels by shining laser light onto the animals' ears and then measured how long it took for a clot to form.

To mimic bad urban air pollution, the researchers gave the rabbits air containing 70 micrograms of nanospheres per cubic meter for up to 3 hours. In this regimen, clotting took less than half as long as it had in a trial 2 days earlier with the same animals breathing clean air. The effect shows up quickly after exposure, reports Alison Elder, suggesting that nanoparticles travel from the lungs to the bloodstream rather than send clotting agents from the lungs.

Many researchers who acknowledge the potential dangers of nanoparticles point out that industry safely uses countless toxic and dangerous substances. "The important thing is dose," said Anthony Seaton, emeritus professor at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, at the meeting. There should be little problem if industry keeps worker exposures low, he says.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Letters:

You may be aware that nanoparticles from sources such as diesel engines have clearly been shown to be a major component of the exposures causing thousands of human deaths in the London smog of 1952. So, the news regarding synthetic nanoscale particles in this article is important but not terribly surprising.

Jerrold L. Abraham
SUNY Upstate Medical University
Syracuse, N.Y.

_________________
John

I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that
I may learn how to do it. Pablo Picasso


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:30 pm
Posts: 4
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Hello,

I'm new here, I thought that the conversation was to be on evolution and creation, while is see a new creation, I don't see it coming to fruition.

Now about another issue and back onto topic, how about the: 'Evolution of Religion'

I authored the thought that our religions need to evolve, and in that we are not removing religion from those that have this deep abiding faith, but we are including those that are certain that there is no GOD at all and everything just happened by random events. One of the neat things about what I propose is the change in thought of our origins and removing sin and satan and hell, removing the infidel.

I would suggest a revision to all texts and the removal of all houses of worship. This will free up the great mass of people to work together in a new way, we can work in small or large groups networking on the internet.

The next phase of our existence would be greatly improved and get us out of the terrorist wars and cycles of anger and aggression. If you don't like someone you just move away from them and keep your distance, you become accountable to you own thoughts and societies expectations. You can expose the wrongs of others.

Forgiveness requires the asking to be forgiven.

Help others, to tell the truth.

_________________
GOD Bless ALL; ALL Bless GOD,

Peace and Blessings,

Sincerely,

Gary


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:40 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
Posts: 5991
Location: Mount Dora, Florida
When people ask me about my religion, I alway say..

I'm a religious person, but don't believe in religion.

BTW, welcome to the Eastern Arts forum

_________________
GEM
"Do or do not. there is no try!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Natural cycles
PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 6:01 am
Posts: 1443
Location: Jeddore
Quote:
I kid you not, the power of creation and immortality may be within reach of our own lifetimes.


As long as we have the option to die. I see no purpose in allowing anyoneto live forever, as with New Years...ring in the new :wink:

Anyone remember this old Star Trek episode? The captain became a God...creator and imortality
Image

_________________
Léo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:37 pm
Posts: 237
Dana Sheets wrote:
At the most basic level it seems to me that all these arguments boil doing to the fact that we can't explain change. And change, at this point, is understood as something reacting to a stimulus in the environment. Whether you look at that at the micro or macro level.

Motion = change = inexplicable = life

If you can find what made the first motion - you'll find what, for now, our little blobs of brain are trying to grasp at as a definition of G-d.

That's why Douglas Adams' books were/are so wonderful. They turned the conventional answers on their heads and did it in a lighthearted way.

That the creater of our earth was a junior designer in a firm that created planets and universes for clients who needed complex machine to solve their problems. In our case the Earth was a computer built by design (kinda like a Dell) for the mice who wanted to find the question to the answer "42" which had been given by the previous machine as "the answer the life the universe and everything."

So time and gravity and light are wonderful to study - because without our reasoning mind we never would have "seen" those concepts. It would have been like asking fish to define water. So we've made a great leap.

Light and gravity are the most fun to play with right now because they are things we can manipulate readily. Time's still a bother for us because we haven't yet found a way to manipulate it. We are starting to conceive of how to manipulate it though - and that's good. And we're starting to figure out just how closely gravity and time are related. Which is what folks suspected all along (if you can manipulate yourself within the temporal plane then spatial movement will be easy as pie.)

A Wrinkle in time talks about folding the universe together in place and stepping across the divide as a means of achieving teleportation. It is basically the ability to move from a to b by staying in the same place.

So, personally, I think that's the nut to crack. Once we learn how to manipulate the temporal dimension I'm sure we'll be over the mountain again and like the bear will be able to see further.

Anyone know how are we doing on that front?


Dana,

I'm not sure what your educational background is, but as an engineer I found the following books by physicist Brian Green facinating:

"The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375708111/qid=1135003392/sr=8-2/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-5988700-2567850?n=507846&s=books&v=glance

"The Fabric of the Cosmos : Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375727205/qid=1135003392/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-5988700-2567850?n=507846&s=books&v=glance


He's a brilliant teacher and expert on modern physics. One of those few truley talented individuals who not only is an expert among experts in his field, but is able to teach the material to the masses with relative ease. Don't get me wrong, not everybody is going to be able to get through these books. I lost him 2/3rds of the way through his first book, but that first 2/3rds was absolutely mind-blowing!

The second book addresses the teleportation issue in terms of worm-holes. It also discusses, at length, this concept of quatum coupling (my terminology) where two particles are "twinned" and can communicate across vast distances of space instantaneously. It's a really bizzare phenomena since we are always taught that nothing can travel faster than light, yet when a pair of these particals are positioned light years apart and one is "influenced", its sister particle is instantaneously influenced, implying some faster than light communication.

He also talks alot about string theory and M-theory, two ideas most physicists now see as the holy grail of human understanding of our universe.

cheers,

chewy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1205
Oldfist wrote:
-Metablade- wrote:
Dana Sheets wrote:
Our grandchildren are going to live very interesting lives.


I'd go so far as to say "And they'll live forever."

In fact, I'd be willing to lay odds that you and I and the rest of the world have a good shot at it provided we live another 40 more years.
~Via Nanotech.

This is why quantum computing (The next step) will be spectacular beyond your wildest imagination.

I kid you not, the power of creation and immortality may be within reach of our own lifetimes.


Hold on there wild imaginer :lol: We are apparently a long way from that sort of "creationism." It's like other great breakthroughs, they come with great responsibility and unanticipated possible harm and negative consequences, while we dream only of the positive ones.



I first want to thank you for those links.
Good stuff. I enjoyed them very much.
:D

That said,
It's going to happen.
The Cat is out of the bag, so to speak.
Responsibility, ethics, and morality will be only be a small part. If one Gov't bans it, another will pick it up.
You see, information cannot remain secret any longer.
You may not like it, it may frighten you, but it will happen.
Yes, there will be challenges, hurdles, and obstacles like any other technology, but it will happen.
People said we would never fly.
We now do.
People said we would never travel into space.
We now do.
People said we would never harness the power of the atom.
We now do.
People said we would never clone a multicellular organism.
We now do.

Since the dawn of man, everything we have envisioned, no matter how impossible sounding, no matter how far fetched, we have done it. The only separation is how and when.

As for when?
Look at the rate of which technology is growing (especially in the field of bio-science.)
It's not slowing down, it's speeding up, exponentially.
100 years ago we barely had steam power.
Now we can land on other planets.
The rate of last 50 years of human advancement has been greater than the sum total of our roughly 2 1/2 million years
of existence.
I predict, in 20 years:
*Real, functional Robots (Like housemaids) will be a normal part of everyday life.
*Robots or robotic exoskeletons will fight wars, do construction, and other tasks we prefer not to do.
* There will be a controversy about whether or not Robots are "conscious" and therefore have rights, and also whether or not you can marry a robotic entity.
*Furthermore, it will be possible to create a child with such entity.(In a lab, using artificiality created genetic structures)
*Scientists will manipulate the Human genome so much that eventually the percentage needed to naturally mate with other humans will not be possible, and we will have created a new life form. (Which will eventually replace regular humans)
*People's lifespan will increase 10 years for each 5 of the next years through technology, and within 50 years, immortality will be a reality.
*Quantum computing will be created, and the majority of common physics will be solved.

*We are headed for an event Horizon of phenomenal proportion. It will be a most excellent time to be alive.

These are but a few of the things that will come to pass.
Don't believe me? Try investigating any of these issues.
You'll find that there are many, many, companies and organizations have already been pursuing these issues and you may be shocked to find how much progress has been made.

_________________
There's a bit of Metablade in all of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Natural cycles
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1205
CANDANeh wrote:
Quote:
I kid you not, the power of creation and immortality may be within reach of our own lifetimes.


As long as we have the option to die. I see no purpose in allowing anyoneto live forever, as with New Years...ring in the new :wink:

Anyone remember this old Star Trek episode? The captain became a God...creator and immortality
Image



But you see, space is a really really really really really really really really really really big place..
There's plenty of room for unimaginable amounts for immortal humans.
Knowing that this life is all you get, (unless someone proves different) I wouldn't mind living forever. Besides, if I get bored, I could always do seppuku.
Think of the vast knowledge you could gain by exploring the Universe for say, a million years or so.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Besides, I see no issue with being omnipotent.
No issue at all.
(And if one believes that we were made in our creator's image, then It's our destiny)

_________________
There's a bit of Metablade in all of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 203
-Metablade- wrote:
Oldfist wrote:
-Metablade- wrote:
Dana Sheets wrote:
Our grandchildren are going to live very interesting lives.


I'd go so far as to say "And they'll live forever."

In fact, I'd be willing to lay odds that you and I and the rest of the world have a good shot at it provided we live another 40 more years.
~Via Nanotech.

This is why quantum computing (The next step) will be spectacular beyond your wildest imagination.

I kid you not, the power of creation and immortality may be within reach of our own lifetimes.


Hold on there wild imaginer :lol: We are apparently a long way from that sort of "creationism." It's like other great breakthroughs, they come with great responsibility and unanticipated possible harm and negative consequences, while we dream only of the positive ones.



I first want to thank you for those links.
Good stuff. I enjoyed them very much.
:D


Glad you liked them! I've been enjoying yours too - Thanks! :D


Quote:
That said,
It's going to happen.
The Cat is out of the bag, so to speak.
Responsibility, ethics, and morality will be only be a small part. If one Gov't bans it, another will pick it up.
You see, information cannot remain secret any longer.
You may not like it, it may frighten you, but it will happen.
Yes, there will be challenges, hurdles, and obstacles like any other technology, but it will happen.


What exactly is the it that is going to happen? That's the real question. Are we mucking around with things we are trying to understand that are very interesting - yes. Will we over-hype them before we really have a clue or can deliver, in order to fund them and/or leverage new companies to make a quick profit - yes. (Companies the have used the 'nano' prefix have seen their stock go up merely by using the prefix - that's good hype and good business :roll:)

We are good at imagining and that's cool, but we may not be bright enough to either understand what is really going on or to implement it in useful and nonharmful ways. For example, with all our great ability and knowledge we can't even make a decent Cox -2 inhibitor (Vioxx). It is clear that we really don't know Jack about making drugs and their side effects. We stumble along doing some definite and significant good, but mainly making a fortune for drug companies.

The real frontier and barrier that needs to be overcome is that we have a really, really, really, .... (omega times) poor understanding of what exactly a human being (organism) is and how it functions on the molecular level. Yes, we have mapped the human genome and that's wonderful. We know about how many and where the proteins are, but we still have very little understanding of the function and interaction of each of the individual proteins. So, in order to successfully apply any new technology to the human body, we must e.g. first make significant progress in proteomics, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Isn't unbridled belief in the human race's purported ability to figure everything out about the universe just another flavor of (pseudo-scientific) anthropocentrism? Doesn't it fly in the face of real scientific inquiry? It's fun to speculate, but it is what it is, namely unscientific speculation.

I think the right (objective scientific) attitude is the one expressed by Richard Feynman (Nobel prize winning physicist). He often said that he didn't prejudge what science is or what it should be, but rather "he just wanted to find out about the world," and that if it came out all nice and neatly arranged, that was fine, or if it turned out to be an onion with an unbounded number of layers that we always must keep peeling off forever than that was fine too. He "just wanted to find out about the world," how ever he could and in what way it might reveal itself to us (humans).

_________________
John

I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that
I may learn how to do it. Pablo Picasso


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 1221
"Live forever"

Nice idea, but as several works of speculative fiction has pointed out--that concept is going to cause alot of trouble for future generations.

We should be able to extend useful, healthy, lives for people well into their 90's in the next decade of so.

Maybe a LOT more.

When people say that "the 50's are the new 30's" they are largely correct.

To horribly butcher a quote--author unkwn.

"People that have no idea what to do with themselves on a rainy afternoon always want to live forever."

I sudder to think of a world where Paris Hilton gets to live another 100 years because she is rich and the folks that teach children don't because they have chosen a life that helps others.

We already see coflicts over resources such as land, energy etc, coming conflicts for food and fresh water, imagaine when the resources is life itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 203
cxt wrote:
"Live forever"

To horribly butcher a quote--author unkwn.

"People that have no idea what to do with themselves on a rainy afternoon always want to live forever."


cxt, pretty darn close :D I googled and found this:

Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ~Susan Ertz, Anger in the Sky

_________________
John

I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that
I may learn how to do it. Pablo Picasso


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1205
Oldfist wrote:
What exactly is the it that is going to happen? That's the real question. Are we mucking around with things we are trying to understand that are very interesting - yes. Will we over-hype them before we really have a clue or can deliver, in order to fund them and/or leverage new companies to make a quick profit - yes. (Companies the have used the 'nano' prefix have seen their stock go up merely by using the prefix - that's good hype and good business :roll:)


Meta:
I knew that's get your blood pumping. :lol:
What is going to happen? Major Paradigm shift, of course!
Not the "Edgar Cayce" Woo-Woo New Age nation Paradigm, but one with Societal Altering results none the less.
As in, what would happen if you suddenly were faced with the power of creation? Or, we could find out what the secret of life is, or isn't. That sort of thing.
Look at how we view the world and ourselves at this time in history vs 20, 50, 100 years ago.
So the answer is Yes, No, and maybe. To all of those questions.

Oldfist wrote:
We are good at imagining and that's cool, but we may not be bright enough to either understand what is really going on or to implement it in useful and nonharmful ways. For example, with all our great ability and knowledge we can't even make a decent Cox -2 inhibitor (Vioxx). It is clear that we really don't know Jack about making drugs and their side effects. We stumble along doing some definite and significant good, but mainly making a fortune for drug companies.


Meta: See, I don't buy that "are we bright enough to handle the technology?" argument because clearly we are, otherwise we could not have discovered these things.
Now, society at large, is another thing. Realistically, if you can show that technology will enhance people's lives, consumerism will generally make the decision on which way it will progress. However, behind that is education. Proper education, not mythos and F.U.D (Fear, uncertainty and doubt) I see the major opponents of technology in the coming years to be right wing religious groups who's motives are based on ignorance, fear, and feelings of self righteousness stemming from an irrational mythos which has no basis in scientific reality.
For example, I want our nation to pursue cloning technology, not because we are "violating the laws of nature" (Besides, my philosophy is since all that there is nature, then nothing exists which is Un-natural) but mainly I am interested in the process of cloning which can produce spare body parts for the ill.

Oldfist wrote:
The real frontier and barrier that needs to be overcome is that we have a really, really, really, .... (omega times) poor understanding of what exactly a human being (organism) is and how it functions on the molecular level. Yes, we have mapped the human genome and that's wonderful. We know about how many and where the proteins are, but we still have very little understanding of the function and interaction of each of the individual proteins. So, in order to successfully apply any new technology to the human body, we must e.g. first make significant progress in proteomics, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.


Meta: It's only a matter of (exponential) time before these issues become clear. That's all.

Oldfist wrote:
Isn't unbridled belief in the human race's purported ability to figure everything out about the universe just another flavor of (pseudo-scientific) anthropocentrism? Doesn't it fly in the face of real scientific inquiry? It's fun to speculate, but it is what it is, namely unscientific speculation.


Meta: To quote Shakespeare:
"What a piece of work is man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculties! in form and moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god!"


It's interesting that in the Western world, we are "programmed" so to speak, to always think we are, by creation, somewhat inferior. Inferior to what, I say? To "God?" Some "Higher Power?" On what basis would we say something is "Higher" to what regard? In value? In rights? In wisdom?
I would argue that that thought process of thinking that the human species does not have limitless potential at least in the body being strapped or hindered by mere existence, to achieve whatever it is we put our minds to, is grossly underestimating the special circumstances that the human condition creates by merely being one.

What some might call anthropocentrism I call current realism.
I cannot experience life as anything BUT human, therefore I have nothing else to relate it to. Until we find another civilization among the stars , or prove that deities do exist, there is nothing else we can do BUT be anthropocentric.
What else would you have us do?
I say, to hell with the "future generations" I live in the NOW.
I say, to hell with "morality" "ethics" and other self constructed and misguided memes of "Human meaning."
The fact that we as humans need a "reason for being" and thus create entities that provide false hope is more of a definition of anthropocentrism than any I can think of.

You, and I, humans, are bags of meat.
It's not romantic, it's not pretty,
In fact, it can be fairly dark,
and depressing, but that's it.
You don't get any more life after you die.
You are worm food. No reincarnation, No second chance, that's it. Game over. Forever.
Not ONE single human being, in the billions of human beings
who have died has ever come back from the dead and said,
"Hey, there's something else out there."
Not one. That in itself should be a fairly big impetus.

Technology, and the struggle to prolong death and one day eliminate it, should be the prime concern among the human race right now. We need to take care of US. We humans.
Let the Dolphins get their own toys.


Oldfist wrote:
I think the right (objective scientific) attitude is the one expressed by Richard Feynman (Nobel prize winning physicist). He often said that he didn't prejudge what science is or what it should be, but rather "he just wanted to find out about the world," and that if it came out all nice and neatly arranged, that was fine, or if it turned out to be an onion with an unbounded number of layers that we always must keep peeling off forever than that was fine too. He "just wanted to find out about the world," how ever he could and in what way it might reveal itself to us (humans).


Meta: Right.
I'm not saying that we will find out everything there is to know in the next 50 years. I'm simply saying that there is an
"Event" which we are rushing towards within the concept of technology, one wherein Medicine, Traditional Technology, and Quantum physics will unify.
I hate to say I'm right, but while I am indeed "guessing", I am making reasonable assertions based upon current trends, research, and technology levels.

I would also add, that I have been making such predictions about technological advancement for the last 25 years.
I have not been wrong yet.

Each time, everyone has the same arguments, and things like,

"No, Meta: U.S. companies would never send their tech and customer service depts. overseas. The public wouldn't stand for it!"

"No, Meta: You're mad. Computers will never reach the 4 GHz limit." They'll simply MELT!

"No, Meta, You're a Loon. This "Information Super Highway" You keep babbling about will never take off because computers will always be to difficult, and too expensive, for the average Joe to use."

"No, Meta, You're bonkers. No one will "Pay for T.V." and certainly no one will ever want more than 13 channels, and if they did, they certainly wouldn't pay for commercials."

"No Meta, You've Flipped. Humans aren't smart enough to clone an animal."

"No Meta, You are insane: "Paying a website to download music and movies will never work."

And on, and on, and on..
But as I said, I beg you not to take my word for it at all.
Read up on it.
"The future's so bright, we gotta wear shades.."
8)

_________________
There's a bit of Metablade in all of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1205
cxt wrote:
"Live forever"

Nice idea, but as several works of speculative fiction has pointed out--that concept is going to cause alot of trouble for future generations.


You're assuming that I give a Rat's A$$ about "future generations"
For crying out loud, they're not even born yet, and people are worrying about the nebulous!
:lol:
I'd like to make my life a bit more about other things rather than spawning "Future Generations".
I live in the now.
The past is gone, and the future has not yet taken place.
There is only the now.
Ask a dying person sometime if they would like to live.

(Not literally)
I've spoken with the dead by the way,
And do you know what they have to say?
They say, "Pssst. Meta. Of being dead or alive;
It's better to be alive."

_________________
There's a bit of Metablade in all of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group