11–20 of 34 posts
I've often thought along these same lines (c.f. Asimov's Galaxia concept) but I think that this one-ness will inherently be limited by distance. Thoughts can be propagated across a planet pretty quickly but if we become a multi-planet civilization I would expect each planet to have it's own "one mind" (or whatever you want to call it) simply because of communication latency.
I've often thought along these same lines (c.f. Asimov's Galaxia concept) but I think that this one-ness will inherently be limited by distance. Thoughts can be propagated across a planet pretty quickly but if we become a multi-planet civilization I would expect each planet to have it's own "one mind" (or whatever you want to call it) simply because of communication latency.
Thought doesn't have mass. I see no reason to discount superluminal communication.
I've often thought along these same lines (c.f. Asimov's Galaxia concept) but I think that this one-ness will inherently be limited by distance. Thoughts can be propagated across a planet pretty quickly but if we become a multi-planet civilization I would expect each planet to have it's own "one mind" (or whatever you want to call it) simply because of communication latency.
Thought doesn't have mass. I see no reason to discount superluminal communication.
I've often thought along these same lines (c.f. Asimov's Galaxia concept) but I think that this one-ness will inherently be limited by distance. Thoughts can be propagated across a planet pretty quickly but if we become a multi-planet civilization I would expect each planet to have it's own "one mind" (or whatever you want to call it) simply because of communication latency.
Thought doesn't have mass. I see no reason to discount superluminal communication.
I've often thought along these same lines (c.f. Asimov's Galaxia concept) but I think that this one-ness will inherently be limited by distance. Thoughts can be propagated across a planet pretty quickly but if we become a multi-planet civilization I would expect each planet to have it's own "one mind" (or whatever you want to call it) simply because of communication latency.
Thought doesn't have mass. I see no reason to discount superluminal communication.
An addictive, codependent, smothering one-ness delivered with unquestioning religious fervour sounds like something I’d start an armed resistance against.
I imagine many people will feel the same way. Do you think the Oneness will let you alone or pull you in for your own good :-)
It will happen across such a long and large gradient that no one will know or ever understand it. Does a single ant “know” what the whole colony wants? Yet one can describe the colony as a whole in many ways: finding food, reacting to threats, etc. Does a single neuron “know” it is part of a brain? Yet the brain acts as a system, responding to stimuli in a coordinated fashion. Hypothesis: we are already “one”, we jus…
Just as there is no China, there also is no me. I am the dance of a trillion cells who are each the dances of an infinite sea of atoms within and without them. Patterns on top of patterns forever.
Not to mention that the version of the future the author projects is one where a person will choose to yield their mental independence to another. This runs right up against the entire history of humanity — humanity’s best systems are those which leverage individual self interests to collective good. Systems which assume individuals will not pursue self interest and self preservation seem to be unstable and prone to failure.