• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

'Time Travel'/'Access to the past' Poll


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

Poll: 'Time Travel'/'Access to the past' Poll (66 member(s) have cast votes)

Will 'time travel' to the past be possible?

  1. No. (18 votes [26.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.87%

  2. Yes, to any time in the past. (20 votes [29.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 29.85%

  3. Yes, but only as far back as when time travel machine was turned on. (8 votes [11.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.94%

  4. Don't Know. (21 votes [31.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.34%

Will 'Access of the past' become possible?

  1. No. (20 votes [29.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 29.85%

  2. Yes, to any time in the past. (23 votes [34.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.33%

  3. Yes, but only as far back as when 'Access Machine' was turned on. (6 votes [8.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.96%

  4. Don't Know. (18 votes [26.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.87%

Should more research & investigation into 'time travel'/'Access to the past' be carried out?

  1. Yes. (41 votes [61.19%])

    Percentage of vote: 61.19%

  2. No. (19 votes [28.36%])

    Percentage of vote: 28.36%

  3. Don't Know. (7 votes [10.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.45%

Do you think you'll become immortal with the help of 'time travel'/'access to the past'?

  1. Yes. (8 votes [11.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.94%

  2. No. (44 votes [65.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 65.67%

  3. Don't Know. (15 votes [22.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.39%

Vote Guests cannot vote
⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#31 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 02 August 2014 - 04:18 PM

Well, real is the whole universe to come back into its previous state.



#32 Brain_Ischemia

  • Guest
  • 139 posts
  • 23
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA
  • NO

Posted 02 August 2014 - 08:32 PM

And what exactly, other than a question of fidelity or resolution, makes this universe "real" as opposed to a simulated one?



#33 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 03 August 2014 - 07:31 AM

I told you, man. Simulated things are only imaginary. The same is to play a tank game and to pretend, that you are driving a real tank.

 

If you close your eyes and imagine, that you travel in the past, this is imaginary. The same is the virtual time travelling. You imagine very convincingly, with the help of a computer, that you are travelling in the past.

 

The next step will be your employer to hire you and to pay you virtual reality money. When you stay hungry for several days, you will understand what is the difference between virtual reality and the real world.



sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#34 A941

  • Guest
  • 1,024 posts
  • 50
  • Location:Austria

Posted 20 August 2014 - 08:12 PM

Thats disturbing and makes no real sense, the concept of time must either be kept, or replaced with something that explains things, and not replaced with a gap that makes no explaination possible.

 

Time travell sounds... I dont know if i can grasp that completely, and i dont mean time travel itselfe but what would happen if you cause a time paradoxon.

 

 

 

 

 



#35 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 20 August 2014 - 08:34 PM

Not only the time travel, the entire quantum mechanics is very hard to be understood.



#36 A941

  • Guest
  • 1,024 posts
  • 50
  • Location:Austria

Posted 20 August 2014 - 08:35 PM

Maybe one day we will be able to understand it completely... by upgrading our tiny little brains.



#37 Multivitz

  • Guest
  • 550 posts
  • -48
  • Location:UK
  • NO

Posted 21 December 2015 - 12:57 AM

Time experience gets altered as one gets control of the certain large arteries. The effect on an open mind is time travel to the observer. If you see it in a movie with systems and effects you are more likely to think it's not real. The notions that movies portray are designed to confuse the masses by subconscious image implants. The synchronicity they like to orchestrate is a vain effort to use mass reality stimulation to stop the prying minds of the good people seeing what the wrongens are up to. They do it like, on an industial scale by compartmentalization slaves.
Dwelling on the fear has the result of lowering ones vibration.
Oh and Quantum physics is floored and the consept taken from previous theories.
The QP theory is used in CERN but not for looking for particles, after all matter is condensed energy, its looking for flux that can be used as a magnetic bomb. Why on earth would they spend all that effort to try and use predicive satistical maths to see the difference of 1 drop in 7000 pints of beer? Thats what the logic boils down to. Utter BS.
You think that the establishment would waste millions of peoples life times with BS?
They do, don't get upset, love conquers all, just keep clear of psychopaths(they can be stealthy).



You'll never yawn again the same way! Lol

Edited by Multivitz, 21 December 2015 - 01:17 AM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1

#38 Rib Jig

  • Guest
  • 170 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Florida

Posted 04 September 2016 - 04:58 PM

Didn't read each post, but...

 

if time travel to past happens,

doesn't it instantly create "new" multiverse

ergo time travel to past of our specific universe

is possible but NOT maintainable...???  :|o  :|o  :|o

 

You travel back to your 3rd birthday party &

you create a new universe with a person

identical to you until their 3rd birthday party,

afterwhich that person becomes different

than you & your past is unchanged...

 

ALL THE DISAPPOINTMENTS,

ALL THE SADNESS,

the aches, the pains,

ALL UNCHANGED!!!!!

no new improved you molded

by time traveler you, sorry...

 

you may live vicariously, but your own past is impregnable, IMPREGNABLE


Edited by Rib Jig, 04 September 2016 - 05:15 PM.


#39 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:49 AM

I told you, man. Simulated things are only imaginary. The same is to play a tank game and to pretend, that you are driving a real tank.

 

If you close your eyes and imagine, that you travel in the past, this is imaginary. The same is the virtual time travelling. You imagine very convincingly, with the help of a computer, that you are travelling in the past.

 

The next step will be your employer to hire you and to pay you virtual reality money. When you stay hungry for several days, you will understand what is the difference between virtual reality and the real world.

 

If digital physics is true, there's no difference between a digital pattern and an exact replication of that digital pattern.   You cannot even tell right now if you're within a simulation.   If the digital pattern of sensory experiences is the exact same, then it is the exact same experience from your point of view.

 

We've also got to remember that the possibility exists reality is a naturally occurring simulation in a naturally eternal supercomputer with memory of everything that can be.   If that were the case, it means the possibility of taking control over the machinery whose rules define reality may be possible.

 

The relativity of simultaneity indicates that the present does not exist, that its nature is identical to both past and future, but true absolute simultaneity is said to be nonexistent.  This might or might not be the case.    IF the past, nor the future, nor the present exist, but only a  4 dimensional block of data, a block time universe, the possibility that it is digital in nature is not out of the question.  Nor is the possibility that control over the underlying machinery may be possible, and that such will grant access both to the past present and future, including the distant past and the distant future.


Edited by Castiel, 11 September 2016 - 01:50 AM.


⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#40 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 11 September 2016 - 04:54 AM

Everything simulated is not real. It is fake experiences.

 

If we are currently in a simulation, then we need to get out of the simulation and try to start living in the real world. Yet, I hope, that we are not in a simulation.

 

I don't know much about digital physics, but since you write if it "is true" means, that it is some sort of a theory, that may not be correct after all. If you ask me, I distinguish between a plan(a digital pattern), and the object made by the plan. The situation is not "a digital pattern" = "exact replication of that digital pattern" because you are not two exact replications of the plan, but a plan and a construction. Its like compareing a building with the plans of the building. To claim, that you are compareing "exact replication of that pattern" would mean you to compare a plan with a plan, or a building with a building.



#41 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 September 2016 - 08:57 AM

Everything simulated is not real. It is fake experiences.

 

If we are currently in a simulation, then we need to get out of the simulation and try to start living in the real world. Yet, I hope, that we are not in a simulation.

 

I don't know much about digital physics, but since you write if it "is true" means, that it is some sort of a theory, that may not be correct after all. If you ask me, I distinguish between a plan(a digital pattern), and the object made by the plan. The situation is not "a digital pattern" = "exact replication of that digital pattern" because you are not two exact replications of the plan, but a plan and a construction. Its like compareing a building with the plans of the building. To claim, that you are compareing "exact replication of that pattern" would mean you to compare a plan with a plan, or a building with a building.

 

All conscious experience emerges from the pattern of neural activity, whether deep down it is digital or not is not confirmed.  What is known is that  consciousness is distributed throughout large chunks of brain tissue, and that high bandwidth information through long range connections is sent through digital signals, action potentials.

 

Some of the proponents of digital physics believe there is no outside, no other reality, that a digital world would be all there is and all that exists, perhaps even all that can logically exist.

 

If the patterns behind consciousness turn out to be at the root digital in nature, then out of digital pattern would emerge consciousness the most powerful and important phenomena in the world.  IF consciousness, which is more important than the material world, which gives meaning to existence, if even it could emerge out of such, then it is likely so could reality itself.

 

Remember the digital information behind a virtual object, and the virtual object are different aspects of the same exact thing.  The virtual object is but properties of the pattern, a manifestation of it.   If the world is digital, what some would call in a sense 'virtual', then the fundamental information, would be all there is.

 

A brain computer interface can elicit any possible pattern of neural activity,  you could consider such as a hallucination or a memory.   But deep down the pattern elicited would be no different from that generated from the real activity, you would be having real experiences, the exact same experiences as if you went through a particular circumstance.   You could record and relive any moment with all accompanying sensations and thoughts, even the sensation of free will, replaying such a memory would from the conscious observer's point of view, would be no different from living it for the very first time.   

 

Yet consider that given the possibility of immortality, you would likely have relived this very moment an infinity of times, the probability that it is the very first time you're experiencing this, it wouldn't be too unreasonable to conclude this probability can be considered very low.

 

 

PS

 

In the future if we do not destroy ourselves, what code do you think brain computer interfaces are going to be using to store memories and exchange sensations and thoughts?  Why it is all but certain the digital code, binary information.    Consider if a digital code can even encompass the qualia, the sensations of consciousness itself, what stops it from encompassing all that can be?

 

music is real, whether heard from an ipod or a loudspeaker.  There's no 'fake' vs 'real' music, 'fake' vs 'real' sound.   The idea that a precise digital replication of a digital pattern does not carry all its properties, is the fallacy of essentialism.   If I take my eye and replace it with a future advanced bionic eye, my sight does not suddenly become 'fake' sight.   It is just as real as the real thing.   A conscious experience is a real conscious experience no matter what causes it.  The sensation of red, is a real sensation of red, whatever the cause.

 

The mind's eye is nothing but a canvas, what is placed upon it, what it is witness to is the truth, reality. 


Edited by Castiel, 11 September 2016 - 09:29 AM.


#42 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:01 AM

In my view, there is outside, the reality, that our receptors register. It is known, that the light has an effect of the eyes, and that the eyes generate the vision. There are sound waves comming from the world, that are registered with our ears.

 

Our brain is not build to be digital. The digital manages only 1 and 0. It is analogous. In the analogous systems there is an analogous number for each possible signal. E.g., in the analogous recordings it is not only 1 and 0, but all of the numbers together. For the analogous brain paeople can only make a digital model of its working or activity, whatever you name it. It is like the sound - the sound is analogous in its nature, but you can record it in a digital form, e.g. you can make a digital model of the sound, by using special sound analogous to digital transformer, which is build in each new computer - in the sound card and that allows you to use the microphone. Something simmilar is with the brain activity. The neurons don't fire ones and zeros, but pulses with different voltage.



#43 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:49 AM

In my view, there is outside, the reality, that our receptors register. It is known, that the light has an effect of the eyes, and that the eyes generate the vision. There are sound waves comming from the world, that are registered with our ears.

 

Our brain is not build to be digital. The digital manages only 1 and 0. It is analogous. In the analogous systems there is an analogous number for each possible signal. E.g., in the analogous recordings it is not only 1 and 0, but all of the numbers together. For the analogous brain paeople can only make a digital model of its working or activity, whatever you name it. It is like the sound - the sound is analogous in its nature, but you can record it in a digital form, e.g. you can make a digital model of the sound, by using special sound analogous to digital transformer, which is build in each new computer - in the sound card and that allows you to use the microphone. Something simmilar is with the brain activity. The neurons don't fire ones and zeros, but pulses with different voltage.

 

The input to the brain are digital all or none action potentials, the exchanges of information between brain areas are primarily digital all or none action potentials. 

 

The so called analog aspects, are not truly analog but pseudo analog.  For they do not allow the brain to utilize infinite precision, infinite continuous states.   The membranes of neurons have finite number of molecular and atomic components, the number of ions is a discrete number, and their position cannot be used to arbitrary infinite precision in computation.   Any finite element with a discrete number of elements, is effectively digital.  It is analog in the same sense that a random number generator from deterministic system is random, aka pseudorandom and pseudoanalog correspondingly.

 

The action potential is not believed to vary meaningfully in degree of strength, it is arrival time and number of action potentials that transmit information, essentially a digital code.

 

A brain computer interface can record patterns of neural activity, and eventually it will be able to replay them, from a digital code will emerge conscious experiences.



#44 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 11 September 2016 - 11:13 AM

On the same way you may pretend that everything is digital and nothing is analog, but pseudo analog. Even the water, that flows in a river may be proclaimed to be pseudoanalog. You know, each molecule is moving 1 or not moving 0. Some may say the opposite - nothing is purely digital and everything is a pseudo digital analog. It is only a matter of point of view. The 1 and 0 are only a small part of the analog, since the analog imbunes in itself all of the digits.

 

Even if the brain can be explained with digital workings, this does not mean, that it is digital.

 

Even if it turns out to be digital, this does not mean, that we live in a halluciantion.



#45 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 September 2016 - 11:26 AM

On the same way you may pretend that everything is digital and nothing is analog, but pseudo analog. Even the water, that flows in a river may be proclaimed to be pseudoanalog. You know, each molecule is moving 1 or not moving 0. Some may say the opposite - nothing is purely digital and everything is a pseudo digital analog. It is only a matter of point of view. The 1 and 0 are only a small part of the analog, since the analog imbunes in itself all of the digits.

 

Even if the brain can be explained with digital workings, this does not mean, that it is digital.

 

Even if it turns out to be digital, this does not mean, that we live in a halluciantion.

 

Here's the thing true analog, requires that the continuous, the infinitely divisible exist.  It is doubtful that truly infinitely divisible things exist.   The continuous seems more like a useful abstraction.   Without the ability to use infinite precision any function is reproducible digitally.

 

Now if we consider the possibility of indefinite lifespans, and control over the conscious sensation by machine, the number of possible states of a human brain is said to be finite.   Given a virtual infinity of time with a finitude of states, the eventuality is repetition virtually infinite repetition.   There's no way to tell if you are experiencing something you might call real or simply living a memory, a rule following hallucination or interactive full immersion movie.   Even reality itself, existence itself, its foundation might very well be information, perhaps even digital information.   Information need no justification to exist, it is eternal.

 

The mind cannot distinguish between any possible reality and the truth, the informational truth.  If there's no real way to distinguish between these, perhaps it is the case that they're both one and the same.   Truth simply is, it is atemporal, it is eternal, it does not begin to exist.   To attempt to define a reality independent of information is like speaking of the invisible intangible dragon in your garage, which is indistinguishable from the case where all there is is the garage with no dragon.


Edited by Castiel, 11 September 2016 - 11:33 AM.


#46 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:41 PM

The analog does not require that the infinitely divisible exists. It simply can survive it. It can exist with or without it.

 

If the infinitely divisible exist it will place a stop on the digital technologies, maybe, but not the analog.

 

The existence of the infinitely divisible or its inexistence is not proven, so it cant be a scientific argument.

 

If we consider the possibility of indefinite lifespans, it is not obligate that the possible states of a human brain to be finite. The mental state, that you name cnsciousnes - memories, needs, way of thinking, whatever brain workings product - depends and adapts to the situation, and we are living in a changing world, in which the consciousness changes indefinitely. For example, there always will be a new book waiting to come out, that you would like to read.

 

Information, that exists now is not etrnal. When the carrier of the information gets destroyed, the information itself will die with it. The existence of an eternal information is only a theory.



#47 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:43 PM

The existence or the absence of eternal information is not a proof for the idea, that we live in a hallucination.



#48 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 September 2016 - 02:37 PM

The existence or the absence of eternal information is not a proof for the idea, that we live in a hallucination.

 

Depends.  We don't know the full nature of the brain's patterns.  Whatever their nature, it is safe to assume same patterns = same experience.   Given that, if we assume the patterns didn't ever begin to exist, that they are eternal, then the experiences are eternal as a result.   Though it rests on two assumptions, equal patterns mean equal experiences and patterns are eternal in nature.

 

Regardless, the apotheosis of man will likely take place this very century, with such man will gain control over his mind's eye.   Through neural interfaces, the ability to record, recall, and exchange sensations will be a reality.  With no aging, a person could easily relive or reconstruct earlier points in their live and experience them as if from the very first time.   Indefinite lifetime means thousands, millions, billions, trillions of years, perhaps eternity depending on technological progress.   If recalling an experience can be done indistinguishable from living it for the very first time.   Then assuming one benefits from technological progress, it seems likelier one might very well be reliving, recalling, than living for the very first time.



#49 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 11 September 2016 - 05:34 PM

I am not sura I understand everything you write.

 

Why do we assume, that the brain patterns didn't ever begin to exist? They start their existence from the moment the neural network starts working, and they end their existence when the neural network is disrupted for one reason or another.

 

"If recalling an experience can be done indistinguishable from living it for the very first time. Then ... one might very well be reliving, recalling, than living for the very first time."

Reviving and recalling memories does not mean, that you live for the very first time. In biological terms you start living from the moment you were a zygote. It is the one and only very first time, you are alive in biological terms.

 



#50 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 September 2016 - 03:57 AM

I am not sura I understand everything you write.

 

Why do we assume, that the brain patterns didn't ever begin to exist? They start their existence from the moment the neural network starts working, and they end their existence when the neural network is disrupted for one reason or another.

 

"If recalling an experience can be done indistinguishable from living it for the very first time. Then ... one might very well be reliving, recalling, than living for the very first time."

Reviving and recalling memories does not mean, that you live for the very first time. In biological terms you start living from the moment you were a zygote. It is the one and only very first time, you are alive in biological terms.

 

 

 

However, Skow believes that events do not sail past us and vanish forever; they just exist in different parts of spacetime. (Some physics students who learn to draw diagrams of spacetime may find this view of time intuitive.) Still, Skow’s view of time does lead to him to offer some slightly more unusual-sounding conclusions.

For instance: We exist in a “temporally scattered” condition, as he writes in the new book.

“The block universe theory says you’re spread out in time, something like the way you’re spread out in space,” Skow says. “We’re not located at a single time.”-http://news.mit.edu/...-time-pass-0128

 

Eternalism is a philosophical approach to the ontological nature of time, which takes the view that all points in time are equally "real", as opposed to the presentist idea that only the present is real and the growing block universe theory of time in which the past and present are real while the future is not....Many philosophers have argued that relativity implies eternalism-https://en.wikipedia...osophy_of_time)

 

 

You are assuming that gradual replacement, which is the reality of the living brain, is fundamentally different from discontinuous one shot replacement.  My belief is that this belief in the difference between gradual versus non gradual replacement is erroneous.

 

Even if separated by time and space, the same exact pattern of brain activity in an exactly identical brain will yield the exact same experiences, and the exact same observer, the exact same person.    The idea that somehow identical patterns, have differing essences, in my view is like the belief in vitalism or the soul, it is magical thinking.   Two identical patterns carry the same identity, and that includes identity of the individual involved.



#51 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 12 September 2016 - 07:54 AM

Even if you believe, that gradual replacement and one shot replacement are equal, you can replace parts only with equal type of parts. E.g. you can replace your brain only with a biological brain, having your own DNA. You cant replace your brain with a software and preted, that you keep existing.



#52 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2016 - 05:00 AM

The analog does not require that the infinitely divisible exists. It simply can survive it. It can exist with or without it.

It can exist as pseudoanalog.   The moment it becomes discrete, digital it no longer is truly analog.  True continuity implies infinite divisibility and true continuity is the assumption behind the belief in analog.

If we consider the possibility of indefinite lifespans, it is not obligate that the possible states of a human brain to be finite.

Several renowned physicists have stated that the observable universe has a finite number of possible configurations or states, that if the universe is infinite and infinitely varying at a certain distance exact replicas would exist, there would be infinite repetition in all directions.

 

If the observable universe itself has a finite number of states, anything smaller than the universe also has a finite number of possible states.

 

For example, there always will be a new book waiting to come out, that you would like to read.


 No, in practice the number of possible combinations of reasonable finite size is finite.  Given time infinite repetition is the answer, larger sizes, even if you could use them,  would only  consist of undigested regurgitations of entire books one after the other.  No escaping the finitude of the possible.

Even if you believe, that gradual replacement and one shot replacement are equal, you can replace parts only with equal type of parts. E.g. you can replace your brain only with a biological brain, having your own DNA. You cant replace your brain with a software and preted, that you keep existing.

If the brain is nothing more than a biological computer, a natural information processor, then the principle of computational equivalence states that identical computations in another medium will preserve function.   A patttern does not depend on one particular medium to exist, a file can go from computer to computer, from magnetic embodiment to electric electric embodiment to optical embodiment, and the file remains the same exact file, the same exact pattern.   The properties of the pattern are intrinsic to it, if the pattern occurs somewhere anywhere the properties follow, including consciousness.

 

The only alternative is bordeline magical thinking, that the brain performs something that is not computational in nature.  But all the beasts have a pathetic repertoire of behaviors which do not seem beyond computational replication, and man is barely above the beasts.



⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#53 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 13 September 2016 - 06:53 AM

The strongest contra-argument against your views, is that you rely entirely on theories, e.g. on unproven things, that sound logical. Even a very plausable theory is still a theory.

 

They sound logic though. The universe may turn out to be representable in digital form, the universe may has a finite number of states, then everything smaller than the universe also would have a finite number of possible states. 

 

For good or for bad, however, we are biological, made of cells, and these cells have our own DNA, and we have a biological brain. Maybe you can emulate your brain workings, but if some part of it gets destroyed, then the best repair still is to replace it with an equal biological part, made of cells, genetically identicle to your DNA, because only in that case you will be biologically alive. 


Edited by seivtcho, 13 September 2016 - 06:57 AM.


#54 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2016 - 10:27 AM

The strongest contra-argument against your views, is that you rely entirely on theories, e.g. on unproven things, that sound logical. Even a very plausable theory is still a theory.

 

They sound logic though. The universe may turn out to be representable in digital form, the universe may has a finite number of states, then everything smaller than the universe also would have a finite number of possible states. 

 

For good or for bad, however, we are biological, made of cells, and these cells have our own DNA, and we have a biological brain. Maybe you can emulate your brain workings, but if some part of it gets destroyed, then the best repair still is to replace it with an equal biological part, made of cells, genetically identicle to your DNA, because only in that case you will be biologically alive. 

 

The dna is a digital code, and it carries the instruction for the building and maintenance of all organic life.

 

We've observed that all manner of phenomena is representable in a digital medium, from text to sound to image.   When it comes to brain computer interfaces, the memory used to store the patterns and exchange information is likely to be digital in nature.   So even qualia itself may be storable in digital patterns.

 

Through our ever advancing computer simulations untold realism has been shown.

 

The brain receives a series of signals which are essentially digital, between brain regions the signals are essentially digital, the output is essentially digital, all or none.   

 

Already it is not unreasonable to presume that a brain computer interface could reactivate brain activity patterns to arbitrary spatiotemporal precision from a digital code.  If it can do that essentially the conscious universe can emerge entirely from digital information, not too out of the question to suspect the physical universe itself can emerge from such.

 

It is what seem like unreasonable assumptions such as true randomness and continuity, infinity divisibility, that stand in the way of a true digital interpretation of the world.

 

 

One may speak of infinite divisibility, or the lack thereof, of matter, space, time, money, or abstract mathematical objects such as the continuum.-wikipedia article on infinite divisibility

 

Regards true randomness, it implies a mechanism free, indivisible force acting on the universe.   I find it quite similar to free will in its unreasonableness, but unlike free will which is believed to result in meaningful action despite requiring content, mechanism free agents, true randomness demands essentially meaningless output de novo.    Yet any possible pattern that can exist can be produced through a deterministic process, so no matter the pattern observed there's no telling a true random pattern apart from an advanced pseudorandom pattern.   Essentially it is a nontestable, nonscientific concept resting on questionable assumptions of a mechanism free, non algorithm, indivisible entity interacting with the world.

 

But the relativity of simultaneity, which emerges from relativity, which has real world experimental backing,   It suggests the nature of the 'future' is similar in kind to that of the 'past'.   So either both future and past are set in stone, in which case events can't help but happen at the precise moment they happen in the exact way they happen, or both future and past are malleable which would be problematic to say the least.

 

While we must remain open to all possibilities, we must also weight all possibilities and their likelihood, if some possibilities rest on seemingly nonsensical or contradictory assumptions, unless such can be cleared, the possibilities must be considered unlikely or zero, as logically impossible worlds must be assumed to be nonexistent.



#55 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 13 September 2016 - 01:08 PM

Whatever else you do, you will not receive a biological immortality.

 

The main question is how you can be biologically alive, and keep existing as a human biological being. 

 

That is because this is what you are. 

 

Each deviation from that result in making you something else, but not an alive human. 



#56 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2016 - 04:00 PM

Whatever else you do, you will not receive a biological immortality.

 

The main question is how you can be biologically alive, and keep existing as a human biological being. 

 

That is because this is what you are. 

 

Each deviation from that result in making you something else, but not an alive human. 

 

If reality is composed of ideas, of information.  Then the notion of human is but a concept, and a concept can be kept eternal.   But again this desire to remain human, is like the desire of a child to remain a child, Peter Pan?   A child must grow into an adult, and humanity must grow into the next stage, must ascend to a higher state of existence, of freedom, security, and time.

 

If you're a dog and can become human, you're free to remain a dog, but you will know your place in human society.  The posthuman world nears, you decide where you want to be in the hierarchy of being.

 

You believe there are limits to the power of the eternal truth, through the truth absolute freedom is possible.  The truth will make you free, it will set you free from the shackles of your reality.  Making the blind see, making the deaf hear, making the amputees regain their limb, resurrecting the dead, and even biological immortality is possible.   There is no limit.   Before the light of truth all falsehoods disappear.

 

Bring a lie to the table, and call it the truth all you like, site passage after passage, it matter not a false sword will be cut down by a true sword.  A lie will shatter when faced with the hammer of truth.

 

Like belief in the god of the gaps, you can believe in gaps in the power of the final stage of evolution, the final solution.   But time and again, you will witness the gaps disappear one after another.

 

Evolution has been viewed in the light of an algorithm, a search, a process....   They say there's no solution, no answer, no direction, but the existence of dead ends does not imply there's not an exit to the maze.  That there's not an optimal solution, a final solution, a final answer to the ultimate question.

 

 


Edited by Castiel, 13 September 2016 - 04:07 PM.


#57 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 13 September 2016 - 04:36 PM

You know what? It again becomes a matter of a personal decision. Each idiot deserves his faith :) 

 

An idiot like me, who dreams of being a forever alive human being, deserves that - to be a forever living human being. He works for that, dreams for that, and pushes his way into that direction. Why not to be a forever living human being? 

 

An idiot like you, who does not mind to destroy his human features, but to immortalize himself by turning into a software model, independent of time and damage, because of that, deserves being a software model. He works for that, walks that pathway, and pushes his way into that direction. Why not to be a software model? 



#58 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2016 - 06:08 PM

You know what? It again becomes a matter of a personal decision. Each idiot deserves his faith :)

 

An idiot like me, who dreams of being a forever alive human being, deserves that - to be a forever living human being. He works for that, dreams for that, and pushes his way into that direction. Why not to be a forever living human being? 

 

An idiot like you, who does not mind to destroy his human features, but to immortalize himself by turning into a software model, independent of time and damage, because of that, deserves being a software model. He works for that, walks that pathway, and pushes his way into that direction. Why not to be a software model? 

 

We gather evidence and update our beliefs.   The key questions are what is a human? what is reality?  you may find that depending on the truth is whether you like what you find or not.   It is very possible that what I seek and what you seek is one and the same.    I seek growth, imagine a world where all humans remained as children?   Would these humans stop being humans if they modified such that they continue their growth and eventually they became adults?

 

In this world of possibilities, human growth is limited by genetic limitations.  A human that no longer ages, that regenerates, that can survive all manner of injury, that does not get sick...  That is still a human, through and through.   You may say but I want to age, I want to get sick, if I lose a limb I want to remain without it, if I'm in an accident I want to suffer the consequences of said accident.   That is your choice, but it does not make the transcendental human any less human. 

 

If your body lacks growth hormones, and you're given growth hormones, human still you remain.   IF your mind's growth is limited by your body, giving it the right ingredients to grow past its current limitations does not remove your humanity.

 

A faster, a smarter, a stronger human is still a human.
 


Edited by Castiel, 13 September 2016 - 06:09 PM.


#59 seivtcho

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 408
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 13 September 2016 - 06:28 PM

The human kind is the only biological specie, that can grow without to change the essence of being a biological specie. This is because of our brain. It is cappable to make inventions and items, that to solve the problems impossible for the biological species, and thus we both grow and preserve our human features.

 

For example, you can't enter in a chamber with high radiation, but what you need is an electronic machine, that to be there and do the job for you. You don't need to be the machine itself.

 

If you seek growth, seek it in the human inventions, the science and the technology, not in discarting your human features.

 

I don't want to age, nor I want to get sick, if I lose a limb I don't want to remain without it, if I'm in an accident I don't want to suffer the consequences of the accident. But my pathway is different.

I dont want to age with regenerative medicine, dont want to get sick with medications, and want to grow new limbs with stem cells. As for the accidents, I don't want them at all :) by prevention and accident proof technologies.



sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#60 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 193 posts
  • 29
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2016 - 07:35 PM

The human kind is the only biological specie, that can grow without to change the essence of being a biological specie. This is because of our brain. It is cappable to make inventions and items, that to solve the problems impossible for the biological species, and thus we both grow and preserve our human features.

 

For example, you can't enter in a chamber with high radiation, but what you need is an electronic machine, that to be there and do the job for you. You don't need to be the machine itself.

 

If you seek growth, seek it in the human inventions, the science and the technology, not in discarting your human features.

 

I don't want to age, nor I want to get sick, if I lose a limb I don't want to remain without it, if I'm in an accident I don't want to suffer the consequences of the accident. But my pathway is different.

I dont want to age with regenerative medicine, dont want to get sick with medications, and want to grow new limbs with stem cells. As for the accidents, I don't want them at all :) by prevention and accident proof technologies.

 

I believe hard nano is not viable outside of limited domain applicability.   Synthetic biology provides pretty much all the benefits and can probably even outcompete the applications that have been envisioned to require hard nano.

 

What that means, if that is true, is that a posthuman body will still be biological, but will be stronger, faster, smarter, able to self regenerate, withstand radiation, food, water, air deprivation via metabolic suspension until circumstances improve.  And will also be able to withstand decapitation and massive organ damage including central nervous system damage, regenerating with digital stored backup information.

 

That said, depending on the nature of reality, we may be able to tap into the fundamental laws and move from molecular machinery to an unimaginable machinery that can manipulate physical laws and reality itself.   A godlike indestructible immortal body, capable of anything seen in fiction.   Now whether that is possible or not will depend on the nature of reality.  It will say whether our godlike powers will sit atop an underlying rule set or whether or godlike abilities will go beyond this to define the rule set itself.

 

Sure we do not know how far our power will extend, but praying that a gap will forever remain restraining us, and resting one's faith on this gap aiding god forever.   That's not something I think one should be too proud of, it's simply god of the gaps.   You won't touch the moon, you won't fly, only god can heal the blind, only god can heal the mute, only god can heal the deaf, only god can heal the amputee, only god can raise the dead, only god can perform miracles.    You can rest believing in this, but most of the list is set to be crossed out as abilities of man, you can rest on some ability remaining forever beyond man's reach, just like the ai skeptics continue going down their list of things machines can't do yet.

 

 


Edited by Castiel, 13 September 2016 - 07:41 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users