…
Imagine sometime in the far future we pick up some type of
signal from an alien civilization. Since we mastered harnessing an
infinite amount of energy using our perpetual motion engines, it’s
pretty easy for us to hop in our spaceships and break the speed of
light.
Once there we scan for life and find none. Puzzled, we
instead find that the entire planet is in a constant state of creation
and destruction due to out of control chemical chain reactions. In
addition, the harmful radiation from the nearby star, and the corrosive
gases in the atmosphere would make life as we know it impossible. And
yet, we are still receiving crude repetitive transmissions from this
planet.
The captain orders a team sent to the surface to
ascertain the planet from the ground. Our anti-matter suits should be
effective at reflecting any sort of hostile matter or radiation that
would kill us outright. We beam down to the planet, and what we find is
horrendous:
Everything on the planet is hostile. From the
tiniest groups of molecules to the largest object, anything that moves
on the planet will chemically assimilate anything else. Though we are
repulsed, we are vaguely curious. From razor sharp blades, to pointed
objects, to poisons, to lethal traps and exothermic reactions,
everything has a way to consume energy.
Fearing for our lives,
we beam back to our ship, carefully decontaminate the team, then place a
warning force field around the entire solar system. We build a science
station with a nova bomb on a nearby planet in case the contagion
spreads, and then hastily head back home.
What would have
happened had this planet been exposed to infinite energy? It’s only
logical that the chain reaction would have spread infinitely, consuming
the entire universe. Photosynthesis and cellular respiration must be
quarantined for the safety of the universe.
That’s why this is called, oh wait, I wrote the wrong title. This should be: “Why Aliens Never Want to Contact Humans.”
…
Showing posts with label technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label technology. Show all posts
Saturday, June 8
Thursday, January 20
A Different Sort of Penis
The wife went to a "Future of Social Gaming" seminar, to which I replied, "Tell the geniuses at the social gaming thing to make people suck less."
I was half serious, and as she always does, she ignores me when I'm being...being, well like me. Then last night, I'm playing League of Legends, which is a free-to-play competitive PvP game, and the dicks arrived. They started using the N-word, and dropping F-bombs, which is shorthand for, I'm a dick, and I'm going to let you know I'm a dick, and there is nothing you can do about my dickishness.
Then they started "feeding" which is a type of griefing in which a player lets the opposing team kill them over and over again, which in turn makes the opposing team more powerful because kills give experience and gold. So not only are the dicks being dicks with words, their actions are dicky as well.
So the half-serious quip becomes truth.
Now, to be fair to LoL, they have a reporting system (which is ineffective due to the number of complaints vs. the number of employees at their company), and they are implementing a democracy of sorts called the Tribunal System, where we the players may judge other players. Hopefully all of that works out. Perhaps heads will roll, and Viva La LoL! will save us from the dicks, but honestly, that is just sweeping the dicks to another place, somewhere else where they can continue to be dicks to other people (hopefully each other).
My observation about most attempts to corral the dicks away from "normal people" is that they tend to treat the symptoms. Yes, suspensions and bans work, about as well as prison does, which means it's too little too late. As proposed by Penny Arcade in this comic, what gives the dicks their power is the anonymous nature of social gaming. I mean, think about it, how can something be social if the people in question have no idea who they are being social with? Wouldn't that be called "anonymous gaming" or perhaps "gaming with strangers?"
Though the quick fix of attaching your real life information to your game avatar has serious issues, as evidenced by the World of Warcraft Real ID fiasco. So on one hand, we have anonymous dicks, and on the other, we have dicks IRL.
So I'll rehash here what I told my wife (seriously this time), because the entire future of social gaming depends on it--
Hey Geniuses: Fix the Dick Problem.
I was half serious, and as she always does, she ignores me when I'm being...being, well like me. Then last night, I'm playing League of Legends, which is a free-to-play competitive PvP game, and the dicks arrived. They started using the N-word, and dropping F-bombs, which is shorthand for, I'm a dick, and I'm going to let you know I'm a dick, and there is nothing you can do about my dickishness.
Then they started "feeding" which is a type of griefing in which a player lets the opposing team kill them over and over again, which in turn makes the opposing team more powerful because kills give experience and gold. So not only are the dicks being dicks with words, their actions are dicky as well.
So the half-serious quip becomes truth.
Now, to be fair to LoL, they have a reporting system (which is ineffective due to the number of complaints vs. the number of employees at their company), and they are implementing a democracy of sorts called the Tribunal System, where we the players may judge other players. Hopefully all of that works out. Perhaps heads will roll, and Viva La LoL! will save us from the dicks, but honestly, that is just sweeping the dicks to another place, somewhere else where they can continue to be dicks to other people (hopefully each other).
My observation about most attempts to corral the dicks away from "normal people" is that they tend to treat the symptoms. Yes, suspensions and bans work, about as well as prison does, which means it's too little too late. As proposed by Penny Arcade in this comic, what gives the dicks their power is the anonymous nature of social gaming. I mean, think about it, how can something be social if the people in question have no idea who they are being social with? Wouldn't that be called "anonymous gaming" or perhaps "gaming with strangers?"
Though the quick fix of attaching your real life information to your game avatar has serious issues, as evidenced by the World of Warcraft Real ID fiasco. So on one hand, we have anonymous dicks, and on the other, we have dicks IRL.
So I'll rehash here what I told my wife (seriously this time), because the entire future of social gaming depends on it--
Hey Geniuses: Fix the Dick Problem.
Tuesday, December 7
Where is All the Dark Matter/Energy?
I've been thinking about Dark Matter and Dark Energy, which is to say that I've been speculating possible reasons for why we have no idea where most of the matter and energy in our universe is. Just take a look at this graph:
This pretty much means that 96% of the mass/energy in the universe is not visible to us. Which is sort of confusing. I mean, we can see stars, we can see gas, we can see the rocks and matter all around us, but for some inexplicable reason we are unable to visibly see 80% of all matter, or even observe, let alone harness most of the energy in our universe.
Let me combine this idea with my previous post about a super advanced alien civilization:
For sake of an analogy, pretend we are fish. We are swimming up a river, and bam, out of the blue, we hit this barrier where we can't go upstream anymore. Our fishy senses are confused, because hundreds of thousands of years of evolution have programmed us to want to swim up this stream, but for some reason we are blocked. Something hard and impassible obstructs our way, and we are unable to continue, unable to advance up this river, all because of a dam.
Now imagine a super advanced civilization of aliens. Perhaps these aliens evolved in another universe, somewhere trillions or quadrillions of years in the past from our own universe. Maybe they developed a way to travel through space and time, and even between universes, and they have been skipping between universes, colonizing as they go. Perhaps these technologies require unthinkable amounts of energy, possibly the energy from many stars, from many galaxies, from many universes, all acquired by this supremely powerful species.
(Just like how we have dominated the resources on our own planet, and would absolutely ransack the resources of nearby planets, if we could only figure out a cheap way to get there.)
So imagine this alien species is here already. Perhaps they have already harnessed 95% of the matter/energy in our universe, possibly with a super advanced version of a Dyson Sphere, that blocks all outgoing radiation with a super thin mesh of nano-robot solar panels. They could place these megastructures on any star, at any point in time, at the exact moment of a star's birth, to maximize the efficiency of their consumption.
What if we can't see most of the matter and energy in the universe, for the simple explanation that they are already being harvested by someone else? What if there is a fifth level to the Kardashev scale, where an alien civilization has not only consumed all of the energy of their universe, but has moved on to dominate millions or billions of other universes, including our own?
If this is true, then I would alter the Zoo Hypothesis to something much more humbling, something more fitting of our proper place in the universe:
I'd call it the Fishbowl Hypothesis.
This pretty much means that 96% of the mass/energy in the universe is not visible to us. Which is sort of confusing. I mean, we can see stars, we can see gas, we can see the rocks and matter all around us, but for some inexplicable reason we are unable to visibly see 80% of all matter, or even observe, let alone harness most of the energy in our universe.
Let me combine this idea with my previous post about a super advanced alien civilization:
For sake of an analogy, pretend we are fish. We are swimming up a river, and bam, out of the blue, we hit this barrier where we can't go upstream anymore. Our fishy senses are confused, because hundreds of thousands of years of evolution have programmed us to want to swim up this stream, but for some reason we are blocked. Something hard and impassible obstructs our way, and we are unable to continue, unable to advance up this river, all because of a dam.
Now imagine a super advanced civilization of aliens. Perhaps these aliens evolved in another universe, somewhere trillions or quadrillions of years in the past from our own universe. Maybe they developed a way to travel through space and time, and even between universes, and they have been skipping between universes, colonizing as they go. Perhaps these technologies require unthinkable amounts of energy, possibly the energy from many stars, from many galaxies, from many universes, all acquired by this supremely powerful species.
(Just like how we have dominated the resources on our own planet, and would absolutely ransack the resources of nearby planets, if we could only figure out a cheap way to get there.)
So imagine this alien species is here already. Perhaps they have already harnessed 95% of the matter/energy in our universe, possibly with a super advanced version of a Dyson Sphere, that blocks all outgoing radiation with a super thin mesh of nano-robot solar panels. They could place these megastructures on any star, at any point in time, at the exact moment of a star's birth, to maximize the efficiency of their consumption.
What if we can't see most of the matter and energy in the universe, for the simple explanation that they are already being harvested by someone else? What if there is a fifth level to the Kardashev scale, where an alien civilization has not only consumed all of the energy of their universe, but has moved on to dominate millions or billions of other universes, including our own?
If this is true, then I would alter the Zoo Hypothesis to something much more humbling, something more fitting of our proper place in the universe:
I'd call it the Fishbowl Hypothesis.
Friday, October 29
Granting Immortality to Children
I had a conversation the other day where we started with science, then moved into genetics, then lifespan. Or rather the future of all of those things.
I wonder about the humans that are currently tinkering around with our DNA, like how someone would putter around in their garage on their old Chevy, and whether they will someday succeed at granting Humanity the long sought after gift of Immortality.
Just as a brain exercise, let's imagine what such a breakthrough would look like:
I wonder about the humans that are currently tinkering around with our DNA, like how someone would putter around in their garage on their old Chevy, and whether they will someday succeed at granting Humanity the long sought after gift of Immortality.
Just as a brain exercise, let's imagine what such a breakthrough would look like:
- I'd imagine that it would have something to do with our genetic code at a base level. I highly doubt that you could hand someone a drug and freeze their body in time. Perhaps a type of chemical solution could keep someone alive longer, but over time, I'd think the natural programming of our genes would take over and shut everything down. This means that most likely, it would have to be something you would alter before conception. A baby would be born immortal, birthed by scientists and rich patrons.
- Definitely--It would also be expensive. New technologies almost always are. Maybe over time the price would drop, but think of the supply vs. demand equation, and we are talking .0001% of people on Earth who could afford it. A middle class salary isn't going to cut it. Just think how things work in catastrophes, and you have your answer about who would live for a time, and who would live forever.
- It would redefine everything. There would be those with everything that would risk other people for their own gain. Indefinitely. Those people would become a separate species, only bound by their everlasting nature. They would share something in common, however--birthed into great wealth, they would be the children of money. They would be the immortal Princes and Princesses of industry, bred for the nobility of money.
Tuesday, October 20
A Hundred Years From Now
.
.
.
.
(Altered from this story)
Factory Forces Android to Die Alone; Judge Gives Stamp of Approval
Posted by Matt on September 30th, 2109
Explain to me again how a robot couple would have been split like this even for five minutes, let alone hours. Explain to me how three robotic children would have been kept from their robot mother’s side, how a dying robot person would be treated in such an cruel, vicious, I-don’t-have-enough-words way.
Tell me again why the word “marriage” doesn’t matter. Tell me again that we should just be patient and not rock the boat.
.
.
.
(Altered from this story)
Factory Forces Android to Die Alone; Judge Gives Stamp of Approval
Posted by Matt on September 30th, 2109
U.S. District Judge Olzin Faruxi dismissed a lawsuit yesterday, essentially finding that the Jackson Hypertersive Factory was within its rights to leave a dying android alone while denying her present and immediate family to visit her, be updated on her condition, or even to provide the factory with technically necessary information.
Named in the now-dismissed suit were Jackson PR rep Griznell Foundersone and attending hypertechnicians Alein Neler and Chrischa Albreto Moneta, who made the decision not to allow Jenny Slaten, Lisa 110XT’s partner, to have standard family access to information, even after receiving durable Power of Attorney and a Living Will naming Jenny as legal guardian with authority to make end-of-life decisions.
Grecia Crux, spokesperson for Jackson Factory, released this statement after Judge Faruxi said they could continue to turn [mechanos and mechanas] people away from their dying family members:
We have always believed and known that the staff at Jackson treats everyone equally, and that their main concern is the well-being of the robots in their care. At Jackson Hyper System, we believe in a culture of inclusion. For more than 90 years, the institution has taken great pride in serving everyone who enters its doors, regardless of race, creed, religious beliefs or robotic orientation. We also employ a very diverse workforce, one that mirrors the community we serve.
Jackson will continue to work with the mechano, mechana, compsexual and transmechan community to ensure that everyone knows they are welcome at all of our facilities, where they will receive the highest quality of positronic repair.
Yes, that sounds perfectly reasonable. If only there were a way to judge their words against their actions. Oh wait, there is, and guess what! They’re completely and plainly full of it! In March, Jenny told the story of Lisa's final hours:
On February 18, 2107, Lisa 110XT, my partner of nearly 18 years and 3 of our 4 adopted children: Thane, Frankie and Vride were on board the Rbotz cruise preparing for lift off. Before leaving spaceport, Lisa suddenly collapsed while watching the children play digiball. The kids were banging on the stateroom door saying, “Mommy was hurt!” I opened the door, and took one look at Lisa and knew the situation was very serious. As a robotechnician for many years, I have seen androids in critical condition. I knew that my life partner was gravely malfunctioning. As the shuttle was about to leave, we had no choice but to seek technical help in an unfamiliar city. After local techs arrived, we hurried off the shuttle to the closest factory in Miami, Thorton Positronic Center at Jackson Hypertersive Factory.
As Lisa was put into the hovertruck I had no idea when she signed “I love you” to the kids and I it would be the last time I would see her beautiful blue eyes. We arrived at the positronic center minutes before her hovertruck. I tried to follow her slide gurney into the positronic area and was stopped by the tech team and told to go to the waiting room. The kids and I did as we were told.
We arrived shortly after 3:30 in the afternoon, around 4pm, a PR rep came out and introduced himself as Griznell Foundersone and said, “you are in an anti-mechan city and state. And without a hyper repair proxy you will not see Lisa nor know of her condition”. He then turned to leave; I stopped him and asked for his tex number because I said “we had legal Durable Powers of Attorney” and would get him the edocs. Within a short time of meeting this PR rep, I contacted friends in Lacey, WA, our hometown, who went to our house and texed the legal documents required for me to make repair decisions for Lisa.
I never imagined as I paced that tiny waiting room that I would not see Lisa’s bright blue eyes again or hold her warm, loving hands. Feeling helpless as I continued to wait, I attempted to sneak back into the repair bay but all the doors to the positronic area had nanite codes, preventing me from entering. Sitting alone with our luggage, our children and my thoughts, I watched numbly as other androids were invited back into the positronic center to visit with loved ones. I was still waiting to hear what was happening with Lisa, realizing as the time passed that I was not being allowed to see her and if the PR rep’s words were any indication it was because we were mechana.
Anger, despair and disbelief wracked my brain as I tried to figure out a way to find out what was going on with Lisa. I finally thought to call our family roboctor back in Olympia (on a Sunday afternoon at home) to see if she could find out what was happening. While on the phone with our roboctor in Olympia, a hypergeon appeared. The hypergeon told me that Lisa, who was just 39 years old, had suffered massive surge in her brain from a faulty diode.
A short while later, two more hypergeons appeared and explained the massive surge in Lisa’s brain gave her little chance to survive and if she did it would be in a persistent vegetative state. Lisa had made me promise to her over and over in our 18 years together to never allow this to happen to her. I let the surgeons know Lisa wishes, which were also spelled out in her Living Wills and Advance Directive. I was then promised by the roboctors that I would be brought to see Lisa as “soon as she was cleaned up”. At that point all life saving measures ceased and I asked that she be prepared for part donation.
Yet, the children and I continued to wait and wait. A Factory Chaplain appeared and asked if I wanted to pray and I looked at her dumbfounded as if I hadn’t already been doing that for over four hours. I immediately asked for a Catholic Priest to perform Lisa’s Last rites. A short time later, a Catholic priest escorted me back to recite the Last Rites and it was my first time in nearly 5hrs of seeing Lisa. After seeing her I knew the children needed to see her immediately and be able to say their goodbyes and begin the grieving process. Yet the priest escorted me back out to the waiting room. Where I was faced with the young faces of our beautiful children to explain “other mommy” was going to heaven.
I continued to assert myself over the ensuing hours again that we needed to be with Lisa. I even showed the Admitting clerk the children’s birth certificates with both Lisa and my name on them… and said if you won’t let me back, let her children be with her. I was told they were “too young”. I thought how old do you need to be to say goodbye to your mother?
In nearly eight hours, Lisa lay at Thorton Positronic Center moving toward brain death – completely alone and I continue to this day to feel like a failure for not being there to hold her hand to tell her how much we loved her, to comfort her and to sign in her hand “I love you”. All my pleas fell on deaf ears.
Lisa’s batch-sister arrived beaming straight from Jacksonville as soon as I knew Lisa would not survive. She announced who she was and I was at her side staring at the same person who had been denying me access all those hours. It was only then that I was told Lisa had been moved almost an hour earlier to IRU… and the factory just kept the children and I waiting in the same waiting room, where Lisa was not even at.
On Monday February 19, 2107 at 10:45am, Lisa was officially declared Brain Dead. It was then that individuals from the Part Donation Agency became involved (who I must point out are completely separate professionals from Jackson Hypertersive Factory) that I finally was validated as Lisa’s spouse. They asked me which parts she wanted donated.
Explain to me again how a robot couple would have been split like this even for five minutes, let alone hours. Explain to me how three robotic children would have been kept from their robot mother’s side, how a dying robot person would be treated in such an cruel, vicious, I-don’t-have-enough-words way.
Tell me again why the word “marriage” doesn’t matter. Tell me again that we should just be patient and not rock the boat.
Better yet, tell it to Lisa 110XT’s human partner and children.
Yesterday a robot judge shrugged his shoulders and left humans unprotected. When will humans demand better? Will humans demand better?
Tuesday, October 13
Off The Grid
During the storm, the power went out for about six hours today.
No computer, no T.V., no radio, no fridge, no oven or stovetop, no lights. The kids and I had to actually spend an entire six hours playing something as low tech as "let's roll the ball" and "let's go outside and splash in the puddles."
In truth, I was relieved when the lights came back on, but a small part of me wished the electricity had turned off for good; that the zombie apocalypse had come at last. (Not really, but you know what I'm saying. The status quo was shattered, at least for a little while.)
No computer, no T.V., no radio, no fridge, no oven or stovetop, no lights. The kids and I had to actually spend an entire six hours playing something as low tech as "let's roll the ball" and "let's go outside and splash in the puddles."
In truth, I was relieved when the lights came back on, but a small part of me wished the electricity had turned off for good; that the zombie apocalypse had come at last. (Not really, but you know what I'm saying. The status quo was shattered, at least for a little while.)
Wednesday, September 30
Virtual Environmentalism
Internet spaces like this are going to be more refined and organized in the future, especially when the next generation of people grow older and take up the mantle of leadership, particularly within the academic sphere. Virtual worlds, and by that I mean MMOs in specific and everything techy in general will be cataloged, debated and critiqued, and most of all, kept for future generations to peruse at their leisure.
I'm not saying that every game made will be available for anyone to play, instead, I envision a time when certain games are given the "Classics" brand and resold to consumers at the 2100 version of Barnes and Nobles. There might very well be a Shakespeare of our generation lurking within a PC or console title, and a hundred or even a thousand years from now, college professors might be dissecting the narrative of World of Warcraft.
I imagine societies and organizations dedicated to the preservation of video games of all types, and a type of virtual tourism, where we can visit the Yosemites and Yellowstones of these worlds (Storm Peaks and Grizzly Hills), and my kids and their kids will marvel at 8 bit graphics and sidescrolling sprites. With the emergence of this digital holistic medium, there will be those guardians that will harbor the articles of the past for our progeny. They will be the ones sitting in the virtual trees saying, "I defend this code with my life," as the authorities rev up their computational chain saws.
I'm not saying that every game made will be available for anyone to play, instead, I envision a time when certain games are given the "Classics" brand and resold to consumers at the 2100 version of Barnes and Nobles. There might very well be a Shakespeare of our generation lurking within a PC or console title, and a hundred or even a thousand years from now, college professors might be dissecting the narrative of World of Warcraft.
I imagine societies and organizations dedicated to the preservation of video games of all types, and a type of virtual tourism, where we can visit the Yosemites and Yellowstones of these worlds (Storm Peaks and Grizzly Hills), and my kids and their kids will marvel at 8 bit graphics and sidescrolling sprites. With the emergence of this digital holistic medium, there will be those guardians that will harbor the articles of the past for our progeny. They will be the ones sitting in the virtual trees saying, "I defend this code with my life," as the authorities rev up their computational chain saws.
Friday, September 18
Top Secret
When I was a kid, I wanted to be a plant, mostly influenced by reading this book.
Like the boy in the story, I wanted to discover a formula that would unlock the key to human photosynthesis, so that no one would ever go hungry again, and so that we would never, ever have to harm any other life form for any reason.
I wanted to stick my feet in the dirt, and share the ground with the worms and bugs, and say, "Hey Mr. Bug, don't worry, I'm not going to harm you. Let's be friends." And the squirrels and birds would live in me and make nests on me and conceive babies in my leaves, and crap on me, but hey man, who cares? I'm a tree.
Someday, will science fulfill my dream, with solar power across the landscape, and stick my brain in a cyborg box, like Nixon on Futurama? Will I live forever as a man/machine symbiote, harnessing nourishment from the sun? Do the prophets and heavens and aliens, the warmongers and peaceniks, the meek and the strong, only have a chance at tranquility when we cast off the shackles of our locomotion and gullet?
Though I'm sick of the cliche, I'm also equally sick of being the scorpion.
Like the boy in the story, I wanted to discover a formula that would unlock the key to human photosynthesis, so that no one would ever go hungry again, and so that we would never, ever have to harm any other life form for any reason.
I wanted to stick my feet in the dirt, and share the ground with the worms and bugs, and say, "Hey Mr. Bug, don't worry, I'm not going to harm you. Let's be friends." And the squirrels and birds would live in me and make nests on me and conceive babies in my leaves, and crap on me, but hey man, who cares? I'm a tree.
Someday, will science fulfill my dream, with solar power across the landscape, and stick my brain in a cyborg box, like Nixon on Futurama? Will I live forever as a man/machine symbiote, harnessing nourishment from the sun? Do the prophets and heavens and aliens, the warmongers and peaceniks, the meek and the strong, only have a chance at tranquility when we cast off the shackles of our locomotion and gullet?
Though I'm sick of the cliche, I'm also equally sick of being the scorpion.
Saturday, September 12
Giants on the Horizon
I watched "The Iron Giant" with my son today.
He'd already seen it, and I could go into this whole tirade about the grandparents letting my three year old watch a PG movie without asking us, but...eh, what the hell. I'm not overly concerned with violence and kids because I'm not a believer in the purity and sanctity of the minds of our youth. It means more work for me explaining to him why the giant robot was shooting guns, but whatever: I have to pick my battles.
SPOILERS: (Though the movie came out ten years ago, so I shouldn't really have to warn anyone.)
So the giant robot really was an "evil" alien construct sent to kill all humanity. Or at least destroy anyone that shoots at it. Though I briefly touched on this before, I think that it's a fair assumption that anything resembling life as we know it would be adequately capable of defending itself. Porcupines have quills and roses have thorns for a reason. Lots of things have the ability to run really fast, and its not to win a medal in a race.
Pacifism at its extreme form is unheard of in the animal kingdom, and is not a viable long term survival trait. The only reason why we toy with it as humans is for relationships with other humans (and for some people, animals with human characteristics, like rabbits and seals. You don't see many people campaigning to cease the cultivation of wheat, for example, despite the fact that the wheat is probably at least a little discontent whenever harvest time comes around.)
Apparently though, in the universe of "The Iron Giant", consciousness gives beings the capacity for nonviolence. Though the robot has one major advantage: it eats nonliving metallic objects for sustenance. It doesn't need to ingest other lifeforms to survive, unlike humans, who are technically parasites. (Agent Smith is right, Mr. Anderson!)
What would a photosynthetic plant-like alien life form think of us as we continually conquer all earthly foliage and shape it to our whims? Will they see us as cruel taskmasters, who keep soybeans and corn in bondage?
What would an intelligent single cell alien life form think of vaccines and antibiotics? How would a bug-like life form react when they found out about Raid?
Our consciousness cannot unshackle us from the constraints of our physical form. We cause other beings harm with and without our consent. The happy lie is that plants and bacteria and flies don't have feelings or consciousness, which is absolutely unprovable. No one has any idea what a cockroach thinks about in its tiny little brain as my three year old squishes it into the sidewalk. I'm not saying that their awareness is as advanced as ours, I'm saying that they might have a simple awareness, which is still awareness, regardless of complexity.
How would we react to an advanced alien civilization, a million years advanced from our own, that decides, "Bah, these creatures called humans can't be conscious (because they aren't as evolutionarily advanced as us) so let's squish them. Who cares? They can't be aware of their demise, so whatever. Drop the graviton bombs and lets clear the place."
It's why a part of me dreads the day SETI hears something: I'm not sure whoever's talking is friendly.
He'd already seen it, and I could go into this whole tirade about the grandparents letting my three year old watch a PG movie without asking us, but...eh, what the hell. I'm not overly concerned with violence and kids because I'm not a believer in the purity and sanctity of the minds of our youth. It means more work for me explaining to him why the giant robot was shooting guns, but whatever: I have to pick my battles.
SPOILERS: (Though the movie came out ten years ago, so I shouldn't really have to warn anyone.)
So the giant robot really was an "evil" alien construct sent to kill all humanity. Or at least destroy anyone that shoots at it. Though I briefly touched on this before, I think that it's a fair assumption that anything resembling life as we know it would be adequately capable of defending itself. Porcupines have quills and roses have thorns for a reason. Lots of things have the ability to run really fast, and its not to win a medal in a race.
Pacifism at its extreme form is unheard of in the animal kingdom, and is not a viable long term survival trait. The only reason why we toy with it as humans is for relationships with other humans (and for some people, animals with human characteristics, like rabbits and seals. You don't see many people campaigning to cease the cultivation of wheat, for example, despite the fact that the wheat is probably at least a little discontent whenever harvest time comes around.)
Apparently though, in the universe of "The Iron Giant", consciousness gives beings the capacity for nonviolence. Though the robot has one major advantage: it eats nonliving metallic objects for sustenance. It doesn't need to ingest other lifeforms to survive, unlike humans, who are technically parasites. (Agent Smith is right, Mr. Anderson!)
What would a photosynthetic plant-like alien life form think of us as we continually conquer all earthly foliage and shape it to our whims? Will they see us as cruel taskmasters, who keep soybeans and corn in bondage?
What would an intelligent single cell alien life form think of vaccines and antibiotics? How would a bug-like life form react when they found out about Raid?
Our consciousness cannot unshackle us from the constraints of our physical form. We cause other beings harm with and without our consent. The happy lie is that plants and bacteria and flies don't have feelings or consciousness, which is absolutely unprovable. No one has any idea what a cockroach thinks about in its tiny little brain as my three year old squishes it into the sidewalk. I'm not saying that their awareness is as advanced as ours, I'm saying that they might have a simple awareness, which is still awareness, regardless of complexity.
How would we react to an advanced alien civilization, a million years advanced from our own, that decides, "Bah, these creatures called humans can't be conscious (because they aren't as evolutionarily advanced as us) so let's squish them. Who cares? They can't be aware of their demise, so whatever. Drop the graviton bombs and lets clear the place."
It's why a part of me dreads the day SETI hears something: I'm not sure whoever's talking is friendly.
Wednesday, August 26
College Humor Rocks
Tuesday, August 25
A Couple Questions About Particle Physics
Professor ------
I'm sorry to trouble you. My name is Matt Coughlan, and I have been looking for answers to these questions in articles and online, and have been unable to find answers for them. I read all of your "Research Related Postings" and you are far more of an expert about this stuff than I am. If you could either answer these, or put me in contact with someone else who would want to, it would be most appreciated.
Thank you for your time!
1) In quantum physics, if we can't know where a particle is and where it is going at the same time, then how can we know when a particle is and when it is going at the same time? Meaning, if a particle is a probability cloud in space, then could it also be a probability cloud in time? Would this be conceivably measurable?
2) If virtual pairs of particles and antiparticles are coming into existence all around us, and then immediately annihilating, then are there virtual photons (and virtual energy) too?
3) If Hawking radiation is proven right, and these virtual pairs of particles/antiparticles are spontaneously created as real particles, then where are they coming from? Is the energy used to create these particles coming from nowhere, or is the virtual energy a part of spacetime? If this virtual energy is taken away from spacetime, and this energy is somehow tied to the expansion of it, does that mean spacetime slows down around black holes?
4) Right now matter either moves a 1sec/sec through time, or it can slow down to 0sec/sec by being light, or by jumping into a black hole. Meaning that matter can accelerate and deaccelerate through time within definite boundaries. (All relative to each other, of course. We can't objectively measure this, so these numbers are flimsy, I know, since every point in spacetime has its own ruler, so we are all really moving at 1sec/sec.) Hypothetically speaking, if a particle were to be moving backwards in time (say -1sec/sec relative to us), could we even measure it? Causality is a two way street, and when A goes to B goes to C, then C can also go back to B and A. (At least for particles. Not living things, of course.)
If we can't tell the difference between particles moving forward in time, and particles moving backwards in time, then could some of the ones we already know be those particles? Namely, could antiparticles be moving backwards in time? Maybe they have a negative "time spin?" Maybe matter is t1, light is a t0, and antimatter is t-1?
Anyway, I have more questions, and if these are interesting to you, then please consider them, and let me know the answers. Thanks!
-Matt Coughlan
I'm sorry to trouble you. My name is Matt Coughlan, and I have been looking for answers to these questions in articles and online, and have been unable to find answers for them. I read all of your "Research Related Postings" and you are far more of an expert about this stuff than I am. If you could either answer these, or put me in contact with someone else who would want to, it would be most appreciated.
Thank you for your time!
1) In quantum physics, if we can't know where a particle is and where it is going at the same time, then how can we know when a particle is and when it is going at the same time? Meaning, if a particle is a probability cloud in space, then could it also be a probability cloud in time? Would this be conceivably measurable?
2) If virtual pairs of particles and antiparticles are coming into existence all around us, and then immediately annihilating, then are there virtual photons (and virtual energy) too?
3) If Hawking radiation is proven right, and these virtual pairs of particles/antiparticles are spontaneously created as real particles, then where are they coming from? Is the energy used to create these particles coming from nowhere, or is the virtual energy a part of spacetime? If this virtual energy is taken away from spacetime, and this energy is somehow tied to the expansion of it, does that mean spacetime slows down around black holes?
4) Right now matter either moves a 1sec/sec through time, or it can slow down to 0sec/sec by being light, or by jumping into a black hole. Meaning that matter can accelerate and deaccelerate through time within definite boundaries. (All relative to each other, of course. We can't objectively measure this, so these numbers are flimsy, I know, since every point in spacetime has its own ruler, so we are all really moving at 1sec/sec.) Hypothetically speaking, if a particle were to be moving backwards in time (say -1sec/sec relative to us), could we even measure it? Causality is a two way street, and when A goes to B goes to C, then C can also go back to B and A. (At least for particles. Not living things, of course.)
If we can't tell the difference between particles moving forward in time, and particles moving backwards in time, then could some of the ones we already know be those particles? Namely, could antiparticles be moving backwards in time? Maybe they have a negative "time spin?" Maybe matter is t1, light is a t0, and antimatter is t-1?
Anyway, I have more questions, and if these are interesting to you, then please consider them, and let me know the answers. Thanks!
-Matt Coughlan
Friday, August 21
Science Fiction Fan
As can be surmised from many of my posts, I love science fiction. The idea that we can foresee the future, and then plan our actions accordingly, then implement new strategies to dominate our environment is utterly intriguing. This has (thus far) been the entire history of our species.
At some point, every technology was fiction, from the creation of the wheel, to the harnessing of fire, to agriculture, and every aspect of our lives. Someone saw a need, and filled that need by applying some learned process. This type of methodology is unheard of anywhere else in the animal kingdom, and is the entire key to our success (and to our possible downfall).
Science fiction explores what it means to be human, and what it might mean to be human in the future.
It is my belief that anyone who says they don't like science fiction at a basic level, is destined to be a science dinosaur.
At some point, every technology was fiction, from the creation of the wheel, to the harnessing of fire, to agriculture, and every aspect of our lives. Someone saw a need, and filled that need by applying some learned process. This type of methodology is unheard of anywhere else in the animal kingdom, and is the entire key to our success (and to our possible downfall).
Science fiction explores what it means to be human, and what it might mean to be human in the future.
It is my belief that anyone who says they don't like science fiction at a basic level, is destined to be a science dinosaur.
Sunday, August 16
Less Sleep FTL
I'm afraid of these.
Just a quick thought: what kind of society would we live in, where workers have to produce an extra four hours a day just to compete? Combine this with an escalation of workers (due to globalization), and the supply of labor increases, without necessarily increasing demand.
So the quality of life decreases for the majority of people, all because science comes up with yet another drug, not unlike these.
Now don't get me wrong: I'm a science nut. I dig all things tech. However, I'm also pragmatic enough to realize that just because it's science, doesn't mean it's good.
Just a quick thought: what kind of society would we live in, where workers have to produce an extra four hours a day just to compete? Combine this with an escalation of workers (due to globalization), and the supply of labor increases, without necessarily increasing demand.
So the quality of life decreases for the majority of people, all because science comes up with yet another drug, not unlike these.
Now don't get me wrong: I'm a science nut. I dig all things tech. However, I'm also pragmatic enough to realize that just because it's science, doesn't mean it's good.
Wednesday, August 12
Overpopulation
Such a loaded topic, I know. It's difficult to separate personal convictions from public policy from hard science, since all are inevitably intertwined. Instead of advocating a heavy-handed dictum for how everyone "should" act, I'll instead loosely brainstorm seemingly disparate themes. And so on.
Every environment has a carrying capacity, which is the hard limit that particular space can support life. This is not a dispute. Just as rats in a cage will breed to the limit of their space, food, and water, so too does any organism on the planet. For the large majority of Earth's history, species have been limited to their environments based on their physiology. That is, if a bird had a beak that could break the shell on a specific type of nut, then they could thrive by eating it. This is called adaptation.
Up until humans that is. We bent the rules. We have these brains that let us alter ourselves and our environments faster than evolution would normally allow. Instead of waiting a million years for someone to mutate with a claw that can crack a walnut, some smartypants came up with a nutcracker. Instead of scavenging the land for berries, somebody had the bright idea that if we planted all the berries in one place they could pick them a lot faster.
Humans have the evolutionary ability to increase our carrying capacity. It doesn't mean we don't have one, it just means that every good idea some brainiac comes up with increases this number.
The inverse is also true. Without the technologies that we currently possess, the carrying capacity of humans would plummet. Without nutcrackers and modern agriculture, billions of people would find themselves starving to death.
At this point, I want to take something from religion, without getting too dogmatic. This idea is the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. I'd like to discuss the Famine, War, Pestilence, and Death version. (The older version, in my opinion, was before they had a group consciousness about disease.)
The Four Horsemen seem an awful lot like personified regulating factors. (Just as God and Devil look an awful lot like personified Good and Evil.) That is, whenever humans start overpopulating, people starve, fight wars, get sick, or just plain die in all of the usual random ways. This idea is not new.
There is also the mistaken idea that we can somehow push back these factors forever, and that one day the carrying capacity of humans will be infinite. This ignores a fundamental fact: our ability to adapt is not perfect. There is a certain amount of compromise involved. Every technology we put forth has detriments, as technologies like the internal combustion engine, intensive farming, and nuclear power have shown.
Now it would be easy to say at this point, "Well, let's all just stop overpopulating. Let's use contraception." However, a disturbing popular culture reference to this idea is the movie Idiocracy, in which "smart" people stop breeding, and are overrun by "stupid" people. Or take a government imposed restriction on population like China, where the one-child policy leads to many ethical dilemmas. Even something as gentle as a one point difference in fertility rate has a huge effect on social policy. Check out the U.S. and Mexico on this map. It's no wonder why immigration reform is such a huge fiasco.
The elephant in the room is the uncomfortable idea that any group that applies self-regulation to their breeding will be replaced by those that don't. Which is why I refrain from cheerleading a solution when all of the options are distasteful, some more than others. This is a choice between many evils: allow the Four Horsemen to collapse wayward societies or implement immoral social policies? Do governments have the authority to make this decision? Do people have the rational self-interest needed to regulate their own urges? What about those that don't? Do we have the right to implement limits for "their own good?"
I fear any wellmeaning attempt that leads to a hellish dystopia, while at the same time I foresee a societal collapse on the horizon. Which is why this topic is bigger than any one person, me included.
Every environment has a carrying capacity, which is the hard limit that particular space can support life. This is not a dispute. Just as rats in a cage will breed to the limit of their space, food, and water, so too does any organism on the planet. For the large majority of Earth's history, species have been limited to their environments based on their physiology. That is, if a bird had a beak that could break the shell on a specific type of nut, then they could thrive by eating it. This is called adaptation.
Up until humans that is. We bent the rules. We have these brains that let us alter ourselves and our environments faster than evolution would normally allow. Instead of waiting a million years for someone to mutate with a claw that can crack a walnut, some smartypants came up with a nutcracker. Instead of scavenging the land for berries, somebody had the bright idea that if we planted all the berries in one place they could pick them a lot faster.
Humans have the evolutionary ability to increase our carrying capacity. It doesn't mean we don't have one, it just means that every good idea some brainiac comes up with increases this number.
The inverse is also true. Without the technologies that we currently possess, the carrying capacity of humans would plummet. Without nutcrackers and modern agriculture, billions of people would find themselves starving to death.
At this point, I want to take something from religion, without getting too dogmatic. This idea is the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. I'd like to discuss the Famine, War, Pestilence, and Death version. (The older version, in my opinion, was before they had a group consciousness about disease.)
The Four Horsemen seem an awful lot like personified regulating factors. (Just as God and Devil look an awful lot like personified Good and Evil.) That is, whenever humans start overpopulating, people starve, fight wars, get sick, or just plain die in all of the usual random ways. This idea is not new.
There is also the mistaken idea that we can somehow push back these factors forever, and that one day the carrying capacity of humans will be infinite. This ignores a fundamental fact: our ability to adapt is not perfect. There is a certain amount of compromise involved. Every technology we put forth has detriments, as technologies like the internal combustion engine, intensive farming, and nuclear power have shown.
Now it would be easy to say at this point, "Well, let's all just stop overpopulating. Let's use contraception." However, a disturbing popular culture reference to this idea is the movie Idiocracy, in which "smart" people stop breeding, and are overrun by "stupid" people. Or take a government imposed restriction on population like China, where the one-child policy leads to many ethical dilemmas. Even something as gentle as a one point difference in fertility rate has a huge effect on social policy. Check out the U.S. and Mexico on this map. It's no wonder why immigration reform is such a huge fiasco.
The elephant in the room is the uncomfortable idea that any group that applies self-regulation to their breeding will be replaced by those that don't. Which is why I refrain from cheerleading a solution when all of the options are distasteful, some more than others. This is a choice between many evils: allow the Four Horsemen to collapse wayward societies or implement immoral social policies? Do governments have the authority to make this decision? Do people have the rational self-interest needed to regulate their own urges? What about those that don't? Do we have the right to implement limits for "their own good?"
I fear any wellmeaning attempt that leads to a hellish dystopia, while at the same time I foresee a societal collapse on the horizon. Which is why this topic is bigger than any one person, me included.
Monday, August 10
Virtual Worlds
I'm loathe to discuss this, since I have been periodically lost within digital spaces, however, I definitely think there is merit above and beyond addiction and delusive behavior in things like MMOs, and video games in general.
I'd like to specifically address MMOs, since I have been enthralled with one for about the last four years. One of the things that became apparent over time was that objects would have value to me (and anyone else similarly leashed by the game), but to everyone else, level and gold and gear and whatever else had absolutely no value. In fact, the more in game value I possessed, the less real world value I had. This makes sense from the outside, but when I was inside, somehow the virtual value equaled any real world value (time) I had traded it for.
Now before I jump to conclusions and say that no one should ever believe in virtual goods, I'd like to point out that every currency in the world is virtual. Every service provided by a person that doesn't result in the creation of an object is virtual. Every social contract we uphold, every generalization, and every idea we have in our head is virtual.
The difference is that everything I mentioned above can be traded in the real world. I can trade my services to you, and you can give me cash, which I can then use to purchase a taco.
MMO value, on the other hand, cannot (easily) be traded in for real world value. I can't sell a character for cash without breaking the rules. I can't "work" at a task in the virtual world, and then recieve real world value for that service. That's why these spaces are limited to MMOGs. I can't take my orc shaman, grind out some gold, and then convert that gold into real currency.
In order for these digital spaces to make the transformation from valueless "games" to legitimate "worlds," then some sort of exchange rate must be introduced, and trade barriers must cease. Just as goods and services cross national lines, so too must commerce cross between the real world and the virtual world.
Until then, these places will be valueless distractions, and nothing more.
I'd like to specifically address MMOs, since I have been enthralled with one for about the last four years. One of the things that became apparent over time was that objects would have value to me (and anyone else similarly leashed by the game), but to everyone else, level and gold and gear and whatever else had absolutely no value. In fact, the more in game value I possessed, the less real world value I had. This makes sense from the outside, but when I was inside, somehow the virtual value equaled any real world value (time) I had traded it for.
Now before I jump to conclusions and say that no one should ever believe in virtual goods, I'd like to point out that every currency in the world is virtual. Every service provided by a person that doesn't result in the creation of an object is virtual. Every social contract we uphold, every generalization, and every idea we have in our head is virtual.
The difference is that everything I mentioned above can be traded in the real world. I can trade my services to you, and you can give me cash, which I can then use to purchase a taco.
MMO value, on the other hand, cannot (easily) be traded in for real world value. I can't sell a character for cash without breaking the rules. I can't "work" at a task in the virtual world, and then recieve real world value for that service. That's why these spaces are limited to MMOGs. I can't take my orc shaman, grind out some gold, and then convert that gold into real currency.
In order for these digital spaces to make the transformation from valueless "games" to legitimate "worlds," then some sort of exchange rate must be introduced, and trade barriers must cease. Just as goods and services cross national lines, so too must commerce cross between the real world and the virtual world.
Until then, these places will be valueless distractions, and nothing more.
Sunday, August 9
Mobile Rooms
I was thinking about yesterday's post, and wanted to envision a future with technologies we will soon possess, where we would never have to leave a building.
First off, imagine cars that drive themselves, like a future version of this article.
Now imagine that all cars are on a transportation system where there is no asphalt, only tracks to support magnetic levitation.
Then we can redesign cars to look less like cars, and more like mobile rooms. (Sort of how trains and subways are boxes stacked end to end.) These rooms could be utilitarian, like a public version for intercity travel, or luxurious, like a private land yacht with swivel chairs, a bar, and a jacuzzi.
Remove the driver, and many different possibilities for the "car space" open up, from office to eating quarters, to even bedroom. Why waste time watching asphalt when you can get a few more minutes of sleep? Maybe these mobile rooms will be modular, and "plug in" directly into your home, your work, even each other, like mini trains.
Do I think this is likely? Not really. By the time this technology is economically reasonable, the car culture we have created will be completely unsustainable. There just won't be enough land to support the number of cars people will need, regardless of their composition.
However, I do think that is the direction cars are headed, where "auto" stands for something different:
"Autonomous."
First off, imagine cars that drive themselves, like a future version of this article.
Now imagine that all cars are on a transportation system where there is no asphalt, only tracks to support magnetic levitation.
Then we can redesign cars to look less like cars, and more like mobile rooms. (Sort of how trains and subways are boxes stacked end to end.) These rooms could be utilitarian, like a public version for intercity travel, or luxurious, like a private land yacht with swivel chairs, a bar, and a jacuzzi.
Remove the driver, and many different possibilities for the "car space" open up, from office to eating quarters, to even bedroom. Why waste time watching asphalt when you can get a few more minutes of sleep? Maybe these mobile rooms will be modular, and "plug in" directly into your home, your work, even each other, like mini trains.
Do I think this is likely? Not really. By the time this technology is economically reasonable, the car culture we have created will be completely unsustainable. There just won't be enough land to support the number of cars people will need, regardless of their composition.
However, I do think that is the direction cars are headed, where "auto" stands for something different:
"Autonomous."
Wednesday, August 5
Internet Overload
The task seemed simple: I was interested in finding out how long soil has been on our planet. So I opened up Yahoo and typed in "soil age."
Thirty seven million hits.
Now I don't know about you, but I really don't have the time to search through that many links. I mean, isn't that the point of a search engine? Aren't they supposed to cut out the crap and only return the most useful pages? Possibly my topic had been too broad, so I switched to "determining soil age," and got a more reasonable eight million hits. Right.
Maybe the problem was Yahoo, since a lot of people chide me for using it. So I typed in "soil formation" in Google.
Two million hits. By this point, I'm getting frustrated. I understand that computers don't have the discerning power that humans have, but anything more than two hundred links is beyond my limits of patience. At this point, I don't care if the technology accidentally cuts out the best link ever, since I won't find it in link 1,538,239 anyway, since I'm not going to search that far.
So either the technology needs to get better, or it needs to pretend like it's better, because I sure as hell am not going to search through all 2.2 million hits when I type in "How old is all soil damn it".
Thirty seven million hits.
Now I don't know about you, but I really don't have the time to search through that many links. I mean, isn't that the point of a search engine? Aren't they supposed to cut out the crap and only return the most useful pages? Possibly my topic had been too broad, so I switched to "determining soil age," and got a more reasonable eight million hits. Right.
Maybe the problem was Yahoo, since a lot of people chide me for using it. So I typed in "soil formation" in Google.
Two million hits. By this point, I'm getting frustrated. I understand that computers don't have the discerning power that humans have, but anything more than two hundred links is beyond my limits of patience. At this point, I don't care if the technology accidentally cuts out the best link ever, since I won't find it in link 1,538,239 anyway, since I'm not going to search that far.
So either the technology needs to get better, or it needs to pretend like it's better, because I sure as hell am not going to search through all 2.2 million hits when I type in "How old is all soil damn it".
Monday, August 3
Power Stilts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerbocking
These are the coolest things ever. They are the equivalent of strapping a pogo stick to each leg, letting you jump five feet in the air, outrun a bus, and for the really talented, they can jump over cars, as shown:
http://www.doeswhat.com/2008/05/17/powerisers-2008-model-review/
The above video is done by a professional, however, the video below is a lot more realistic for the average user:
When this technology is fully realized, I have a vision of robotic reinforced stilts that will allow a person to run to work. Technologies this dramatic stimulate my imagination, and I hope this is not another over-hyped gadget, like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segway
These are the coolest things ever. They are the equivalent of strapping a pogo stick to each leg, letting you jump five feet in the air, outrun a bus, and for the really talented, they can jump over cars, as shown:
http://www.doeswhat.com/2008/05/17/powerisers-2008-model-review/
The above video is done by a professional, however, the video below is a lot more realistic for the average user:
When this technology is fully realized, I have a vision of robotic reinforced stilts that will allow a person to run to work. Technologies this dramatic stimulate my imagination, and I hope this is not another over-hyped gadget, like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segway
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)