The cyclical nature of human civilization is due to a theoretical limit of the universe

[Anonymous No.10198151]

The progress of human civilizations mirrors the progress of life on earth. Photosynthesis was a game changer. Instead of relying on chemical and thermal energy, prokaryotes began to utilize the an abundant energy source - the Sun. Photosynthesis started the evolution of single cellular life into complex multi-cellular life. Photosynthesis ensured food production as long as the Sun shone on Earth.

Farming was the photosynthesis for man. Farming ensured a few humans could produce food for a large population - enabling humans to form complex civilizations. Each human in a civilization is a cell, specializing in a task to ensure the survival of the civilization.

Just like how multi-cellular organisms fought each other for resources and food, human civilizations fought each other for resources and food. However, unlike evolution of life on a single cell level, human civilizations follow a cyclical pattern. They form, they rise, and then they fall. Why is this? Why can't human civilizations stabilize and perpetuate for eternity?

The answer lies in the genome of civilizations - ideas. Ideas, or ideologies, are the genes of human civilizations. Ideas are passed down from one generation to the next in civilizations. Ideas give rise to morality, laws, and culture. However, in cells, genes are chemical in nature - molecules. Chemical molecules are bound by the laws of the universe and thus genes in cells can pass on information perfectly for many many generations before they degrade. However, ideas are not bound by the laws of the universe. Ideas are often passed on imperfectly and they degrade far quicker than chemical genes.

[Anonymous No.10198152]

>>10198151
Ergo, life in the universe is stuck in a cycle due to a theoretical limit - ideas are not bound by the laws of the universe. Thus, life will keep producing better and better life till sentience is created. Once sentient life forms exist, farming or some equivalent will be discovered. This will give rise to a new form of life - civilizations based on ideas as the genomic structure. Since ideas are not bound by the laws of the universe, they will be passed down imperfectly, eventually degrade, and cause a civilization's downfall.

[Anonymous No.10198156]

>>10198152
Good luck 4chan, and goodbye.

[Anonymous No.10198170]

>>10198156
I'm pretty sure the idea behind evolution was that something happens a countless number of times until the circumstances are right for a mutation to suit a change in the environment, if not they fail. So you can see this constant failure of civilizations as something akin to the billions of years it took for life to even adapt reproduction. Cells were just forming and dying without even a way to transfer their existence, luckily it changed. Civilization is changing as well, the oral/written history is now the phenotype we lacked all along.

[Anonymous No.10198192]

>>10198151
As soon as we get over greed and self-interest we can progress as a species

[Anonymous No.10198224]

>>10198151
>>10198152
>>10198156
Woah dude

[Anonymous No.10198480]

>>10198224
Pass the bong dude weed lmao

[Anonymous No.10199174]

Bumping for interest.

[Anonymous No.10199742]

Bamp

[Anonymous No.10199886]

Samsara.

What cycle inflection do you want?

[Anonymous No.10199952]

>>10198151
>fall. Why is this? Why can't human civilizations stabilize and perpetuate for eternity?
>The answer lies in the genome of civilizations
Wrong. The answer lies in the fact that complete stability is impossible. Not for ideas, civilizations, not for molecules, not for anything.
Stability would mean you have completely stopped interacting with any new elements, which means death.

[Anonymous No.10199972]

>>10198151
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4-Od8cq5Gk&list=PLXTePDlKDQfSduqPdJ4ZUMDCz_u_k7Uu6

[Anonymous No.10200021]

>>10199952
>Wrong. The answer lies in the fact that complete stability is impossible. Not for ideas, civilizations, not for molecules, not for anything.
>Stability would mean you have completely stopped interacting with any new elements, which means death.
>Calls OP a fag.
>Doesn't realize he's a fag himself for stating a fact without presenting the reason behind it.

[Anonymous No.10200025]

>>10199952
If it was stable in the sense of unreactive then it would become an economic symbol.

[Anonymous No.10200043]

It's a nice but flawed start to trying to generalize evolutionary terns so that they could be applied in other context.
The analogies are not one to one and your conclusion at the end is wrong because the system we live in is chaotic and as such could not be predictable without showing a major factor. Your theory is not a major factor in the interplay of human civilization, its an attempt to describe them, not the same thing

[Anonymous No.10200044]

>>10200021
I called no one a fag, you just happen to have fags in mind, for some obvious reason.
>>10200025
>stable in the sense of unreactive
There's no other sense of the word. Interaction means change, and a system susceptible to change is not stable.

[Anonymous No.10200126]

>>10200043
So your description would be a bounding attempt made, self-aware, and more as a teaching to demonstrate that some doorways will lead to dead ends.

[Anonymous No.10200127]

>>10200044
If it is unreactive but interactable then the utilization of stable becomes personal.

[Anonymous No.10200134]

>>10200127
I'm not sure what you are saying but how can something be unreactive and interactable ?

[Anonymous No.10200145]

>>10200134
Did you mean linear or perpetual stability?

Gold is unreactive, we still interact with it. I am trying to isolate how many dimensions you are referencing when you say stable. If it is just chemical then the remainder is a stunted imagination on your part.

[Anonymous No.10200158]

>>10200145
In this context it should be clear I'm not talking about chemistry. I mean nonreactive in every sense of the word.
It needs to react in order to be interactive. I needs to change in order to react. And it needs to be unstable in order to change.

[Anonymous No.10200169]

>>10200158
So basically a substance that doesn't react to light?

[Anonymous No.10200174]

>>10200169
You've lost me.
I'll be honest, you should've lost me at "economic symbol" though. I'm not sure that your posts are coherent.

[Anonymous No.10200196]

>>10200174
Well a strongly unreactive element means it is stabler for longer. Gold is an economic symbol even though the material's practical use is low. Division to value requires information on many systems.

Really I was just curious about your reactive point. If an object does not react to photons then how would it be detected or prevalent enough to get this far in problem resolution process?

>accounts for dark matter

[Anonymous No.10200535]

>>10200025
>economic symbol.

[Anonymous No.10200548]

>>10200043
>The analogies are not one to one
I think they are, and I think he's on to something here.
>because the system we live in is chaotic and as such could not be predictable without showing a major factor.
He's stating a simple fact - thoughts are not bound by the laws of the universe and hence thoughts evolve in a manner that are uncontrolled and thus lead to collapse of civilizations. If anything, he's actually saying that the evolution of human thoughts is indeed chaotic.

[Anonymous No.10200558]

>>10198151
>""trippy"" all knowing god pics
are there any filters for these posts?

[Anonymous No.10201317]

>>10198151
>>10198152
Whaaaa.....t?

[Anonymous No.10201324]

>>10199952
I’m so proud of /sci/ today!!

[Anonymous No.10201332]

Because we are limited by the confines of our own neurological pathways, there is no perfect shell for an imperfect snail.

Read up on transhumanism Broski.

>>10198192
Not possible without /g/

[Anonymous No.10201365]

>>10198151
>However, ideas are not bound by the laws of the universe.

Daniel Dennett level of stupidity. All ideas relevant to humans are dependent on humans existing. Reason being they must be stored as patterns in the brain in order to travel through time and the human brain is finite. I agree with your micro to macro and group lineage explanation of human civilization although I don't believe its cyclical in nature. Ideas have a self correcting mechanism through a quasi Darwinian fitness whereby the individual with an individual belief will either benefit or be harmed by holding a particular belief e.g. extremist ideas which harm society is corrected by reducing the reproductive success of the holder of the ideas through social pressure.

[Anonymous No.10201374]

>>10201365
So the logical conclusion of all that shit is that we should transcend the human form correct?

[Anonymous No.10201380]

There is some ignorance of the sculpting of man's genome through multiple factors (ideas/culture being a part of environment, etc.,) and how that genome contributes to ideas? In a way, that constrains the capacity for ideas. It provides a universal constraint on the ideas. Yes, the theoretical limit has to operate under it, but it is also guided by it.

In a mathematical way, we are limited within a single number's decimal, where man is a whole number and his ideas are irrational and take him .9999999999999... away from himself, where .9999... =/= 1. Environment provides the rest of the fraction to take him to 2.

[Anonymous No.10201388]

>>10201374
Its likely where we are headed whether we are consciously aware of it or not. Things are getting so complex that an individual can hardly stand back and make any comprehension of the massively complex societal structures we have built. The life force that moves through us is using us for all our abilities and inabilities as a means to an end.

[Anonymous No.10201396]

>>10201388
Can you give me some insight into what you believe, thanks for teaching me that shit, well I guess it doesn't really matter anyway thanks. What you said makes sense.

[Anonymous No.10201401]

>>10201374

Logical conclusion is that we can't. Everything else it your coping mechanism that you're not special.

[Anonymous No.10201410]

>>10201401
We can't transcend the human form in an infinite universe? I'll show you famalam.

[Anonymous No.10201427]

>>10201380
Ya, the genome moves with the ideas and civilization. OP is assuming that civilization's genome is separate from the genome of mankind - as if ideas aren't biologically rooted. The iterations of societies is a process of morphing the genome into a result that is ready to "move forward".

[Anonymous No.10201438]

Bit of a brainlet and not super smart. So please bare with me. Reading all this stuff makes me think towards the Chaos Theory. If I'm wrong please educate me on this further. Either I'm looking at a bigger picture or I'm completely on the wrong page but could chaos theory contribute to our existence and evolution. From civilization growth and then either us destroying ourselves or there happens to be some random occurrence to wipe out civilization. But then we just repeat the steps we have taken but just in a different way to create a whole new lot of ideas and creations? I get this idea because you can never get rid of chaos, from what I see and understand. But I can also see and understand the good and beauty of what comes out of chaos or happens inside/during it? I don't know man, I'm just an 18 year old with no qualifications in anything. I dropped out of school at 16 and I've been independent since. Please educate me if I'm to have the wrong idea so that I can learn further

[Blank No.10201474]

>>10198151
What a dumb thread. No wonder the hindus had problems with understanding the stupidity of the caste system

[Anonymous No.10201504]

idk op i think its possible that the current system will never fall, just transmutate infinitely until the sun swallows it.

[Anonymous No.10201510]

>>10198151
You make way too many assumptions and you sound pretty fucking stupid doing so. People like you are why science can't get anywhere, stupid blatant assumptions all over the place.

[Anonymous No.10201514]

>>10198151
>Ideas, or ideologies, are the genes of human civilizations. Ideas are passed down from one generation to the next in civilizations. Ideas give rise to morality, laws, and culture. However, in cells, genes are chemical in nature - molecules. Chemical molecules are bound by the laws of the universe and thus genes in cells can pass on information perfectly for many many generations before they degrade. However, ideas are not bound by the laws of the universe. Ideas are often passed on imperfectly and they degrade far quicker than chemical genes.
Absolutely pseudo "scientific" please don't post stuff like this

[Anonymous No.10201530]

>>10201514
He's just stating an obvious relationship through language, stop being such a brainlet. Everything you greentexted is logical.

[Anonymous No.10201553]

>>10198192
>hey guys as soon as we get over these pesky evolutionary imperatives we can progress!
Don't hold your breath

[Anonymous No.10201559]

>>10201530
He's assuming that no idea is better than others and that civilization can't arise out of stimuli I'm not even going to start posting about the other stuff

[Anonymous No.10201640]

>>10201396
I would argue like Bret Weinstein that societal/cultural norms are phenotypic extensions of genetic interest and not a separate entity of ideas which propagates in the environment independent of humans.

https://youtu.be/rm8FksjlJtM?t=573

[Anonymous No.10201676]

>>10199972
what the fuck is a "significant figure"

[Anonymous No.10201680]

>>10201504
once everyone gets along just fine rules and government will be abolished

[Anonymous No.10201704]

>>10198151
Cool story bro. Hey, have you ever done DMT before?

[Anonymous No.10201927]

>>10198192
>>10201553
i was watching a lecture by graham hancock, he got into this "new wave" rant about how we should go back to the ancient spirituality live insync with nature before is to late for us....THE ANCIENT FUCKERS ARE ALL GONE...FUCKING GONE!!! sumerians,aztecs, egiptians, incas...etc even the supposedly teachers of the ancients the "hyperboreans" are all gone!!!

this is the most probable future IF WE SURVIVE long enough>>10201388
even heiddeger saw this and thats why hes called the last philosopher

SPIEGEL: And what now takes the place of philosophy?

Heidegger: Cybernetics.

SPIEGEL: And what now takes the place of philosophy?

Heidegger: Cybernetics.

SPIEGEL: Or the pious [one] that holds himself open.(31)

Heidegger: But that is no longer philosophy.(32)


http://www.ditext.com/heidegger/interview.html

[Anonymous No.10202542]

>>10200535
$

[Anonymous No.10202557]

>>10201438
Chaos Theory is basically that there is a perpetual process substrate everything works with, but the substrate is never truly predictable.

Sub process from main process on chaos substrate however is predictable. The more division away from chaos the more precision achievable.