"The Paperclip Maximizer" & UFOlogy

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

No need to apologize, no damage done. The last part about waves referred to the last part of the post I was responding to :

replication wave already happened.

Then, I reread your post, and I misunderstood it.

I like discussions, else it would become difficult to identify the flaws in my ideas. Or to consider new ones.

a reply to: IgnorantGod

Perfect. Ditto.

I hope I didn’t handwave any, not my intention as I’m not an expert at all in anything to do with science or space travel etc. I just like to see these posts and think about what people are saying, find a nugget of info I’ve never thought about. Plus writing with thumbs on my phone is a pia.

Here’s a thought, already mentioned before, but instead of trying to travel great distances, why not invite our friends here, if there’s space faring vehicles with IA, or Aliens, somehow attract them to visit us. Borrow there car and go joy ride. I know, I know. Bad things happen and as KPB said, we are vicious animals who would use those tools to power over each other. First one with the tool has the throne. Brings me back to square one.

Maybe we just need to wait for another Tesla or Einstein etc al to be born.

a reply to: 38181

you are good.

A lot of people won't participate in my threads,
so props to you for participating.

As for 'inviting friends', the main problem seems
to be the lack of FTL.

I wrote a paper on relativistic travel through the
universe for plasma lifeforms..

Oh for a certain type of critter, near-instantaneous
travel might well be possible.. but not for things
made of matter I think.

Just my postulation.

But a universe where only something like a Boltzmann
brain has 'FTL' changes the UFOlogy landscape
markedly.

Here's another Isaac Arthur gem:

www.youtube.com...

Where he mentions a replicator wave and the zoo
hypothesis.

This man, IA, is very close to 100% rational in his
videos, educated in science, and yet he's not afraid
to mention some 'out there ideas'.

I recommend this video as well. I recommend all
his videos actually.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Interesting thought.

Obviously, I'm more nihilistic than IA. I'm more prone to consider morality as an entirely subjective fabric from within consciousness, but I'm wondering if the subjective fabric wouldn't be programmed as a set of parameters (or attributes) by default within a certain point of conscious awereness/development?

a reply to: IgnorantGod

well, if eventually species 'ascend' into some
"Universal Quantum Group Consciousness" that
could certainly be.

I'm not much for over-hyping 'objective morality'
myself. It's nearly a dichotomy to even say that
phrase.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

well, if eventually species 'ascend' into some
"Universal Quantum Group Consciousness" that
could certainly be.

I guess at this point it is imposition actualized to its max potential... imposition on itself that is. Not that I'm entirely against it, I can correlate to this kind of masochistic behavior.

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: 38181


I wrote a paper on relativistic travel through the
universe for plasma lifeforms..

A good friend of mine died Back 20 years ago, a year or so later after his death I had a very vivid dream, he was in it but in a strange way, He said he could travel the universe In a blink of the eye, in a faster way then we could think, and there was nothing to fear of death and it was the most fun he could have than being a lifeForm on earth. This was not dreamed through thought or words, but through feelings, and I see/feel it crystal clear to this day. Weird.

Your plasma idea might be that?

a reply to: IgnorantGod

Learning, then forgetting, then learning, never ends.

a reply to: 38181

Everyone, who wishes not to be deluded,
needs to untie their own knot.

Much of the 'knot' inside of us, is due to
accepting other people's thoughts uncritically,
and 'bolting them into ourselves'.

There are various ways to rectify that error,
but it's not easy.

Asking me for answers, to your personal
experiences, probably does not assist
in that journey, if that is the journey
you want to be on .. dispelling your own
self-delusion.

Most people don't want to take that journey
as it feels like death.

There are many things I could say about sentience
and plasma, but they are my own unproven theories.

Kev

a reply to: IgnorantGod

this is turning into a Isaac Arthur fanboi thread;

But this one:

www.youtube.com...

Because it shows that organic alien life, like people
postulate may be DANG RARE.

Whether organic alien life is THAT rare, or just rare,
it's quite the fascinating video, if you like learning
science.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Always amazing to wonder about life's development. The odds are against us, yet here we are, thinking about it. To be honest, I'm not really interest to know whether there is another developed civilization out there or not.

Unless one of these would come and directly impact life on earth, its existence value shouldn't alter my experiences.

However, I'm interest in these odds for development. It is the critical part. As someone who tend to conceive the universe as a "living organism" (with a mind) rather than a machine; these odds are the real challenge to that view. Since if the universe would be a living organism that replicates living organisms (or set the stage to life development), why is it so inefficient?

Why choose randomness over specific paths? Well, as IA said, these calculations are mostly related to the universe at its present state.

I guess the universe likes to be in a state of uncertainty; it gives enough clues to actually make something, but the overwhelming lack of everything else always gives potentials for the else.

a reply to: IgnorantGod

Like your thinking. It's very similar to mine.

"why is it so inefficient?"

It's all a matter of scale.

We think the Universe is large. But is it really?

It's all a matter of perspective.

Look inside even ONE atom and it's 99.9999999999999%
(whatever the number) empty space.

Is that inefficient too?

If it's all a transitory blip, from 'nothing' to 'everyting'
caught mid-blip, like those virtual photon pairs erupting
from the void,

does it matter,

if say this entire Universe was just inhabited by one
species say? (I'm not saying it is),

but for all it matters, it could be.. and that would
be fine.

Inefficiency is in the eye of the beholder.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Look inside even ONE atom and it's 99.9999999999999%
(whatever the number) empty space.

I see, I was too narrowed and I forgot to take into account such particularities. I ought to agree here, it isn't inefficient in my opinion.

If it's all a transitory blip, from 'nothing' to 'everyting'
caught mid-blip, like those virtual photon pairs erupting
from the void,

does it matter

Oh I like this part; 'from nothing to everything'! Most wonderful aspect of it all.
Hmm, if it is all about the journey, and not about the final outcome, nor the initial state, then I guess efficiency doesn't matter.

a reply to: IgnorantGod

Yes...

Let's say you take out a 100 trillion dollar loan,
where the interest begins to accrue tomorrow.

So you pay it back before interest accrues.

you could do it endlessly and forever,

and efficiency would not exist as an issue.

If it's all funny money, there is no debt, no
consequence.

In such a case, it wouldn't matter if all the Universe
were as small as one atom, or infinitely larger than
all known universes.

When it's all funny money, and the result of a simple
transaction (the 'blip'),

there's nothing to fuss over. No need for human
baggage to make something of it, other than
what it is.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I've read about the idea that a soul is a 0 (a dimensionless point). That it contained infinite positive energy (all numbers greater than 0 to infinity) and also infinite negative energy, so that the sum of all its energy cancelled to 0, or nothing.

If I use your metaphor and put energy instead of money, it gives a pretty interesting stage for some "Acts" to happen, given that all 0's could potentially exchange any number.

Anyway around, you generate the money you use for transaction, so the number doesn't really matter either.

a reply to: IgnorantGod

Some take a 'mystical path', they become ensnared
in an onion of infinite layers.

They find 1, and say, 'that's the soul'.
They find 2, and say, "that's the soul'.
if they keep looking long enough, they become exhausted
and choose some arbitrary thing and 'make their last
stand'.

As 'wasting a lifetime' without 'finding your soul' is
humiliating. it's actually not unusual to commit
suicide.

Only of course, ones initial premise may be wrong...

If you don't know if your original premise is true or not,
and it's impossible to know this,

All you can do is to become a magician,

or to succumb to despair.

Or, you run with the null hypothesis, and see where
that takes you.

Frankly, it can take you far.. in fact it could potentially
help you find what you are looking for.

So maybe you spin it on it's head..

maybe I or you or any of us... maybe none of us..
has an 'individual soul', except in the most temporary
manner.

We are like a god, to the biota in our guts.

We are like a god, to all our individual organs.

Perhaps we too are 'organs for something else.

Organs come.

Organs go.

If you were to discover that there is no part of you
which is not temporary... just like stars/galaxies/&
apparently universes come and go..

then you become deathless and unafraid.

you see you are equal to everything; there is nothing
to fight or fret about or attain.

When 'reality' wants to be KPB, it grows one..

Or you can say 'reality' is mindless too.. that's fine
too from certain persecteive.

in either case, KBP is 'here'.

Until he's not.

Neither existing or not existing is a tragedy.

Of course people go, "if nothing matters, then why bother?"

By this they mean, if their limited concept of a soul isn't true,
and there is nothing to 'save their work', then why bother?

Me? I think being deathless is quite liberating and enjoyable.

Some wise women once said,

"Today a God"
"Tomorrow a worm".
Same thing.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Well, the way I think about "individual soul" is similar to OOP (Object-Oriented Programming); You have a class with a set of attributes (variables in which you can stock data), the class in itself doesn't exist, or doesn't have any value.

However, you can create an infinity of instances of the class. These instances are the objects (they have values) and can interact with the rest of the code (environment).

Some wise women once said,

"Today a God"
"Tomorrow a worm".
Same thing.

Lol, it reminds me of this : "It's no use, Mr. James—it's turtles all the way down."

Great post, thank you for your replies, really constructive (at least, for me).

a reply to: IgnorantGod

Souls in VB.net or C++ ?
;-)

I don't talk about it much, but the soul death
I experienced was full of useful information,
both before and after the death.

But going over the details isn't helpful really..
even if other people go through the same
process at some point, it's far more important
to be helpful with broad strokes, not the very
subjective 60 seconds.

Nice conversations!