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.
The Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and the null hypothesis
page: 36share:
Water may be more prevalent than astronomers have thought previously.
First, consider the abundance of elements in the sun. The sun is 92% hydrogen, but because hydrogen is so light compared to the other elements, this totals only 73.4% of the sun's total mass. Helium is 7.8% of all the atoms in the sun, but those atoms add up to 25.0% of the sun's total mass. Oxygen is 0.06% of the atoms in the sun yet they add up to 0.80% of the sun's total weight. Now, if you could somehow extract all the oxygen from the sun, and combine it with only a very small part of the hydrogen in the sun, you'd up up with 0.90% of the sun's mass as water! Since the sun masses 1.9891e30 kg this adds up to 1.79e28 kg of water. Now, all the water on Earth totals 1.41e21 kg. That means if you could extract all the oxygen from the sun combine it with a trivial amount of its hydrogen, you'd end up with 12,787,071 times all the water on Earth!
Now consider that recently, probes have discovered large quantities of water in places where no one expected water. The poles of Mercury for example have water ice apparently. So do the poles of the Moon. Ceres has a vast amount of water as do the moons of the giant planets of the outer solar system. There may be an explanation for this. Namely, micrometeorites and radiation break down oxides on these planets and moons and the solar wind which is largely hydrogen, combines with this oxygen, forming water.
Since water is far more abundant than previously thought, it may very well turn out that carbon based life forms are far more common than previously thought as well.
First, consider the abundance of elements in the sun. The sun is 92% hydrogen, but because hydrogen is so light compared to the other elements, this totals only 73.4% of the sun's total mass. Helium is 7.8% of all the atoms in the sun, but those atoms add up to 25.0% of the sun's total mass. Oxygen is 0.06% of the atoms in the sun yet they add up to 0.80% of the sun's total weight. Now, if you could somehow extract all the oxygen from the sun, and combine it with only a very small part of the hydrogen in the sun, you'd up up with 0.90% of the sun's mass as water! Since the sun masses 1.9891e30 kg this adds up to 1.79e28 kg of water. Now, all the water on Earth totals 1.41e21 kg. That means if you could extract all the oxygen from the sun combine it with a trivial amount of its hydrogen, you'd end up with 12,787,071 times all the water on Earth!
Now consider that recently, probes have discovered large quantities of water in places where no one expected water. The poles of Mercury for example have water ice apparently. So do the poles of the Moon. Ceres has a vast amount of water as do the moons of the giant planets of the outer solar system. There may be an explanation for this. Namely, micrometeorites and radiation break down oxides on these planets and moons and the solar wind which is largely hydrogen, combines with this oxygen, forming water.
Since water is far more abundant than previously thought, it may very well turn out that carbon based life forms are far more common than previously thought as well.
a reply to: draknoir2
In thinking about the Drake Equation Mike Shermer estimated the average life span of ETI to be 420 years with a standard deviation of 200 years. So, we apply the cumulative distribution function;
N = 1/2 * ERFC((420-X)/(200*SQRT(2)))
To obtain the fraction of civilizations by age, and assuming a 4% rate of growth in energy use per year, and assuming radio occurs at around K=0.5 (where Earth discovered radio) we have a way of estimating the number of species between 0.5 and 1.0 - planet bound communicative, 1.0 and 2.0 star bound communicative, but not planet bound, 2.0+ beyond their star.
You can adjust these figures anyway you like. You can attain values over a broad range, however you will find that most communicative species are interplanetary, a significant number planetary, and very few, interstellar.
Kardashev Year Percent Number
1016 in this interval
0.50 0 1.79% 75
0.53 20 2.28% 96
0.57 40 2.87% 121
0.60 60 3.59% 151
0.64 80 4.46% 187
0.67 100 5.48% 230
0.70 120 6.68% 281
0.74 140 8.08% 339
0.77 160 9.68% 407
0.81 180 11.51% 483
0.84 200 13.57% 570
0.87 220 15.87% 666
0.91 240 18.41% 773
0.94 260 21.19% 890
0.98 280 24.20% 1016
2990 in this interval
1.01 300 27.43% 1152
1.05 320 30.85% 1296
1.08 340 34.46% 1447
1.11 360 38.21% 1605
1.15 380 42.07% 1767
1.18 400 46.02% 1933
1.22 420 50.00% 2100
1.25 440 53.98% 2267
1.28 460 57.93% 2433
1.32 480 61.79% 2595
1.35 500 65.54% 2753
1.39 520 69.15% 2904
1.42 540 72.57% 3048
1.45 560 75.80% 3184
1.49 580 78.81% 3310
1.52 600 81.59% 3427
1.56 620 84.13% 3534
1.59 640 86.43% 3630
1.62 660 88.49% 3717
1.66 680 90.32% 3793
1.69 700 91.92% 3861
1.73 720 93.32% 3919
1.76 740 94.52% 3970
1.79 760 95.54% 4013
1.83 780 96.41% 4049
1.86 800 97.13% 4079
1.90 820 97.72% 4104
1.93 840 98.21% 4125
1.96 860 98.61% 4142
45 in this interval
2.00 880 98.93% 4155
2.03 900 99.18% 4166
2.07 920 99.38% 4174
2.10 940 99.53% 4180
2.14 960 99.65% 4185
2.17 980 99.74% 4189
2.20 1000 99.81% 4192
2.24 1020 99.87% 4194
2.27 1040 99.90% 4196
2.31 1060 99.93% 4197
2.34 1080 99.95% 4198
2.37 1100 99.97% 4199
2.41 1120 99.98% 4199
2.44 1140 99.98% 4199
2.48 1160 99.99% 4200
2.51 1180 99.99% 4200
2.54 1200 100.00% 4200
In thinking about the Drake Equation Mike Shermer estimated the average life span of ETI to be 420 years with a standard deviation of 200 years. So, we apply the cumulative distribution function;
N = 1/2 * ERFC((420-X)/(200*SQRT(2)))
To obtain the fraction of civilizations by age, and assuming a 4% rate of growth in energy use per year, and assuming radio occurs at around K=0.5 (where Earth discovered radio) we have a way of estimating the number of species between 0.5 and 1.0 - planet bound communicative, 1.0 and 2.0 star bound communicative, but not planet bound, 2.0+ beyond their star.
You can adjust these figures anyway you like. You can attain values over a broad range, however you will find that most communicative species are interplanetary, a significant number planetary, and very few, interstellar.
Kardashev Year Percent Number
1016 in this interval
0.50 0 1.79% 75
0.53 20 2.28% 96
0.57 40 2.87% 121
0.60 60 3.59% 151
0.64 80 4.46% 187
0.67 100 5.48% 230
0.70 120 6.68% 281
0.74 140 8.08% 339
0.77 160 9.68% 407
0.81 180 11.51% 483
0.84 200 13.57% 570
0.87 220 15.87% 666
0.91 240 18.41% 773
0.94 260 21.19% 890
0.98 280 24.20% 1016
2990 in this interval
1.01 300 27.43% 1152
1.05 320 30.85% 1296
1.08 340 34.46% 1447
1.11 360 38.21% 1605
1.15 380 42.07% 1767
1.18 400 46.02% 1933
1.22 420 50.00% 2100
1.25 440 53.98% 2267
1.28 460 57.93% 2433
1.32 480 61.79% 2595
1.35 500 65.54% 2753
1.39 520 69.15% 2904
1.42 540 72.57% 3048
1.45 560 75.80% 3184
1.49 580 78.81% 3310
1.52 600 81.59% 3427
1.56 620 84.13% 3534
1.59 640 86.43% 3630
1.62 660 88.49% 3717
1.66 680 90.32% 3793
1.69 700 91.92% 3861
1.73 720 93.32% 3919
1.76 740 94.52% 3970
1.79 760 95.54% 4013
1.83 780 96.41% 4049
1.86 800 97.13% 4079
1.90 820 97.72% 4104
1.93 840 98.21% 4125
1.96 860 98.61% 4142
45 in this interval
2.00 880 98.93% 4155
2.03 900 99.18% 4166
2.07 920 99.38% 4174
2.10 940 99.53% 4180
2.14 960 99.65% 4185
2.17 980 99.74% 4189
2.20 1000 99.81% 4192
2.24 1020 99.87% 4194
2.27 1040 99.90% 4196
2.31 1060 99.93% 4197
2.34 1080 99.95% 4198
2.37 1100 99.97% 4199
2.41 1120 99.98% 4199
2.44 1140 99.98% 4199
2.48 1160 99.99% 4200
2.51 1180 99.99% 4200
2.54 1200 100.00% 4200
a reply to: tanka418
I have for a long time argued that we can learn a lot from this single instance of intelligence arising on Earth if we look carefully at our history.
We can produce amino acids from a reducing atmosphere in a few hours. It seems that life arose in a very short period of time after conditions for life were present on Earth. Thus, life is easy.
It took nearly half the history of life on Earth for multi-celled creatures to arise. This after the crisis due to oxygen killed off a lot of the older forms. This arose because of efficient photosynthesis being created. This caused the survivors to innovate bodies and skins to protect themselves from the rising oxygen levels. The first tooth arose to cut through this skin. And we were off in a new direction of evolution - the evolution of form - which occurred far faster than the evolution of biochemistry in the cells. Photosynthesis (and bodies) are hard.
It took nearly all the remaining history of life on Earth for multi-celled creatures to develop large brains. This after the crisis due to snow ball Earth. This caused survivors to innovate tools. In less than 1 million years high technology arises. Brains are hard. Technology easy.
We are at the end of two hard things. Things that radically reduce the number of communicative ETI. By this reasoning, ETIs are common on the scale of the cosmos, rare on the scale of galaxies. This is another explanation of why the milky way seems wild. We haven't moved into it yet.
This is quite different than Sagan's conclusion that ETIs are scattered liberally across the cosmos one every 2250 light years - (with 4200 present in the Milky Way by this estimate).
Is there any evidence to support this sort of thing?
Well, the Smithsonian completed a deep sky survey in 2000 - and found that the galaxies were distributed like soap film in a soap suds. That is, galaxies were on the periphery of large voids that were 100s of millions of light years across.
What could explain these huge structured voids?
Some astronomers speculated that super strings collided in the early cosmos and created vast explosions that drove the gas with huge shock waves into the patterns we see.
I wondered if the stars were switched off by ETI?
Check it out.
Imagine that life is rare on the scale of galaxies, common in the cosmos. Say, 1 in 1 million galaxies have space faring ETI. They wouldn't have intelligent neighbours and would get the idea they owned the damn place. They would see it as their duty to populate an empty cosmos. The easiest way to do that is send out self replicating probes and terraform the cosmos - making it suitable for life. Their life. To this end, they would do, what NASA scientist David Criswell calls 'star lifting' They would basically turn off their star, and preserve it over the long haul. Making it last trillions of years, instead of billions of years.
What would this look like from a distance? Over time, the self replicating probes would expand in all directions turning off stars as they went, leaving the keys under the mat for when the owners arrive. In short, they would create spherical voids stretching across millions of galaxies. The size of the voids would give us the age of each species. Their distribution in space and time would give us the distribution of ETI.
How would we confirm this hypothesis? Well, there would be missing mass in the cosmos. Check. There would be a lot of heat at the centre of the voids - these would be the waste heat of the super civilizations operating there. No one has looked for this sort of thing, but it would be an interesting experiment to carry out.
I'm not saying this is what's going on. I'm just saying its an interesting experiment to try.
I have for a long time argued that we can learn a lot from this single instance of intelligence arising on Earth if we look carefully at our history.
We can produce amino acids from a reducing atmosphere in a few hours. It seems that life arose in a very short period of time after conditions for life were present on Earth. Thus, life is easy.
It took nearly half the history of life on Earth for multi-celled creatures to arise. This after the crisis due to oxygen killed off a lot of the older forms. This arose because of efficient photosynthesis being created. This caused the survivors to innovate bodies and skins to protect themselves from the rising oxygen levels. The first tooth arose to cut through this skin. And we were off in a new direction of evolution - the evolution of form - which occurred far faster than the evolution of biochemistry in the cells. Photosynthesis (and bodies) are hard.
It took nearly all the remaining history of life on Earth for multi-celled creatures to develop large brains. This after the crisis due to snow ball Earth. This caused survivors to innovate tools. In less than 1 million years high technology arises. Brains are hard. Technology easy.
We are at the end of two hard things. Things that radically reduce the number of communicative ETI. By this reasoning, ETIs are common on the scale of the cosmos, rare on the scale of galaxies. This is another explanation of why the milky way seems wild. We haven't moved into it yet.
This is quite different than Sagan's conclusion that ETIs are scattered liberally across the cosmos one every 2250 light years - (with 4200 present in the Milky Way by this estimate).
Is there any evidence to support this sort of thing?
Well, the Smithsonian completed a deep sky survey in 2000 - and found that the galaxies were distributed like soap film in a soap suds. That is, galaxies were on the periphery of large voids that were 100s of millions of light years across.
What could explain these huge structured voids?
Some astronomers speculated that super strings collided in the early cosmos and created vast explosions that drove the gas with huge shock waves into the patterns we see.
I wondered if the stars were switched off by ETI?
Check it out.
Imagine that life is rare on the scale of galaxies, common in the cosmos. Say, 1 in 1 million galaxies have space faring ETI. They wouldn't have intelligent neighbours and would get the idea they owned the damn place. They would see it as their duty to populate an empty cosmos. The easiest way to do that is send out self replicating probes and terraform the cosmos - making it suitable for life. Their life. To this end, they would do, what NASA scientist David Criswell calls 'star lifting' They would basically turn off their star, and preserve it over the long haul. Making it last trillions of years, instead of billions of years.
What would this look like from a distance? Over time, the self replicating probes would expand in all directions turning off stars as they went, leaving the keys under the mat for when the owners arrive. In short, they would create spherical voids stretching across millions of galaxies. The size of the voids would give us the age of each species. Their distribution in space and time would give us the distribution of ETI.
How would we confirm this hypothesis? Well, there would be missing mass in the cosmos. Check. There would be a lot of heat at the centre of the voids - these would be the waste heat of the super civilizations operating there. No one has looked for this sort of thing, but it would be an interesting experiment to carry out.
I'm not saying this is what's going on. I'm just saying its an interesting experiment to try.
How do you test for aliens?
According to this source;
worldtracker.org...&%20Spirituality/INTERVIEW%20WITH%20AN%20ALIEN.pdf
All you've got to do is ask.
According to the writer, there are a number of alien species around us all the time aware of our every move, our every thought.
According to this source, we have the ability to send a few tons of delicate electronics to orbit a distant world like Mars and figure out all sorts of things about that planet. This would seem like magic to anyone born before the 20th century. Really advanced aliens have the ability to know things that seem like magic to us.
Arthur Clarke with Stephen Baxter wrote a book, "Light of Other Days" that explores the potential of wormhole technology to connect the universe together in space and time...
worldtracker.org...
which seems pretty magical, though he sticks to every day science.
He did not explore the impact such techniques would have on computing technology. Though others like Hans Moravec, in 1991 have;
www.frc.ri.cmu.edu...
So, anyone that has access to this sort of technology, would be in touch with the whole cosmos - just as the internet provides a means for each of us to be in touch with everyone everywhere on this planet- a sufficiently advanced technology, based on a network of wormholes through all of spacetime - would allow us to be aware of what is happening everywhere everywhen.
Now, how do we make sense of all this? The same way we make sense of the internet. We have search engines, and other mechanisms that sort through a vast array of information to present to us the information we seek.
In short, creatures that resonate with us - on a personal level - will make contact - if they want to.
This explains why the hell ET doesn't make contact with the President, or Prime Minister, the Pope or the King or Queen. They don't resonate. Its a mano a mano sort of thing.
Look, if you were an anthropologist who were interested in the intelligence of an ape, would you pick out the alpha male? would you pick out the alpha male's entourage? If you were interested in the natural beliefs of a primitive tribe, would pick the members that were totally in thrall to the medicine men and their obvious bs? or would pick one that was far removed from that crap to see what really was up?
If someone is looking for honey in a bee hive, they might not want to attract attention of the hive's defenses.
Same here.
There's a reporter that wrote a book a few years after the Wright Brothers announced their conquest of the sky at Kitty Hawk. He was inspired to write the book because for years, astronomers had assured him that rocks couldn't fall from the sky, yet now meteorites were an accepted fact. And for years physicists assured him that heavier than air travel was impossible! Yet now, aeroplanes are an accepted fact!
SO what other impossible things will one day be an accepted fact?
I'm talking of course about Charles Fort and his "Book of the Damned" Damned good reading if you ask me.
www.sacred-texts.com...
I find Chapter 12 most compelling, Charles Fort writes'
Would we, if we could, educate and sophisticate pigs, geese, cattle?
Would it be wise to establish diplomatic relation with the hen that now functions, satisfied with mere sense of achievement by way of compensation?
I think we're property.
I should say we belong to something:
That once upon a time, this earth was No-man's Land, that other worlds explored and colonized here, and fought among themselves for possession, but that now it's owned by something:
That something owns this earth—all others warned off.
Nothing in our own times—perhaps—because I am thinking of certain notes I have—has ever appeared upon this earth, from somewhere else, so openly as Columbus landed upon San Salvador, or as Hudson sailed up his river. But as to surreptitious visits to this earth, in recent times, or as to emissaries, perhaps, from other worlds, or voyagers who have shown every indication of intent to evade and avoid, we shall have data as convincing as our data of oil or coal-burning aerial super-constructions.
But, in this vast subject, I shall have to do considerable neglecting or disregarding, myself. I don't see how I can, in this book, take up at all the subject of possible use of humanity to some other mode of existence, or the flattering notion that we can possibly be worth something.
Pigs, geese, and cattle.
First find out that they are owned.
Then find out the whyness of it.
I suspect that, after all, we're useful—that among contesting claimants, adjustment has occurred, or that something now has a legal right to us, by force, or by having paid out analogues of beads for us to former, more primitive, owners of us—all others warned off—that all this has been known, perhaps for ages, to certain ones upon this earth, a cult or order, members of which function like bellwethers to the rest of us, or as superior slaves or overseers, directing us in accordance with instructions received—from Somewhere else—in our mysterious usefulness.
But I accept that, in the past, before proprietorship was established,
inhabitants of a host of other worlds have—dropped here, hopped here, wafted, sailed, flown, motored—walked here, for all I know—been pulled here, been pushed; have come singly, have come in enormous numbers; have visited occasionally, have visited periodically for hunting, trading, replenishing harems, mining: have been unable to stay here, have established colonies here, have been lost here; far-advanced peoples, or things, and primitive peoples or whatever they were...
According to this source;
worldtracker.org...&%20Spirituality/INTERVIEW%20WITH%20AN%20ALIEN.pdf
All you've got to do is ask.
According to the writer, there are a number of alien species around us all the time aware of our every move, our every thought.
According to this source, we have the ability to send a few tons of delicate electronics to orbit a distant world like Mars and figure out all sorts of things about that planet. This would seem like magic to anyone born before the 20th century. Really advanced aliens have the ability to know things that seem like magic to us.
Arthur Clarke with Stephen Baxter wrote a book, "Light of Other Days" that explores the potential of wormhole technology to connect the universe together in space and time...
worldtracker.org...
which seems pretty magical, though he sticks to every day science.
He did not explore the impact such techniques would have on computing technology. Though others like Hans Moravec, in 1991 have;
www.frc.ri.cmu.edu...
So, anyone that has access to this sort of technology, would be in touch with the whole cosmos - just as the internet provides a means for each of us to be in touch with everyone everywhere on this planet- a sufficiently advanced technology, based on a network of wormholes through all of spacetime - would allow us to be aware of what is happening everywhere everywhen.
Now, how do we make sense of all this? The same way we make sense of the internet. We have search engines, and other mechanisms that sort through a vast array of information to present to us the information we seek.
In short, creatures that resonate with us - on a personal level - will make contact - if they want to.
This explains why the hell ET doesn't make contact with the President, or Prime Minister, the Pope or the King or Queen. They don't resonate. Its a mano a mano sort of thing.
Look, if you were an anthropologist who were interested in the intelligence of an ape, would you pick out the alpha male? would you pick out the alpha male's entourage? If you were interested in the natural beliefs of a primitive tribe, would pick the members that were totally in thrall to the medicine men and their obvious bs? or would pick one that was far removed from that crap to see what really was up?
If someone is looking for honey in a bee hive, they might not want to attract attention of the hive's defenses.
Same here.
There's a reporter that wrote a book a few years after the Wright Brothers announced their conquest of the sky at Kitty Hawk. He was inspired to write the book because for years, astronomers had assured him that rocks couldn't fall from the sky, yet now meteorites were an accepted fact. And for years physicists assured him that heavier than air travel was impossible! Yet now, aeroplanes are an accepted fact!
SO what other impossible things will one day be an accepted fact?
I'm talking of course about Charles Fort and his "Book of the Damned" Damned good reading if you ask me.
www.sacred-texts.com...
I find Chapter 12 most compelling, Charles Fort writes'
Would we, if we could, educate and sophisticate pigs, geese, cattle?
Would it be wise to establish diplomatic relation with the hen that now functions, satisfied with mere sense of achievement by way of compensation?
I think we're property.
I should say we belong to something:
That once upon a time, this earth was No-man's Land, that other worlds explored and colonized here, and fought among themselves for possession, but that now it's owned by something:
That something owns this earth—all others warned off.
Nothing in our own times—perhaps—because I am thinking of certain notes I have—has ever appeared upon this earth, from somewhere else, so openly as Columbus landed upon San Salvador, or as Hudson sailed up his river. But as to surreptitious visits to this earth, in recent times, or as to emissaries, perhaps, from other worlds, or voyagers who have shown every indication of intent to evade and avoid, we shall have data as convincing as our data of oil or coal-burning aerial super-constructions.
But, in this vast subject, I shall have to do considerable neglecting or disregarding, myself. I don't see how I can, in this book, take up at all the subject of possible use of humanity to some other mode of existence, or the flattering notion that we can possibly be worth something.
Pigs, geese, and cattle.
First find out that they are owned.
Then find out the whyness of it.
I suspect that, after all, we're useful—that among contesting claimants, adjustment has occurred, or that something now has a legal right to us, by force, or by having paid out analogues of beads for us to former, more primitive, owners of us—all others warned off—that all this has been known, perhaps for ages, to certain ones upon this earth, a cult or order, members of which function like bellwethers to the rest of us, or as superior slaves or overseers, directing us in accordance with instructions received—from Somewhere else—in our mysterious usefulness.
But I accept that, in the past, before proprietorship was established,
inhabitants of a host of other worlds have—dropped here, hopped here, wafted, sailed, flown, motored—walked here, for all I know—been pulled here, been pushed; have come singly, have come in enormous numbers; have visited occasionally, have visited periodically for hunting, trading, replenishing harems, mining: have been unable to stay here, have established colonies here, have been lost here; far-advanced peoples, or things, and primitive peoples or whatever they were...
originally posted by: WilliamMook
a reply to: tanka418
I have for a long time argued that we can learn a lot from this single instance of intelligence arising on Earth if we look carefully at our history.
It is my current belief that much is already known about ET by simply applying the principals of Hermetic Science. By being honest with themselves Terrestrial Humans can learn quite a lot about the needs, desires, motivations, even the science and technology of Extraterrestrials. I also feel that most visiting species are not significantly more advanced than Terrestrial Humans.
After all 8000 years ago ET was using chemical powered rockets for transport to planet surfaces...600 years he was still using fuel burning atmospheric craft. It is only in modern Terrestrial times that ET has any sort of advanced technology. Most people don't know that the technology used by ET is easily explained by modern physics. Things like field drives, space warp, control of time, generation of vast amounts of energy are all possible today on Earth. I feel there is a rather good probability that many of these things already exist in Earth's inventory .
I wondered if the stars were switched off by ETI?
Check it out.
Imagine that life is rare on the scale of galaxies, common in the cosmos. Say, 1 in 1 million galaxies have space faring ETI. They wouldn't have intelligent neighbours and would get the idea they owned the damn place. They would see it as their duty to populate an empty cosmos. The easiest way to do that is send out self replicating probes and terraform the cosmos - making it suitable for life. Their life. To this end, they would do, what NASA scientist David Criswell calls 'star lifting' They would basically turn off their star, and preserve it over the long haul. Making it last trillions of years, instead of billions of years.
While I typically have little issue with "imagination" there are limits. My background in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 40 years as an engineer and my rather "old school" approach to understanding software and the universe (yes they are related), and of course the 40 years of Western Ceremonial / Hermetic Magick lead me to the conclusion that such probabilities for life in the cosmos would be wholly out of order. Logic, science, mathematics, all demand that life be abundant. Given the "state of evolution" observable on Earth alone would seem to dictate that space-faring species are not uncommon.
Turn off a star...Wow...would it even be theoretically possible to stop nuclear fusion?
Most stars fuse because their gravity causes it to happen...they get the gravity from the collection of a "critical mass" of hydrogen gas...just how would one stop a natural process like that?
Actually, I think that any intelligent species would "know better" than to do something foolish like that long before they figured out how.
a reply to: WilliamMook
The thesis that the universe is teeming with life is a materialistic idea: life emerges spontaneously whenever conditions are right. But what If it does not? What if life needs an input from the spiritual realm? What if life is a projection of spiritual life into the physical realm? If this is the case life would only emerge when the decision to create it is made in the spiritual realm. In this case life might be very rare in the universe.
The thesis that the universe is teeming with life is a materialistic idea: life emerges spontaneously whenever conditions are right. But what If it does not? What if life needs an input from the spiritual realm? What if life is a projection of spiritual life into the physical realm? If this is the case life would only emerge when the decision to create it is made in the spiritual realm. In this case life might be very rare in the universe.
a reply to: tanka418 who wrote:
: Turn off a star...Wow...would it even be theoretically possible to stop nuclear fusion?
:
:Most stars fuse because their gravity causes it to happen...they get the gravity from the collection of a "critical :mass" of hydrogen gas...just how would one stop a natural process like that?
There are two ways to 'turn off' a star to a distant observer in another galaxy.
Occlude the output or reduce the output.
(1) Occlude: A self-replicating solar panel that operated in the stellar atmosphere extracting energy from the star and efficiently converting it to positronium whilst absorbing the metals in the star and forming additional solar panels from them, as well as ejecting it, along with the positronium, for use by species. I already described this process in detail for the sun. Any Kardashev 2 civilization would have this capability. A self-replicating probe that deposited a single square meter panel on to a star, would cause it to be encased in a matter of hours. That star would become invisible to a distant observer in another galaxy, even if the folks that created the panel system took care to generate sunlight and maintain appropriate conditions on planets and among nearby stars by beaming energy to them only whilst absorbing 99.999% of the energy that spills uselessly into space.
(2) Reduce: Break the star up into a Klemperer Rosette with the same barycenter and mass as the original, but consisting of a number of small stars whose total output is vastly less than previously. The mass luminosity relation for stars is;
L/Ls = (M/Ms)^4
So, by breaking up a star into six equal parts that are 0.167x the mass of the original, the luminosity of each drops to 0.0007716x the luminosity of the original, which time six totals 0.00463 or 1/216th the original! The longevity of the system is also multiplied by the same factor!
Of course in doing this, if we wanted to maintain conditions on planets orbiting this star we'd have to collect energy on the stellar surfaces of the rosette, and beam energy the same colour and luminosity at each of these worlds, though this would take vastly less than 0.0001% of the total energy even of the reduced luminosity star!
Now, many have heard of the Dyson sphere, that takes the planet Jupiter apart and builds a system of space stations that encase the Sun at a 2 AU radius - reproducing Earth like conditions across a vast spherical surface.
However, ejecting heavy materials from the interior of the sun in a way that causes it to increase its rate of spin, and then changing the ejecta's direction once spin is established, to cause it to break up into a ring of stars, creating a Klemperer rosette, is possible! The metals are far more massive than the planet Jupiter, and since we're ejecting them, we can choose what they are, and even form them. I'll discuss how this is done in just a moment.
The Sun's surface gravity is 28 gees! This at a radius of 695,500 km. So, at 3,680,000 km the gravity of a stationary object due to solar gravity is precisely 1 gee. Unfortunately, at today's energy output of the Sun the intensity of sunlight is 1661x as bright as it is at Earth! This is 9,091x as brighter than needed for Earth like conditions to prevail. This means that the Sun must be broken up into a Saturn like ring of 21 smaller stars each 1/21st the size of the sun - forming a stable self gravitating rosette, orbiting within the interior of a shell 7.36 million km in diameter. A surface area 334,145 times larger than the surface area of Earth. I computed elsewhere there is enough oxygen and hydrogen in the sun to make 14.3 million oceans the size of all Earth's oceans. Ditto for the nitrogen and oxygen in the atmosphere. Ditto for the iron and other materials.
Basically, we'd engineer a shell, that had circulating within it a kinetic energy supported structure, powered by the reduced sunlight. The interior of the shell consists of solar panels. The panels are supported by a kinetic energy supported structure. Atop this rests 235 km of materials - which replicate on the outside, 334,145 Earths, including oceans! If oceans are replaced with land, the area will be equivalent to 1,000,000 Earths! Complete with atmosphere. The panels on the interior beam energy through the shell to large reflectors orbiting above the shell at a distance of 4.66 million km an altitude 980,000 km above the surface of the shell. Here the orbit is precisely 48 hours - and two satellites reproduce a 24 hour diurnal cycle. Rising and setting above the surface the same as the Sun appears to do on the rotating Earth. Each Earth area is positioned within a tile, and between tiles is plenty of opportunities to house projectors, powered by the stars within the shell, and the reflector satellites, operating at various inclinations to the shell, are illuminated to reproduce Earth like conditions across the surface of the shell, with 1 million times the land area of Earth. Beneath each Earth is 295 km of every material imaginable, organized into forms that are readily available to support any manner of manufacturing. Surplus energy not used for illumination, is used to produce positronium to power starships, and for any industrial purpose imaginable. 100 billion stars converted in this way means each galaxy can support 100 trillion earthlike habitats.
I will cover how to build this shell in my next post.
: Turn off a star...Wow...would it even be theoretically possible to stop nuclear fusion?
:
:Most stars fuse because their gravity causes it to happen...they get the gravity from the collection of a "critical :mass" of hydrogen gas...just how would one stop a natural process like that?
There are two ways to 'turn off' a star to a distant observer in another galaxy.
Occlude the output or reduce the output.
(1) Occlude: A self-replicating solar panel that operated in the stellar atmosphere extracting energy from the star and efficiently converting it to positronium whilst absorbing the metals in the star and forming additional solar panels from them, as well as ejecting it, along with the positronium, for use by species. I already described this process in detail for the sun. Any Kardashev 2 civilization would have this capability. A self-replicating probe that deposited a single square meter panel on to a star, would cause it to be encased in a matter of hours. That star would become invisible to a distant observer in another galaxy, even if the folks that created the panel system took care to generate sunlight and maintain appropriate conditions on planets and among nearby stars by beaming energy to them only whilst absorbing 99.999% of the energy that spills uselessly into space.
(2) Reduce: Break the star up into a Klemperer Rosette with the same barycenter and mass as the original, but consisting of a number of small stars whose total output is vastly less than previously. The mass luminosity relation for stars is;
L/Ls = (M/Ms)^4
So, by breaking up a star into six equal parts that are 0.167x the mass of the original, the luminosity of each drops to 0.0007716x the luminosity of the original, which time six totals 0.00463 or 1/216th the original! The longevity of the system is also multiplied by the same factor!
Of course in doing this, if we wanted to maintain conditions on planets orbiting this star we'd have to collect energy on the stellar surfaces of the rosette, and beam energy the same colour and luminosity at each of these worlds, though this would take vastly less than 0.0001% of the total energy even of the reduced luminosity star!
Now, many have heard of the Dyson sphere, that takes the planet Jupiter apart and builds a system of space stations that encase the Sun at a 2 AU radius - reproducing Earth like conditions across a vast spherical surface.
However, ejecting heavy materials from the interior of the sun in a way that causes it to increase its rate of spin, and then changing the ejecta's direction once spin is established, to cause it to break up into a ring of stars, creating a Klemperer rosette, is possible! The metals are far more massive than the planet Jupiter, and since we're ejecting them, we can choose what they are, and even form them. I'll discuss how this is done in just a moment.
The Sun's surface gravity is 28 gees! This at a radius of 695,500 km. So, at 3,680,000 km the gravity of a stationary object due to solar gravity is precisely 1 gee. Unfortunately, at today's energy output of the Sun the intensity of sunlight is 1661x as bright as it is at Earth! This is 9,091x as brighter than needed for Earth like conditions to prevail. This means that the Sun must be broken up into a Saturn like ring of 21 smaller stars each 1/21st the size of the sun - forming a stable self gravitating rosette, orbiting within the interior of a shell 7.36 million km in diameter. A surface area 334,145 times larger than the surface area of Earth. I computed elsewhere there is enough oxygen and hydrogen in the sun to make 14.3 million oceans the size of all Earth's oceans. Ditto for the nitrogen and oxygen in the atmosphere. Ditto for the iron and other materials.
Basically, we'd engineer a shell, that had circulating within it a kinetic energy supported structure, powered by the reduced sunlight. The interior of the shell consists of solar panels. The panels are supported by a kinetic energy supported structure. Atop this rests 235 km of materials - which replicate on the outside, 334,145 Earths, including oceans! If oceans are replaced with land, the area will be equivalent to 1,000,000 Earths! Complete with atmosphere. The panels on the interior beam energy through the shell to large reflectors orbiting above the shell at a distance of 4.66 million km an altitude 980,000 km above the surface of the shell. Here the orbit is precisely 48 hours - and two satellites reproduce a 24 hour diurnal cycle. Rising and setting above the surface the same as the Sun appears to do on the rotating Earth. Each Earth area is positioned within a tile, and between tiles is plenty of opportunities to house projectors, powered by the stars within the shell, and the reflector satellites, operating at various inclinations to the shell, are illuminated to reproduce Earth like conditions across the surface of the shell, with 1 million times the land area of Earth. Beneath each Earth is 295 km of every material imaginable, organized into forms that are readily available to support any manner of manufacturing. Surplus energy not used for illumination, is used to produce positronium to power starships, and for any industrial purpose imaginable. 100 billion stars converted in this way means each galaxy can support 100 trillion earthlike habitats.
I will cover how to build this shell in my next post.
a reply to: WilliamMook
(continued)
I mentioned in other posts how a self-replicating solar panel that operates in the atmosphere of the sun can encase the sun in about 9 hours. Let's now describe a process of breaking the sun up.
I mentioned in other posts how we are ALREADY a K=2 civilization, one that control the output on the scale of stars, albeit briefly with H-bombs and A-bombs. Yet, Project Excalibur, as part of the Strategic Defence Initiative in the 1980s, built X-ray lasers powered by bomb blasts too! And don't forget Project Orion, an atom bomb propelled spaceship!
en.wikipedia.org...
www.youtube.com...
We have also built, since the 1950s, small suitcase nukes like M388
en.wikipedia.org...avy_Crockett_bomb.jpg
We also know how to make synthetic holograms using computers.
en.wikipedia.org...
Now, consider a small M388 nuclear device equipped with a collection of rod shaped gain media that are energized to produce powerful x-ray laser beams that pass through a Wolter type concentrator and through a tantalum sheet chemically machined to a fine tolerance to produce a synthetic x-ray hologram some distance from the gadget.
After thorough testing and modelling we place this gadget on top of an Atlas SLV-3C Centaur-D1A Star 37E and fly it past Jupiter. Twenty months later, at Jupiter the spacecraft undergoes a gravity assist maneuver around Jupiter to cause it to zero out its speed relative to the Sun. So after passing Jupiter the gadget drops directly into the Sun. Twenty-five months after its encounter with Jupiter, and forty-five months after launch from Earth, the gadget approaches the surface of the Sun.
At a predetermined altitude above the solar surface, the gadget explodes, projecting a 3D X-ray image into the solar atmosphere.
So what?
Consider that the hot plasma of the solar surface, is a nonlinear optical material.
arxiv.org...
Furthermore, by changing the temperature of the plasma with an X-ray blast, fusion reaction rates which are already underway, are changed as well.
www.sciencedaily.com...
Now, nonlinear optical material supports optical switching and optical computing functions.
en.wikipedia.org...
By creating a pattern of 'hot spots' we create an optical version of Conway's GAME OF LIFE - that is, we create a self-replicating computing pattern inside the solar interior. A pattern that implements an operating system.
conwaylife.com...
This is far more serious than a game. We have the ability in a matter of minutes really, to convert the entire energy of the Sun into a computing platform! All we do, is monitor the spacecraft and when the gadget detonates, we send a boot pulse to the platform - and it will reply in a preprogrammed way - to our message - and we have completed the first step in creating our shell and the other things mentioned.
Now, we can add x-rays to heat up the solar interior in spots. We can also interfere x-rays to cool the solar interior down in spots.
en.wikipedia.org...
We can in this way, create an optical molasses
en.wikipedia.org...
We can also focus x-rays into a collimated beam across a large area, and accelerate selected species to any speed we like, ejecting it from the sun at well defined locations and in well defined directions at well defined speeds.
en.wikipedia.org...
Since we have the entire output of the Sun, and even more since we can increase reaction rates to an arbitrarily high level (the computing platform of the sun itself can be used to help us model this)
en.wikipedia.org...
www.youtube.com...
The Sun generates energy at a rate of 3.87e26 watts! Its escape velocity is 617 km/sec. Thus, if ALL of its energy were directed at ejecting the 1.9% of the stellar mass that we wanted to assemble into the shell, it would take 311,880 years to do this if all were ejected to orbital velocity.
If we wanted to do this in 10 years, we'd have to temporarily, increase the power output of the Sun 31,188 times!! Doing this without adversely affected the solar conditions on Earth and the other planets, would require detailed modelling and understanding of the physics involved.
In addition to the heavier elements that form the shell, we will also eject hydrogen at very high speeds, in order to increase the spin of the Sun, and then send shock waves through the body of the sun to cause it to break up into 21 equally sized pieces. The 21 M-class red dwarf stars that result from this operation, each 502,000 km in diameter all orbiting in a stable Klemperer rosette, that will last trillions of years producing a steady output of light all that time - not going through all the phases that would destroy life on Earth in a scant 900 million years.
The interior of the shell created by the process intercepts this light and makes use of it to illuminate the outer surface of the shell, producing Earth like conditions and powering human industry on the shell and beyond while projecting sunlight similar to that reflected on to the engineered surface, and similar to that sent to all the planets asteroids and small bodies of the solar system by the ancient star that was once there, so as not to disrupt conditions there.
(continued)
I mentioned in other posts how a self-replicating solar panel that operates in the atmosphere of the sun can encase the sun in about 9 hours. Let's now describe a process of breaking the sun up.
I mentioned in other posts how we are ALREADY a K=2 civilization, one that control the output on the scale of stars, albeit briefly with H-bombs and A-bombs. Yet, Project Excalibur, as part of the Strategic Defence Initiative in the 1980s, built X-ray lasers powered by bomb blasts too! And don't forget Project Orion, an atom bomb propelled spaceship!
en.wikipedia.org...
www.youtube.com...
We have also built, since the 1950s, small suitcase nukes like M388
en.wikipedia.org...avy_Crockett_bomb.jpg
We also know how to make synthetic holograms using computers.
en.wikipedia.org...
Now, consider a small M388 nuclear device equipped with a collection of rod shaped gain media that are energized to produce powerful x-ray laser beams that pass through a Wolter type concentrator and through a tantalum sheet chemically machined to a fine tolerance to produce a synthetic x-ray hologram some distance from the gadget.
After thorough testing and modelling we place this gadget on top of an Atlas SLV-3C Centaur-D1A Star 37E and fly it past Jupiter. Twenty months later, at Jupiter the spacecraft undergoes a gravity assist maneuver around Jupiter to cause it to zero out its speed relative to the Sun. So after passing Jupiter the gadget drops directly into the Sun. Twenty-five months after its encounter with Jupiter, and forty-five months after launch from Earth, the gadget approaches the surface of the Sun.
At a predetermined altitude above the solar surface, the gadget explodes, projecting a 3D X-ray image into the solar atmosphere.
So what?
Consider that the hot plasma of the solar surface, is a nonlinear optical material.
arxiv.org...
Furthermore, by changing the temperature of the plasma with an X-ray blast, fusion reaction rates which are already underway, are changed as well.
www.sciencedaily.com...
Now, nonlinear optical material supports optical switching and optical computing functions.
en.wikipedia.org...
By creating a pattern of 'hot spots' we create an optical version of Conway's GAME OF LIFE - that is, we create a self-replicating computing pattern inside the solar interior. A pattern that implements an operating system.
conwaylife.com...
This is far more serious than a game. We have the ability in a matter of minutes really, to convert the entire energy of the Sun into a computing platform! All we do, is monitor the spacecraft and when the gadget detonates, we send a boot pulse to the platform - and it will reply in a preprogrammed way - to our message - and we have completed the first step in creating our shell and the other things mentioned.
Now, we can add x-rays to heat up the solar interior in spots. We can also interfere x-rays to cool the solar interior down in spots.
en.wikipedia.org...
We can in this way, create an optical molasses
en.wikipedia.org...
We can also focus x-rays into a collimated beam across a large area, and accelerate selected species to any speed we like, ejecting it from the sun at well defined locations and in well defined directions at well defined speeds.
en.wikipedia.org...
Since we have the entire output of the Sun, and even more since we can increase reaction rates to an arbitrarily high level (the computing platform of the sun itself can be used to help us model this)
en.wikipedia.org...
www.youtube.com...
The Sun generates energy at a rate of 3.87e26 watts! Its escape velocity is 617 km/sec. Thus, if ALL of its energy were directed at ejecting the 1.9% of the stellar mass that we wanted to assemble into the shell, it would take 311,880 years to do this if all were ejected to orbital velocity.
If we wanted to do this in 10 years, we'd have to temporarily, increase the power output of the Sun 31,188 times!! Doing this without adversely affected the solar conditions on Earth and the other planets, would require detailed modelling and understanding of the physics involved.
In addition to the heavier elements that form the shell, we will also eject hydrogen at very high speeds, in order to increase the spin of the Sun, and then send shock waves through the body of the sun to cause it to break up into 21 equally sized pieces. The 21 M-class red dwarf stars that result from this operation, each 502,000 km in diameter all orbiting in a stable Klemperer rosette, that will last trillions of years producing a steady output of light all that time - not going through all the phases that would destroy life on Earth in a scant 900 million years.
The interior of the shell created by the process intercepts this light and makes use of it to illuminate the outer surface of the shell, producing Earth like conditions and powering human industry on the shell and beyond while projecting sunlight similar to that reflected on to the engineered surface, and similar to that sent to all the planets asteroids and small bodies of the solar system by the ancient star that was once there, so as not to disrupt conditions there.
a reply to: EnPassant
I think you are making a false choice somehow. Also, you need to define your terms for me more clearly. I find myself asking wow is 'spiritual' different than 'material' in your view, for example, and why does one (say 'spiritual') need or desire the other (say 'material')? Also, are there more ways of looking at things than the two ways described here? Are you arbitrarily limiting yourself to two patterns of thought that make sense in a dualistic view of things, but are severely limited with a more expansive view?
Are you asking about a relationship between two supposed systems? If one form - say 'spiritual' merely casts shadows that are 'material' then like the parable of the cave, it is merely what you're paying attention to that determines your outlook! In this case say the material world is merely the shadow that the spiritual world casts.
In this case, then we must ask, how do we affect the material world? Are we really spiritual beings that believe themselves to be material? If so, is this view necessarily limiting? I still don't understand your question, because we can think we're shaping the material world all we like, but in reality, if we're spiritual too, we're shaping the spiritual world to cast specific shadows in a specific way in the material. So, are you asking about a question of taste? Should we seek to deal directly with the spiritual (however you might define it) and eschew the material? Its sort of like my dad telling me, never use your rear view mirror when driving in reverse. Turn around and look out the back window. I've always done that because of this advice. Yet, others, not receiving this advice when they were learning to drive, have no qualms about looking in the rear view mirror when driving in reverse. Is one way more real than the other? I don't know. I just know what works for me - and it doesn't always work that way for others. If on the other hand, if we're material, and in no way spiritual, then we don't really have a choice do we? We're the shadows cast by another, believing ourselves to be self-generated or something. In the parable of the cave, Plato presumes the prisoners are humans casting shadows. The 'trouble' comes from them believing themselves to be shadows. Presumably Plato was not troubled by what the shadows themselves thought.
There are radical transformations of perspective that can lead to deep insights in one's plight if you can call it that. Creating a 'spirituality' if you can call it that - depending on how you define it. For example, if you always wanted to go to New Zealand and start a company and never could quite manage it, and if one day you're in New Zealand running a company - well, that can seem magical when you reflect upon it. If you always wanted to be loved by someone and suddenly that person appears and expresses their love for you - that can bring about huge transformations of your reality.
Okay, how about this, an allegory... you're at a bus stop late one night. You don't normally ride the bus, but your car wouldn't start, and your cell phone is flat. So, you decided to take the bus home and call for AAA in the morning. You're standing there waiting for the bus and a tough looking character, stands next to you at the stop. You check them out. They look pretty scary. You ignore them hoping for the best, pissed about your car, wishing you weren't there. Suddenly, the big tough character jumps at you and pushes you to the ground. You try to fight back, but he was too quick for you. OMG! What will you do? You want to kill the bastard or run away as quickly as possible, both preferably. Then the fellow stands back, and laughs, are you alright - damn that was close. You look up and see, the fellow risked his life, to save you from the bus which would have run you over had the fellow not pushed you out of the way. You suddenly have a rapid change of heart - if you can call it that. All your fear anxiety loathing and negativity - is replaced by joy, friendship, positivity - the same exact events, by the same exact people - viewed differently - by a change of perspective.
The ability of perspective to change the entire cosmos - that's powerful #.
We're at the mercy of our perspective, more than we're at the mercy of our situation.
That's the important detail to keep in mind.
And I guess that answers your question - as far as I can understand it.
Being wise enough to know what's in charge.
It is likely a reflection of our brain structure...
www.ted.com...
But may be more mysterious than that, as Carl Jung points out.
www.youtube.com...
Now, when I was at a party when I was a young undergraduate I hung around the girl who gave the party, hoping to get lucky. I ended up sleeping on the couch, but we both talked and drank all night, until we couldn't stay awake any longer. In the end, I found myself asleep on the couch, and she was asleep in her bedroom. I give away my age - because this song was playing in my head
www.youtube.com...
Now time seemed to slip away - I don't recall her leaving me on the couch or me falling asleep. I just recall thinking about the song, and getting this feeling of I don't know what, but I get the feeling every time I hear the song, and I remember her. Suddenly, it seemed like it was the next morning and she was getting ready for work - and I'm in this hypnogogic state. I'm lying on the couch and cannot move and don't really want to - yet I'm also lying on a couch in the distant future a very clear and definite experience of my death some years hence. Now, it wasn't scary or anything. It was just this feeling permeating everything... and the takeaway from that is, I'm not scared of any damn thing, because I know very specifically when where and how I'm going to die... well that's the myth at least. And when I recapture this feeling, I'm not afraid of anything.
Now is this what you mean by spiritual?
Back when I was a graduate student I got Edgar Mitchell to come to a regional AIAA meeting and give a talk to the students. I picked him up at the airport and took him back. Now, Mitchell was a PhD Aeronautical Engineer, flew A3s in the Navy, and was a test pilot. If you ever watched the movie Top Gun, you get the idea of the kind of character he is. Not given to flights of fancy. Well, after the meeting I took him back to the airport. He said 'mind if I smoke?' I wanted to reply with the Steve Martin line, 'mind if I fart?' but I didn't - No worries I said. It was dark and he was looking at the sky. Ever get scared of the dark he asked? puffing on his Pall Mall unfiltered. Not since I was five I replied. Sometimes I get the shakes looking at a clear sky like this. Why's that? I asked. Then he explains to me that he thinks he spent too much time looking out the window on Apollo 14. You see he was the lunar module pilot, and the lunar module was thrown away before the command/service modules blasted back from lunar orbit. So, they come around the back side of the moon, and as the ship heads off to Earth, he's out back looking out the window with a sextant triple checking the inertial guidance and the radar fixes then
www.youtube.com...
I think you are making a false choice somehow. Also, you need to define your terms for me more clearly. I find myself asking wow is 'spiritual' different than 'material' in your view, for example, and why does one (say 'spiritual') need or desire the other (say 'material')? Also, are there more ways of looking at things than the two ways described here? Are you arbitrarily limiting yourself to two patterns of thought that make sense in a dualistic view of things, but are severely limited with a more expansive view?
Are you asking about a relationship between two supposed systems? If one form - say 'spiritual' merely casts shadows that are 'material' then like the parable of the cave, it is merely what you're paying attention to that determines your outlook! In this case say the material world is merely the shadow that the spiritual world casts.
In this case, then we must ask, how do we affect the material world? Are we really spiritual beings that believe themselves to be material? If so, is this view necessarily limiting? I still don't understand your question, because we can think we're shaping the material world all we like, but in reality, if we're spiritual too, we're shaping the spiritual world to cast specific shadows in a specific way in the material. So, are you asking about a question of taste? Should we seek to deal directly with the spiritual (however you might define it) and eschew the material? Its sort of like my dad telling me, never use your rear view mirror when driving in reverse. Turn around and look out the back window. I've always done that because of this advice. Yet, others, not receiving this advice when they were learning to drive, have no qualms about looking in the rear view mirror when driving in reverse. Is one way more real than the other? I don't know. I just know what works for me - and it doesn't always work that way for others. If on the other hand, if we're material, and in no way spiritual, then we don't really have a choice do we? We're the shadows cast by another, believing ourselves to be self-generated or something. In the parable of the cave, Plato presumes the prisoners are humans casting shadows. The 'trouble' comes from them believing themselves to be shadows. Presumably Plato was not troubled by what the shadows themselves thought.
There are radical transformations of perspective that can lead to deep insights in one's plight if you can call it that. Creating a 'spirituality' if you can call it that - depending on how you define it. For example, if you always wanted to go to New Zealand and start a company and never could quite manage it, and if one day you're in New Zealand running a company - well, that can seem magical when you reflect upon it. If you always wanted to be loved by someone and suddenly that person appears and expresses their love for you - that can bring about huge transformations of your reality.
Okay, how about this, an allegory... you're at a bus stop late one night. You don't normally ride the bus, but your car wouldn't start, and your cell phone is flat. So, you decided to take the bus home and call for AAA in the morning. You're standing there waiting for the bus and a tough looking character, stands next to you at the stop. You check them out. They look pretty scary. You ignore them hoping for the best, pissed about your car, wishing you weren't there. Suddenly, the big tough character jumps at you and pushes you to the ground. You try to fight back, but he was too quick for you. OMG! What will you do? You want to kill the bastard or run away as quickly as possible, both preferably. Then the fellow stands back, and laughs, are you alright - damn that was close. You look up and see, the fellow risked his life, to save you from the bus which would have run you over had the fellow not pushed you out of the way. You suddenly have a rapid change of heart - if you can call it that. All your fear anxiety loathing and negativity - is replaced by joy, friendship, positivity - the same exact events, by the same exact people - viewed differently - by a change of perspective.
The ability of perspective to change the entire cosmos - that's powerful #.
We're at the mercy of our perspective, more than we're at the mercy of our situation.
That's the important detail to keep in mind.
And I guess that answers your question - as far as I can understand it.
Being wise enough to know what's in charge.
It is likely a reflection of our brain structure...
www.ted.com...
But may be more mysterious than that, as Carl Jung points out.
www.youtube.com...
Now, when I was at a party when I was a young undergraduate I hung around the girl who gave the party, hoping to get lucky. I ended up sleeping on the couch, but we both talked and drank all night, until we couldn't stay awake any longer. In the end, I found myself asleep on the couch, and she was asleep in her bedroom. I give away my age - because this song was playing in my head
www.youtube.com...
Now time seemed to slip away - I don't recall her leaving me on the couch or me falling asleep. I just recall thinking about the song, and getting this feeling of I don't know what, but I get the feeling every time I hear the song, and I remember her. Suddenly, it seemed like it was the next morning and she was getting ready for work - and I'm in this hypnogogic state. I'm lying on the couch and cannot move and don't really want to - yet I'm also lying on a couch in the distant future a very clear and definite experience of my death some years hence. Now, it wasn't scary or anything. It was just this feeling permeating everything... and the takeaway from that is, I'm not scared of any damn thing, because I know very specifically when where and how I'm going to die... well that's the myth at least. And when I recapture this feeling, I'm not afraid of anything.
Now is this what you mean by spiritual?
Back when I was a graduate student I got Edgar Mitchell to come to a regional AIAA meeting and give a talk to the students. I picked him up at the airport and took him back. Now, Mitchell was a PhD Aeronautical Engineer, flew A3s in the Navy, and was a test pilot. If you ever watched the movie Top Gun, you get the idea of the kind of character he is. Not given to flights of fancy. Well, after the meeting I took him back to the airport. He said 'mind if I smoke?' I wanted to reply with the Steve Martin line, 'mind if I fart?' but I didn't - No worries I said. It was dark and he was looking at the sky. Ever get scared of the dark he asked? puffing on his Pall Mall unfiltered. Not since I was five I replied. Sometimes I get the shakes looking at a clear sky like this. Why's that? I asked. Then he explains to me that he thinks he spent too much time looking out the window on Apollo 14. You see he was the lunar module pilot, and the lunar module was thrown away before the command/service modules blasted back from lunar orbit. So, they come around the back side of the moon, and as the ship heads off to Earth, he's out back looking out the window with a sextant triple checking the inertial guidance and the radar fixes then
www.youtube.com...
a reply to: WilliamMook
Some people believe that we are simply material beings. Matter gets together and forms human beings and the mind is equivalent to the brain. This is the materialistic view.
If this view is correct the universe might be filled with alien life.
BUT! others believe that the mind is independent of the brain and it is the mind that initiates biological life; spirits generate life in physical terms. If this is the case life will not emerge until it is decided by incarnate minds to initialise it.
By 'spiritual' I mean the conscious experience of the mind as distinct from basic brain activity. The material is imbued with spirit but spirit is ultimately non material. If such non material spirits exist - and much in ufoloty suggest that aliens are spirits - then it may be that spirits generate biological life. (This is NOT to say I believe aliens created humans. There can be spirits that are native to this world. Not everything spiritual is alien)
Some people believe that we are simply material beings. Matter gets together and forms human beings and the mind is equivalent to the brain. This is the materialistic view.
If this view is correct the universe might be filled with alien life.
BUT! others believe that the mind is independent of the brain and it is the mind that initiates biological life; spirits generate life in physical terms. If this is the case life will not emerge until it is decided by incarnate minds to initialise it.
By 'spiritual' I mean the conscious experience of the mind as distinct from basic brain activity. The material is imbued with spirit but spirit is ultimately non material. If such non material spirits exist - and much in ufoloty suggest that aliens are spirits - then it may be that spirits generate biological life. (This is NOT to say I believe aliens created humans. There can be spirits that are native to this world. Not everything spiritual is alien)
edit on 26-4-2014 by EnPassant because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: EnPassant
Some people believe that we are simply material beings. Matter gets together and forms human beings and the mind is equivalent to the brain. This is the materialistic view.
My metaphysical, ad occult education contains a similar concept; wherein spirit "inhabits" the body at some point prior to birth.
My thoughts are the we (as sentient beings) are a symbiosis of an animal (physical form), and "spirit" (perhaps an energy being). With our symbiosis we attain a synergy that make us both far greater than the parts.
Here are a couple of papers on the more metaphysical aspects of life and the universe.
1. On the number 451
2. General Theory of Magick
In this model there are ample resources for "Spirit", providing a wide variety of experience
By 'spiritual' I mean the conscious experience of the mind as distinct from basic brain activity.
I like that...good concept for spirit, and consciousness.
a reply to: tanka418
Well, Joseph Atwill has pretty much demolished the Jesus myth and proven that religion has been used by the elite to control the masses.
www.youtube.com...
as was the New Age movement and the drug culture
www.youtube.com...
and the modern education system
www.youtube.com...
meanwhile, any real scientific insight into spiritual energies and forces, was uprooted and destroyed totally and the seekers of that truth murdered.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
Well, Joseph Atwill has pretty much demolished the Jesus myth and proven that religion has been used by the elite to control the masses.
www.youtube.com...
as was the New Age movement and the drug culture
www.youtube.com...
and the modern education system
www.youtube.com...
meanwhile, any real scientific insight into spiritual energies and forces, was uprooted and destroyed totally and the seekers of that truth murdered.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
originally posted by: WilliamMook
a reply to: tanka418
Well, Joseph Atwill has pretty much demolished the Jesus myth and proven that religion has been used by the elite to control the masses.
www.youtube.com...
as was the New Age movement and the drug culture
www.youtube.com...
and the modern education system
www.youtube.com...
meanwhile, any real scientific insight into spiritual energies and forces, was uprooted and destroyed totally and the seekers of that truth murdered.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
Yep; pretty much aware of all that...they failed!
I've a question. Why is it that the Star Sirius can not have any natural life? And, do you know how old the star is?
I've a hypothesis that these "powers that Be" originally migrated here from Sirius, and the ensuing difficulties of the Sirian colonies here on Earth, lead to an isolation of Earth from the rest of the local stellar community. And thus to the retardation of Terrestrial Human evolution in virtually all respects, and of course the fact that Earth has no open contact.
a reply to: EnPassant
Well, there is the material world and then there is life. Life is capable of replication and evolution. On Earth life is carbon based and seems to arise whenever the conditions are right for it to arise relatively quickly. Life has been around on Earth for nearly as long as conditions were right for life, for the past 3.5 billion years! Yet, throughout half that period, it has been single celled. Evolution occurred in the cell, through genetics that affected cell function. Now, there was photosynthesis 3.4 billion years ago, using chemicals that were the predecessors of chlorophyl. These used infrared light to process sulphur compounds. It wasn't until 1.75 billion years ago that red-brown algae appeared that used short wave light to process oxygen, and create the oxygen crisis. It was only 0.75 billion years ago that green algae appeared that efficiently made oxygen using chlorophyll. Multi-celled plants on land didn't appear until 0.48 billion years ago. It wasn't until the oxygen crisis some 2.0 billion years ago that there was intense selective pressure to develop multi-celled organisms. There were 46 different paths toward multi-cellularity tried over this period. After the last, the evolution of form occurred more rapidly than evolution of cell chemistry, leading to an explosion of forms 0.52 billion years ago! In more recent times we have the development of brains and the evolution of ideas, which occur even faster than evolution of forms. Most recently we have developed artificial evolution and machine intelligence which appears to be capable of surpassing humanity in speed complexity and capability in many respects. Since we do not know the nature of humanity fully, we cannot make any firm statements at the present time. Yet this has not stopped the transhumanists from making bold claims.
The developments we see in technology trends may very well be common among all technical species, leading to subsequent post-biological evolution of all species based on technologies developed by biological beings. That is, we may be a highly unusual 'missing link' between animal and god. This may be the point of interest among ETI.
Now, if we move beyond Earth and look at the history of the cosmos, we run up against the Hertzsprung Russell diagram and stellar evolution.
www.youtube.com...
And what this tells us is that carbon is made inside of massive stars that then explode and form later generation stars that have carbon and other heavier elements inside of them, and around them, upon which life as we know it can form.
en.wikipedia.org...
Now, the stars with elements heavier than Hydrogen and Helium are no older than 5 billion years. Yet the cosmos formed 13.8 billion years ago! That means for 8.8 billion years there was no possibility of life as we know it. Then, after the heavier elements built up in the stars, and some of them exploded, then there was the possibility of life as we know it. Life made of chemicals.
Now the conditions for self-replication and evolution are well defined.
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu...
Hydrogen and helium are not complex enough to support self-replication and evolution. A highly structured pattern of light in a hydrogen atmosphere may be able to support a sort of life. This is a life distinctly different than any we have considered heretofore. However, from what we understand of life and evolution, this should be possible. In fact given the amount of time the cosmos was devoid of chemical elements, it may be that life inside the cores of stars may be the dominant form!
The Rayleigh Criterion tells us if patterns can be transmitted from star to star. The Sun is 1.4 million km across. A 200 nanometer soft xray blast emitted from the sun's surface as a single coordinated ray - can form spots less than 8 meters wide from a distance of 4.3 light years! So a pattern with a trillion elements - a cube 10,000 elements on a side, would be a held in a volume 80 km on a side. An 'infected' star could use its entire surface as an optical element, and receive lots of information very quickly, to allow patterns to be transferred star to star... so as to allow 'light beings' to 'escape' a dying star. Living stars may know full well of the possibilities of chemical life as a theoretical construct, and arrange things to explode the star before they leave it. They may even arrange to construct avatars to interact with chemically evolved beings - telling them they were created by the sun and so forth...
These are highly speculative musings, but well within the science we know.
Yet, when we look at the early evolution of the first few moments of the big bang we find that its not merely chemicals - whether complex interactions of hot plasma, or complex interaction of cold molecules - that can support the mathematics of reproduction and evolution.
upload.wikimedia.org...
2.1 Planck epoch - the four fundamental forces were united before 1e-43 seconds.
2.2 Grand unification epoch - expansion, cooling, phase changes 1e-36 seconds.
*gravitation separates, a gravity wave type life is possible*
2.3 Electroweak epoch - electromagnetic separates from the weak force 1e-12 seconds
*a new type of life and evolution possible as life becomes too cold to support g-wave life*
3 Early universe
3.1 Supersymmetry breaking - 1e-6 seconds
3.2 Electroweak symmetry breaking and the quark epoch - 1e-6 seconds
3.3 Hadron epoch- 1 seconds - protons and neutrons form.
3.4 Lepton epoch - 10 seconds - leptons dominate
3.5 Photon epoch - 380,000 years
3.5.1 Nucleosynthesis - 3 minutes to 20 minutes
3.5.2 Matter domination - after 70,000 years
3.5.3 Recombination - 377,000 years
3.5.4 Dark Ages
4 Structure formation
4.1 Reionization - 150 million years to 1 billion years
4.2 Formation of stars - 380 million years until today
4.3 Formation of galaxies - 380 million years
4.4 Formation of groups, clusters and superclusters 380 million years
4.5 Formation of the Solar System - 9 billion years after big bang.
4.6 Today - 13.8 billion years after big bang.
5 Ultimate fate of the universe
5.1 Fate of the Solar system: 1 to 5 billion years
5.2 Big freeze: 100 trillion years and beyond
5.3 Big Crunch: 100+ billion years from now
5.4 Big Rip: 20+ billion years from now
5.5 Vacuum metastability event
5.6 Heat death: 10e150+ years from now
There are several epochs where different energy levels could exist and be communicated between the four fundamental forces of nature. Each of these could have given rise to a form of life that operated on a vastly different time scale, space scale, and energy scale than the others.
For example, the Hadron Epoch may have created life forms that would find the nucleus of an atom larger than the surface of our planet is to us! Yet, that atomic nucleus would have been far larger than the entire cosmos in an earlier epoch!
We also find that life on one scale in the cosmos may not survive into the other scale, with subsequent epochs being too cold, too large, and take too much time, for the life of one epoch to operate for long in the other epochs.
Well, there is the material world and then there is life. Life is capable of replication and evolution. On Earth life is carbon based and seems to arise whenever the conditions are right for it to arise relatively quickly. Life has been around on Earth for nearly as long as conditions were right for life, for the past 3.5 billion years! Yet, throughout half that period, it has been single celled. Evolution occurred in the cell, through genetics that affected cell function. Now, there was photosynthesis 3.4 billion years ago, using chemicals that were the predecessors of chlorophyl. These used infrared light to process sulphur compounds. It wasn't until 1.75 billion years ago that red-brown algae appeared that used short wave light to process oxygen, and create the oxygen crisis. It was only 0.75 billion years ago that green algae appeared that efficiently made oxygen using chlorophyll. Multi-celled plants on land didn't appear until 0.48 billion years ago. It wasn't until the oxygen crisis some 2.0 billion years ago that there was intense selective pressure to develop multi-celled organisms. There were 46 different paths toward multi-cellularity tried over this period. After the last, the evolution of form occurred more rapidly than evolution of cell chemistry, leading to an explosion of forms 0.52 billion years ago! In more recent times we have the development of brains and the evolution of ideas, which occur even faster than evolution of forms. Most recently we have developed artificial evolution and machine intelligence which appears to be capable of surpassing humanity in speed complexity and capability in many respects. Since we do not know the nature of humanity fully, we cannot make any firm statements at the present time. Yet this has not stopped the transhumanists from making bold claims.
The developments we see in technology trends may very well be common among all technical species, leading to subsequent post-biological evolution of all species based on technologies developed by biological beings. That is, we may be a highly unusual 'missing link' between animal and god. This may be the point of interest among ETI.
Now, if we move beyond Earth and look at the history of the cosmos, we run up against the Hertzsprung Russell diagram and stellar evolution.
www.youtube.com...
And what this tells us is that carbon is made inside of massive stars that then explode and form later generation stars that have carbon and other heavier elements inside of them, and around them, upon which life as we know it can form.
en.wikipedia.org...
Now, the stars with elements heavier than Hydrogen and Helium are no older than 5 billion years. Yet the cosmos formed 13.8 billion years ago! That means for 8.8 billion years there was no possibility of life as we know it. Then, after the heavier elements built up in the stars, and some of them exploded, then there was the possibility of life as we know it. Life made of chemicals.
Now the conditions for self-replication and evolution are well defined.
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu...
Hydrogen and helium are not complex enough to support self-replication and evolution. A highly structured pattern of light in a hydrogen atmosphere may be able to support a sort of life. This is a life distinctly different than any we have considered heretofore. However, from what we understand of life and evolution, this should be possible. In fact given the amount of time the cosmos was devoid of chemical elements, it may be that life inside the cores of stars may be the dominant form!
The Rayleigh Criterion tells us if patterns can be transmitted from star to star. The Sun is 1.4 million km across. A 200 nanometer soft xray blast emitted from the sun's surface as a single coordinated ray - can form spots less than 8 meters wide from a distance of 4.3 light years! So a pattern with a trillion elements - a cube 10,000 elements on a side, would be a held in a volume 80 km on a side. An 'infected' star could use its entire surface as an optical element, and receive lots of information very quickly, to allow patterns to be transferred star to star... so as to allow 'light beings' to 'escape' a dying star. Living stars may know full well of the possibilities of chemical life as a theoretical construct, and arrange things to explode the star before they leave it. They may even arrange to construct avatars to interact with chemically evolved beings - telling them they were created by the sun and so forth...
These are highly speculative musings, but well within the science we know.
Yet, when we look at the early evolution of the first few moments of the big bang we find that its not merely chemicals - whether complex interactions of hot plasma, or complex interaction of cold molecules - that can support the mathematics of reproduction and evolution.
upload.wikimedia.org...
2.1 Planck epoch - the four fundamental forces were united before 1e-43 seconds.
2.2 Grand unification epoch - expansion, cooling, phase changes 1e-36 seconds.
*gravitation separates, a gravity wave type life is possible*
2.3 Electroweak epoch - electromagnetic separates from the weak force 1e-12 seconds
*a new type of life and evolution possible as life becomes too cold to support g-wave life*
3 Early universe
3.1 Supersymmetry breaking - 1e-6 seconds
3.2 Electroweak symmetry breaking and the quark epoch - 1e-6 seconds
3.3 Hadron epoch- 1 seconds - protons and neutrons form.
3.4 Lepton epoch - 10 seconds - leptons dominate
3.5 Photon epoch - 380,000 years
3.5.1 Nucleosynthesis - 3 minutes to 20 minutes
3.5.2 Matter domination - after 70,000 years
3.5.3 Recombination - 377,000 years
3.5.4 Dark Ages
4 Structure formation
4.1 Reionization - 150 million years to 1 billion years
4.2 Formation of stars - 380 million years until today
4.3 Formation of galaxies - 380 million years
4.4 Formation of groups, clusters and superclusters 380 million years
4.5 Formation of the Solar System - 9 billion years after big bang.
4.6 Today - 13.8 billion years after big bang.
5 Ultimate fate of the universe
5.1 Fate of the Solar system: 1 to 5 billion years
5.2 Big freeze: 100 trillion years and beyond
5.3 Big Crunch: 100+ billion years from now
5.4 Big Rip: 20+ billion years from now
5.5 Vacuum metastability event
5.6 Heat death: 10e150+ years from now
There are several epochs where different energy levels could exist and be communicated between the four fundamental forces of nature. Each of these could have given rise to a form of life that operated on a vastly different time scale, space scale, and energy scale than the others.
For example, the Hadron Epoch may have created life forms that would find the nucleus of an atom larger than the surface of our planet is to us! Yet, that atomic nucleus would have been far larger than the entire cosmos in an earlier epoch!
We also find that life on one scale in the cosmos may not survive into the other scale, with subsequent epochs being too cold, too large, and take too much time, for the life of one epoch to operate for long in the other epochs.
a reply to: WilliamMook
(continued)
For anyone who has ever read Frank Tipler's The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, or The Physics of Immortality, you will know that cosmologists have considered our long-term survival in epochs far removed from our present happy circumstance, giving deep insight to the transhuman movement.
theophysics.host56.com...
Any life that arose in any of the earlier epochs I have outlined previously, would do no less! Could it be that cosmic evolution is dominated by life already? Could this be the explanation of dark matter and the inflationary period or even stellar novae?
A minimum mass black hole the mass of a mosquito, may support a vast retinue of life from the earliest part of our cosmos. The dominance of dark matter of this type may even be the result of efforts of this earlier life form.
Just as the activity of a planetary ecology warmed by a friendly star exceeds in its information processing capability the ability of a universe deep in the throes of heat death a quadrillion years from now, so too it should not be surprising that at the energies, densities and time scales of the early cosmos, MORE has happened in the first few seconds of cosmic evolution than has happened since.
In this way, we may indeed be a rather small (though no less important) foot note in the history of the cosmos.
(continued)
For anyone who has ever read Frank Tipler's The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, or The Physics of Immortality, you will know that cosmologists have considered our long-term survival in epochs far removed from our present happy circumstance, giving deep insight to the transhuman movement.
theophysics.host56.com...
Any life that arose in any of the earlier epochs I have outlined previously, would do no less! Could it be that cosmic evolution is dominated by life already? Could this be the explanation of dark matter and the inflationary period or even stellar novae?
A minimum mass black hole the mass of a mosquito, may support a vast retinue of life from the earliest part of our cosmos. The dominance of dark matter of this type may even be the result of efforts of this earlier life form.
Just as the activity of a planetary ecology warmed by a friendly star exceeds in its information processing capability the ability of a universe deep in the throes of heat death a quadrillion years from now, so too it should not be surprising that at the energies, densities and time scales of the early cosmos, MORE has happened in the first few seconds of cosmic evolution than has happened since.
In this way, we may indeed be a rather small (though no less important) foot note in the history of the cosmos.
Somebody has posted his 'book' on here. I'm enjoying it William for giving me some great new avenues of thinking and research to pursue.
I too agree that it may be folly to separate evolution from the physical universe. It could be that evolution of replicating living things is a major driver of structural change in the universe? Why not? It's a powerful force that could rip apart atoms and stars by the hands of the creatures that it created. According to some theories our universe itself evolved from previous universes.
On Earth we know that the very rocks we stand on and the atmosphere we breath were at least partially created by living things.
If evolution is the 'survival of the fittest' it will choose the fittest for survival. The fittest will be faster, stronger, bolder, smarter and more. They will explore every avenue that information can be processed and packaged and replicated in. Evolution works on information processing systems, it doesn't matter what the information is constructed from or packaged in or transmitted by.
I too agree that it may be folly to separate evolution from the physical universe. It could be that evolution of replicating living things is a major driver of structural change in the universe? Why not? It's a powerful force that could rip apart atoms and stars by the hands of the creatures that it created. According to some theories our universe itself evolved from previous universes.
On Earth we know that the very rocks we stand on and the atmosphere we breath were at least partially created by living things.
If evolution is the 'survival of the fittest' it will choose the fittest for survival. The fittest will be faster, stronger, bolder, smarter and more. They will explore every avenue that information can be processed and packaged and replicated in. Evolution works on information processing systems, it doesn't matter what the information is constructed from or packaged in or transmitted by.
a reply to: ManInAsia
Darwin and the elitists of 19th century Britain loved 'survival of the fittest' and made it into the mantra of the modern age. How one British royals define 'fitness' may have nothing at all to do with how the cosmos defines this term!
I recall reading a paper recently about host/parasite evolution. Basically, when parasites become detrimental to the survival of their hosts, the parasites have far more selective pressure applied to them than the hosts do. As a result, parasites tend to get wiped out if they become detrimental to the survival of their hosts.
To see why this is so, all you've got to do is realize that
(1) hosts that die cannot support parasites,
(2) hosts that survive, resist parasites efficiently,
So, at worst, the deaths for parasites scale as the square or cube of the deaths of host populations. For example, if half the hosts get killed, 3/4 to 7/8 of the parasites get wiped out - and those that remain are not as virile.
Now, this has important consequences to the present day parasites of the human race;
www.youtube.com...
who actually view themselves as superior to the 'common herd'. There are likely 82,500 of these folks around today. About 1 in 86,300 persons who own interests in the central banks and 80% of all the assets in the world;
www.sg.ethz.ch...
Now, this is relevant because since the times of Malthus, there has been an incessant beating of the drum of 'overpopulation' - which has taken on greater importance since the Club of Rome and environmental developments of the 1970s onward.
www.youtube.com...
Now, despite the increasingly hysterical demand to cull human numbers, we are still growing! 7.12 billions as of 2014. Growing at 1.14% per year at present. In the meantime, we're developing ageing control, and reversal, as well as self-replicating machinery that can transform entire worlds in weeks.
The problem the parasites have is that if they attain their 93% reduction in human numbers - from 7.12 billions to a 'sustainable' 500 million - it is very likely that 97.6% of the Oligarchy will die - reducing their numbers from 82,500 to 1,971 !!
Now this is likely to occur if humans respond to the growing awareness of the oligarchy and its influence as bacteria does as the parasite turns more lethal.
I tend to think, no matter how stupid we might think the common herd is, (and that includes most of us, and you too if you have anything less than $100 million in liquid assets in the bank), they're very likely smarter than bacteria. As such, as awareness of the parasite's role grows as the lethality of the parasites increase, it is very likely that there will be a sea change, and ALL of the parasites will be eradicated by the hosts.
Even today, as growth in human numbers slow, people universally are growing more aware of the role of parasites in the process. A reduction in human numbers - even a small reduction - will result in the eradication of parasites and the erection of barriers to the re-creation of parasites, which are basically high functioning psychopaths who are ready to kill without remorse to attain and maintain control and power.
Should it pass that death tolls rise, I fully expect the hosts will at some point be ready to kill without remorse anyone who exhibits any psychopathic tendencies or might have such tendencies, ending the present age of humanity.
It may very well be that the Satanic and other religions that appeal to psychopaths are engineered every bit as much as the Christian and other religions adopted by the sheeple. If so by whom? Well, among the ruling oligarchy, at the very top, to control and moderate the 4% of humanity who is psychopathic. That's one possibility. Another possibility, which makes me smile, is that aliens present on Earth, following our attainment of atomic bombs (which make us Kardashev 2 capable straight away) have shaped our religion over time, to cause the oligarchy - the parasites - to arrange things so they self-destruct!
That would be awesome!
Darwin and the elitists of 19th century Britain loved 'survival of the fittest' and made it into the mantra of the modern age. How one British royals define 'fitness' may have nothing at all to do with how the cosmos defines this term!
I recall reading a paper recently about host/parasite evolution. Basically, when parasites become detrimental to the survival of their hosts, the parasites have far more selective pressure applied to them than the hosts do. As a result, parasites tend to get wiped out if they become detrimental to the survival of their hosts.
To see why this is so, all you've got to do is realize that
(1) hosts that die cannot support parasites,
(2) hosts that survive, resist parasites efficiently,
So, at worst, the deaths for parasites scale as the square or cube of the deaths of host populations. For example, if half the hosts get killed, 3/4 to 7/8 of the parasites get wiped out - and those that remain are not as virile.
Now, this has important consequences to the present day parasites of the human race;
www.youtube.com...
who actually view themselves as superior to the 'common herd'. There are likely 82,500 of these folks around today. About 1 in 86,300 persons who own interests in the central banks and 80% of all the assets in the world;
www.sg.ethz.ch...
Now, this is relevant because since the times of Malthus, there has been an incessant beating of the drum of 'overpopulation' - which has taken on greater importance since the Club of Rome and environmental developments of the 1970s onward.
www.youtube.com...
Now, despite the increasingly hysterical demand to cull human numbers, we are still growing! 7.12 billions as of 2014. Growing at 1.14% per year at present. In the meantime, we're developing ageing control, and reversal, as well as self-replicating machinery that can transform entire worlds in weeks.
The problem the parasites have is that if they attain their 93% reduction in human numbers - from 7.12 billions to a 'sustainable' 500 million - it is very likely that 97.6% of the Oligarchy will die - reducing their numbers from 82,500 to 1,971 !!
Now this is likely to occur if humans respond to the growing awareness of the oligarchy and its influence as bacteria does as the parasite turns more lethal.
I tend to think, no matter how stupid we might think the common herd is, (and that includes most of us, and you too if you have anything less than $100 million in liquid assets in the bank), they're very likely smarter than bacteria. As such, as awareness of the parasite's role grows as the lethality of the parasites increase, it is very likely that there will be a sea change, and ALL of the parasites will be eradicated by the hosts.
Even today, as growth in human numbers slow, people universally are growing more aware of the role of parasites in the process. A reduction in human numbers - even a small reduction - will result in the eradication of parasites and the erection of barriers to the re-creation of parasites, which are basically high functioning psychopaths who are ready to kill without remorse to attain and maintain control and power.
Should it pass that death tolls rise, I fully expect the hosts will at some point be ready to kill without remorse anyone who exhibits any psychopathic tendencies or might have such tendencies, ending the present age of humanity.
It may very well be that the Satanic and other religions that appeal to psychopaths are engineered every bit as much as the Christian and other religions adopted by the sheeple. If so by whom? Well, among the ruling oligarchy, at the very top, to control and moderate the 4% of humanity who is psychopathic. That's one possibility. Another possibility, which makes me smile, is that aliens present on Earth, following our attainment of atomic bombs (which make us Kardashev 2 capable straight away) have shaped our religion over time, to cause the oligarchy - the parasites - to arrange things so they self-destruct!
That would be awesome!
a reply to: tanka418
I like to imagine that present estimates of N are correct. So, there are 4200 communicative ETI in the Milky Way. Of these something like 28 of them will have self-replicating probes operating throughout the Milky Way, including on Earth. So, these folks will have been around here for a long long time, and our detonation of atomic bombs will have caused those self-replicating probes to build avatars that interact with us in various ways.
I don't know this, but it is interesting to think about.
Now, if it turns out that superior intelligences have interacted with and shaped human culture or even the human genome, one must wonder why? What is the motivation?
So, I have a fiction to tell - that to me seems fully consistent with all reports of UFOs and ancient cultures and so forth - but which is merely an idea.
It arose after I read Charles Fort's "Book of the Damned" wherein he concluded that he thought we were owned by something! The same way the fish in a pond are owned by the family that owns the pond. Sometimes, they go fishing!
Our ability to imagine what purpose an alien presence has of humanity may be as limited as that of a fish, who has no idea what they taste like to the aliens when deep fried and eaten with butter and lemon. Of course this isn't a new idea. An old one;
vimeo.com...
My idea stems from the observation made by the Comedian Bill Hicks, that aliens seem to avoid dealing directly with our leaders to make open contact. They prefer to meet up with folks in Fyfe Mississippi and whittle something!
To my mind that suggests they are constrained by the Novikov Self-Consistency Principle. Which means they're time travellers, and that WE somehow contribute to the existence of the mechanism by which they travel here.
en.wikipedia.org...
So, here's my narrative that makes sense to all of this;
Humanity is the first to develop the means to traverse the cosmos - creating a cosmic mechanism in the process. By doing this before others, we preclude others from doing likewise. Just as being the first to dig subway tunnels in Manhattan creates obstacles to anyone who might wish to build subways in Manhattan at a later date, so too does erecting wormholes between stars, and around black hole ergospheres, deny those who come later from using them without dealing with us.
Now for those we get along with and don't mind dealing with us, there's no problem. For those we don't like, or those who do mind dealing with us, there are a host of problems. For those that are clever, aggressive, and motivated, they may carry out a successful campaign to undermine us, make us more to their liking, or more easily controlled. This would entail mounting a war against us in the past, defeating us, and to maintain access through the time portals that make use of our technology that make the war possible in the first place, they would have to nurture us enough to build those portals - and then destroy us after, temporal stability is attained.
I like to imagine that present estimates of N are correct. So, there are 4200 communicative ETI in the Milky Way. Of these something like 28 of them will have self-replicating probes operating throughout the Milky Way, including on Earth. So, these folks will have been around here for a long long time, and our detonation of atomic bombs will have caused those self-replicating probes to build avatars that interact with us in various ways.
I don't know this, but it is interesting to think about.
Now, if it turns out that superior intelligences have interacted with and shaped human culture or even the human genome, one must wonder why? What is the motivation?
So, I have a fiction to tell - that to me seems fully consistent with all reports of UFOs and ancient cultures and so forth - but which is merely an idea.
It arose after I read Charles Fort's "Book of the Damned" wherein he concluded that he thought we were owned by something! The same way the fish in a pond are owned by the family that owns the pond. Sometimes, they go fishing!
Our ability to imagine what purpose an alien presence has of humanity may be as limited as that of a fish, who has no idea what they taste like to the aliens when deep fried and eaten with butter and lemon. Of course this isn't a new idea. An old one;
vimeo.com...
My idea stems from the observation made by the Comedian Bill Hicks, that aliens seem to avoid dealing directly with our leaders to make open contact. They prefer to meet up with folks in Fyfe Mississippi and whittle something!
To my mind that suggests they are constrained by the Novikov Self-Consistency Principle. Which means they're time travellers, and that WE somehow contribute to the existence of the mechanism by which they travel here.
en.wikipedia.org...
So, here's my narrative that makes sense to all of this;
Humanity is the first to develop the means to traverse the cosmos - creating a cosmic mechanism in the process. By doing this before others, we preclude others from doing likewise. Just as being the first to dig subway tunnels in Manhattan creates obstacles to anyone who might wish to build subways in Manhattan at a later date, so too does erecting wormholes between stars, and around black hole ergospheres, deny those who come later from using them without dealing with us.
Now for those we get along with and don't mind dealing with us, there's no problem. For those we don't like, or those who do mind dealing with us, there are a host of problems. For those that are clever, aggressive, and motivated, they may carry out a successful campaign to undermine us, make us more to their liking, or more easily controlled. This would entail mounting a war against us in the past, defeating us, and to maintain access through the time portals that make use of our technology that make the war possible in the first place, they would have to nurture us enough to build those portals - and then destroy us after, temporal stability is attained.
a reply to: WilliamMook
Actually...I was hoping for a story about life around the Star Sirius...What difference does a white dwarf some 7au away make?
Actually...I was hoping for a story about life around the Star Sirius...What difference does a white dwarf some 7au away make?
a reply to: tanka418
The Sirius System has two stars A and B. By looking at the colors of these stars and how they change over time we can tell a lot.
α CMa A - Sirius A - This is the Star you see
Mass 2.02 M☉ (heavier than the sun)
Radius 1.711 R☉ (larger than the sun)
Luminosity 25.4 L☉ (far brighter than the sun)
Surface gravity 21,380 gees!!! (1000x the surface gravity as the sun!)
Temperature 9,940 K (far bluer than the sun) - peak output at 292 nm (UV light)
Metallicity [Fe/H] 0.50 (more metals than the sun)
Rotation 16 km/s (spinning faster than the sun)
Age 300 million years (far younger than the sun)
α CMa B - Sirius B - This is invisible to the naked eye
Mass 0.978 M☉ (as massive as the sun)
Radius 0.0084 R☉ (5,842 km radius - smaller than the Earth!)
Luminosity 0.026 L☉ far less luminous than the Sun.
Surface gravity 371.53 million gees!!!! (vastly larger than the Earth)
Temperature 25,200 K (this is as hot as an X-ray machine filament!) - peak output 115 nm (Xray)
Sirius is the brightest star in the night sky. The name "Sirius" is derived from the Ancient Greek: Seirios ("scorch"). What the naked eye sees as a single star is actually a binary star system. A blue white star, called Sirius A, and a faint white dwarf companion that emits x-rays mostly called Sirius B. The distance separating Sirius A from its companion varies between 8.2 times the distance of Earth from the sun to 31.5 times that distance (1.23 billion km to 4.73 billion km) and takes 50 years to complete a revolution.
To get an idea of this the orbit of the dwarf star is a distance from the main star larger than the distance Saturn is from the sun to Beyond Pluto's distance from the sun! The main star is so bright that at a distance of 756 million km (just inside the orbit of Saturn in the solar system) a planet would receive the same amount of light per unit area as the Earth does in the solar system. Of course, because the surface is so hot on the main star, it puts out mostly UV light. Then, periodically there would be the dwarf star overtaking it and irradiating it with x-rays dozens of times brighter than the moon! Also, at this distance, the orbit of the planet wouldn't be stable, since the dwarf star is so massive! However, an orbital resonance is possible with 3/2 or 33.3 years orbital period - so that the planet stays away from the X-rays and the gravity.
Even with high UV, our kind of life might survive on such a world, since it would be at the right temperature, providing it were blanketed with UV and X-ray luminescent dyes, that shifted the short wave light down a notch into the visible part of the spectrum! Photosynthesis might even take place if cells learned how to use minerals to shift the light in the plant leaves. These leaves would glow like powerful rainbows - and change color at night.
Calcite and other minerals glow when exposed to UV light and X-rays. They even change their colors as UV light changes - so these minerals would look totally different on this world and make for some very colorful situations.
farm3.static.flickr.com...
Sirius appears bright on Earth partly because because its intrinsically bright and partly because its not very far from Earth. At 8.6 ly the Sirius system is one of Earth's near neighbors. Sirius is gradually moving closer to the Solar System, so it will slightly increase in brightness over the next 60,000 years. After that time its distance will begin to recede, but it will continue to be the brightest star in the Earth's sky for the next 210,000 years.
The system is 300 million years old. It was originally composed of two bright bluish stars. The more massive of these, Sirius B, consumed its resources and became a red giant before shedding its outer layers and collapsing into its current state as a white dwarf around 120 million years ago.
The rising of Sirius marked the flooding of the Nile in Ancient Egypt and the "dog days" of summer for the ancient Greeks, while to the Polynesians it marked winter and was an important star for navigation around the Pacific Ocean.
The Sirius System has two stars A and B. By looking at the colors of these stars and how they change over time we can tell a lot.
α CMa A - Sirius A - This is the Star you see
Mass 2.02 M☉ (heavier than the sun)
Radius 1.711 R☉ (larger than the sun)
Luminosity 25.4 L☉ (far brighter than the sun)
Surface gravity 21,380 gees!!! (1000x the surface gravity as the sun!)
Temperature 9,940 K (far bluer than the sun) - peak output at 292 nm (UV light)
Metallicity [Fe/H] 0.50 (more metals than the sun)
Rotation 16 km/s (spinning faster than the sun)
Age 300 million years (far younger than the sun)
α CMa B - Sirius B - This is invisible to the naked eye
Mass 0.978 M☉ (as massive as the sun)
Radius 0.0084 R☉ (5,842 km radius - smaller than the Earth!)
Luminosity 0.026 L☉ far less luminous than the Sun.
Surface gravity 371.53 million gees!!!! (vastly larger than the Earth)
Temperature 25,200 K (this is as hot as an X-ray machine filament!) - peak output 115 nm (Xray)
Sirius is the brightest star in the night sky. The name "Sirius" is derived from the Ancient Greek: Seirios ("scorch"). What the naked eye sees as a single star is actually a binary star system. A blue white star, called Sirius A, and a faint white dwarf companion that emits x-rays mostly called Sirius B. The distance separating Sirius A from its companion varies between 8.2 times the distance of Earth from the sun to 31.5 times that distance (1.23 billion km to 4.73 billion km) and takes 50 years to complete a revolution.
To get an idea of this the orbit of the dwarf star is a distance from the main star larger than the distance Saturn is from the sun to Beyond Pluto's distance from the sun! The main star is so bright that at a distance of 756 million km (just inside the orbit of Saturn in the solar system) a planet would receive the same amount of light per unit area as the Earth does in the solar system. Of course, because the surface is so hot on the main star, it puts out mostly UV light. Then, periodically there would be the dwarf star overtaking it and irradiating it with x-rays dozens of times brighter than the moon! Also, at this distance, the orbit of the planet wouldn't be stable, since the dwarf star is so massive! However, an orbital resonance is possible with 3/2 or 33.3 years orbital period - so that the planet stays away from the X-rays and the gravity.
Even with high UV, our kind of life might survive on such a world, since it would be at the right temperature, providing it were blanketed with UV and X-ray luminescent dyes, that shifted the short wave light down a notch into the visible part of the spectrum! Photosynthesis might even take place if cells learned how to use minerals to shift the light in the plant leaves. These leaves would glow like powerful rainbows - and change color at night.
Calcite and other minerals glow when exposed to UV light and X-rays. They even change their colors as UV light changes - so these minerals would look totally different on this world and make for some very colorful situations.
farm3.static.flickr.com...
Sirius appears bright on Earth partly because because its intrinsically bright and partly because its not very far from Earth. At 8.6 ly the Sirius system is one of Earth's near neighbors. Sirius is gradually moving closer to the Solar System, so it will slightly increase in brightness over the next 60,000 years. After that time its distance will begin to recede, but it will continue to be the brightest star in the Earth's sky for the next 210,000 years.
The system is 300 million years old. It was originally composed of two bright bluish stars. The more massive of these, Sirius B, consumed its resources and became a red giant before shedding its outer layers and collapsing into its current state as a white dwarf around 120 million years ago.
The rising of Sirius marked the flooding of the Nile in Ancient Egypt and the "dog days" of summer for the ancient Greeks, while to the Polynesians it marked winter and was an important star for navigation around the Pacific Ocean.
new topics
-
BIDEN Admin Begins Planning For January 2025 Transition to a New President - Today is 4.26.2024.
2024 Elections: 3 hours ago -
Big Storms
Fragile Earth: 5 hours ago -
Where should Trump hold his next rally
2024 Elections: 7 hours ago -
Shocking Number of Voters are Open to Committing Election Fraud
US Political Madness: 8 hours ago -
Gov Kristi Noem Shot and Killed "Less Than Worthless Dog" and a 'Smelly Goat
2024 Elections: 9 hours ago -
Falkville Robot-Man
Aliens and UFOs: 9 hours ago -
James O’Keefe: I have evidence that exposes the CIA, and it’s on camera.
Whistle Blowers and Leaked Documents: 10 hours ago -
Australian PM says the quiet part out loud - "free speech is a threat to democratic dicourse"...?!
New World Order: 11 hours ago -
Ireland VS Globalists
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 11 hours ago
top topics
-
James O’Keefe: I have evidence that exposes the CIA, and it’s on camera.
Whistle Blowers and Leaked Documents: 10 hours ago, 17 flags -
Australian PM says the quiet part out loud - "free speech is a threat to democratic dicourse"...?!
New World Order: 11 hours ago, 15 flags -
Blast from the past: ATS Review Podcast, 2006: With All Three Amigos
Member PODcasts: 14 hours ago, 13 flags -
Biden "Happy To Debate Trump"
2024 Elections: 12 hours ago, 13 flags -
Ireland VS Globalists
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 11 hours ago, 10 flags -
Mike Pinder The Moody Blues R.I.P.
Music: 14 hours ago, 8 flags -
BIDEN Admin Begins Planning For January 2025 Transition to a New President - Today is 4.26.2024.
2024 Elections: 3 hours ago, 7 flags -
What is the white pill?
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 13 hours ago, 6 flags -
Shocking Number of Voters are Open to Committing Election Fraud
US Political Madness: 8 hours ago, 6 flags -
Big Storms
Fragile Earth: 5 hours ago, 6 flags
active topics
-
Gov Kristi Noem Shot and Killed "Less Than Worthless Dog" and a 'Smelly Goat
2024 Elections • 63 • : GENERAL EYES -
Mood Music Part VI
Music • 3113 • : MRTrismegistus -
BIDEN Admin Begins Planning For January 2025 Transition to a New President - Today is 4.26.2024.
2024 Elections • 20 • : BustedBoomer -
One Flame Throwing Robot Dog for Christmas Please!
Weaponry • 12 • : worldstarcountry -
RAAF airbase in Roswell, New Mexico is on fire
Aliens and UFOs • 13 • : Ophiuchus1 -
President BIDEN's FBI Raided Donald Trump's Florida Home for OBAMA-NORTH KOREA Documents.
Political Conspiracies • 40 • : BingoMcGoof -
Australian PM says the quiet part out loud - "free speech is a threat to democratic dicourse"...?!
New World Order • 7 • : 19Bones79 -
It takes One to Be; Two to Tango; Three to Create.
Philosophy and Metaphysics • 8 • : Compendium -
Big Storms
Fragile Earth • 16 • : rickymouse -
James O’Keefe: I have evidence that exposes the CIA, and it’s on camera.
Whistle Blowers and Leaked Documents • 14 • : 19Bones79