It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
...quote from the wiki page:
Future shock is also a term for a certain psychological state of individuals and entire societies, introduced by Toffler in his book of the same name. Toffler's shortest definition of future shock is a personal perception of "too much change in too short a period of time". The concept of future shock bears resemblance to the late 20th/early 21st century concept of "the technological singularity", and may have been influenced by Kuhn's concept of a paradigm shift.
...and a quote from the book:
Future shock is a time phenomenon, a product of the greatly accelerated rate of change in society. It arises from the superimposition of a new culture on an old one. It is culture shock in one's own society. But its impact is far worse. For most Peace Corps men, in fact most travelers, have the comforting knowledge that the culture they left behind will be there to return to. The victim of future shock does not.
When a fifty-year-old father tells his fifteen-year-old son that he will have to wait two years before he can have a car of his own, that interval of 730 days represents a mere 4 percent of the father's lifetime to date. It represents over 13 percent of the boy's lifetime. It is hardly strange that to the boy the delay seems three or four times longer than to the father. Similarly, two hours in the life of a four-year-old may be the felt equivalent of twelve hours in the life of her twenty-four-year-old mother. Asking the child to wait two hours for a piece of candy may be the equivalent of asking the mother to wait fourteen hours for a cup of coffee.
There may be a biological basis as well, for such differences in subjective response to time. "With advancing age," writes psychologist John Cohen of the University of Manchester, "the calendar years seem progressively to shrink. In restrospect every year seems shorter than the year just completed, possibly as a result of the gradual slowing down of metabolic processes." In relation to the slowdown of their own biological rhythms, the world would appear to be moving faster to older people, even if it were not.
Originally posted by EvasiusThe code is counting down to something in the near future, however it’s not clear whether it's a transition point in an infinite cycle or an endpoint leading to the 'flatline' of our known existence.
This acceleration of time or complexity shows no sign of slowing down. In fact, within the fabric of our own lives we can almost daily...hourly...by the minute feel it speeding up, taking hold. It’s a cliché that time is moving faster and faster; a cliché of the mass media. But I want to suggest that this is not a perceptual illusion or a cultural mirage, that this is actually happening to the space-time matrix that time is in fact speeding up that history in which we are embedded because our life of fifty to eighty years is so infemeral on a scale of ten to fifteen thousand years, but nevertheless history is a state of incredible destabilization. It’s a chaostrophy. In the process of happening it begins with animals kept in balance by natural selection, and it ends with a global internet of electronic information transfer and a language using species hurling its instruments towards the stars. There is no reason for us to suppose that this process of acceleration is ever going to slow down or be deflected. It has been a law of nature from the very beginning of nature, that this acceleration was built-in. What poses a problem to us, as thinking individuals, is that the speed of involution toward concrescence is now so great that we can feel the tug of it within the confines of our own lives. There has been more change since 1960 than in the previous several thousand years. There has been more change since 1992 than in the previous thousand years. Change is accelerating - invention, connection, adumbration of ideas, mathematical algorithms, connectivity of people social systems, this is all accelerating furiously, and under the control of no one, not the Catholic church, the communist party, the IMF - no one is in charge of this process. This is what makes history so interesting, it’s a run-away freight train on a dark and stormy night.
I totally believe that everything is alright, and that what we're going through are birth pangs. And naturally when a pregnancy comes to term the baby must be expelled or there is danger of toxemia, and birth is an end to the stable reinforcing environment of the womb. We are being expelled from the planet. It's very clear that human culture is too toxic of a process to be carried out on the surface of any planet. To be who we are, we must leave the planet because to be who we are wrecks planets...Do your mother a favour and be born, You know, yes, the Earth is the cradle of humanity, but are we to remain in the cradle forever?
Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by BlasteR
There is an Art piece called,"World Tree" painted by Alex Grey back in the '80's.If you check it out you will see the Twin Towers and Two planes headed towards from two directions,very eerie.Sort of what I understand to be your meaning is which came first?Or is it resonance?
On the other side of the tree are symbols of destruction and raping of Mother Earth and in clear detail, the Twin Towers and two airplanes flying by. Also, one can not miss the George Bush looking figure hiding behind a “terrorist” looking man standing alongside a “prickly” penis (or”dick” as he emphasized in the tour, possibly referring to Dick Cheney)
Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by BlasteR
There is an Art piece called,"World Tree" painted by Alex Grey back in the '80's.If you check it out you will see the Twin Towers and Two planes headed towards from two directions,very eerie.Sort of what I understand to be your meaning is which came first?Or is it resonance?
A man sits down before a gun, which is pointed at his head. This is no ordinary gun; it's rigged to a machine that measures the spin of a quantum particle. Each time the trigger is pulled, the spin of the quantum particle -- or quark -- is measured. Depending on the measurement, the gun will either fire, or it won't. If the quantum particle is measured as spinning in a clockwise motion, the gun will fire. If the quark is spinning counterclockwise, the gun won't go off. There'll only be a click.
Nervously, the man takes a breath and pulls the trigger. The gun clicks. He pulls the trigger again. Click. And again: click. The man will continue to pull the trigger again and again with the same result: The gun won't fire. Although it's functioning properly and loaded with bullets, no matter how many times he pulls the trigger, the gun will never fire. He'll continue this process for eternity, becoming immortal.
Go back in time to the beginning of the experiment. The man pulls the trigger for the very first time, and the quark is now measured as spinning clockwise. The gun fires. The man is dead.
But, wait. The man already pulled the trigger the first time -- and an infinite amount of times following that -- and we already know the gun didn't fire. How can the man be dead? The man is unaware, but he's both alive and dead. Each time he pulls the trigger, the universe is split in two. It will continue to split, again and again, each time the trigger is pulled, and becoming quantum immortal.
one cannot introduce the notion of "elements of reality" without affecting the predictions of the theory. That is, one cannot complete quantum mechanics with these "elements", because this automatically leads to some logical contradictions (of the type 1=-1).
Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics as a "real" and complete theory, struggling to the end of his life for an interpretation that could comply with relativity without complying with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. As he once said: "God does not play dice", skeptically referring to the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics which says there exists no objective physical reality other than that which is revealed through measurement and observation.
The EPR paradox is a paradox in the following sense: if one adds to quantum mechanics some seemingly reasonable (but actually wrong, or questionable as a whole) conditions (referred to as locality, realism (not to be confused with philosophical realism), counterfactual definiteness, and completeness; see Bell inequality and Bell test experiments), then one obtains a contradiction. However, quantum mechanics by itself does not appear to be internally inconsistent, nor — as it turns out — does it contradict relativity. As a result of further theoretical and experimental developments since the original EPR paper, most physicists today regard the EPR paradox as an illustration of how quantum mechanics violates classical intuitions.
Originally posted by Evasius
Time for us is very different to the people of the past - if someone were to travel here from the past, it would be like stepping from a stand-still into a rushing river.