Quantum Vacuum

[twigsnapper]

I am not a math expert nor a scientist but sometimes information seems to find its way to me.

Trickfox. I have had a book that you might enjoy. A friend of mine has had it for years and since she is not blessed with those two abilities either she has had it on a shelf. Its a discussion of the quantum vacuum and she thought that she might like to have it on your shelf. It was written in 1994 by a fellow at Los Alamos. She felt that it would be better served in your library.

She wanted you to look particularly at "Stochastic Electrodynamics"
and other subjects that she says will fairly well leap out at you. If it is not useful now, just put it away for awhile.

I have opened this post just in case anyone else wants to talk about this subject. Hello out there? Twigsnapper

[Trickfox]

Thanks again for comming to my rescue Mr. Twigsnapper. I will look this up quickly to see when and where it fits in. I have a couple of very good books on Stochastic order and detection of such. As you probably know a friend of mine offers a unique approach, and I think I understand close to 95% of it.
There is allways plenty of room to get other details from people who understand what I'm looking for. It's a pleasure and priveledge for me just to have the time to read and work on this and I spend at least 30 to 40 Hrs a week just researching, reading and rereading, then gathering more data.

By all means I promis that I will pay attention to the section mentioned in this post area.



Trickfox

[Trickfox]

I think I will look into the Vedic Sciences
http://www.gosai.com/science/

Trickfox

[twigsnapper]

Mr. Trickfox,

One step in the right direction is worth a thousand mile journey in the wrong. Go Forth. Twigsnapper

[Trickfox]

Mr. Twigsnapper, Elizabeth, others

I fear that history is repeating itself to a larger degree than I wish.
I immediatly detected the symetry issue in Vedic Arithmetic and I understand how these are applicable in Quaternions, and ***** Functions.

Internation conflicts are distracting me, and I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same way?

I also found some very positive reasons for continuing the quest for knowledge at this website

http://www.504bank.com/telodpo.asp

The above website gives us the motivation to help develop new mitogenic radiation technologies which contain the information needed to help build life at a nanometric scale. We can build Kidney from the original subject's own DNA and illiminate the need for anti rejection medicine. I would be capable of repairing my own body and get off the dialisys machine.

How can we avoid the war machines?

Start with the principle that Ultimate Power is in the mind only. It must be accompanied with Ultimate Peace for it to have any value.

Otherwise ther is only conflict.

Trickfox

[Trickfox]

http://www.gosai.com/science/computerized-gods.html

Now the article above is a very provocative argument which brings out the NEW issues surrounding the future and GOD.

If this cycle exists we are moving forward in a loop of comprehension regarding carbon based life being eventually controlled by artificial intelligence. The beginnings of which are comming from A.L.I.C.E.
http://www.pandorabots.com/pandora/pics ... orial.html

We could just be rediscovering all this over and over again from planet to planet only to find out that it's the combined radiation from the complete univers that is affecting every inertial reference point of information in four dimensional spacetime.

the Trouton/Noble experiment is a subject of current investigation. Pascal says that it proves eather theory differently than Michaelson Morely.Pascal is repeating this simple experiment.

Trickfox

[Victoria Steele]

I think that the ONE thing that reading Pauls words have inspired in me is the ability to recognize an Either/or situation or option and that when you see that there are OTHER options being ignored.

I know thats a simple concept and it really leapt out at me when I read the link you set up Trickfox regarding "Artificial Intelligence. " I think the author was pointing that same thread out. (That some believe science is the only way to find the truth about our reality, and some say religion is the only way that can bring you to the core.)

I think that others here on the forum have already discussed that we shouldn't trust English here because it has a tendency to set up our thinking in that scenario of either/or and that if perhaps we were writing in sanskrit or some other more appropriate language then we would be able to think in a more "quantumized (my own word I think) way."


In other words. We would realize that there is not necessarily one thing OR the othere\. In a more quantumized world there could be BOTH. Or a million other paths available. When we see "Either"/"Or" in a sentence we should be instantly wary of the situation

Which brings me back to a question for you Trickfox. In your newfound interest in sanskrit, I have a question. This is off the wall. Do you think that a version of sanskrit could be turned into a "computer language?"

Look at what has already been said here on the forum. Sanskrit is more appropriate possibly for "communicating " with another enity of high intelligence. Perhaps it has more "channels" which could be used by an entity that doesn't play inside our box. But to be REALLY successful at that wouldn't you need the power and assistance of a computer?

So maybe thats the future? A computer language based on sanskrit?
I don't think that Dr. brown ever had much occasion to go into the computer field so maybe I am off base here but I am just sort of putting two and two together and it seems to make sense to me. If Dr. Brown at some point made "contact" then the next problem would be actually communicating.

Its like with his "sensors" he was listening and listening and then maybe (just me here folks) maybe he found a way to "send" ..... and then suddenly something ANSWERED. WELL, BEYOND THE FIRST SHOCK YOU STILL HAVE TO FIGURE OUR HOW TO REALLY COMMUNICATE AND COMPUTER LANGUAGE WOULD HAVE TO BE IT.

Hey folks, I didn't mean to but isn't this the theme for the movie"Contact?"

Victoria

[Victoria Steele]

You know Trickfox you mentioned that we were a "carbon-based" life form and I wanted to tell you about something I saw on T.V. Hold on. Its a little different.

the other thing I wanted to mention that is left out of all that "artificial intelligence bit is .... (and I am decidedly a romantic in this as you all know) ..... where do you find love then? Isn't that some part of this equation? Or will the information in your article come true, that humans will be replaced eventually by "information gathering " machines? I don't think I would like the future very much . And somehow I just can't accedpt that because something is missing.

So I go on to my other story, which might be linked, I don't know. You tell me.

Someone has opened an enterprise where you can have the ashes of your loved one processed into a diamond. And people are actually doing that ... then having a "grandmother ring" for example that REALLY is a Grandmother ring. <G>.

But, you know, aftr the shock of the thought wore off a little I thought "You know .... what a nice thought, really!"

People tend to want to "hang on" to their loved ones ashes sometime s(I am into ashes this week) and what a better way to do it, keep a loved one with you than to make a diamond that could be then passed on as a family heirloom. Something that could be with you all the time, as I am sure the loved one would want to be. ( Well, unless its Uncle Clancy)

I thought about this alot this last week while helping people at the Pioneer Town fire ruins. One man was digging around in the rubble of his home and what did he pull out, unscathed? His Mothers funeral urn! Now thats like STRANGE. the only thing that wasn't ashes, was the ashes! I don't know, I figure there is a lesson there somewhere, I just haven't seen it yet.

Anyway, going back to help out this weekend again. So I MIGHT go a little quiethere for awhile. (THANKYOU says Paul!) but I would love to hear what you all have to say. My question is like the song " What has love got to do with it, got to do with it?"

Victoria

[Trickfox]

Victoria
I would like to present my interpretation of the theory of two issues which are actually one. Whenever that either/or situation shows up we need to remind ourselves that we have seen the "GOD perspective".

To prove it we simply need to look at the LOVE issue.

Both Nature and mankind have references to GENDER. Gender rules mankind as an either/or issue by seperating gender and seeding it with LOVE. Before anyone yells out "What about hermaphrodites", I will point out that hermaphrodites and homosexuals will probably ALLWAYS be a minority for the immediate stretch of future time. These minorities may not necessarilly present any evidence contradicting the Gender/Love issue but it may prove indeed that Love (for the sake of it's own definition) must superceed the gender issue. Yes, in some ways this lends proof to the theory that homosexuals are closer to God. The truth is that scientist have found homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom also. So in the end balance is everywhere.

Only the God Perspective allows us to see the LOVE issue for it's own sake.
Love "is" or "is not" Victoria, and only the beholder sees the perspective.

Nature USES Gender to propagate Love through sexuality in humans and in some lower life forms, it is not quite officially understood as LOVE between animals, but you may ask any pet owner and most will agree that love between animals and mankind ALSO exists.

Regarding J. Weizenbaum's position in that last hyperlink, here is a portion of it.

This is a satanic vision. In that new Utopia. God will have eliminated the source and power of evil from the universe, and what remains will be a mechanical kingdom in which truth with a capital "T" and righteousness, or pure intelligence, can reign undisturbed forever. This reasoning, which, as I said, is more or less explicitly gaining dominance amongst scientists, technologists and many intellectuals, is a philosophical foundation on the basis of which the destruction of the human species, a very realistic threat, becomes defensible. In a certain sense, It provides a philosophically tilled soil in which the idea of an absolute genocide becomes thinkable. It argues that the purpose of the universe is the evolution of ever higher forms of intelligence. At the moment we happen to be carriers. As perhaps the most highly developed intelligence in the universe, we've now succeeded in creating our truly worthy successors: computers. We have the tools of destruction in our hands, but we've sent computers into timeless, endless space, and thus, having fulfilled our destiny, we have no reason to grieve over the probable death of our species.

I suppose the answer to this point of view is the TRUTH of LOVE!!!

The truth is that intelligence propagates using LOVE, and GENDER.
Sexuality is the "multiplication factor".

Can we envision these qualities in future artificial intelligence?

Will man grow to LOVE machines?

Will Machines learn to LOVE? (mankind or itself)

Will Machines have Genders?

The answer is: If scientists LOVE science for the sake of it's own value as truth, then scientists will answer YES to the three questions above.

Only then will "singularity" finally make sense and people like
Ray Kurzweil of http://www.singinst.org have allready forseen this.

In my opinion the Vedic sciences are trying to teach us mathematics about how this whole cycle has allready happened. That is probably why Dr. Oppenheimer was seeking to find out also. I'm not sure yet but my hunch is being confirmed as we go along here.

[Victoria Steele]

Absolutely Trickfox. For once I was able to hang on and go along on your mental ride and I absolutely agree with you and strangely your reference to Oppenheimer. Thinking out loud here, so reel me in if I go beyond understandable.

Do you think that he realized after studying the Vedic texts that we had in fact come full circle. "We " as a civilization had "been there before" and under his stewardship had again reached that spot again after a very long circle. Others have touched on the fact that the Vedic texts mention a terrible war and their descriptions of "parasol shaped clouds" is terrifyingly accurate. Some of them even mention more than one parasol in a cloud formation. And no one would ever have known that until that Trinity blast and the tests that came after it. (unfortuneately the wartime use of that energy too, though I do not mean to get into a discussion of whether the bomb should have been used on those cities or not. Thats for another discussion entirely, But it does seem to me that Oppenheimer quoting those text is in fact saying that he was aware that another civilization had reached this point before us.

So is it Love that will make the difference this time around? Or are all of us just kidding ourselves and this is supposed to be a never ending cycle. Build up a civilization, Destroy it, build it up again, destroy it. Can this time around be different or are we already trembling on the brink you think?
Victoria

[Trickfox]

Victoria

If you ask the question "Will WE survive", you must ponder the possibility of the "WE" being "Silicon based life". In other words will our "entities" include intelligent computers that meet the definition of life and include love, genders, and reproduction. Does your question mean "WE" the biological creatures we are today, or does it include "Cyborg life" or machines of our own creation.

Will future machines seek to refer to us as "their god"? The answer lies beyond singularity, and singularity is the same point at the beginning of the universe as it is in the center of a black hole as it is in the center of the micro-cosimc world. It's the point of iteration and the divider in the time interval.

If you are thinking that Nuclear genocide is the dividing point, then you are probably wrong because I will argue that soon Artificial intelligence will catch up and surpass the human mind. This may not have the same physical meaning as a nuclear bomb exploding, but philosophically it is just as powerfull of an idea as Nuclear Genocide.

When we wake up the first form of artificial life, will it look at us and think that we human creators are GOD?

If Contact were made with another life form outside our solar system, aren't we faced with the same question?

Did they create US? -because we certainly did not create them.

Perhaps this is why anything alive fails to understand anything beyond death.

All this will change IF and when we can transfer the entity of a mind from a body to a machine. After all the mind is made up of molecules with a finite quantitative value.

Does the sum total of the brain contain the BEING or is the BEING infinite, and capable of transfering itself from Flesh and bones to computer chips and binary logic?

I think we can assume that we CAN reach "Transhumanism" and perhaps live forever. We may end up forgetting history alltogether and find ourself in the exact same dilema we are in right now!!

We are all trying to find God, without knowing that we are IT subjectively.

Trickfox


Trickfox

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Trickfox,

What I would rather see happen is that mankind might note that he can actually go over to energy without going the machine route first.

In fact I have the thought that turning down machinery road might cause a detour in what is meant to be our destiny. Perhaps even turning that road into a dead end.

I agree its becoming easier and easier to give machines the right of way in our life .... to point to our heads and say of our brains ...." The old computer isn't working today" . But when we do that we shortchange ourselves by believing that we don't have anything "special" .... nothing that a machine could not duplicate. Frankly, I don't buy that.

And if such a thing as "love" was even introduced into a machines makeup as a part of a strictly "intelligence process" ,I am not sure that I would be inclined to accept that as a fully vested understanding of "love". Not the understanding that we are capable of.

Problem is, we do not even realize what we are capable of . Thats why I say that the whole trip toward machines becoming the ultimate intelligence is a dangerous road that we must consider carefully. Because its sort of an easy short cut. Its a stranger opening a door and offering a ride when the road ahead looks hot and difficult.

I am alot like Victoria in one respect. I am a romantic. A hopeful romantic (which probably is the most dangerous of all of them.) I am constantly searching, (like the fellow looking for an honest man with his flickering lantern), I seem to WANT to be out there looking for indications that man can figure out how to maintain his humanity .Somehow if we can manage to do that, reach our Creator embedded potential without giving over all of that to the next machine, then thats a better choice for us.

I believe that people can actually see what it is that they have been given. Old and very wise books have the same quotes ....."Look and you will see. Listen and you will hear ...... ask, and you will be given" Elizabeth

[Trickfox]

Elizabeth

It sounds more to me like you think that true transhumanism is impossible.
It sounds like you don't believe it is possible to seperate the being completely unless it is done through complete ascension from biological entity to pure energy in one easy step.

Perhaps that taking "the being" into ascension is rather simple once the essential fear factor is resolved. The process is probably mortality itself.

True transhumanism may actually be a sideroad to the ascension process as you say, but it would be a necessary sideroad if the future continues as it must. The process is being fueled by our desire to create life itself. Imagine never actually knowing or understanding life until you are dead!

I expect that the first step towards transhumanism is "life extension". I don't know about you but I'm in no hurry to die and face the consequences of ascension just yet. In fact I love being alive and would gladly accept an organ transplant at this point.

I'm allready suppose to be dead (over 7 years ago). If that was meant to be, I would not be having this conversation with you. Of course, I suppose I will never know what I missed by NOT ascending seven years ago.

Despite all the possible misgivings imagined by the human mind regarding this transhumanism process, I do not fear it, and I have no indications that evil lurks behind the desire to create silicon (or Galium Arsenide)based life.

It is not an either/or process so it's not likely that all human species will become destroyed as machines become living entities. There is room for both, and the challenges ahead for those of us who wish to explore this realm are fascinating. Life is nothing if not a curious process of discovery!!

Of course IF ANYONE in the world can point to any evidence that I am going in the wrong direction, I will stop and listen to any logical reasonning.
Otherwise I would need proof of the existence of the supernatural somehow. That would certainly be a reason to hold back.
As for uncertainty itself, - As I have once said, When Satan asks me "Where will you go?", I can only answer, "I will go where it is my nature to go".

Dr. Oppenheimer had the choice of not letting out the nuclear genie, but he did "go forth" anyway, and when he did he also experienced his "moment of singularity". Was it progress or a downhill road towards self anialation? Indeed we are only now just finding this out. Will an Islamic nuke explode on Israel and cause all of mankind to self destruct?

Some of us are destined to hold back and conserve idealism, and others are destined to act freely and liberally and throw caution to the wind. In the end if we trust in Gaia, life will continue and nothing we do can destroy it completely.

Trickfox

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Trickfox,

Yoru responses are always a challenge. Thankyou.

One of the last things that you said in your message was "In the end if we trust in Gaia, life will continue and NOTHING we can do can destroy it completely".

I just need to ask, "how do you know that? How do you know that there is nothing that we can do to destroy it completely? What if there was?"

And what system does Gaia have in place which warrents our trust that there is some kind of guardianship over the earths well being?

I appreciated your thoughts about the intelligent machine- life possibility in the future and I have to admit I had never really considered that. Something indeed to think about. Machines considering us God? Well, I wonder how long that would last? Shades of the "Terminator"

When I said that I felt that going the "machine road" might be a detour I was reflecting the fact that I ........ 1) Hadn't thought about that possibility all that much and 2) was coming at the entire proposition from somewhat different angle ....

What if ........ we have been experiencing a sort of circular route in our development ....... from pure energy ..... to materialism ..... back eventually to pure energy. Not saying its easy at all but thats the frame of thought I was into.

Did Dr. Oppenheimer actually have a choice of letting the genie out of the box? I am sure that he would have found it difficult to sway the tide of military pressure that was coaching that development and actually .... one wonders ..... did he continue also ..... just to see if it actually would work .......

Dr. Oppenheimer did not actually KNOW that destruction of that magnitude was available to mankind and right under his finger . I understand that he was not the person who actually pushed the button for the Trinity test but up to that point I don't believe he actually knew for sure that it would work. He felt that it would, all the paperwork said that it would .... but there was still the question. And there was the curiosity .........

What if, he had been invested with the SURE KNOWLEDGE that the bomb would actually work. Would he have ordered that button pushed? Would he have let the project get that far down the line? What if that BOMB had actually meant destruction of the entire earth?

I have come to the conclusion (my own personal thought here) that Dr. Brown knew ahead of time that there were elements of his work that could be that dangerous. I don't understand how he knew, but thats the feeling that I have gotten during my study of the man. He seemed somehow be well invested in the knowledge ahead of time that his concepts WOULD ACTUALLY WORK. Knowing that ahead of time, I would think, might have given him a different perspective.

I know that he was not the type of personality that required that kind of social vindication or ego uplift. So I think if he realized that there was also danger in some of his developments, I ask myself what a man like Townsend Brown might have been prepared to do to keep that information in a secure box?

I believe that Pauls efforts in following Dr. Browns shadowed footsteps will give us all an indication of how much Dr. Brown cared about keeping certain information "in that box" with a lock securely in place ,hopefully only to be unlocked when we were better prepared for that information. He did not need to light the fuse, or push that button to satisfy his scientific and human curiosity. He didn't need to prove that it worked. He already knew.

Anyway, just my studied opinion, from my side of the fence. Elizabeth

[Trickfox]

When I said "if we trust in Gaia" I meant it literally. Gaia in the modern sense of the term means "all of life on Earth". I did not say "mankind will survive" and I still believe that total human genocide is very possible.

What I meant is that the earth has allready undergone several catastrophic events, one of which destroyed practically all dinosaurs.
Life continued afterwads anyway. What I'm saying is that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that "LIFE" probably cannot be completely destroyed, but then this is still a statement of faith.

Now let me clarify the issue of "second generation life" I'm not sure if this second generation will be MACHINE life or Biological life as created from scratch with biological nanotechnology being the engine. Sort of like creating a rudimentary heart and brain with artificial tissues and then giving it a light electrical shock just to see it start to beat on it's own.

Secondly, I do not see it as being terribly important for us to create second generation life. Personally I'm not curently interested in doing so.
I am only interested in life extension technologies such as cloned organs (for obvious reasons). I am curious about quantum communications and quantum computing because I believe this is a key towards the understanding of the communications process which supports LIVING organisms.

I believe in moving slowly and carefully in this area, but I repeat that at the slightest indication of supernatural manifestations we must hold and step back and re-evaluate our position and desire to move forwards.

It is important to try and structure expected results as a model first.
Dr. Oppenheimer had a model which told him that a certain amount of nuclear mass would result in a certain amount of energy release and his observations were made far enough away to see the experiment completed successfully. I would suggest that we proceed with the same wisdom in the future.

I suppose the first nuclear detonation was though of as being some sort of controlled supernatural manifestation. The point is we had a model before we went ahead. The same principle should apply to any future endeavor.

I was done building "rockets that explode" when I was 15 years old. I realised early that I could make dangerous mistakes. When I worked in Los Angeles in the late seventies I had to work in an environment where if I moved a few inches too quickly in any direction I would have been instantly killed by high voltage. I had to rethink every thing I did three time before proceeding. I'm still very much the same way when it comes to technology.

Trickfox