[extropy-chat] mathimatical model for the singularity

[Robert Bradbury]

On 12/9/06, ps udoname <ps.udoname at gmail.com> wrote:

> Is this the planck volume?
>

I believe so.  But the transition from  nm to fm is one of those difficult
limits I was outlining.  Though we can deal with electrons and photons, it
is questionable whether we will be able to eliminate atoms from the
picture.  That will place constraints on things.


> There are extreamly speculative idears about omega point compution, alpha
> point compution, reality engenering etc which would allow us to surpass your
> limits. However if we limit ourselves to what we know is possible then I
> agree.


Yes, those and $1.25 will get you a ride on the Boston MBTA at this time.

It can surly be approximated by equations to some extent?
>

You can approximate the ramp up to it and how fast it may change but unless
your equations actually look like an S in the long run -- something like
slowly growing from 2006 through ~2020, speeding up significantly and going
through the roof from ~2030-2050 and then slowing down signifcantly into
something relatively flat from ~2060-70 for the next few hundred years (at
least) they don't capture the essence.  This assumes of course one is
measuring things in ways relatively similar to the way we measure them now
(physical units of mass, physical quanta of energy, etc.).  If you go
virtual then the conversions become difficult (as the recent discussion of
post-singularity economics points out).


> A singularity of artistic creativity?


Something like that.  People are going to have an interesting time deciding
what is really important after all the "classical" guides (derived from
classical resource limits, selfish genes, etc.) have to be thrown out.

Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061210/c20e7ed1/attachment.html>