People like to use the term random without actually really understanding what random means. The term random simply means an event has so many variables or inaccessible variables that it can’t be fully understood. Random is ignorance of the variables involved. When the variables of a situation can’t be accessed for one reason or another, science resorts to using statistical models. If a statistical model has any degree of success it is because it is picking up on constants indirectly.
In an attempt to explain the order in chaos I have built a new project which ca be accessed by clicking below.
Essentially what this project does is take a series of very standard waves and combines them to build a more complex wave form. You can play around with the different settings to get all kinds of interesting wave forms. The more waves you add and change, the more complex the final form will become. If you were not aware of all the different waves that went into creating the final form, you would have a very difficult time trying to figure out how it was created.
Another example would be to drop a dice down a very small tube and then slowly increase the size of the tube on additional rolls. As the tube got larger it would become increasingly difficult to predict how the dice would land. In the same way, in the above wave example it might be easy to guess or predict a wave form if it is only made up of two waves, but it would become increasingly difficult to predict as you added more.
The problem is that because random activity is built on orderly components, it can sometimes mislead us to believe we can predict it. In real life we have another name for it, we call it luck. What we consider luck is more a product of timing than any innate characteristic that gives us an upper hand. There will always be the temptation of trying to figure out how things work by looking at a final form, but we must aggressively resist this seduction. We can only gain true understanding by analyzing the underlying orderly components, not the final production.
Jason Koger is one of the first people to have two complete bionic hands. After losing both his hands, using technology he now has the capability to grasp things as small as jelly beans. Advances like this one support the idea that technology is rapidly integrating directly with us as opposed to being simply an auxiliary source of information or capability.
As technology becomes more advanced something very apparent rises to the surface. What we consider to be advanced technology is simply us catching up with nature. The primary difference between technology and traditional nature is that we have far more control over technology. As advanced as we often think we are, all our technology really does is replicate things in nature. Let’s use a car for example. While a car may not have any organic material present besides oil, a car functions very similar to the human body. It takes in food (gasoline) and then converts this food into energy which is utilized to execute its primary function of movement. While engaging in this process it does other similar things to us as well, for instance a car has filters and this is the same function our liver serves.
Soon we are going to start running into issues between what our technology can accomplish and our ideals. For instance, we all want to protect trees (for the most part) but trees are highly inefficient at clearing the atmosphere of pollutants; we require a significant amount of trees. What if with technology we can create a better tree? What if this new tree was almost indistinguishable from current trees?
The answer to this question is that humanity should come first, but we should make sure we are not jeopardizing ourselves by implementing brand new technology too quickly. With anything brand new there is always the potential for problems. We can mitigate this risk by not implementing new technology too fast. That said, we should never dismiss technology for the sole reason that it is in conflict with our existing ideals because our ideals can always change.
I have talked in other posts about how so much of our lives is dictated by certain genetic traits we are born with. For every blessing I have received in my life I am always acutely aware of how I won a genetic lottery in order to be the person I am today. The average human likes to think they are completely responsible for their life and every event that occurs in it is the result of some action they did. No matter how much a human deludes them self, this simply is not the case. Human will power can accomplish a lot but it is not without its limits on an individual basis.
Some have exploited these ideas for profit such as the book “The Secret” which makes the claim that you can obtain anything you want if you just think about it enough. Of course the theology of the secret is merely a mask for satanism, not so much the religious satanism, but the satanist concept of self enrichment through aggressive self gratification. It misses the point that selflessness is a form of selfishness; everyone benefits when the world is a better place.
What humans are all increasingly interested in is the idea of improved quality of life and, fortunately, technology is allowing for the human race to take more control of this than ever. We are all trying to make strides to help the world, but a lot of humans are still falling through the cracks on a daily basis. Part of quality of life is the ability to experience glory. There are those will never truly taste any glory during their life time, and this not only makes me sad, it is also unfortunate. Every human being should have the chance to be recognized for accomplishment. Glory is most often the product of an action or event that helps humanity. Now it might seem impossible to expect that everybody could experience glory in their life times, but I think it is actually possible. That said, it would require some fundamental accomplishments by humanity.
1. End Aging
We need to stop aging. One of the primary reasons a human may not accomplish something noteworthy in their life time is because they don’t have enough time.
2. Reduce Population
An unfortunate consequence of a large population, besides the strain on resources, is the fact that the more humans you have the more likely they will end up doing menial things.
3. Improve Automation & End Scarcity
We are finally getting to a point where we can have automatons start doing things like cleaning up. This will allow humans to focus on much larger goals.
4. Improve Education Methods
The education system is terrible because it requires learning through brute force memorization. We need to create better methods of assimilating large amounts of data.
5. Space Travel
True space travel would allow for a significant increase in glory opportunities.
If we could accomplish even a small portion of these goals, many people would live much more gratifying lives.
There are two types of fear, the first is the fear created by personal survival. The second is the fear of change. We will throw out success and run away from things that are good for us to avoid change. We think we know and understand fear such as the serial killer, the nuclear bomb, or global warming. Our most common fears regarding survival are easy to understand because we can formulate solutions even if they would never work.
I can almost certainly assure you that in the next one hundred years you will long for the days when nuclear war seemed like a legitimate fear. Technology is moving off the screens and into our bodies and this is going to have profound implications. What will you do when you are told that all your accumulated experiences are irrelevant because in seconds you can become anything you want? You might think this is amazing but think of the implications. If you can become anything, who are you? If you choose not to act, you could find yourself scraping the bottom unable to compete with genetically improved humans. What if you were offered the ability to lose the capability to commit evil, would you accept it? If you accept it, would you still be you?
What we call science fiction is starting to fall behind what we are actually accomplishing. The biggest challenge we will have in the future will not be about weather or murderers, it will be about existence. We will try to escape it by chasing media and digital worlds but the gleam will wear off. When the gleam runs out you will be left to make very serious decisions that will have dramatic effects on your life over very short time frames.
Now, more than ever, we need to become architects of the future. We must face the coming challenges now, not once they arrive.
The above statement is true but that isn’t a good thing. It is very true that meditation and discovering what people call your true center can have a certain peaceful affect on your psychology. However, this could slow our progression down as a race and have some other unforeseen consequences.
Every human action is powered by the ego. Every action derives from want. Your desire and need to find peace, and think about peace, is also driven by your ego. The mental gymnastics people are playing with themselves to “view the viewer” is a method of giving you peace through release. When you surrender, you give up the need to become more accomplished. This is why the most spiritual of people will either be those at the very top who can’t really accomplish much more or those at the bottom who can’t seem to accomplish anything.
To surrender the need to accomplish is no different then taking a drug to override your senses. While people might think they are casting off their ego what they are actually doing is reprogramming it. The very method of meditation is a mechanism for psychological programming. Whenever you have a thought you discard it and you stay focused on the present. When things bubble up to your consciousness and you discard them you are telling your unconscious that these things don’t matter as much because the whole purpose of the consciousness is to prioritize importance.
Don’t get me wrong, meditation is very important to do. In fact I endorse meditating some what frequently. It is like cleaning out a closet. What I don’t endorse is to stop caring or to delude yourself in to thinking you can actually stop caring. No one seems to find it odd that these people who have discovered how to truly stop caring, care so little that they need to tell everyone about it?
“A trait that we call empathy, a trait that completely vanishes if everyone simply accepts everything.”
We have incorrectly demonized selfishness. Every philanthropic action in the world is a way of forming a better world for ourselves. When we vilify selfishness incorrectly it is not good for society. Are you evil when you feel hunger and selfishly want to eat? Of course not. We create a hyperbole where on one side of the spectrum we have people who give away everything and live in poverty (saints) and on the other you have these evil business men who take money for services. The ego is a core to our selfishness and it makes us want to accomplish things. That isn’t to say it is perfect but it actually has done a some what decent job so far in progressing us as a human race.
I want to change the world, or at least try. If I stopped caring and simply accepted life for what it was there would be little motivation for me to do so. In a Brave New World a drug called soma was discussed that had zero biological side effects. This drug allowed the “beta” working class to do horrible jobs but get through it. I can’t help but believe that spirituality revolving around the attempted casting off of the ego is the soma of this society. It’s a way of allowing people to deal with, sometimes incorrectly, the dissatisfaction with their lives.
The main problem is that right now we can’t support everyone being satisfied. Someone has to clean the sewers. However, we’re trying to fix that. We can get workers out of the sewers with technology but that technology might not be developed by someone who is satisfied either, it might be developed by someone who just needs to pay their bills. At a certain point there will be so many improvements that we will enter what I call the second phase. In this phase we will be able to live in ways that right now we can’t even think or dream about.
The difference between say Eckhart Tolle and I is that I believe that dissatisfaction is necessary to improve the lives of all humans where as he thinks that everyone can just learn to deal with their terrible situations. He is a glorified drug dealer. People who work in sewers should not be happy about what they’re doing because then who would be interested in getting them out of that situation? Our need to help others stems from a trait that we call empathy and this is a trait that completely vanishes if everyone simply accepts everything.
With the recent Bill Nye Video on creationism, I thought I would take the time to write about science and the human condition. The primary friction when it comes to the theory of evolution for the religious is that it would prove that God did not create us in a complete form but also that the religious text of genesis would be wrong. Scientists need to produce not only in lab results for macro evolution (not micro) but also for how amino acids could form proteins in the primordial soup. These are two things scientists will need to do to get the populous at large to believe in evolution, simply providing circumstantial evidence in the form of fossils is not enough. This will ultimately happen even if the timeline is unknown.
However, this whole debate is a little misplaced because in the grand scheme of things evolution will be the smallest thing that will affect mainstream religions. If we push the evolution debate to one side and then we push the belief in God to the other side below the surface we will see something else brewing. The things that are happening right now are mind boggling. First, we are on are way to curing cancer by modifying a patient’s own white blood cells. We are even regrowing organs and this is without using fetus stem cells. What used to be science fiction is becoming science fact. We are very well on our way to curing aging and even death by sickness.
Curing aging will fundamentally change society and not just for the religious. Death underlies a lot of successful businesses and dictates a lot of government policy. If people stop aging and getting sick, religious beliefs will be the least of our problems. We will have to deal with social programs, over population, and more. The implications of living a thousand years could mean you could literally do everything there is to do on this world, we have never had this issue before. People may become shut-ins minimizing any exterior physical risk to themselves so that there will never be any risk of dying. A lot of our willingness to take physical risks now is the fact that at some point we are going to die but what if that becomes no longer the case?
When these changes come and bubble to the surface a lot of people who were very sure of their beliefs may begin to question them. The things science is discovering right now will fundamentally change the way we think, act, and feel. Whether this is for the better or for the worse is yet to be seen but either way these changes are happening.
Since we have started getting modern technology the idea of androids has been around us. The idea that we can have integrated biology and technology. While perfect integration doesn’t exist yet, we have all very much become androids. Most of us carry around smart phones now which can act as a map, type writer, calculator, tv, flash light, photo/video camera, and it can even be used as a phone. We already take it for granted, but this technology in the form we have it today didn’t exist 10+ years ago. The only thing really missing from smart phone are tools to interact with physical environments.
So where is this all leading? The dream, to some, is to have integrated biology and technology. The first thing we need in order to do this is biological batteries and this is already being developed. So is our future to have our body riddled with various forms of foreign technology? The answer is, I believe, not what you would expect. Being human we like to believe our technology is something special but really what technology is is rudimentary artificial biology designed to do specific tasks. Take a car for instance, it consumes fuel (food) to generate energy to perform a motor function. A car is a microcosm of the human digestive system.
As our technology advances something will start to happen that we may have not predicted, technology will merge almost fully with biology and by this I mean technology and natural occurrences will seem almost indistinguishable. The future isn’t to have artificial technological devices throughout our body, instead, it is to have modified biology which performs the functions of technology that are indistinguishable from our regular bodies.
This will extend far past ourselves and our bodies. Things like trees could potentially be replaced by superior versions of themselves designed specifically to cater more to human society and provide things like improved pollution filtering. Bio engineers have already started rebuilding bacteria to produce crude oil. All of these things are signs of what is to come.
The argument for and against wealth distribution are pretty common. Conservatives will often believe that wealth distribution will stunt job growth because the rich will stop creating jobs. Liberals believe that if money is distributed everyone will have a higher quality of life. They are both wrong and this can be deduced by a simple deduction of basic facts.
#1 Money does not equal products
World hunger can easily be solved, we just need to print an infinite amount of money and we would have an infinite amount of food, right? The people that believe wealth distribution would actually work don’t understand what money is. Money is just an arbitrary representation of your time you exchange for products, it doesn’t actually represent products. People that don’t have a lot of money will often look at the wealthy and assume that everyone can live the way they do but that would be an impossibility. If everyone had infinite amounts of money not everyone could buy a Ferrari because Ferrari’s take a certain amount of time to make.
There is also this illusion that the wealthy are massive consumers. Sure they might have a larger house or a fancier car but outside of that their consumption rates are some what comparable to everyone else. Even if they did actually consume 5x more then everyone else, distributing their wealth would only help (maybe) an extra 5-10% of the population. The only thing distributing wealth would do is max out the means of production and ultimately reduce the availability of items for everybody which would lead to preferential treatment based on other criteria. You don’t need a sophisticated understanding in economics to get this principle.
#2 The wealthy create massive amounts of jobs
On the opposite side of the spectrum you have the belief in the “trickle down” effect. The reason this idea is fallacious is because a lot of wealthy people usually don’t spend their own capital on projects and even if they do in the case of some billionaires, assuming their projects are successful (4/5 are not) their endeavors won’t really become true job creators until they get public funding through the stock market.
While it is true that the wealthy usually have a better understanding of this process, they can execute the process without ever spending a cent of their own money. A venture capital firm might be entirely funded by means of the stock market (the public) and while the wealthy might buy shares and fund indirectly their impact to the total funding amount is relatively small. This principle has direct business applications as well. Who makes more money wal-mart or Neiman Marcus? In 2011 Neiman Marcus made 4 billion gross, wal-mart made 446 billion in 2012. Public investment is always worth more then private wealthy investment.
Part of the misconception is that only the wealthy invest in the stock market but the public will actually invest in the stock market indirectly. For instance, mutual funds buy into the stock market on behalf of the public. A lot of people who have retirement funds usually have mutual funds and by this process are actually investing into the stock market.
In video games where they have fake currencies generated all the time there is a common problem of inflation which is important to the designer because it makes elements in the game have less value and because of that the overall good experience of the game is reduced. What game designers do to combat the issue of increasing amounts of money is to create money sinks and these are methods that occur to pull money out of the system indefinitely.
The wealthy act as a money sink. They pull money out of the system and then don’t spend it. This process is important because it increases the value of everyone’s money. It is even more important when you have a government that insists on creating new money all the time. The wealthy or corporations are actually what is stopping inflation from actually rising at an even faster levels then they already are.
Our economies revolve around a variety of balancing acts. We want to maintain quality of life, introduce social programs, but at the same time we want to encourage competition via free market but not have abuse of the general populous in the process. I am not sure what processes are the best, the only thing I am sure of is that no pure system would be without fault.
Whether it is capitalism or socialism, all systems that exist exist for the same reason and that is to overcome the problem of not having enough to go around. Capitalism links the amount of stuff you can get to your effort or innovation (hopefully) and socialism gets you more stuff via rationing.
There would be some, of course, that argue we need to learn to live with less but this is highly ideological and wouldn’t work because of the human ego always demanding more. It is unrealistic to expect or hope everyone to change their consumption rates. The easiest way to solve our economic problems is through technology and making material items valueless because we can create them so easily. From this view point, at the current time capitalism seems to be the best motivating force for reducing production times and devaluing materialistic items.
In the past 200 years we are flying through the sky using artificial contraptions, speaking to people on the other side of the planet in an instant, growing organs, driving ground vehicles that travel faster then any other creature on the planet, illuminating the earth at night with artificial light, travelling into space, and splitting atoms. This is the most important time in human history ever; we have only been treading water for the last couple billion years until now.
Some may look at humanity and point out all the flaws or looking for radical economic and political change. While I think the ideas are interesting, it’s a little sour with unrealistic idealism. The reality is that there has never been any political system that has stood the test of time. Capitalism, facism, and socialism have all been tried to their extremes and have failed. The problem is that most humans don’t understand that political and economic failure is a part of evolution. When things fail and collapse what remains is the strongest bits.
There is no such thing as a long-term lasting political/economic system and if there were it means we have reached the apex of our possible evolution. However it is important, despite unavoidable failure, that humans strive for the best possible systems. I don’t think this would be accomplished by starting completely fresh. In the grand scheme of things the largest corporations and the most greedy politicians are a relatively small blip on the human radar.