Every working society is built around a death star, but the folks maintaining it should not form the administration if it can be helped. You want to remove the option for violence, but rule via civil negotiation, not terror.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
to flip that a bit, in the sense of prisoner reform i guess, but that's really a complicated subject as we phase from nonsentient evolution to a sentient regime and end of social gov theory Temporal math: Science > Biodiversity > Transient entities [universal existential key]
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Eschersand
If we manage to completely align our social structure with inclusive fitness I am disinterested. I find the idea of being selected subservient to a yeast god repulsive.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
yet bacterial biomass is worth more then the temp. human race. is where the bulk of earths billions yrs of evolutionary intelligence (infinity games on surface of the quantum ocean) is contained, the more that is lost the longer real time sentient evolution takes to develop, yes?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Eschersand
Given a large enough surface, prokaryotic evolution is blindingly fast when compared to geological time spans. Eukaryotic evolution seems to have a larger search space and is more prone to local optima before it gets to general intelligence. And we don't seem to be sustainable.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @Eschersand
Ah, correction. The problem with evolving large multicellular critters is that the numbers of individuals are very small, generations are extremely long, and dependencies on habitat and food chain ecology are complicated, when compared to single celled organisms.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
you'd probably have to be a condensed matter researcher to even begin to comprehend the scale of computational complexity of nature. (and valuation via processing time) .. or perhaps the subject is over humanities head entirely. I suppose Elon Musk suffers from the same handicap
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Eschersand
Why? I don't think it is so hard. Seth Lloyd gives a decent way of estimating the upper bound on the number of operations in a given spacetime volume.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
and he's been pretty roundly debunked too. as a side note, if you comment on your last comment it doesn't fragment the thread
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Eschersand @Plinz
his more recent work: "focused on the role of quantum phenomena such as coherence in biological phenomena" is interesting. if recognized spacetime as surface tension on the quantum ocean (product of the existence/nonexistence paradox (E/NE-P), they might even start cooking w/ gas
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I lack the comprehension to make sense of your statements. I don't even know what a quantum ocean is and how it can have surface tension.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
strangely... physics hasn't gotten there yet. but the quantum ocean is the product of the Existence/NonExistence-Paradox (E/NE-P). And dark energy is simply the ongoing coalescing of matter out of the Quantum Ocean. Paradoxes of set theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxes_of_set_theory …
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.