Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve recently become dissatisfied with the two standard ways to make closed timelike curves. Gravity: that’s treating gravity like it doesn’t go through the wormhole. I expect it would. If it does, both sides are time dilated equally. Acceleration: what, exactly, are you accelerating? If it’s made of stuff, you time dilate the stuff. If it’s not made of stuff… can you even move it in any meaningful sense, or is that…
You are accelerating the space which contains the wormhole. It doesn't matter if it's "stuff" or not.
What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
161–168 of 168 posts
Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess it’s more fun to dream about the world millions of years in the future, but wouldn’t we gain so much more if we spent all of our energy trying to optimize acquiring knowing more rapidly in the next few decades? For example, supply 9 billion humans with clean, renewable energy by 2050. Accelerate cures for cancers, heart disease, malaria, etc. Large colony on Mars within 20 years, ...
It is not how science works. You can't predict what might be useful. 1940 Hardy labels number theory (his own area of mathematics) as useless 1977 RSA You can't imagine the modern internet without cryptography.
> This proposal concerns the management of general information about accelerators and experiments at CERN. It discusses the problems of loss of information about complex evolving systems and derives a solution based on a distributed hypertext system.
Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#163Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chances are we'll have self-annihilated or been beaten by disease within 10K years. After that, it will only take millions of years for all traces of humanity's existence to vanish. Cement structures, plastics, garbage, etc. will mostly be gone in tens of thousands of years.
Diseases have evolutionary pressure to not wipe out their hosts. While it’s not impossible, I literally don’t expect anything that bad in a million years.
Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Diseases have evolutionary pressure to not wipe out their hosts. While it’s not impossible, I literally don’t expect anything that bad in a million years.
Rare, but not unheard of. With only one exception that I am aware of, really nasty human diseases are those which only infect humans by accident and have a different main host. The exception, HIV, is already evolving into a various strains, at least one of which is much less dangerous than the original.
However, if we ever consider a disease to be an existential threat, wiping out the other host species isn’t something we would have much practical difficulty with these days. We’re already considering that with Malaria, and that’s not an existential threat.
Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#166Here's my take on the future: We'll upload ourselves and use much less energy. As uploaded agents we'll have all the advantages of software - forking multiple instances of ourselves, backup for assured immortality, plugins and upgrades, changing our appearance at will, slowing down or speeding up, becoming part of a collective - everything. It will be Life 2.0, very different from our life. We've already "uploaded" p…
I'm finding it difficult to understand what you mean by 'uploading'. Do you mean in some kind of Mixed Reality scenario where we are interacting with virtual assets?
You can read free here:
www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/accelerando/accelerando-intro.html
Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Prior civilizations collapsed after over-exploiting their environment, and we're making the same mistake on a global scale. Our complex supply chains based on fossil fuels are rather fragile - we will likely survive a collapse at reduced quality of a life, however total recovery may be slow or impossible depending on remaining resources.
We can produce more food than ever with less energy. Knowledge transfer is always improving, and with computer programs it will be even easier to transfer knowledge. You guys need to clarify what "a collapse" is. Not eating as much meat? Do you really think that we would not be able to power our computers or not be able to produce rice/wheat on any industrial scale? The amount of FUD spread without any foundation for…
It is a reasonable low-probability high-risk concern, given (unordered):
* Depleting fossil fuel reserves: most obvious risk; dominant fuel source for transportation and agriculture, dominant energy source for industries, dominant material in many consumer goods.
* Climate change: threatens some regions' agricultural and ocean productivity, pressuring human migration, spreading diseases.
* Exhausted oceans: oceanic deadzones are spreading, loss of fishing as a food source is a serious risk for parts of Asia, which will put additional pressures on agriculture and motivate economic migration.
* Over-use of antibiotics and vaccines: risk of super-bacteria/virus plagues, mostly in agriculture and 3rd world nations.
* Depletion of aquifers: imminent risk amplified by climate change. America's food production is heavily reliant on effectively non-renewable aquifers, depletion or poisoning through fracking are serious risks.
* Globalized economy/supply chains: coupling economies improves efficiency but introduces the risk of cascade failures.
No one of these problems are an existential risk by themselves... but they are all interrelated and poorly understood, which impacts our ability to effectively preempt wide-spread impact.
Humanity will recover should the worst happen, but I think it's better to avoid the set back in the first place.
Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now
#168Have we ruled out the possibility that a future civilization could slow or stop the expansion of the universe before all the stars disappear from view forever?