Manufacturing the Singularity? Options

[trojan_libido]

I work in a factory producing power steering motors for cars. I see thousands upon thousands of these units being built, everything identical, everything efficient, every business meeting about efficiency, capacity and speed.

I see the same process has occurred throughout the evolution of life. Biology carries information with DNA - we have no real idea on what this information is or how it accumulates. Take a plant as an example - its shape has evolved to suit the environment, to make it more efficient, to store and convert more and more energy, to grow as fast as possible into new suitable areas.

Doesn't it seem odd that capitalism has heralded in an age that seems remarkably similar to Natures original goals? (I'm giving Nature a personality and thus deifying it, live with it )

Another example - termites. These things are deaf and blind, yet they build structures that dwarf the pyramids of Giza by comparison. They form colonies, they work together, they presumably do all this communication through smell or vibrations. More importantly they go to war. Animals have been fighting for territory, the opposite sex, or just when they're grumpy, well before we ever began taking notice.

So is the current trend of mass production and global conflict something we can actually remove from our lives? Aren't we a bit limited in our view of what God intended for us? It seems to me that the signs are all around us that life is acting exactly the way life has always acted. If there is a God there is NO evidence whatsoever that it is a God that cares for our pain. It seems that the process called God is simply to expand into order, and carry on the volatile nature that has always been part of life.

My question is fairly simple, is mass production a new realisation of natures laws of speed and efficiency?

[Joesus]

A Douglass Fir takes about 6-700 years to reach maturity but it would be difficult to find one at that age because man in his hurried attempt to get the most out of natural resources has cut them all down.

I think man lacks the capacity to stand still for very long and really take in what is around him and inside of him.
The examples of blind absorption in group structure shows that one pointed effort toward the goal can achieve alot, but men are not termites, we are reflections of potential.
If man has the capacity to rise from ones beliefs to creating miracles which have become myth to the herd, then the system of manufacture would only be an example of a mind set rather than the pure potential of human being.

[trojan_libido]

What makes you believe we're doing anything wrong? Isn't what we're doing exactly what we're supposed to be doing at any one moment? Our systems of manufacture are creating items at an extraordinary rate, much more than we can dispose of. This system of manufacture isn't just a mind set, its the commercial beast we've unleashed and its more grounded in reality than any state of mind could be. Pandora's box is well and truly open - there is no way we'll go backwards in time - more advanced automated machinery is being put into factories the world over. This rides got no brakes, only a huge environmental change ie cataclysm could realistically alter our path.

We are self-righteous, which enables us to avoid some disasters, but overall we are on fixed rails which don't really allow for that much freedom of choice. For instance politicians are always telling us they'll change this or fix that if they get to power, but once they're in power they are unable to fulfil most of their promises. If they wanted to radically reduce the number of soldiers, for moralities sake, they would be unable to without creating a crisis. Jobs would be lost on a massive scale, which would have a knock on effect on the economy.

Our freedom, diversity and the pure potential you mention is constantly under threat from the layers of structure and order we've created around ourselves.

[Joesus]

What makes you believe we're doing anything wrong?

What gives you the impression I think there is anything wrong?
If you look at a child who is exploring its world but has no knowledge of it, any parent would know there is much that will open to the child in discovery and experience, but the parent would not think there was something wrong.
If the parent is wise enough to know that he/she is still discovering the world inside and out it would be a bit shortsighted to observe the child playing with a toy stethoscope and say look, the child is going to be a doctor, see how effortlessly he/she takes to it...

Isn't what we're doing exactly what we're supposed to be doing at any one moment?

Supposed to be doing is a strong idea. It can be broken down into many interpretations. If a man is pounding nails into a board someone might think he is building a fence or a house, another might not see that far and only see him pounding a nail.
If one doesn't have vision the observance would be only of pounding the nail. Someone with greater vision might see him building a fence. Another with still greater vision will see him refining his awareness of himself and building his relationship with God.

Our systems of manufacture are creating items at an extraordinary rate, much more than we can dispose of.

Creating waste and absorbing resources faster than they can be replenished.

This system of manufacture isn't just a mind set, its the commercial beast we've unleashed and its more grounded in reality than any state of mind could be. Pandora's box is well and truly open - there is no way we'll go backwards in time - more advanced automated machinery is being put into factories the world over. This rides got no brakes, only a huge environmental change ie cataclysm could realistically alter our path.

So getting back to your original question

...... is mass production a new realisation of natures laws of speed and efficiency?

Is speed and efficiency really a law of nature?

[trojan_libido]

I use 'law' in a loose sense, because obviously its not a physical law. I suppose its similar to saying love is 'Gods' nature, no real evidence but many believe it.

Ok, ill try and explain my reasoning for speed and efficiency being a byproduct of evolution, and if you personify nature, a goal of it.

Life has evolved, and it does so with small mutations. Those mutations are often deadly to the species, but sometimes there are advantages which can further the species. Nature doesn't overdevelop these mutations before they are used, it wont create a huge ear on an elephant and when its happy allow it to hear - the ear is in use throughout all the mutations leading up to the familiar form. The reason is obvious, the mutations have to be an advantage right here and now. This is contrary to human invention, which can be more like art (pointless) than evolution.

Another example is a plant. DNA isn't like a hard drive in a computer, there isn't ample room for redundant data (despite claims of junk DNA). Nature doesn't go off developing pointless limbs. Somewhere in our DNA is a pattern of how each cell or limb grows. We know for sure that the proteins in DNA don't spell out "Grow arm until x cm long" or "eye color: blue size: 5cm radius". So whats the alternative? I guarantee the answer is in maths and formula, a very efficient way to encode information. I wont go into the whole phi ratio and such but its important to efficient growth patterns nonetheless.

Another example is a type of bug that stays underground in egg form, it only hatches and takes to the surface every so many years. It does this to avoid potential seasonal predators, and the cycle they hatch on is based on prime numbers. Now its not as though the species knows about prime numbers, but its evolved into those patterns to become more efficient in survival.

So Joe, do you believe that where biology stops is the end of the evolutionary chain, or do you believe our inventions and ideas are an extention of that process? I believe the latter. Its the only sensible idea in a fractal universe, in my opinion.

All of our inventions have been to improve the speed and efficiency of everyday tasks. If we can imagine culture as biology, the effect is an entity evolving. We need to move that stone from here to there, no problem, ideas form and are implemented, evolve and are reimplemented. This cycle continues, always trying to do tasks quicker and cheaper. Name me one practical invention (no chocolate fireguards) that doesn't make improvements in efficiency or speed and I'll be impressed.

My view of the Earth is one big organism, our mother. All our technology has been to improve resource gathering, speed of transfer and communication. The car and mobile phone and internet are the inventions that have radically altered our world. We're on a path that is developing better logistics and communication to allow us to react faster to hazards and such.

The same thing has happened in biology, multi-celled organisms have evolved 'equipment' to allow it to react better to the environment. Evolving nervous systems and brains to process incoming information; evolving faster propulsion to catch vulnerable prey; evolving camouflage to reduce the chance of death; evolving sound and movement techniques to communicate in groups.

The self-ordering and evolving properties of a multicelled organism are extremely similar to business, at least from the perspective capitalism. Leads (prey) are found, trade routes are setup (resource gathering), customer service records good and bad customers (memory); there are many parallels better than those I've quickly came up with.

A business is constantly reviewing how efficient it is, trying to improve the profit margins. This spirit of commerce seems to be the same threaded right through all lifes processes.

I'd appreciate a genuine discussion of how others feel about this.

[Joesus]

So Joe, do you believe that where biology stops is the end of the evolutionary chain, or do you believe our inventions and ideas are an extention of that process? I believe the latter. Its the only sensible idea in a fractal universe, in my opinion.

If we take your idea about inventions and apply it to biology of all living things, and then identify the inventor I think you'll have to change your point of reference to the fact that evolution is not the state of mind of the inventor, but an idea of the inventor.
Then if you take your own experiences in how many thoughts and ideas you have and apply that to the inventor you might find that instead of the single reflection of a universe or organism most absorb themselves in, there are many reflections of the inventor in many different forms as many different universes.
Consciousness is not bound to evolution, nor is it affected as much as the ego believes it is affected by change and any measure of time.

Do you think Mother Earth (as an organism) is healthier as a result of technology?

Also what would the singularity of the universe look like?

Have you ever contemplated the verse:
Mt 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

[trojan_libido]

If we take your idea about inventions and apply it to biology of all living things, and then identify the inventor I think you'll have to change your point of reference to the fact that evolution is not the state of mind of the inventor, but an idea of the inventor.

I'm not entirely sure how that relates to what I'm saying so lets remove this inventor, call it a process with a simple cause and effect evolution in which we don't know the cause and the effect is hidden in all our movements.

Then if you take your own experiences in how many thoughts and ideas you have and apply that to the inventor you might find that instead of the single reflection of a universe or organism most absorb themselves in, there are many reflections of the inventor in many different forms as many different universes.

I dont give much weight to the many universes theories, mainly because of my contempt for changing the word universe into something that doesnt encompass everything. But your correct, every eye has a different view. But surely we have enough eyes to see a shadow of the truth?

Consciousness is not bound to evolution, nor is it affected as much as the ego believes it is affected by change and any measure of time.

This is only speculation, no consciousness has ever been found outside of biology, although I do feel the Universe is consciousness and we're its eyes, ears, hands and mouth.

Do you think Mother Earth (as an organism) is healthier as a result of technology?

Does the survival of Earth have to continue on to infinity? Does an egg survive the birth of a new life? If I've learned anything from my time on Earth, the seasons, the image of Shiva, nothing is eternal. Think about the Earth as an organism for a moment, its been upgrading communication through technology, with the same patterns as we've seen in evolution except now its faster because we're its hands.

The flying birds, the fish, anything that lives or moves through the different density fields of matter has been important to our consciousness and forming archetypes. Throughout time we have revered the Lotus. The lotus was revered because it grows in the earth, moves up through water and flowers on the surface within air. The lotus species even had scientific merit for being pure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_effect
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJtQ6dvcbOg

So going back to our thought experiment Gaia, its just developed a method of propagation! If we are a limb or component of an organism, then we must be the propagating tool. The other alternative is grim and we are but a virus, but life is life and all survival is instinctive. We are now seeking new worlds to explore, our curiousity see's to it that we find the Truth (Ma'ats feather). Its a basic part of our makeup to explore.

To answer your question though, no I do not think we're having a positive effect on the Earth. There are many species of animal that die at childbirth. If anything the Earth will continue and it will become incompatible to most life for a while, we won't destroy it anytime soon. It may be more healthy than ever, look around at the fertility of it all. We maybe witnessing a birth soon

Also what would the singularity of the universe look like?

Without anything on the outside, it wouldn't have form to look like anything, probably We are expanding into an expanding Universe, it hurts to think about it.

Have you ever contemplated the verse:
Mt 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

I have not, but I shall do over the course of the next couple of days. Any interpretation you'd like to present will be considered too.

I had an arguement with a friend about the path of evolution. I think that another world with carbon based life will need to use previous forms of life (fossil fuel) to create the next leap into the space age. My reasoning is simple, its the easiest and cheapest method of fast propulsion, and I believe commerce is related to my deities movements. Commerce displaying both a negative and positive duality. Fire being sacred also as I'm sure your aware. Its like the phoenix bursting from the ashes of long dead threads of evolution. She disagreed, said the path wouldn't necessarily use fossil fuels. What do other people believe?

[Rick]

... the path wouldn't necessarily use fossil fuels. What do other people believe?

Fossil fuel is like a miraculous gift that jump started the industrial and modern ages. Before coal and petroleum were burned for energy, the forests were stripped to burn wood. So an industrial age without fossil fuel is conceivable, its would seem to be enabled to happen quicker if fossil fuel is available.

Of course, fossil fuel is a temporary expedient. World oil production peaked last year so transitioning to wind and solar power will become more important. Corporate interests will push nuclear power, but I think that should be resisted for the long term health of the planet. Done right (without government subsidy), nuclear power also will be found to cost more than wind and solar. A correct accounting includes long term storage costs for nuclear waste, a cost that corporations externalize by neglecting. The law should help them do it properly.

Nuclear power can be best used for certain specific applications such as propulsion systems for submarines and spacecraft.

[trojan_libido]

Can you conceive of an alien carbon based lifeform that will use nuclear power before finding the energy in fossil fuels? Even burning wood is using other indigenous life on this planet.

Life definately looks pretty fractal to me, continually transforming from moment to moment. The best case for a fractal universe....is....people come out of people . We are worlds to other lifeforms, both on our surface and in our bodies in symbiosis with us. The logical extension of that is that the pattern of our being will emerge from this point we call the Earth.

I wonder if wind and solar energy will also damage the earth if its relied upon. By using wind turbines we are taking energy out of the atmosphere; don't you think there'd be some impact on the environment if that was the only source we used?

[Joesus]

I'm not entirely sure how that relates to what I'm saying so lets remove this inventor, call it a process with a simple cause and effect evolution in which we don't know the cause and the effect is hidden in all our movements.

Lets take it to this level

I do feel the Universe is consciousness and we're its eyes, ears, hands and mouth.

Thats a big universe to isolate those eyes, ears hands and a mouth. By the way which voice would you pick to be the actual words to come out of that mouth?

To answer your question though, no I do not think we're having a positive effect on the Earth. There are many species of animal that die at childbirth. If anything the Earth will continue and it will become incompatible to most life for a while, we won't destroy it anytime soon. It may be more healthy than ever, look around at the fertility of it all. We maybe witnessing a birth soon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ

[trojan_libido]

Thats a big universe to isolate those eyes, ears hands and a mouth. By the way which voice would you pick to be the actual words to come out of that mouth?

What I meant was we're the Universe experiencing itself. I didn't mean we should pick someone to be the voice of God, that would be creating a religion - ewww, i feel dirty now.

[maximus242]

Hmm, thats an interesting thought. I suppose if you define the universe as the collective of the atoms which make up the universe. Then we are a part of that universe, observing itself?

[trojan_libido]

Yes it is interesting and answers many questions whilst posing many more.

A fractal is generally "a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be subdivided in parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole, a property called self-similarity

This self-similarity is evident because of the whole past-present-future sequence - we have been shaped by the past and so the future events are merely extentions of the past. If we are lucky we can be a new direction on a stale tree (inventiveness, creativity).

Terrence McKenna once joked about humans living their lives like they're driving a car by using the rear-view mirror. All you can see is the huge expanse of history (vague and corrupted). We are unable to look into the future without extremely vivid imaginations. If we are the Universe experiencing itself, then this concept of time is a primary function of our being.

True originality is extremely hard to find, if not impossible. This would be the case if the Universe was a living fractal entity. A great man once said that consciousness is down to a feedback loop in spacetime that allows the Universe to experience itself. That sounds plausible to me.

[Joesus]

A fractal is generally "a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be subdivided in parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole, a property called self-similarity

I'm pretty sure you don't experience yourself as a copy of me or me as a copy of you, so why believe in that theory?

[trojan_libido]

That quote is the wiki definition of a fractal not a theory. I've not really read any theories on a fractal universe, but this is my own experience and an amalgamation of ideas I've picked up. But if you mean the other things I outlined, then I don't understand your question.

I don't experience myself as a copy of you. I am of the same species, more or less the same culture, I have fathered a child of the same species. Me, my daughter and you are all different. My patterns can be effected by interaction with your pattern, and we've both arrived at this point from our interaction with parents, friends and culture. I see every conscious thing as a psychological mirror with a speaker attached. Images of culture and the songs and voices of the time are bounced around society, being amplified and reabsorbed. Gaining and losing momentum like the tides.

Whats hard to understand? In what way am I being foolish or are my beliefs invalid? I'm asking because I want a real discussion on the shortcomings of this belief.

[Joesus]

This self-similarity is evident because of the whole past-present-future sequence - we have been shaped by the past and so the future events are merely extentions of the past. If we are lucky we can be a new direction on a stale tree (inventiveness, creativity).

If enlightenment is part of the past then why is it that anyone would insist on shaping the future with an unproductive past memory?

In what way am I being foolish or are my beliefs invalid? I'm asking because I want a real discussion on the shortcomings of this belief.

I don't share your belief so it would stand to reason I wouldn't have the familiarity or the same justification in following the belief.
I would say I represent in your universe the universe that doesn't experience itself the way you do which may lead to the idea that the universe wouldn't necessarily experience itself divided in mixed beliefs. That is if you give the universe any credit for being intelligent.

[trojan_libido]

If enlightenment is part of the past then why is it that anyone would insist on shaping the future with an unproductive past memory?

I think we should leave the whole 'enlightenment' topic in the other thread. The enlightenment of one individual will have inspired many non-enlightened individuals, which would effect the world around it. It obviously has effected the world because we're all here searching for a hint of it.

...I would say I represent in your universe the universe that doesn't experience itself the way you do which may lead to the idea that the universe wouldn't necessarily experience itself divided in mixed beliefs. That is if you give the universe any credit for being intelligent.

There is no unity within the different views each lifes consciousness provides. The only feedback is into our own culture, and this is the first thing to change when a new idea or expression arrives from all the incoming data. I've never said the Universe is intelligent, I just don't think its a prerequisite for this fractal Universe viewpoint.

[Hudzon]

By the way which voice would you pick to be the actual words to come out of that mouth?

All of them...?

[trojan_libido]

Thank you Hudzon, I see you understand the points without having to nitpick at the analogies.

Mt 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

I still can't make out the truth buried in that statement. To my unscholarly eye it seems like its saying that having a single view (belief/purpose?) will make your belief strong and righteous. I'm probably being stupid here, but it sounds like a statement to create religious extremists.

[Joesus]

There is no unity within the different views each lifes consciousness provides.

Not if you don't know what true union is.

By the way which voice would you pick to be the actual words to come out of that mouth?

All of them...?

That would reveal more of what Unity is.

QUOTE(Joesus)
Mt 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

I still can't make out the truth buried in that statement. To my unscholarly eye it seems like its saying that having a single view (belief/purpose?) will make your belief strong and righteous. I'm probably being stupid here, but it sounds like a statement to create religious extremists.

Well I wouldn't call it stupid but ignorant (ignoring of) of the whole picture/reality, because of the personality being attached to definitions and beliefs.

[trojan_libido]

I would say I represent in your universe the universe that doesn't experience itself the way you do which may lead to the idea that the universe wouldn't necessarily experience itself divided in mixed beliefs. That is if you give the universe any credit for being intelligent.

There is no unity within the different views each lifes consciousness provides.

Not if you don't know what true union is.

I simply mean that just because eachviewpoint differs, doesn't invalidate what I'm saying. Each consciousness is simply another receptor.

On the subject of biological to technological evolution, and the possible correllations, how does phantom phone syndrome effect peoples views?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/...chnologysection

[Joesus]

I simply mean that just because eachviewpoint differs, doesn't invalidate what I'm saying. Each consciousness is simply another receptor.

Each viewpoint is relative, non can really support another or invalidate another which leaves the personal viewpoint powerless unless something or someone gives it power and attention. As soon as attention is removed it doesn't exist in the relative anymore.
But getting back to Unity:
There is only one consciousness. Because you don't trace your own personality back to its source and any other receptor you believe in, Unity exists as a projection of like minded individuals or group consciousness all making their decisions based on agreement, like lemmings following an idea even if it is to the edge of a cliff and over the edge.
Similarly the singularity cannot be manufactured because manufacturing something is a relative term given to the idea that something doesn't exist.
Relatively speaking Unity doesn't exist to the awareness when it is ignored, like any other idea. But all ideas exist in consciousness and so does the relationship between consciousness and the relative. The relative and consciousness are united always.
Recognizing consciousness both in its formlessness and relative expression at the same time is a unity experience. Recognizing the union of the two all the time, in every thought feeling and action a state of conscious awareness.
When one experiences this, there is no separation of personalities or receptors, they are living as one, and the personality is surrendered to the greater consciousness.

I and my Father are one.. When thine eye be single....that is Union

When the awareness is in a thousand places at the same time, this is a greater conscious experience of Union.
When this is lived through the formless, all form is malleable or pliable to intention and desire, you as the one consciousness create all form. Life is easily maintained without the thought of age or sickness or the illusion of death, which are born of separation in thought, or the ignoring of the relationship between consciousness and the relative, the belief that Union is somewhere in a different reality and not available, or something different than it really is according to ego and personalities driven by belief.

[Enki]

My question is fairly simple, is mass production a new realisation of natures laws of speed and efficiency?

I think Yes. But the question it too board. Can you please explain the reason of that question?
Fractal grows: new forms, new branches, new whirls, new patterns etc.

[trojan_libido]

I just wanted to know others opinions on the matter. To me all this technology is simply the next evolution, its allowed change faster than any biology can provide yet stuck to the same patterns. The reason its the same patterns is simply because it provides efficient solutions.

[Enki]

Let us hope that it is the same pattern. We do not have the full image of the fractal, you never know where to a new whirl of the branch will lead us.

[trojan_libido]

http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/tesla2.htm

To attract potential investors, Tesla agreed to write a piece for Century magazine. It was entitled "The Problem of Increasing Human Energy" and was published in the magazine's June 1900 edition.

In it, Tesla told of his vision for the future: the weather controlled via radio signals, war ended because it was entirely fought by robots, the tapping of the sun's energy via a giant antenna, and power transmitted through the air without wires. His system, a "world wide wireless" when "applied the earth will [allow it to] be converted into a huge brain, capable of response in every one of its parts," Tesla would later say. The article read more like fiction than science, but the photos that accompanied the article seemed even more unbelieveable.For example, one picture showed Tesla seated at a chair in his Colorado laboratory while streamers of high voltage electricity snaked all around him.

[Enki]

If it get converted into one huge brain then the security of the entire planet will be endangered. From security point of view it is better to have multi-brain system, because the spice is in variety. I stand fundamentally contra against some concepts related with the Consciousness Singularity. Construction of the second Babylon Tower is not a perspective project. History shows that eventually the Towers go down.

Besides I think that Tesla was wrong in matters related with the Huge Brain.

Some kind of similar ideas were rotating about Omega Stations. Btw, beloved topics of Robert.

In old times Druids were using special stones putting them on cross-roads of the extended all over the Huge Celtic world putting special similar marks on each of the stone, thus using some specific technique (which possibly had worked), to provide some sort of cybernetic integrity of the Celtic World.

But as Hay Julius Cizare demonstrated, such a system has serious problems in matters related with self-defense. So Huge Brain of the Celts surrendered to the Legions of Cezare (under the word Legions one can percept an extended category).

[Enki]

E.g. in the city I dwell a gang of admirers of a Rock band, with very alluring obstinacy have put on the walls of the city, at locations where human flow is intense a specific name of a specific Rock band, later on the name been copy-pasted all over the city. Actually gross majority of the city inhabitants each day see that name on walls. The effect is quite interesting: that leads to Unification of thinking (the well known UNITAS). It is not good.

[trojan_libido]

His system, a "world wide wireless" when "applied the earth will [allow it to] be converted into a huge brain, capable of response in every one of its parts

Dont you see the similaries to the world wide web of the internet, and how this has allowed us to react to worldwide situations and learn quicker? If we personify you as the world, wouldn't you be at a dissadvantage if you couldn't communicate with your limbs?

[Enki]

What you say is correct only in case if we confine our consideration to some certain, limited in number, traditional, well known types (forms) of data transfer. You make data transfer fast and more dynamic, provide direct access to flexible data bases and data warehouses and convert the world into a huge brain.

But, if some other specific type of data transfer do exist as well, which do not require building up any special infrastructure etc, then things change dramatically.