[ExI] Book review: Technological Resurrection, by Jonathan Jones
giulio at gmail.com
Sat Sep 23 07:37:40 UTC 2017
Come on, that's the game liberals play, I thought I could expect
better from you. If I give you an arXiv paper, you'll ask for a paper
on a peer reviewed journal. If I give you a paper on a peer reviewed
journal, you'll say that the author is unknown. If the author is
known, you'll say that he is not a specialist. If he is, you'll find
other specialists that criticize the paper. If the author is a Nobel
laureate, you'll say that he is blinded by religion. Come ooon !
Said that, there are many papers out there, much better than my
half-baked conceptual speculations. I just created a subreddit to
assemble scientific references, and will start filling it soon.
On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you know me to be of a very hopeful spirit. But a hopeful spirit isn’t unfortunately enough to make the hope realizable. More embedded.
>> On Sep 15, 2017, at 12:10 AM, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
>> You are missing a hopeful spirit and some arXiv papers ;-) The author
>> of this book is not a physicist and doesn't go into details of how our
>> descendants could copy/teleport detailed information from their past
>> (our present) to their present (our future). Given that capability,
>> our descendants could resurrect people by copying them from their past
>> to their present.. The book just hints at future technologies based on
>> quantum entanglement and all that.
> Please point to any good science papers on how one may reach back into the past, in this case into the past brain state of a then living person, and copy information to one’s own time long after that person is deceased. I don’t know of anything in physics that would allow such a thing. Yeah, you can indeed do amassing things if that is possible. But what would lead us to think that it is?
>> There are hints at promising directions in current cutting edge
>> speculative physics. ER=EPR is one: If wormholes connect entangled
>> particles and entanglement is ubiquitous, then there are wormholes
>> connecting every pixel of spacetime to every other pixel of spacetime,
>> and these wormholes can be exploited as data channels between here/now
>> and there/then (just like in Stephen Baxter's "The Light of Other
> Wormholes won’t cut it. And no reputable astrophysicists claims there are wormholes connecting every pixel (?) of spacetime to ever other part. Again please point to the papers if there is reputable science here.
>> More generally, I find the "emergent physics" approach persuasive: Our
>> physics of matter and fields in Einstein's spacetime emerges from the
>> unknown physics of an underlying trans-Planckian substrate, just like
>> the physics of quasiparticles (e.g. phonons) emerge from the "real"
>> physics of a material substrate (e.g. a crystal). Space and time
>> themselves emerge from trans-Planckian physics like an eefctive
>> spacetime emerges from fluid dynamics in sonic black hole experiments
>> (fluid analogues of general relativity). The entangled wormhole mouths
>> in ER=EPR could be intermediate representations of reality, halfway
>> between our physics and the unknown trans-Planckian physics.
> That is like zero hard science speculation. I hope there is better out there.
> - samantha
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
More information about the extropy-chat