Re: Encouraging a Positive Transcension

From: Keith Henson (
Date: Sat Feb 14 2004 - 13:20:40 MST

At 09:19 AM 14/02/04 -0800, "Tomaz Kristan" wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:52:22 -0800 (PST), Tommy McCabe
> > That I thought of in five minutes
> > at my desk- imagine what a transhuman could do!
>The question, whether or not we can smash through some
>barriers, is of course important.
>Can we ignore the Energy conservation law? Or the speed
>limit c? Or Beckenstien bound? I am quite sceptic, we


>Of course it is a chance, that those limitations will
>be put behind us, but we can't count on that.

Further, the order of change you get when *any* of these can be ignored is
even more of a jump than between here and the singularity.

Perhaps we need to distinguish between a singularity that is bounded by
ordinary atom based materials, conservation of energy and c and one that is
not. I am open to discussion as to how they should be
distinguished. "Bounded" and "unbounded" might do as would "known physical
laws singularity" perhaps shortened to or "KPL singularity" vs "UPL
singularity" for unknown laws. If someone has a better term or there is
one already in use, please post.

>There was never a natural law "you can't fly", "you
>can't go to the Moon", "you must grow old and die" ...
>and so on. That is why we have overcame them - or we
>can do it in the future.
>But some constrains (most probably) do exist and they
>are the boundaries and the very fabric of our to be
>Paradise. Or Hell, depends how clumsy and silly we are.

Again agreed.

There was a time before I became more aware of the ugly aspects of large
and larger governments (dependent on fast communications) that I thought
FTL was highly desirable. Now, especially after becoming a refugee, FTL
seems like a really bad idea.

Keith Henson

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:45 MDT