Tuesday, January 14, 2014

Digital Apocalypse

I often wonder whether the world would survive if the entire digital fabric of the planet was peeled off i.e if the current technologies which define the digital age (which covers almost everything from cameras to smartphones and smart TV's's) were to be slowly made non existent.One would imagine how such an event might impact our civilization.
It might be well assumed that since these technologies are quite young, since the digital age itself might have started its arduous journey only from the beginning of the century, there would not be much of an impact since civilization did very much exist before the year 2000.But this is a fool's argument. Since, 2000 we have changed ourselves in many ways which are almost irreversible. Most of our day to day lives have become dependent on these technologies, for example. it would be impossible to think of our lives without mobile phones. Entire societal structures have now become dependent on these aspects of technology to such a large extent that their very survival would be in question if digital technologies are made absent.
I'm pretty sure that in the event of such a situation there would disaster whose magnitude can be compared to an Apocalypse. Hence, in my further in investigation of such a singular possibility, I shall assume the use of the term 'Digital Apocalypse (DA)' to refer to such an unfortunate event.
Looking into the possibility of a DA taking place I shall make use of my knowledge of how the human societal structure functions ( which most unfortunately has not taken very deep roots - currently I am only 18 years old). I strongly believe that such an event would be apocalyptic in nature as almost all of government infrastructure very much depends upon it. Firstly, the transportation sector would degenerate into chaos. Traffic signals would blink off at junctions, suburban and underground train system would be in jeopardy.Collisions and accidents will be inevitable. Communication lines will go down. This includes both in urban and rural areas. The country's defence mechanisms will become dysfunctional which in turn will make the country's border regions vulnerable to infiltration. Looking at a larger scale, wars and skirmishes could break out in sensitive regions around the world (such as Africa, Middle East ). The possibility that Orders sent out by Commanders to their respective field units and divisions are misunderstood is augmented.
In other words, totalic chaos ensues.

Apocalypse follows.

The destruction meted out could take centuries to correct. One wonders as to why we argue about something which has a very slim possibility of actually taking place. But let me enlighten the reader to the fact that this is so very possible that there is a term to it, its called a 'fire sale'. Let me also enlighten you to the fact that there are people who simply want to see the world burn without any definite reason, they are called psychopaths.Put these two together and its quite obvious. But unfortunately our glorious world is just too saturated with the latter that we'd better watch ourselves. This is done by making ourselves less dependent on technology and becoming more oriented to Nature. By nature I mean the planet, to become in phase with the planet at least to a small extent. This should cushion the destructive effects of a Digital Apocalypse.   

Saturday, September 21, 2013

The Thousand Year Rule

It was invariably amusing, yet it initiated a chain of thought. I was referring to a recent video that I came across the link of which is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGhdX1SI3KY&bpctr=1376558576.
Yes it is an Adolf Hitler speech (with proper English translation). As I previously said, I found a little tinge of ironical amusement in it when he delivers his idea (in highly expressive body language, to add to the amusement) that his party "would last for a thousand years". Perhaps Adolf did not mind adding a little bit of exaggeration that could easily bend a fickle audience, but it was amusing nevertheless as Nazism was crushed within a decade and could not last even a hundredth of the time frame given.

But the above quoted statement does lead me to perform mental manipulations in which I weigh different possibilities ,one against another, to decide as to whether it is conceivable to form a government that can actually last for a thousand years. On performing some research, I came to the conclusion that it is possible...yes it is. Reason? It already has happened.The Monarchical/Absolutist form of government has dominated the political scenario for a long time and has been in existence for thousands of years.

But the fact is, though a particular form of government did exist for eons, there was no definite governmental hierarchy which was,in most cases, highly amorphous. Moreover, the degree of absolutism kept varying from monarch to monarch depending on the character. It happens so that I am not in search of this. I seek a government that is more solid...more stable. One in which the hierarchy of the administration is more or less constant. The monarchical form of government does not come into the above purview, hence I turned to communism which was born around One Hundred and Fifty years before present time and looked into its history.I shall now delve deep into that facet of human political history which I believe is entirely non-empirical, where experimental relations cannot be derived, though I believe that there is a subtle promise of noteworthiness.


But nevertheless I shall not make all my voluminous views on this facet, in their entirety, condescend upon this most unfortunate page which I believe is, was and shall be at the receiving end of the ravings of a person whose mind has converged upon itself, whose mental structure has compressed itself to a point.....a singularity.  




I found that it was one of violence, death, power-hungry men, and famine. I shall not go too much into this subject as my views are so voluminous in this respect that I believe they are entitled to an exclusive post discussing that particular facet alone.In any case, I found that the initial chapters of Communism were one of horror, violence and death. I refer to the Bolshevik Movement in Russia which was led by Vladimir Lenin. Lenin promised a nation in which all men and women would be deemed Equal, a nation in which food would be plentiful. But instead what resulted was hunger and violence. I observe that after famine, the Russian society (including the peasantry) who were previously sympathetic to the Bolshevik cause, were unhappy with the Bolsheviks. Following this, a strike erupted in a navy dock, by soldiers who demanded more food.

This prompted the Bolsheviks to respond, with force. Lenin simply sent in the Red Army and crushed the resistance. The people were aware by now that the popular revolution was over and that around a  thousand Bolsheviks were dragging a nation of millions into their view of the world, and no one could stop them.
Hence afterward a man name Joseph Stalin snatched power and ruled as an absolutist for 20 years. These years in Russia were one of hardship and fear. The point I earnestly try to convey is that none of the 'communist' leaders actually followed communism, the communism put forward by Karl Marx. Each person Lenin and Stalin, followed a political ideology by which they simply used the communist ideology to gain power. It was called Leninism and Stalinism, not communism. Being limited by this, I am not able to derive an empirical relation regarding communist rule and its effects. Hence, I shall leave this topic to be subject to scrutiny.
This leaves me with no other options but to abdicate with Democracy. By Democracy I mean absolute Democracy, not nations which claim to have democracy.
Yes, a Democratic rule will be one in which no rash actions are taken. But it reminds us of the chaos as no action can be taken at once. For instance, to approve a bridge a parliament would take many months or years. Initially, it will be seen as a chaotic, meaningless authority. But what seems as chaos at first will soon work out some order. As it progresses, we would observe that disorder would be necessary for order. This order sprouts out through the subtle interplay between a billion minds

In my view,I concede that democracy is not necessarily ideal, but may indeed survive and sustain for an entire millennium.  


Tuesday, July 23, 2013

The Robot Insurrection

I have wondered for many an evening as to whether our future in a decade would be one in which AI technology is dominant and this topic has been the base of many discussions. Recently I came across a vlog in which an intellectual discusses the rather preposterous situation where Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) attains sentience and turns on their unfortunate human creators. Yes, I call this preposterous as I believe that such a situation can never arise. It is impossible for any form of AI to attain sentience. Perhaps it would be more proper to say that an AI would become so advanced that it can imitate sentience. Yes, the latter statement is better put.
Coming back to the vlog, the person called this situation as the Singularity, where robots attack their own creators. This Singularity may well arise but the chances of it to actually take place is diminishingly small as we would have in our human community quite a number of distinguished individuals, distinguished with respect to a fundamental human characteristic which I find is lacking in quite a number of people -        common sense.
Speaking of robots, I would like to bring to the cognizance of the reader the insignificant fact that I personally have a high degree of interest in robots, yes in humanoid robots to introduce more specificity. And yes it is limited to AI in the form of humanoid robots alone. I assert the above statements as I believe it shall occupy the remaining portion of this mental convergence. In recent years, robotics has developed to quite a large extent and AI even more. But this extent does in no way appease our expectations of a robot that in every way looks human. In the words of the great physicist Dr. Michio Kaku, the most advanced modern day robot has the intelligence of a cockroach...........a stupid retarded cockroach. The reason attributed to such an eloquent description of present day robotic intelligence is the fact that engineers are limited by the amount of computer power available in their hands. Present day silicon chips are very primitive and the next better alternative is, as I infer from appropriate sources, is to take the binary 0s and 1s to the electronic level where the spins of a single electron are used to resolve high and low voltage, i.e upspins is taken as a ones and downspins are zeros. This is the smallest resolution to which binary can be resolved down to (it is impossible to venture beyond a single electron, due to limitations presented to us by Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle ) and the speed and power such computers possess would dwarf the same capabilities of modern day computers.
The above statements are facts which I have come across and I mention them to foster in us hope that intelligent robots are very well within our reach and this dream could materialize within half a century or even less. I don't know if the following idea is limited to me or if others have felt it too, but I do believe that there is something spiritual and holy about Robots as they imitate life itself. Moreover, if we construct one which imitates life with extremely high accuracy to such an extent that it is indistinguishable from life itself, then it raises the question as to what life is at all and what puts it at a higher position than Robots?

Perhaps time will answer that question.        

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Civilization is.....Decaying?

Hi. So apparently as the title states, this post shall discuss the question as to whether our civilization is actually in a state of constant decay since the beginning of the century. By decay, I mean stagnation in the fields of science, economics, resource and environmental conservation. 
Conventionally, the above statement shall receive rather a significant amount of opposition as people will argue that development is taking place constantly and use examples like Moore's Law according to which computer power doubles every eighteen months. Let me bring to the cognizance of these people the fact that Moore's Law may not be universal and hence I will not be surprised if it breaks down in the century. Let me also state that I do not contest the fact that development is taking place, it is indeed taking place , but at a considerably slower pace than it was half a century earlier. To convince the reader of this, I shall present a series of examples and arguments in the following lines.
Let me begin with the well known fact that our environment is getting damaged beyond repair. Global temperature is going up, the ice caps are melting, human population is shooting up, rivers and lakes are getting dried up or polluted, the ozone layer is thinning, resources are getting depleted,  carbon emissions are at an alarmingly high level so that even if it is stopped now......reduced to zero this second, it will take hundreds of years for it to get back to normal. But yet, there seems to be no hope for the latter to take place.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Soon perhaps within a hundred years, catastrophic effects can be witnessed and the human civilization might well be wiped out. This is just one form of decay.
Competition is a powerful aspect in driving human emotions, which if harnessed in the right way could be used to foster an upward development in any field. This can be seen if we look at the world, around half a century ago, where two great nations competed each other to achieve supremacy in a scientific field. Yes, I am referring to the Space Race between The USA and the Soviet Union ( which at the time was powerful ).
Because of this, mankind was able to reach the moon ( remember, around half a century ago ). There were exciting speculations back then ( I take this from excerpts and other information sources, I myself was not alive back then ) that by the year 2000, humans would have a settlement on the moon. But we have hardly made any progress with respect to lunar settlements and we have stuck to sending out probes, putting satellites in orbit, and simply orbiting around the Earth. This is because the aspect of competition ( healthy competition, mind you ) between USA and Russia does not exist since the Soviet Union broke up. This is clearly what it is.....stagnation or Decay. 
Yes it is Decay, with a capital 'D' as it is the decay of everything and anything ............. 
  ...............................................the decay of humanity.

Friday, July 12, 2013

Rare Earth Hypothesis

Hi. It has been a significant amount of time since I started this blog and I did not keep up with my personal goal of one post a week. It is regrettable that it has to be so the second time itself, but I have a reputation of not following my plans so I have to warn the reader that there will be a high degree of irregularity in initiating new posts though I will try my best to keep up.
In this spray of thoughts, you shall encounter what is perhaps one of the most debatable and interesting issue.  It can be best expressed by the Wikipedia excerpt below :

'The Fermi paradox is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilization and humanity's lack of contact with, or evidence for such civilizations  The basic points of the argument, made by physicists Enrico Fermi and Michael.H.Hart are:

1. The sun is a young star. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older;
2. Some of these stars likely have Earth-like planets which, if the Earth is typical, may develop               intelligent life;
3. Presumably some of these civilizations will develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is               investigating even now;
4. At any practical pace of interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in a few tens of     millions of years.   
According to this line of thinking, the Earth should have already been colonized, or at least visited. But no convincing evidence of this exists. Furthermore, no confirmed signs of intelligence elsewhere have been spotted, either in our galaxy or the more than 80 billion other galaxies of the observable universe. Hence Fermi's question, "Where is everybody?" '

Yes. It is as you guessed. I shall put forth my viewsdiscussing the possibility of whether extraterrestrial 

intelligence or if E.T. life itself can exist. Many of the people with whom I raise the subject for discussion believe that such a possibility can be very much considered, partly due to the fact that such a prospect brings in a lot of excitement. They also justify such an aspect using a very convincing argument that there are hundreds of billions of stars in our own galaxy alone and that there could be a planet somewhere where conditions would be appropriate for life. I very much appreciate this viewpoint, but I myself would like to put forward an argument which vouches for the more ' excitement-less' position. 

Though there are hundreds of billions of planets out there, what if the Earth is ( as the title states ) rare? 
I'm sure that you all are aware of the supposed conditions in which life on Earth came into being and evolved. It involved a complex mix of factors and the most delicate adjustments and can be compared to building a house of cards. If even one card fell, the structure gets destroyed with no hope for realignment. To explain the analogy, consider the fact that the Earth is at the right distance from the sun for example. If it is too close, we would be fried into nonexistence and conditions become inhospitable to life. Same happens in case of the other possibility (if it is too far out from the sun). I beseech the reader to take into account the extremely complex circumstances in which life ( as we know it ) came into being. Taking into account of these facts, perhaps we can come to the conclusion that life itself is rare. 
In the next few lines I shall consider another possibility which may invite a lot of skepticism from the reader. 
Perhaps life ( again- as we know it ) itself was never meant to be.


Perhaps life is an ABERRATION.

I have to forgive you for putting forth something that is rather disturbing but I would not like this to be true either, but Truth does not have emotions and can be very harsh. Yes, I argue that life could very well be an aberration, something that came along accidentally and was not meant to be. If you doubt this, take a look at the night sky, the stars, planets, nebulae, distant red shifted galaxies, gases, energy.
Do any of the above possess life? The universe to our knowledge is primarily made up of non-living materials like stars, gases etc. and in one tiny speck of rock ( which is nothing in comparison to the vastness of space ) , something different comes by....I don't know in what way it is different as all living things are made of atoms and molecules, but somehow different by a certain spark which we call life.

It is like a tiny blotch in a painting...and what would one call such a thing? One would readily term it an aberration. I hope the reader that see the analogy. 




In any case, I find this argument quite disturbing myself and I would like to contradict myself ( yes, it is mental convergence ). First of all, I actually believe that it is very much likely for extraterrestrial life to actually exist and scientists claim we may even make contact by the middle of the century ( Dr.Michio Kaku of New York Univ. clearly asserts the same, also Stephen Hawking ) . This may be possible because of the same reason I contradicted above, that there are billions of stars in our galaxy with at least one planet per star, and is very much within the realm of possibility that conditions can fall in place for some other planet exactly as it did for Earth. For the sake of a conclusion, I shall even state that it would be illogical for life..........not to exist.

                    



  

Monday, July 8, 2013

Hi

Hi. I am Eto Demerzel. The reason I start this blog is primarily to make my views available to others which I believe may be thought provoking to you and I also feel that everyone on this planet should share their thoughts and views as it is necessary for the intellectual development of the Human community.

My justification for choosing to christen this place of my mental convergence as such shall be provided in the following lines.

First of all, the 'End' in the title 'Star's End' is implied with respect to direction, not as in the phrase 'The star is nearing it's end (i.e. implying death of a star)', but more in sense with 'the other end of the road' or 'this end of the rope'. So, the title effectively conveys the location of the star referred to with respect to the Earth.I eloquently reference to a star's position in this manner as I believe, since Humanity has not yet developed the required technological capability to reach even the nearest star, I can very well assume that the magnitude of the position vector of a star with respect to us is psychologically and technologically infinite. Hence, 'Star's End' is to signify that these thought bursts shall have no specific limits or boundaries and shall swell till they grow infinitely large enough to burst the very seams of the space-time fabric. 

The reader may find my reasoning absurd, but I shall take the liberty to make such assumptions. In any case, I wish to conclude this rather singular thought burst and I welcome the reader to nourish my views in the future mental convergences which I shall unleash................






.............till it reaches the Star's End.