The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. Universal Utopia?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10   Go Down

Universal Utopia?

  • 193 Replies
  • 22857 Views
  • 2 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #20 on: 07/06/2018 14:23:28 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 06/06/2018 23:22:27

I just pointed out a counter example to your assertion. War is inevitable when a population doesn't manage their use of available resource to the point of overusage. Except, we can generate new resources at higher rate than population growth. Even if war doesn't happen, some of the population will die anyway due to lack of resources.
Btw, what good is fishing for?

But isn't what you are discussing more based on planetary means of support rather that Universally supported?
Hence your title says one thing, but then in the next breath you dismiss your title so then your notions are based with boundaries/limitations. 
In my opinion your ''model'' and good piece of science, needs an A and B version to apply for both situations.  The obvious is a box can only get so full, where if there is lots of empty boxes that is a different situation.
Logged
 



Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #21 on: 07/06/2018 15:13:54 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 06/06/2018 18:07:24
restating those basic assumptions in fewer words:
1. There is universe.
2. There are universal laws.

As for causality, it is necessary to assume that time exists. This entails that there are changes in things in the universe. Some are fast, some are slow.
A lot of changes seem to be chaotic, such as explosions, collisions, random mutations. Though some changes may seem to be orderly/repetitive, such as planetary orbits, seasons, tides, etc., but in the long run, they seem to be chaotic as well.
Lifeless things tend to break down, which means that their configuration change to become less ordered.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #22 on: 07/06/2018 15:27:32 »
Quote from: Thebox on 07/06/2018 14:23:28
But isn't what you are discussing more based on planetary means of support rather that Universally supported?Hence your title says one thing, but then in the next breath you dismiss your title so then your notions are based with boundaries/limitations. In my opinion your ''model'' and good piece of science, needs an A and B version to apply for both situations.  The obvious is a box can only get so full, where if there is lots of empty boxes that is a different situation.
I just wanted to keep in touch with reality. Science has shown that there exist abundant resources in the universe, but they are mostly unreachable (yet). Hence population growth should be managed according to reachable resources at that moment.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #23 on: 07/06/2018 15:40:15 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 07/06/2018 15:27:32
Hence population growth should be managed according to reachable resources at that moment.
That is true, the world should incur a population growth limit , where a family consists of two parents and one child.  This 'order'' will effectively decrease the population on death to birth ratio.

2+1=3

3 - 2 = 1

We lose two gain one. Nobody has to be killed off .

1 year of no births , 131.4 million births per year

reduces the population at  55.3 million people die each year + 131.4 million births per year

In a 5 year ''plan''

276.5 million reduction if we had a no baby rule enforced .

Reverse engineering as such .

I have ''knocked'' you up a chart.


* growth chart.jpg (31.52 kB . 848x652 - viewed 3154 times)

Logged
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #24 on: 08/06/2018 13:13:19 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 07/06/2018 15:13:54
Lifeless things tend to break down, which means that their configuration change to become less ordered.
The breakdowns are usually caused by changes in the environment.
Their configuration will have better chance to survive if they can duplicate/self replicate, i.e. induce their environment to replicate their configuration, hence creating backups. So even if the original copy does break down, some of its duplicates might survive.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #25 on: 08/06/2018 13:59:16 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 13:13:19
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 07/06/2018 15:13:54
Lifeless things tend to break down, which means that their configuration change to become less ordered.
The breakdowns are usually caused by changes in the environment.
Their configuration will have better chance to survive if they can duplicate/self replicate, i.e. induce their environment to replicate their configuration, hence creating backups. So even if the original copy does break down, some of its duplicates might survive.
Interesting,  that is a concept that grabs attention.  Would the surviving duplicates still be aware and have the same memory as their previous version?
Logged
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #26 on: 08/06/2018 15:41:58 »
Quote
   Interesting,  that is a concept that grabs attention.  Would the surviving duplicates still be aware and have the same memory as their previous version?   
awareness and memory will come later in evolutionary process. I was talking about the earlier phase of it.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #27 on: 08/06/2018 16:09:53 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 15:41:58
Quote
   Interesting,  that is a concept that grabs attention.  Would the surviving duplicates still be aware and have the same memory as their previous version?   
awareness and memory will come later in evolutionary process. I was talking about the earlier phase of it.

Sort of reverse evolution to restart evolution ?
Logged
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #28 on: 08/06/2018 16:17:33 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 13:13:19
The breakdowns are usually caused by changes in the environment.
Their configuration will have better chance to survive if they can duplicate/self replicate, i.e. induce their environment to replicate their configuration, hence creating backups. So even if the original copy does break down, some of its duplicates might survive.
Some copies may be disintegrated beyond recognition, but some other may get lucky changes which make them more resistant to harmful environment, or get better at replication.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #29 on: 08/06/2018 16:24:34 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 16:17:33
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 13:13:19
The breakdowns are usually caused by changes in the environment.
Their configuration will have better chance to survive if they can duplicate/self replicate, i.e. induce their environment to replicate their configuration, hence creating backups. So even if the original copy does break down, some of its duplicates might survive.
Some copies may be disintegrated beyond recognition, but some other may get lucky changes which make them more resistant to harmful environment, or get better at replication.
Ouch , I have never been lucky , I might as well get digging an hole to disintegrate in.   :o
Logged
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #30 on: 08/06/2018 17:35:54 »
Quote
Sort of reverse evolution to restart evolution ?
No. I'm just doing a thought experiment: what would logically follow if my basic assumptions in previous post are actually true.
Some additional assumptions may be made along the way. Some may be implicit, hence taken for granted. I'll try to identify them all by making them more explicit.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #31 on: 08/06/2018 17:38:07 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 17:35:54
Quote
Sort of reverse evolution to restart evolution ?
No. I'm just doing a thought experiment: what would logically follow if my basic assumptions in previous post are actually true.
Some additional assumptions may be made along the way. Some may be implicit, hence taken for granted. I'll try to identify them all by making them more explicit.
Of course it is a thought experiment, I was considering your thought in my answer. An interesting hypothetical situation.
Logged
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #32 on: 08/06/2018 23:01:33 »
Quote
Some copies may be disintegrated beyond recognition, but some other may get lucky changes which make them more resistant to harmful environment, or get better at replication.
when there are more copies of those replicating things, they become part of the environment of each other. They will compete against each other for resources to create more copies of themselves.
Competition against modified copy of themselves may produce better version of them. Just look at alpha zero.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 



Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #33 on: 09/06/2018 05:42:37 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 06/06/2018 08:18:59
Quote from: Thebox on 05/06/2018 10:34:06

I think I already prioritised the order in my previous post.  Let us look at the finer details of the list in order.

1) A universal alliance and laws

Number one is for simplicity,  if we ever discovered intelligent life out there, our prime directive will be firstly to establish a communications ''link''.  We would establish communication by getting over the possible language barrier and befriend our new found friends.  We would then have to establish certain ''laws'' for our alliance.  Pretty standard procedure I would imagine.


2) To share knowledge

What goes around comes around, to share knowledge and technology stops unequal dictatorship.  The power is divided equally rather than a specific continent for example.


3)For all to be equal

Fairness is next to kindness, the green eyed monster cannot exist if things are equal.  Inequality is a form of legalised slavery , the poor picking up the scraps .


4) Universal maintenance standards

Speaks for itself really
What makes point#1 more important than point#2? etc.

What is the goal of the alliance and laws? We need to distinct the goal and the method to achieve the goal (may be we can call it intermediate goal).
Why do we have to share knowledge? why do we have to stop unequal dictatorship? why do we have to be fair? equal? why must we have maintenance standard? that would be a more fundamental goal.



What I meant by priorities is: Your highest priority is the last thing you are willing to sacrifice in order to get other things in the scope of discussed situation.
Quote from: Google dictionary
priority


/prʌɪˈɒrɪti/


noun




the fact or condition of being regarded or treated as more important than others.
"the safety of the country takes priority over any other matter"


synonyms: prime concern, first concern, most important consideration, most pressing matter, matter of greatest importance, primary issue More

"pioneering new forms of surgery should be a priority for the National Health Service"


•precedence, greater importance, preference, precedency, pre-eminence, first/highest place, predominance, primacy, the lead, weighting, weight

"the government's commitment to give priority to primary education"




•a thing that is regarded as more important than others.
plural noun: priorities

"housework didn't figure high on her list of priorities"

Let's take a chess game for an example. The priorities, in my opinion (sorted from highest) :
1. Checkmate the opponent's king.
2. Prevent checkmate on own king.
3. Preserve time and energy.
Try to get #1. If it's impossible, try to get #2 (draw). If it's also impossible, try to get #3 by resigning.
« Last Edit: 09/06/2018 08:36:09 by hamdani yusuf »
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #34 on: 09/06/2018 11:22:33 »
It turns out that setting priorities could be tricky, even in a simple situation like playing a game. It can be set to be specific or general. Generally, end goal of playing a game is to win it. But it can also be set specifically, by the way you want to win the game.
If the game is just a tool to have fun, then winning it is no longer the highest priority.
« Last Edit: 09/06/2018 12:31:04 by hamdani yusuf »
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #35 on: 09/06/2018 16:15:18 »
Due to the vastness of the scope of this thought experiment, the storyline may split into different direction at several points along the way. Hence we will have to go back and forth to explore some branch story into detail, and then back to the main story line to continue the progress toward end goal.
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 

Online hamdani yusuf (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1673
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 50 times
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #36 on: 09/06/2018 18:03:24 »
Quote
  when there are more copies of those replicating things, they become part of the environment of each other. They will compete against each other for resources to create more copies of themselves.
Competition against modified copy of themselves may produce better version of them. Just look at alpha zero.
This scenario relies on implicit assumption that environmental changes never get severe enough to wipe out all copies of those self replicating structural things. For brevity, I will call this "self replicating structural things"    organism from now on. Feel free to suggest a better name.
« Last Edit: 09/06/2018 21:21:21 by hamdani yusuf »
Logged
Unexpected results come from false assumptions.
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #37 on: 09/06/2018 18:20:24 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 08/06/2018 23:01:33
Quote
Some copies may be disintegrated beyond recognition, but some other may get lucky changes which make them more resistant to harmful environment, or get better at replication.
when there are more copies of those replicating things, they become part of the environment of each other. They will compete against each other for resources to create more copies of themselves.
Competition against modified copy of themselves may produce better version of them. Just look at alpha zero.
Sort of meeting yourself right?

Myself would agree we are both as smart as each other.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #38 on: 09/06/2018 18:22:07 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 09/06/2018 18:03:24
Quote
  when there are more copies of those replicating things, they become part of the environment of each other. They will compete against each other for resources to create more copies of themselves.
Competition against modified copy of themselves may produce better version of them. Just look at alpha zero.
This scenario relies on implicit assumption that environmental changes never get severe enough to wipe out all copies of those structural things.
Well if we can build a house we could build a planet given the time.  Maybe there is a way to build like a botanical garden that is isolated .
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Universal Utopia?
« Reply #39 on: 09/06/2018 18:24:15 »
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 09/06/2018 05:42:37
Let's take a chess game for an example. The priorities, in my opinion (sorted from highest) :
1. Checkmate the opponent's king.
2. Prevent checkmate on own king.
3. Preserve time and energy.
Try to get #1. If it's impossible, try to get #2 (draw). If it's also impossible, try to get #3 by resigning.

  Option 4, stalemate.
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: philosophy  / life 
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.098 seconds with 75 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.