Humans evolved from Machines - Theory

I tend to believe this backs up the creationist story how God created man. its evidence of creation being created.


Keeper

reply to post by hidatsa

---

What an enchanting post. Yes, I believe that may be one possible future for humanity.

But I think, rather, that we shall merge with our creation, and together become somethng entirely different. I rather hope so.

reply to post by Astyanax

---

And to that end, I present this article:

DNA Is Blueprint, Contractor And Construction Worker For New Structures

Singularity is coming. First steps are here.

Pretty cool Beach.

As you may know there are a couple types of 'Singularity'. One is a 'technological singularity and the other is the biological singularity.

As machines are able to reach trans-human intelligence, or superhuman intelligence, they'll start designing smarter machines and advances will just accelerate.

Many people feel that we shouldn't go too far with nanotech until we develop the super intelligent computer so that it will aid us in preventing problems (grey goo for instance).

Once that happens, then humans will start trying to develop the perfect machine which includes all the connections for the 100,000,000,000 neurons in the human brain, and we can 'download' ourselves and our consciousnesses into this machine. Being able to self-repair with nano-tech this 'new transhuman' would be immortal.

At some point we may 'transcend'. That is things will start happening so quickly that some singularians predict that we will 'wink out of existence' or transcend to a new plane of existence. We will, in effect, become 'gods' (small g).

There are some people who doubt this for a variety of reasons. Perhaps we'll reach a limit with computing power, or perhaps the permutations of the human brain will be too much to get it right.

Singularians say we will just use a subset and try for close to human and then 'brute force' our way to the next subset and keep trying.

Keep the best random models that are most like humans and throw out the rest.

The computer would judge which programs were the most like human consciousness and then we'd soon be in the 'singularity' where things are happening at an uncalculable rate of progress.

But if we can surpass those potential barriers it will be a strange and interesting time.

Hopefully some of us won't 'just miss' this event by passing on a few months or a few years too soon.

If I haven't covered the salient points, perhaps Beachcoma can chip in and give his impressions.

reply to post by Beachcoma

---

Here are some threads i have started that discuss manufacturing on the nano and atomic scale:

How much does it take to move a single atom?

Scientists use DNA to grow consistently shaped nanostructures


the one issue i have with "uploading" us into a machine is that we then run the risk of limiting who/what we are. If it doesn't go with the program, it cannot exist.

One would hope that at some point, programming logic sequences can be summarized logarithmically (programming for probablistic factors from an infinite pool). It would seem that unless we can create the logical analogy to "vector mapping" on steriods, the "singularity" idea may limit us too much.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

---

Yeah, I wouldn't want to be the first one to be uploaded. In fact the paradigm might be different.

It might be that there would be a holographic way to do it.

Here's a pretty far out thought.

Put the body into a stasis chamber or something on the order of what they show in The Matrix, but voluntarily.

Then jack the consciousness into the machine. After a while, people could opt in to a more aggressive program.

The machine body could also have a very robust monitoring and safety system to assure the corporeal body was OK.

Or...

Remember the transplant machine that was used on Spock in Spock's Brain? The advanced cybernetics surgery department would just translate the meat brain into the cyber body.

Or...

Nano techniques could be used to take the model of the perfect cyber-bot, and then gradually, and internally, replace the carbon-hydrogen-oxygen-nitrogen meat body into unobtanium or adamantine.

Since there would have been a time where this kind of thing was done on a smaller scale for injuries, people would become used to it.

Gradually the whole body would replaced, save, maybe the actual brain, and it would be almost not even noticed by the user.

It doesn't have to be some kind of gross thing where they use optical-quantum cabling and then 'kill' or dispose of the meat body - which most people would find objectionable.

2 cents.

I am of the opinion that the brain is nothing more than the "interface" between physical and other. I don't know what other is. I suppose it is something akin to a soul, but that is just my "preloaded" information that comes from social impacts.

But it would certainly seem that the actual thought and memory comes from elsewhere. We see activity in brain scans, but this activity to me seems more akin to a computer accessing its storage devices, you know?

Consciousness seems to emanate from elsewhere, however, For example, the kid that had the hemospherectomy. He is a college graduate. You can remove HALF OF THE BRAIN and still graduate college? If this is true, then it says very little for a college degree.

Further, brain size does not associate itself with intelligence. Gigantic people are no smarter than people who are extraordinarily small.

Jack Russell terriers are obviously smarter than much, much larger dogs.

Intelligence, to me, must be an artiface of the brains wired ability to convey logic strings and memory from the body to where ever our true consciousness is kept.

yes, this is very "eastern" sounding. I realize that...once again an artiface of my mindset.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

---

RE: you're notion intelligence/consciousness etc., doesn't reside in the brain, (or as I like to put it, the brain may only be the 'modem' by which intelligence/consciousness is downloaded onto the 'desktop' of the body):

- you're probably fully aware of this, anyway, but just in case you aren't, (or indeed anyone else isn't), your idea is hardly discredited by the fact there are over one hundred living people known to science who basically don't have a brain, yet who in every other sense are otherwise perfectly normal fully functioning human beings.

Here's a fairly recent example:

www.spiegel.de...

This guy's supposedly of low IQ (75), but others with even less brain components than him are reported to be the likes of doctors and university lecturers.

In the early days of medical research, (i.e., the days of the infamous bodysnatchers), many early researchers reported performing autopsies on individuals reknowned for their brainpower only to find smaller than average brains or indeed little more than mere vestigial traces.

These reports were - and often still are - readily dismissed as being due to poor observation, poor technique, etc., probably because they seemed to call into question the Theory of Evolution, but are less easy to discredit in the light of modern hi-tech findings.

I doubt humans evolved from machines. It's already been demonstrated that protocells can emerge in early Earth-like conditions in the lab...we don't need anything fancy.

www.lessonplanspage.com...

Well it looks like the preliminary steps to getting it done are, well, done.

Here's the article.

www.sciencedaily.com...

They found a way to pretty much replicate sugar compounds synthetically. I feel like science has finally caught up with science fiction in this field. I wonder if we could use technology like this to synthesize other organic compounds...If so, we could probably synthesize our very energy sources...Hell we can even just do it with sugars. Man the possibilities...Not to mention the medical advancements(as illustrated by the article). As far as they can tell, however, they only really know the structure to only a few sugar compounds like heparin. Basically, the field is wide open.