Superlife Forms

I have now managed to come up with the necessary means to emulate reality on its most fundamental level within a ordinary PC (as opposed to my prior modified PC). What the PC will be doing is forming a cube of “Metaspace” wherein subatomic particles will form automatically and behave exactly like observed physical particles. I am very familiar with this type of thing, so it isn’t merely a theory, but a practice.

If given a huge amount of memory, atoms will form from the particles. Currently even a single hydrogen atom would take more memory than my little PC has so larger molecules would take a horrendous amount of memory. But given sufficient memory, long chain DNA self-replicating molecules can be inspired to form along with a cell housing. The DNA would behave exactly like physical DNA behaves and an actual living organism would have been created that doesn’t obey programmed instructions like our androids, but literally does exactly the same things that organic life does, although horrendously slower and larger.

And then given even more memory (much, much more), a true conscious organism would form, again behaving exactly like a physically organic conscious organism (void of programmed instructions). And with a ridiculous amount more memory (and processor speed) an environment could be formed within which the conscious entity would literally live. As the computer operator, I would be a very serious form of god to the lives within that huge metaspace in that I could alter literally every single subatomic particle of the entire being’s existence as well as turn it off or on at any time. I could make things appear or disappear at any time and the life within wouldn’t have a clue as to what was going on. Yet they would be actually physically real, merely on a higher level of physical existence.

This scenario was depicted in the film The 13th Floor. In the film an entire small town was artificially created within a computer and its inhabitants had no idea that they were actually formed within a computer. Now since I know that I could do that myself, although would never be able to finish the work, I can easily predict that someone else is going to do it. So let’s assume for a moment that they actually do form this kind of “Superlife” within a computer system and that life, although different than ours, suffers the exact same kinds of issues that people do.

Now when that occurs, which it is pretty certain to, what are the ethical and philosophical implications?

1) Is that conscious being to be considered ethically equal to more natural life? Same ethical protections?

2) If there are many lives within the space, are the ethics governing their relationships to be judged and acted upon?

3) Since such a project would demonstrate to an extreme the nature of human existence, how should ethics standards be chosen knowing that it is all really about natural consequences of subatomic interactions?

4) What would be the consequences to the world of endless philosophical argumentation?

And then of course;
5) How do you know that you aren’t already in such a computer and your anthropomorphic “God” isn’t merely the computer operator?

Congratulations James.
But, do not be so worried.

with love,
sanjay

What approach to number theory are you using thats causing you such bad memory troubles?

For large calculations, I use interdependent series of irregular polygons, using a formula not too dissimilar to cellular automata in asserting chaos as a active variable in sorting it out. I also have used staggered honeycombs to calculate waves on a binary rhythm capable of chaos and divergency… which is currently thought impossible of binary systems.

I honestly recommend rethinking your approach to numbers, alot is possible that wouldnt occur to someone indoctrinated in a natural number concept. For a simple concept, a irregular polygon series struggles to express, but it gets easier the larger it gets, with more precision the more variables/erratics included in that series.

James,

You must learn something from CN, the genius. :bulb:

with love,
sanjay

???
What does that have to do with anything?

In order to store the state of a reasonably large region of space, one must store a ridiculously large amount of data. It cannot be compressed beyond a certain ridiculously large minimum.

“Worried”?

Numbers are not space… you only gotta record relativistic space time relations. Polygons can do this very easily…

Take a triangle, it has three points, and three sides. You think, number 3, correct?

You put another triangle behind it, upside down… you get a star of david… juxtaposition this 90 degrees, add two, backwards in two directions two upside down star of davids.

You only used four polygons, equaling a value of 4, but also 16.

If angle 1 of the first triangle is given a value, angle 2 and three can be a potential variable of the first spot… relative the second triangle behind it, you get the possibility of 5 variables per that one spot… recording a spacial and tense function.

With the third polygon back, 8, with the addendum of being able to do a operator-operand equation.

If you have a series of say, a thousand, interflopped in a series, with a triangle pointing everywhere, your memory capacity increases dramatically, while the necessity to do complex calculation to arrive at a sum diametrically decreases at a rate directly related to the number of polygons you hold.

The reason is, the more polygons you have with more angles in a series, the better they track one another’s variables geometrically, on a 3d trajectory platform within.

Say I needed to calculate 50 or 300,000,000,000,000… in terms of memory, both would memory wise HOLD THE SAME AMOUNT OF EXPRESSIBLE DATA… infact, I would only need one more piece of data, the initial trajectory in a Erratic, to figure out every data set variation beyond this, without any net increase in processing calculation to assess this, or to list the cariations… it has already been done by the polygons.

If you take something with more angles, like a pentagon in a series, it becomes easier… five points…

So first pentagon has five points… point one points north… in series after series, you give them a random rotational spin… each with points… you look down a column, on occasion angles line up in clear line of sight… line A-B.

That is a simple value. From point of perspective for polygon 1.1, AB.

B on unknown Polygon who knows how far back has other points that reoccur in rotation. They can be assigned other values via other trajectories.

So using say, your original location, 1.1 A-B to a second mappable position that repeats location, 1.1 A-B-C… you produce a erratic trajectory that bounces back and forth within the polygon system.

You also can obviously do very complex calculations very, very fast with a minimum of calculation, as the process isn’t linear, only single lines are.

When you use a data set of 100,000 polygons (regular) with 50+ angles is when you can start knocking out molecular interactions. Some erractics are assigned noun, other verb functions. You could reverse and fast foreward, and look at every functional variable possible.

I used mnemonic point perspective for this… its a system I started developing when I was 14ish… most of the calculable energy is focused on the center… I use the circular shape as my concept of Zero and Infinity, given it can be used as a fuzzy reference point. Given it is bounded by syntax, but is initially informationless, it holds a wide variety of possibilities for encryption as well as complex quantum positioning calculations. It makes wonderful use of chaos as well.

Irregular polygons can hold much more information. Control of rotation spins can produce field calculations as well… which I dont fully comprehend yet… hurts my head.

What is important is the computational load is stabalized, as well as the size of the expression.

You keep this in mind, and take a look at Stephen Wolfram’s Cellular Automata forum… the Israeli Doctor has already done the ground work for mathematizing biological cells, and they have a long running thread on the subject there.

Secondly, Sanjay… Im not just a expert in Greek mathematics, but have also read quite a few Chinese and Indian works too. Im pretty fearsome with a Abacus, so mock me as you will, but your not in a position of superiority. Ive very painstakenly hit the oldest sources from around the world, and worked my way up… if you remember, I noted I was doing this when dissecting the psychological states listed in the Hamsa Gita.

Its all about your most basic concept of number. It matters more than anything.

I merely found a way to do massive computations without burning out computers. Its the hypothetical 4d Spheres and up that we will travel the stars with I suppose… Im content with my tunnels.

If you disregard everything and just fume, at least check out wolfram’s forum, they are much farther ahead conceptually than you are James.

CN, I get the impression that you have no idea of what I am talking about because I see almost no relation between what I can discern from what you said and what I do.

But in case there is some kind of connection, let me explain a little detail.

In order to model a single monoparticle, I require about 4,000,000 32-bit data variables. In order to model a single hydrogen atom there must be ruffly 1000 times the radius of that first model. Since it’s 3D, that leaves 1000^3 times 4meg 32-bit data as my state table. Each change of state requires access and calculation to every one of those data points.

And all of that, 4x10^12 32-bit data, is only a single atom within as much space as it takes to hold a single atom. Each step in time requires all of that data to be recalculated, requiring roughly 4x10^12 calculations merely to get to the next infinitesimal state in time. And an orbiting electron at perhaps 120 attoseconds per rev, might require 10,000 or more recalculations merely to get a single revolution of the electron. So you are looking at 4x10^16 calculations minimum and then for a single second in time to pass, I have approximately 10^18 times that…
= 4x10^34 32-bit calculations… for the crudest model - per second of time represented for a single atom.

When I said, “fundamental level of reality”, I meant fundamental.

Now if you can relate whatever you are talking about to that issue, please do so… slowly so us dummies can follow.

Yeah… fundamental only to a computer most likely – big numbers though.

Of course it would be nice if someone could address the questions;

If the Super-DNA and associated cell were identical to yours, the Super-being inside the system would be a clone of you. And since, forgiving the sophistication of it, the operator can inspire memories and personality to exactly match yours, that Super-being would think that he is you, alive, breathing, and wondering the same things that you wonder.

It seems to me that the hypothetical creator God ( as hypothetical as your fully fledged metaworld ) already answers your questions. Clearly he does not grant the inhabitants of the universe he programmed any inalienable rights. He just doesnt interfere and allows the particles to figure it out for themselves.

On that level, he would be allowing everything to just decide for itself until he decided to make some specific alteration. But once a sentient being has formed, he is in new territory. What compassion “should he” maintain? What kinds of experiments concerning social interaction “should he” allow? Should he just delete someone? Should he alter their memories? Should he cause them to believe in false realities; superstitions or whatever? And where would all of the endless philosophical argumentation be?

They should be at liberty to pursue an autonomous cultural existence just like the various cultures that exist in our world today that contribute to the richness of diversity among human civilizations. Something of value may emerge from their ethnicity.

I would personally agree.

But aside from my personal preferences, it is really up to the creator. Whoever manages something like that - to create an actual reality - must care an awful lot for it, give the enormous effort and resources that go into it.

Well now this is where it can get interesting.

Let’s say that someone has spent billions of dollars to get it up to that point and has used it for research or whatever for many years. The whole thing isn’t new and fascinating any more and minimum wage people (or bureaucrats) are left in charge of it just to keep it alive. How much sacrifice to the “real world” is owed to the superworld? Eventually the funding would get challenged.

The point is that your real world already works that way but in a little different sense. Governments, especially the Global governance, sets up artificial “worlds” for nations to struggle through for their own reasons. But now, once people are invested into these artificial struggles (perhaps a financial issue), what does the world government really owe to those people who were only chasing a fantasy situation anyway? Perhaps a lot of people are half way through college or have just purchased large businesses when the governance decides to change its mind about how that society is going to work. This really has already happened. But who really owes whom, what?

“US elite people created a system that WE no longer want to support because it doesn’t serve US anymore, so WE are going to build a new system for our Chosen people and unplug the old system of useless people (useless to US).” That is exactly what has been going on for the last 100 years, hence the supposed “overpopulation problem” mandating the murder of billions of people, known as “Agenda 21”.

I had to look that up.
The first non-German entry that seemed to deal with what you mention was this.
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Agenda_21

I’d be interested in your comments on this.
Regardless, we have identified at least one way in which the real universe and a meta-space universe are different - the meta-space one can be manipulated from above - and therefore it is unlikely that it will not be.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUI541MJyV0[/youtube]

Agenda 21 is about 300 pages. You can download the PDF file.

The point is that people’s lives are simply being deleted and rearranged into someone else’s new design. So the question is an ethical one. What is owed to those who were created by (the former population) and/or were invested into a prior designed society when someone decides to alter the design.

I can’t imagine what makes you think that constitutes a “difference from the real world”.

Sometimes the desire to understand the human being is to control him. For example, the day you control the endocrine glands, you will change the personality of man; you won’t need any brainwashing. But why should there be only one type of person or one way of living? In Nature’s scheme of things all things have importance.

“The international counsel of local environment” hahaha yeah that is oxymoronic as hell Jesus the UN… these boneheads think they can just take over.