/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3566541]

Yo /sci/, I've been thinking of this quite a bit lately:

There is no limit to what we as a human race are capable of. If we aren't already, we will be the most advanced species in the universe. Just think of all the things we have accomplished with respect to science and technology. Eventually we will become immortal and with unlimited time I see no limits to what we can achieve.

feelsgoodman

[Anonymous No.3566563]

meh. lots of stupid ppl on earth

[Anonymous No.3566567]

>>3566541
Once immortality is an option, most of the civilization will be forcibly sterilized and/or slaughtered to make room for the uber-rich.

We would go from a population of almost 7billiion to at most 200,000. Possibly 150,000 would be the non-working elites, and 50,000 would be the working-class.

Nothing will stop my plans for purification.

[Anonymous No.3566579]

>>3566541
Look at the gauss distribution.

That distribution tells us how much we're going to discover.

It is going to end. Maybe not this century.
Maybe next millennium.

Perhaps, if we're very, very lucky, mankind might even be there in 10,000 years. But someday, we will perish.

[Anonymous No.3566616]

>>3566541
>There is no limit to what we as a human race are capable of.

Political limitations: In a democracy we can't mobilize all our resources. There will always be dissenting parties that would dilute, impede or otherwise block initiatives that don't serve their interests. As it is we're a money oriented society that places profit over everything else. If an initiative isn't profitable or is expensive then its not going to get done. Not a bad thing, just a reality of democracy. On the opposing end fascism and totalitarian rule doesn't guarantee that resources will be mobilized to reach scientific goals.

Limitations of science:
Science has limitations which are largely based on the tools we use for observation. After a while model building and observation won't be enough to answer the questions we pose. The most notable limitations are on what we observe, for example we can never observe extra-universal places because of the universal speed limit c. We can't say with certainty what occurs on the sub-atomic scale because of the uncertainty that comes in play when our instruments we use for observation interact with the system we're observing, we can never know what occurs past the even horizon of the black hole etc, what's below plank's length, events that occur in shorter duration than plank's time and other such extreme scales can't be observed. Once we hit that wall the only thing left to do is use philosophy and speculation.

So yes there is a limit.

[Anonymous No.3566631]

>>3566616
Ok so I guess there is a limit (scientifically) if you look at it like that, but most of that stuff won't affect how much we can advance technologically. I mean, someone 100 years ago would think we are a society of gods now, so imagine where we will be a 100 years from now. And when colonization of planets happens, there will be no stopping the human race.

[Anonymous No.3566636]

>>3566567
Implying we'll achieve immortality through our current bodies.

[Anonymous No.3566644]

>>3566567
Stop being so stupid. Also, you're a bio-chauvinist. Enjoy your limits.
>>3566616
> Once we hit that wall the only thing left to do is use philosophy and speculation.
There are certain things which are outside of science, but are still testable (but not scientific), they will be trivial to test in a post-singularity scenario (if you're a substrate-independent mind).

[Anonymous No.3566654]

>>3566541
We'll hit some upper asymptote, this is even assuming more wilder philosophical ideas are true about the nature of reality.
That said, we'll always find interesting things to do.

[Anonymous No.3566687]

>>3566636
Immortality is bullshit. Everything must come to its operational end. Think of the consequences it'll have on everything.

[Anonymous No.3566699]

>>3566687
What consequences? Just suicide if you don't like living.
It is our obvious endgoal in life and if you don't like it, you know what you can do.

[Anonymous No.3566717]

>>3566699
http://www.cracked.com/article_18708_5-reasons-immortality-would-be-worse-than-death.html

[Anonymous No.3566724]

>>3566541

I'm naturally an optimist, so I hesitate to contribute to pessimism regarding your ideas, but, I am also a realist, so I have to be honest.

>Yo /sci/, I've been thinking of this quite a bit lately:

There is no limit to what we as a human race are capable of. If we aren't already, we will be the most advanced species in the universe.

That assumes that other advanced species won't also be progressing, which is utterly unrealistic. It is akin to thinking that as long as you keep making money, eventually you'll be the richest person in the world. It ignores the fact that your competitors won't stop competing with you. Or, you are simply an anthropo-chauvanist.

>Just think of all the things we have accomplished with respect to science and technology.

We have possibly reached a tipping point of sorts. What we don't know still dwarfs what we do know by many magnitudes. But some stuff is getting easier to access.

>Eventually we will become immortal and with unlimited time I see no limits to what we can achieve.

Um, no. Not without a leap of some sort. Life extension, sure, but the jump from mortality to immortality implies a qualitative shift, beyond a mere quantitative one.

>feelsgoodman

It feels good to be a man, with or without scientific progress. More power to you! Don't stop thinking!

[Anonymous No.3566754]

>>3566687

Every decent lab has a sample of immortal cells.

A body living forever is possible. Out of reach at this time, but who knows in 200 years ?

[Anonymous No.3566762]

>>3566717
> #5. Evolution Will Turn You Into a Freak
Assumes I would like to stay in my meatbag for so long, even assuming so, that there would be no DNA repair mechanisms. My preferred form of immortality is as an upload which spends most of the time in some VR-like environment and ocasionally goes corporeal (be it in a android body or a biological or cyborg (digital mind + bio body)).
> #4. Nobody Can Ever Find Out
I expect most of the world to take similar choices to me, or at least a sizeable part. No secret "immortality cure" for myself only. I wouldn't care if there was a deathist majority, but I would find it sad that they chose such a silly path.
> #3. You're Still Getting Older (Mentally)
Your mind would still forget stuff and you would be a new person every few hundred years (or less). There's no helping this given our cognitive architecture, but I still like my illusion of continuity of consciousness. Also I'm not assuming biological brains with dieing neurons. Quantum Immortality without being a mind upload would result in you becoming senile with most of your brain dieing off and you becoming a forever-living vegatable.
> #2. Time Speeds Up Until You're Insane
Since you'll forget stuff anyways, this isn't likely. This assumes things about our minds which are not true.
> #1. You'll Eventually Get Trapped Somewhere (Forever)
This assumes literal immortality and not just immortality with option to suicide, which is what most people would have existing physically. Quantum Immortality could prove troublesome, but would still be solved by a gradual mind erase (or some sort of method to gradually destroy your brain).

These reasons are invalid for me as they assume a very different form of immortality than the one I would choose and the one that is most likely to happen (biological "immortality" (no aging, cancers, ...) for a hundred years or less, mind upload for the rest)

[Anonymous No.3566773]

>>3566699
>>3566717
Also with immortality there's an obscene strain on society. This is just conjecture but seriously look at the culture clash of the 1960's. The young will rebel on the old, introduce new ideas into society, challenge paradigms and then bring about a change in society (for better or for worse). But with immortality the old paradigms prevail. Since the young do not replace the old as the old die out you're going to get a big clash between the younger generations and older generation that never goes away. The old just get more and more entrenched in their ideas, the younger generation grows old and becomes old generation 2.0 and a new generation comes into play. Eventually you'll get several hundred generations each with different paradigms and ideas all vying for power in society. That'll lead to collapse. For example imagine if the generation that believes negros are sub-humans were still alive and in majority. With Obama they'd be a civil war.

In an alternate way, the old keep their paradigms and the young conform to them (lets assume no young people rebel). That'll lead to a stagnation in society. No reforms, no progressive movements no nothing. That'll lead to stagnation, then decay an then finally catastrophic collapse.

Those are only societal problems, there's also the strain on resources and the problem of explosive population growth. And being immortal would mean no evolution ever. And yes even if we all transfer our consciousness into robots that'll still be a problem.

Really, read the article its informative.

[Anonymous No.3566791]

>>3566773
> vying for power in society.
If everyone was immortal, there would be no need for fighting with each other. Resources are still a problem, but the universe is large. You will finally have the time to expand.

Exponential expansion may be harmful though to some degree, but I don't expect it to go that fast, and there are various solutions to it.

You would be able to move into parts of the society that conform to your views. There would be no true nation-states, they would be unsustainable. Society will be very very different from what it is today. Some stagnation is possible, but I do expect various bad paradigms to disappear or fade away (such as some popular religions which assume a soul - soul would mean they wouldn't want to be uploaded).

[Anonymous No.3566809]

>>3566791
Also I should have added: one of my ideal views of future immortal society would be similar to those in Greg Egan's Diaspora novel. They're not perfect, but should give you a good idea of how I imagine it - it's certainly many orders of magnitude better than our current society.

[Anonymous No.3566828]

>>3566762
I hope you do realize that your entire argument is based on assumptions and wishful thinking. The assumption that consciousness as we know it is transferable and not restricted to the body which produces it. The assumption that nothing will be lost during the transfer. The assumption that human consciousness is compatible with machine senses etc etc.

Not going to argue hypothetical games with you. For every restriction or downside I bring up, you can bring up a hypothetical made up situation and answer to it. Not a really constructive discussion if every restriction I bring up can be hand-waved with a quick pop-sci answer.

Best thing I can say is: Read some conventional literature and things published in sci-journals to get a realisitc grasp of the concepts and the limitations involved and then re-evaluate if immortality is the best for our species.

Not trying to sound condescending, I apologize if I do.

[Anonymous No.3566840]

>>3566828

Asimov wrote about that, Immortal human beings being so afraid of pain and dying that they stopped their evolution.

[Anonymous No.3566846]

>>3566791
Resources from where? After we exhaust the resources on our planet, we can jump to other planets in our solar system. Then we'll exhaust the resources in our own star system. When the sun dies we may still be able to gather resources from the remains but then what? The nearest star system is billions of kilometers away (in realistic travel time, not light years) and will take ages to reach. Once we reach the stage we're resources are scarce then it'll be a slow decline with warfare between the robot clans. Generation 1 will fight against Generation 100 to salvage whatever resources they have. We may never make it out of our star system and instead of immortality you'll a warring race that'll eventually die out.

[Anonymous No.3566852]

>>3566567
Forcibly? Nah, I think market forces will handle it. It's going to suck when the people who discover the secrets to immortality can't afford it. lol capitalism.

>>3566717
I really want to know what brainwashes people to NOT want immortality.

>>3566828
Be as vague as possible. Provide no evidence.

Why do people want to die? It makes no sense to me. As soon as I found out there was probably no afterlife I figured I had two logical choices: 1. Super Hedonism(drugs, sex and septal electrodes) or 2. Discover or invent some method of immortality.

[Anonymous No.3566863]

>>3566773
Thats why immortality is really only possible coupled with sterility.

[Anonymous No.3566864]

>>3566846
>>3566828
>>3566840
>>3566809
>>3566791
>>3566773
>>3566762
Also this discussion brought something to light:

Along with political restriction and observational restriction theirs also restriction on resources.

>>3566840
Asimov my man.

[Anonymous No.3566868]

>>3566846
Your concept of resource will be archaic, as will your assumptions of war, travel and individuals.

[Anonymous No.3566876]

>>3566717

I fucking HATE Cracked. H A T E W I T H P A S S I O N.
It's such a piece of utter trash.
Their articles are SOOO BULLSHIT. EXTREMELY biased.
Useless garbage that should be deleted.

[Anonymous No.3566885]

>>3566852
>Be as vague as possible. Provide no evidence.
I thought I was pretty specific on what assumptions your making. I don't think I need evidence since I'm not arguing a point but addressing the shortcomings on the one you made. If I was vague in an area just tell me and I'd see if I can be more specific.

Better question: Why don't people want to die? Logically there are a lot more downsides to people staying alive indefinitely than there is to just being dead. And once you're dead you don't really have to worry about the hassles of being alive. The only reason to not one to die is when you have really long term goals that need your hands on leadership to get done and honestly there are no long term projects that can't be handled by your successors.

[Anonymous No.3566884]

>>3566868
this a hundred times.

that guy seems to be unable to imagine how radically different society could be.

[Anonymous No.3566904]

>>3566868
>>3566884
>that guy seems to be unable to imagine how radically different society could be.

See what I said earlier:
>Not going to argue hypothetical games with you. For every restriction or downside I bring up, you can bring up a hypothetical made up situation and answer to it.

The discussion won't be fun if you shoot down every restriction I bring up as "unable to imagine the future". From my perspective you're just shooting down every objection I make with a perfect solution.

ANyway, Laters, it was nice talking to you. Keep the thread alive.

[Anonymous No.3566916]

>>3566904
hello sir. this is
>>3566884
speaking.

If you read my post carefully you'll see that...! I was agreeing with you.

[Anonymous No.3566920]

>>3566541
>If we aren't already, we will be the most advanced species in the universe

Why?
Why couldn't there be a race that's always ahead of us?

[Anonymous No.3566939]

Bitches dont know about my cyberarm prosthesis

[Anonymous No.3566941]

>>3566885
What are the downsides for immortality for the individual? I don't really see a downside or any combination of downsides bigger than DEATH.
Why don't you commit suicide if death is so great? Not being a dick, serious question.

[Anonymous No.3566964]

>with respect to science and technology
nice

[Anonymous No.3567000]

>>3566541

Sigh.

>If we aren't already, we will be the most advanced species in the universe.

It is like an isolated tribe in the amazonian rainforests thinking that they possess the most advanced technology amongst all other animals and if not they will surely be the most advanced eventually.

We cannot even observe 99% of the universe with any degree of significant resolution.

You are the kind of dumbfuck moron who believes in religion. (you may not believe, but you are exactly like them anyway)

[Anonymous No.3567017]

>>3566828
I'm willing to bet on computationalism. If I'm wrong I'll "die" (be a p. zombie). That said, I've considered most philosophical worldviews regarding consciousness and this one melds best with what I know and what cog sci knows. It is a bet I'm willing to take. It might be a bet you're unwilling to take.

>>3566846
What >>3566868 said. Resource are basically just energy and matter. Given that MNT will likely be invented in such a posthuman society, you can just sit back and get all the energy you need from asteroids and stars (if no better solutions arise). Also, your subjective time will be a few thousand times faster than that as a human. This would mean you would be thousands of subjective years old in very small amounts of time, now imagine the amount of energy that will be required to run you (it's not that big given efficient hardware - a human brain consumes quite little energy). By the time you exhaust the energy, civilizations may live, die and change so drastically that they would not be recognizable.
Also, if a certain form of computationalism is true (one that I find likely), you will have the option to explore the level 4 multiverse.

Either way, it'll be an interesting (and very long) time to live in.

[Anonymous No.3567101]

Yep I agree with you OP, in part at least. I always seem to run into this Nihilists that are all emo and shit and they keep saying how we're all just meatbags and then we die, and that mankind is in decline and all that shit, and I'm always like "Fuck no, humanity has unlimited potential and I want to be around to see humanity reach it. I mean, look at what we've accomplished in the last 5000 years (which, in terms of the history of the universe is almost nothing), look at the last 100 years, hell, look at the last 20 years. Humanity has had to put up with some horrible, horrible shit, like the Dark Ages, the Black Death, Flu epidemics, 2 world wars, separated by a depression, what the fuck is so bad right now that would indicate that we are in decline? Mankind kicks ass."

[Anonymous No.3567750]

>>3567101
Horrible shit that humanity has brought upon itself.

Honestly it could go either way, we just cant know.

[Anonymous No.3567752]

Universe?

[Anonymous No.3567767]

> unlimited time

<-- this is you

[Anonymous No.3567776]

Dark times are ahead if humanity has the ability to live without pain or death. I believe that knowing we won't be here forever is the thought that drives us and motivates us the most.

[Anonymous No.3567780]

>>3567101

I think the nihilists have a point in pessimism. They're using the known information that science has provided to make the logical assumption that the human race will die out sometime in the future. Maybe if we made it through any hardship thrown at us, we'd have to deal with the fact that energy always tries to fill a system. We'll run out of ways to successfully harvest energies when the last stars go cold.

Optimism is fine and dandy, but you can't break the laws that govern the universe... and multiverse is a pipedream.

[Anonymous No.3567852]

>>3567000
Dude... that's the same analogy I use in every argument of this nature. well done.

People say that any intelligent alien race with intragalactic travel capabilities would have observed that there is intelligent life here and contacted us with radio transmissions or something.

I'd say the reason we don't get radio transmissions or visits from them is the same reason we don't biochemically engineer scent markings to communicate with packs of wolves.

[Anonymous No.3567912]

TC just got done watching TTGL

spiral power doesn't exist, humanity probably won't make it out of the solar system and will die off through war, disaster or some other thing.

[Anonymous No.3567918]

>>3567780
couldn't enough power break reality?

maybe I watch too much anime, but I've always thought humanity might someday have the balls and the knowledge to use massively high amounts of energy to warp the laws of physics and make the impossible possible!

[Anonymous No.3567934]

>>3567918
Row row fight he power!

but seriously, life isn't anime.

[Anonymous No.3567935]

The Last Question

[Anonymous No.3567971]

>>3567918
That's like saying Goku could punch Friza so hard that they both become actual people.

[Anonymous No.3568010]

>>3567971

This thread has already implied quantum immortality and the singularity (like every other sci thread) So I'll take it a step further
It's simple, we kill the universe

[Anonymous No.3568644]

No limit? Now you're just making shit up.

[Anonymous No.3568653]

>There is no limit to what we as a human race are capable of.
In terms of component problem solving capacity, what separates other hypothetical sapient beings from humans?

[Anonymous No.3568654]

>There is no limit to what we as a human race are capable of.
I think those limits make you think there are no limits.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3568660]

Only the laws of physics truly limit us. Could we agree on that?

[Anonymous No.3568663]

>>3568660
Then the same goes for other sapient species.

>If we aren't already, we will be the most advanced species in the universe.
Is false.