Wouldn't this whole process have to reoccer many times before society got to the point of total enlightenment? And what if the universe itself changed in sync with the people's change, and therefor we could never catch up, like when an older sibling tells a younger sibling that they will never be as old. Or what if this new knowledge causes a collapse in society, or even the entire universe. Are we supposed to know so much?

This process of singularity will take at least a whole human generation's worth in time in order to be completed. It will start with one individual, a single human being who will set the process in motion, unbeknow to others. Then, after his successfull passage into singularity, this human being will show us all the way to it.

As far as the process itself, it will be a consciouss and intentional process. There will be a code of passage, so to speak, the fundamental keys without which no one may attain singularity. These will be readily available to any human being in any language as a manuscript. The original will be written by CITIZEN ONE, or the first human individual to cross into this state of singularity, and it will be written in his mother language. It will most likely be found, when made public, within the realms of our modern collective conscioussness: the World Wide Web.

This so-called process of Singularity, although not guaranteed, is absolutely necessary for the most fundamental reason of all: Survival. Should this process not occur due to any circumstance (the odds are at 50% split as of today) everything and everyone that is alive today, incluinding our CREATOR will cease to exist/anonymous

Addendum to the previous comment.
OUR CREATOR might not necessarily perish, should we not attain Singularity. But OUR CREATOR'S odds of survival will be greately reduced, instead. That's because we, humans, find ourselves at a point in time and space where we are alone in the universe in regards to our attained balance of understanding of the mechanics (for lack of a better word) of OUR CREATOR and OC's creation. That is, while there might be billions of planets capable of sustaining life in the universe, Earth is the planet with the most advanced degreee of intelligence so far. This is because, although life probably started millions or billions of years ago somewhere in a solar system far away from ours, only Earth was able to sustain a steady progress in the attainable intelligence of Her inhabitants. Hence the point in history where we are today: One step away from singularity.

Could I be so bold as to ask for any evidence you might have for this? Or are we writing fiction here (again)?

Sounds like fiction to me. First, the singularity is not a state of mind that one can attain. The singularity is a point in the future where technological change will come too fast to control. That the "singularity" is also a fiction is beside the point. Second, we have no creator. We are evolved, not created.

I'm not (prepared to wait for evidence...). It can't happen. Imagine having to start science all over again to ask the question "who created God?"

As of now, there is no empirical, scientific evidence to back up any claim related to this process of singularity. But there are clues everywhere in our environment.

For those who really take their time to do the research, and maybe try to see "beyond the label" as they say. I would sugggest you start with a book called: "THE CHRIST CONSPIRACY: THE GREATEST STORY EVER SOLD, BY Acharia S, and/or "THE SEARCH OF SCHRODINGER'S CAT" by Joh Gribbin. If you're not into reading I would then suggest a couple of DVD documentaries released by PBS: Carl Sagan's "COSMOS" and Steven Hawkins's "UNIVERSE".

It may only be natural to consider this process of Singularity the kind of stuff for science fiction. But then, I suggest, how soon we forget the times we live in! Have we forgotten the lessons of Quantom Mechanics with respect to the Universe (OC)? They go something like this: "Nothing is Real"; At the sub-atomic level: "Chaos is the only order of things"; "Reality is weirder than fiction" and so forth.

As far as I understand, science is at a standstill right now, trying to make sense of what we are encountering reality to be at the sub-atomic level. And the String theory, impossible to prove so far, is about to snap.

As far as evolution as opposed to creation: Has one theory ruled out the other one as of yet? I thought that so far as we know, they are both either right or wrong, or both wrong and right. Who's to tell?!



By no means am I suggesting that we just beleive in something to be real when it isn't. As rational individuals, we are simply made to make a choice with respect to our believes in events or processes unscrutinized yet by our minds; even when this process or event has taken place outside our senses, but within the realm of rational (pardon the redundance) reality. For example, I still can't beleive that my girlfriend ate my slice of her birthday cake.

Fortunatelly for us, the human experience comes wrapped with a package of very handy tools for coping with those facets of reality that manage to escape our rational scrutiny (ie: feelings, emotions, ect). Thus, the path we take with respect to our beleives when encountering these not immediately understood events, is a matter of individual choice, as we know. To go back to the previous example, now I beleive that my my now ex-girfriend did indeed eat the slice of cake: Because I know her as a person better now.

I supposed that one thing is true (but only as of right now, the present) about the beleive (or not) in the process of singularity as with the many other suggested processes or events that we are bombarded with as conscious individuals: It takes a leap of faith. Just like when you invest heavily in a certain stock having based your decision on a hunch, or maybe a proffessional advise, etc.

I don't know for certain that Cingularity will take place with us humans, but I hope it does, for the reasons explained in previous entries (July 25, 10:04 and 10:35 PM). But I beleive, without a doubt, that this process is the innevitable evolutionary step of any intelligent species within our Universe which has reached our level of uderstanding of reality. We're just the first ones, but will not stay forever as the only ones within OC to attain "pre-Cingularity" status. Therein lies the urgency of our plight: Do or Die, basically.

It seems to be news to many Americans.

Ha Ha! Nice one Rick.

I find it hard to accept that in a world where so much knowledge is presented so freely why more people don't put all the parts of the picture together.

The singularity is predicted in science as I understand to be the point between the big bang and the big implosion, in religion it's defined as the return to god, its end is the zero point.

Everyone's personal journey to God or understanding is an accumulation of metaphors derived from personal meaning to show us the whole. Until we are in a position to stand up and say hand on heart "Every single thing we know is infallible, everything thing we do is perfect, there are no problems" we are not in a position to argue fact from fiction. Science is proven by its own methods which make sense and produce a palpable feeling of reality within the scientist which can be conveyed and modified into belief by others. Advances in science are made by interpretation of these beliefs or "theories".

In my experience Scientists tend to disregard "God" based on the definition of creator in the human sense, or if you like if God made us we his bitchez. Nobody would accept that, nor why should they. People with faith also value their beliefs, and feel as sure of them as the scientest because to them it resounds true on an emotional level which is as highly valued to them as the scientists logic.

The scientist and the faithful are like a French man reading a book in English, they can see the words, understand the letters and maybe get some of it, but until they know English they'll never get it. Instead of arguing over our definition may I instead propose a radical new idea?

Instead of trying to disprove everyone, and adhere to stringently to our beliefs how about adopting their ideals and allow them to expand what you already know. Try it out for a few days, worst case scenario is you go back to being who you are, you made a wrong decision, but you learned not by applying it within the limits of any one belief, but by seeing how it really operated.

We all have so much potential, here especially to do something that will have a meaningful effect, but to do this we need to set aside personal beliefs, and together find a real set of truths.

Sorry for ranting love@u

Yes, synthesizing fragmentary strands of a universal conversation into a single unified whole.

True, but all the more reason we should bind together and figure out real truth.

For the truely attuned, the noise will reveal itself from the signal.

I agree that the noise will reveal itself from the signal, but I don't think it will be limited to the truley attuned. It will be the first to hear that will spread the word, which is why it's important to have a joint concept of truth and acceptance, because for this to work we have to drop all illusions of seperation, all grudges, all history and just accept every person as what they are. Us from a different point of view.

One of the reasons I joined this forum was an essay I read on the main page. It said "We're often told we're the children of God, but we're not expected to become God" I think it's time we all grew up.

I don't think asking people to have an open mind and test for themselves the validity of their beliefs instead of merely accepting what they're told goes against reason. Science is continually proven wrong or “expanded upon”. We all know that the common inventions of today in war planes would have seemed alien 50 years ago. We all get so caught up in what we think now we forget in 50 years it’ll be old, we’ll have moved on.

Evidence is an indication of what may have taken place, again it is fallible, as the evidence fits the scenario in which it is discovered. The man who is wrongly convicted is subject to the same flaw in logic as the man who presumes to know based on what he already knows. By believing in strict truths when we understand so comparatively little about anything is madness, there is no true justice because we don't understand true nature, there is only an interpretation of justice as we hold the majority opinion as fact.

If this seems hard to understand give me one shred of evidence that "nothing" exists. I'm sure you'll come up with all kinds of reason, all kinds of theories but the fact remains that nothing must always consist of something to even exist as a concept. But of course it’s obvious nothing exists because there’s nothing all around. Neither are the correct interpretation, but both are the same argument but from different points of views. We can perceive nothing, but we can’t imagine nothing therefore it seems nothing doesn’t exist. All theories seem to work, all theologies seem to work, all idealisms seem to work. Everything seems to work.

Look around you, the world is full of the facile, mindless drones driven by consumption. We're taught to look to others for recognition, for beauty and for truth. In life and in Science are all subject to the thinking of our peers, and of course we can see the sense in what they say, as they're the people who's beliefs we subscribe to. We end up becoming our own versions of other peoples opinions.

I'm not asking to go against reason; I'm saying listen to reason. This world is a mental construct any psychologist will tell you that, which means for all intensive purposes you are in a game of your own making, you invent the meanings, and you see the paths you follow. I personally think it’s better to try to understand and reason from all elements of my nature and not try to suppress one in favor of the other, but find a balance of both.

I'm not sure I agree with some of Ricks opinions ala "I'm not (prepared to wait for evidence...). It can't happen. Imagine having to start science all over again to ask the question "who created God?".

Thats like sending someone to die because your probably right about them. If it works for him that's cool I prefer to be a little more flexible and patient when deciphering truth, I'd prefer to start all over with better understanding, than finish the job half assed.

Forget about who wrote it: But instead, dwell a little bit on its meaning.
I'll rephrase it here: "Love... is the answer and reason guides us to make the most of it." Wouldn't that be a good way to start our journey?

I agree, as I said everyone has their own way to the truth. Rick seems like a very genuine person, I don't take away any validity from his words, but even the most beautifully message can be horribly corrupted through rigid thinking, and presumed knowledge as we've learned from Christianity.

The correct application of reason will guide us to love I whole heartedly agree, but we must also remember everything else will guide us to a satisfactory illusion of our own construct which can be justified by means of our own reasoning. It will feel as real as we imagine it should feel, like everything it's the illusion of reality. Until we can look at everything and see God, until we can look at everything and feel no negativity our reasoning is wrong. "To see the world in a grain of sand".

It's a minute but important fact, flawed reason produces flawed results. We must treat all reason as flawed, and continually prove it in all contexts until reason becomes so refined it can be printed on the back of a matchbox and still be understood clearly.

To me reason is the path to clarity and truth, it cannot consist of anyone aspect of ourselves, instead it must reflect all of our nature, we must be willing to be wrong and be happy about it, and after all it's one less thing we're wrong about.

too much noise! Not enough signal!

I've realized that some of what I've said could be misinterpreted without knowing what I actually believe. I've created this post to clear up some misinterpretations.

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=47&t=13197