Reality
Christopher L. Nelson
joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
get this type of project off the ground.
Visit www.opennasa.com and provide your realistic feedback. We're
interested in opening up the world in which we live....through
collaboration and cooperation across all generations, industries, and
backgrounds we can truly accomplish the "impossible" and we want to
begin today!
We're interested in pointing our efforts in the direction of the
common dream and really encourage you to post that dream at
opennasa.com so that we can hear it and move forward with it. I ask
that you don't pass on this opportunity, we are truly asking for your
feedback and hope to incorporate that in NASA's mission for the future!
Tobias Greenich
I didn't know NASA had something so accessible online at the moment.
While my mind is nowhere near the caliber of those at the agency, you
might still get me to comment from time to time. We'll call it
perspective (and possibly the peanut gallery).
Klang Wopat
Well put comments. Is opennasa.com actually affiliated with NASA?
Shouldn't it be a .gov?
Doesn't really matter, it looks like a great discussion site. You all
should also try the various Mars Society web sites on the net--and
look at the heavy hitters who are members of the Mars Society of
America.
For another serious discussion see the thread "Going to Mars" on the
virgle discussion. In it I say to the original poster:
"BTW, I salute you on returning to school in pursuit of space
exploration. I spent a whole semester in a graduate level engineering
class designing a mission to Mars using current technology and trying
to stay within NASA's planned budget. I thought I did a pretty good
job, and I got an "A", but the last comment I got from the
professor--
a retired Lockheed Martin engineer--was "Never happen."
This can be a forum for serious discussions.
an expert
Earth and Mars combined can sustain. Therefore I suggest we redirect
the efforts of Project Virgle to starting a colony on the Sun, which
has much greater surface area than the Earth and Mars combined.
schnarff
href=http://www.marssociety.org/portal/>The Mars Society</a>. We're an
international grass-roots organization that's doing actual, no-joke
work towards getting humans to Mars sooner rather than later...and
just for the fun of it, we'll be contacting the "Virgle" folks
shortly, just to see if there's a kernel of real interest in doing a
project like this, so that we can offer our help if there is.
Paul D. Fernhout
Related ideas to Project Virgle
http://groups.google.com/group/virgle/web/related-ideas-to-project-virgle
Check out: "A Review of Licensing and Collaborative Development with Special
Attention to Design of Self-Replicating Space Habitat Systems"
http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/SSI_Fernhout2001_web.html
--Paul Fernhout
Brian Tenneson
how to move ana and kata (see Hyperspace by Kaku) seems to be the key
on moving to a parallel that you are seeking to be in where your
intentions are manifested.
Moving ana and kata could be described as approaching one of two
asymptotes (ie, directions in 3d terms):
<quote>
both generic 'logic' and 'information theory' can be considered
asymptotes to be approached.[13] 'Constancy' and 'variance' are not
stipulatively defined but rather their definitions are allowed to be
understood by abstraction from examples.[14] A stipulated definition,
in any event, would subsume an 'iff' operation on primitive logical
concepts and this manner of reflexive 'prior' analysis is rejected by
axiomatic formal logics (and information theories).
<end quote>
Source (with references as footnotes):
http://www.ceptualinstitute.com/uiu_plus/isss2000/johnson-isss2k-thermsig.htm
When a floating singular viewpoint or FSV is moving ana and kata, it
experiences much disorientation and sense of 'lowered gravity' which
is perhaps as odd as what an astronaut feels the first time in zero G.
I call FSV's that recognize that they are FSV's (whether they were
born humans) this: Oneironaut. Classically, an oneironaut is someone
who, as my understanding has it, can make a dream lucid and then
"travel" (eg, move ana and kata) anywhere. To me, a FSV that knows it
is an FSV (ie a self-aware FSV or, less formally, an oneironaut), is
just moving through different parallels in the multiverse.
Once one is confident in their sense of direction in this new and
extremely abstract world (eg, instead of 'up' versus 'down', etc, it
is 'logic' versus 'information theory'), the 'travel' is more
efficiently and effectively accomplished.
Me saying reality is malleable is kind of a glib abuse of language
where, more formally, I just mean that 'traveling' to wherever you can
go in the multiverse (which appears like manipulating reality to the
FSV, it seems) is possible. However, the 'travel' need not be
differentiable, continuous, or smooth in any way. Jumping is
possible, as well. For example, let U be the set of all world lines
that are consistent with the laws of physics (whatever they might
be). Being a 'point' moving along one worldline is the 'norm' for
humans, it seems. A 'jumper' or 'oneironaut' is someone who can
simply 'hop' to a different worldline all together. And I'd say a
worldline master, if there is such, is someone who can, in some hard-
to-describe, abstract sense, manipulate the contents of U by altering
the laws of physics in the parallel currently occupied by that FSV.
(So being an FSV is necessary but not sufficient to imply 'worldline
mastery', aka, 'omnipotence'.)
On Apr 1, 11:30 am, "Christopher L. Nelson"
> I noticed a number of personnel referring to this as an April Fool's
> joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> get this type of project off the ground.
>
Brian Tenneson
Why need to be physically anywhere else then where we are, or where we
perceive the "i" to be currently 'located'?
Or is that question a 'dupe' question? Duplicate or "newbie-stick
probe test"?
Who knows. Who knows? -- or -- "Who" knows.
:P :P :P
Brian Tenneson
On Apr 1, 2:30 pm, "Christopher L. Nelson"
> I noticed a number of personnel referring to this as an April Fool's
> joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> get this type of project off the ground.
>
Brian Tenneson
On Apr 1, 9:12 pm, Brian Tenneson <tenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's just "pretend" I just got a "Colbert BUMP," m'kay???
>
> On Apr 1, 2:30 pm, "Christopher L. Nelson"
>
> <christopher.l.nel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I noticed a number of personnel referring to this as an April Fool's
> > joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> > who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> > get this type of project off the ground.
>
mike1937
It is a suggestions box to be emptied and forgotten at the end of the
day just like the one at your local burger king. It's nothing anyone
can actually contribute to. In fact, I would be very disappointed if
the beurocracy DID get us to Mars. It would just mean another century
of waiting for another colony to be started with the politicol and
societal advances that are the only way to truly transcend most of our
current problems. Of course, we at OpenVirgle would be willing to
help, or be helped in any way possible
On Apr 1, 12:30 pm, "Christopher L. Nelson"
> I noticed a number of personnel referring to this as an April Fool's
> joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> get this type of project off the ground.
>
mike1937
> joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> get this type of project off the ground.
>
mike1937
NASA would be throwing away time or money. Congress will simply see it
as an excuse to cut their funding more and spend it on wars, bridges
to nowhere, and subsidizing a bloated, parasitical insurance industry.
Uh, forgive the cynicism and lack of tact, I'm in a bad mood this
morning :-(
On May 4, 10:15 am, mike1937 <arid_sha...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Open" sounds like a bit of a, how should I put this? "Blattant Lie."
> It is a suggestions box to be emptied and forgotten at the end of the
> day just like the one at your local burger king. It's nothing anyone
> can actually contribute to. In fact, I would be very disappointed if
> the beurocracy DID get us to Mars. It would just mean another century
> of waiting for another colony to be started with the politicol and
> societal advances that are the only way to truly transcend most of our
> current problems. Of course, we at OpenVirgle would be willing to
> help, or be helped in any way possible
>
> On Apr 1, 12:30 pm, "Christopher L. Nelson"
>
>
>
> <christopher.l.nel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I noticed a number of personnel referring to this as an April Fool's
> > joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> > who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> > get this type of project off the ground.
>
> > collaboration and cooperation across all generations, industries, and
> > backgrounds we can truly accomplish the "impossible" and we want to
> > begin today!
>
> > We're interested in pointing our efforts in the direction of the
> > common dream and really encourage you to post that dream at
> > opennasa.com so that we can hear it and move forward with it. I ask
> > that you don't pass on this opportunity, we are truly asking for your
>
> - Show quoted text -
Brian Tenneson
On May 4, 9:27 am, mike1937 <arid_sha...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Forgot to add this: Anything you managed to actually contribute to
> NASA would be throwing away time or money. Congress will simply see it
> as an excuse to cut their funding more and spend it on wars, bridges
> to nowhere, and subsidizing a bloated, parasitical insurance industry.
> Uh, forgive the cynicism and lack of tact, I'm in a bad mood this
> morning :-(
>
> On May 4, 10:15 am, mike1937 <arid_sha...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > "Open" sounds like a bit of a, how should I put this? "Blattant Lie."
> > It is a suggestions box to be emptied and forgotten at the end of the
> > day just like the one at your local burger king. It's nothing anyone
> > can actually contribute to. In fact, I would be very disappointed if
> > the beurocracy DID get us to Mars. It would just mean another century
> > of waiting for another colony to be started with the politicol and
> > societal advances that are the only way to truly transcend most of our
> > current problems. Of course, we at OpenVirgle would be willing to
> > help, or be helped in any way possible
>
> > On Apr 1, 12:30 pm, "Christopher L. Nelson"
>
> > <christopher.l.nel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I noticed a number of personnel referring to this as an April Fool's
> > > joke. The true reality of it is that there is a group of individuals
> > > who work within the Space Community that have already begun trying to
> > > get this type of project off the ground.
>
Scottyoman
mike1937
> > > > > collaboration and cooperation across all generations, industries, and
> > > > > backgrounds we can truly accomplish the "impossible" and we want to
> > > > > begin today!
>
> > > > > We're interested in pointing our efforts in the direction of the
> > > > > common dream and really encourage you to post that dream at
> > > > > opennasa.com so that we can hear it and move forward with it. I ask
> > > > > that you don't pass on this opportunity, we are truly asking for your
> > > > > feedback and hope to incorporate that in NASA's mission for the future!- Hide quoted text -
>
Bryan Bishop
> Sounds pretty liberal.
Hm. So, an OpenNASA project. Makes me wonder. What are the people
doing there? The individuals that are working at NASA, I mean. Are
they so very busy that they can't bother to spend time appearing on
the internet and organizing amateur communities? Are they really that
busy? I doubt it. I bet most of them have 'desk jobs' from 9 to 5,
that sort of thing, except pushing the longer hours for the techies.
Of course, everybody needs a break, but if promoting space communities
seems like work then maybe they are in the wrong field? I wonder what
happens when digital age tech kids grow up to work at NASA. Do they
torrent all of the data up to the net? Do they publish schematics on
wikileaks.org? etc.
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
mike1937
talking about me or NASA.
> > > > > collaboration and cooperation across all generations, industries, and
> > > > > backgrounds we can truly accomplish the "impossible" and we want to
> > > > > begin today!
>
> > > > > We're interested in pointing our efforts in the direction of the
> > > > > common dream and really encourage you to post that dream at
> > > > > opennasa.com so that we can hear it and move forward with it. I ask
> > > > > that you don't pass on this opportunity, we are truly asking for your
> > > > > feedback and hope to incorporate that in NASA's mission for the future!- Hide quoted text -
>
Spike
take.
add link: http;/ www.yadda yadda yadda .liberal.com
more about me and my "vision"
add link: http:/ www.hillary rodham clinton invented mars .moron
more about nothing but jibberish
add link: http:/ www. too much time on my hands .jag
And yes I'm a pessimist and a conservative. So attack me; I will enjoy
it.
more about me: http:/ I'm not that self important .realist
Brian Tenneson
but is anyone willing to discuss all of reality at once?
http://www.universalsight.org/conference_abstract/00-02-00.pdf
;) :) :)
DCLXVI
Paul D. Fernhout
basic life support (pay) and health care. :-) Same as everyone on the planet
should get as a right of birth IMHO. :-)
Example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_from_Yesteryear
"Since the availability of power from fusion reactors [Solar panels :-)] and
cheap automated [robotic] labor has enabled them to develop a post-scarcity
economy, ..."
Or:
http://www.whywork.org/rethinking/leisure/bucky.html
"It is now possible to give every man, woman and child on Earth a standard
of living comparable to that of a modern-day billionaire."
--Buckminster Fuller
As individuals, no doubt, these OpenNASA people are some of the finest at
NASA; the problem is, beyond their other duties and families, the NASA
bureaucracy and the capitalist economic values that through Congress set the
tone for NASA prevent them from helping the world much through free stuff
(example, the widespread assumption in Congress that NASA stuff has value
only if someone pays directly for it, like by exclusively licensing a patent).
Example:
http://technology.jsc.nasa.gov/licensing.cfm
"NASA owns over 1,000 patents and patent applications that protect
inventions in hundreds of subject matter categories. NASA makes these
inventions available to industry through its Patent Licensing Program, which
is administered by the NASA Office of General Counsel, NASA Headquarters,
Washington, D.C."
See? Taxpayer-supported NASA inventions need to be "protected" from the
likes of, say, well, the taxpayers on the OpenVirgle project. Wouldn't want
to get those pristine ideas dirty, now would we? :-(
Nope, best to keep those leading edge NASA ideas "protected" -- maybe tucked
away somewhere alongside with the "lost" (technology-wise and license-wise
and ) Saturn-V plans. :-(
On lost "technology-wise", see:
http://stason.org/TULARC/science-engineering/space/76-What-happened-to-the-saturn-v-plans.html
"Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, the Saturn V blueprints
have not been lost. They are kept at Marshall Space Flight Center on
microfilm. The Federal Archives in East Point, GA also has 2900 cubic
feet of Saturn documents. Rocketdyne has in its archives dozens of
volumes from its Knowledge Retention Program. This effort was initiated
in the late '60s to document every facet of F-1 and J-2 engine
production to assist in any future re-start. The problem in re-creating the
Saturn V is not finding the drawings, it is finding vendors who can supply
mid-1960's vintage hardware (like guidance system components), and the fact
that the launch pads and VAB have been converted to Space Shuttle use, so
you have no place to launch from. By the time you redesign to accommodate
available hardware and re-modify the launch pads, you may as well have
started from scratch with a clean sheet design."
On lost "license-wise", from what I know of NASA licensing SNAFUs, it is
almost certain (I haven't checked though) that most of those Saturn-V plans
(as blueprints) are copyrighted by the contractors and so OpenVirgle could
redistribute them under a free license that allowed derivative works. It is
barely possible that an OSCOMAK-like project run by NASA might be able to
redistribute them under the government's "for government purposes" rights, I
don't know for sure, but I doubt it, and here is why. I know that contractor
ownership of copyrights on blueprints and CAD files has been a problem with
the shuttle and/or space station. So those plans really are "lost" IMHO,
same as I discussed earlier how the book "The Energy Primer"
http://groups.google.com/group/virgle/msg/5019e137fc4bfe84
was in that sense similarly lost even though I found my physical copy of it
the other day. Of course, even if you could do much with the Saturn-V plans
as far as derivative works, making available rocket technology to the world
beyond a minimal level of sophistication is probably a USA federal offense:
"A short history of export control policy"
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/528/1
"This essay deals with the history of export policy and how it came to be as
it is today, governed by the State Department as part of the International
Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). ... This was accomplished by the removal
of said items from the Commerce list of dual-use items in the Export
Administration Regulations and placing them on the State Department’s United
States Munitions List, controlled under section 38 of the Arms Export
Control Act."
And that's one reason, sadly, I'd probably rather not see any rocket
technology in OSCOMAK right now beyond (presumably legal for-export) hobby
level rocketry. And that is another reason why I myself am focusing on
habitat design. (Although I really do it mainly for this reason:)
"Both CATS and DOGS are needed..."
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=62113&cid=5821178
Of course, people using a distributed system, like you are working with on
SKDB, and who are, say, running it outside the USA (unlike the OSCOMAK
server which is around Pittsburgh) would not necessarily be bound by more
than prudence and local laws of whatever country's laws covered such use.
Still, prudence also suggests we need to solve habitat issues sooner than
rocketry issues, even if just to make SpaceShip Earth work well for most
everybody.
These roadblocks to space habitation are all thrown up as part of our tax
dollars at work under the current economic mythology:
"The Mythology of Wealth by conceptualguerilla.com"
http://kai-zen.livejournal.com/46079.html
"Are you scratching your head? “What do you mean, they have ‘nothing at
all’? Property and money are something.” Property and money are as
mythological as Zeus. The first thing they teach you in law school – and I
mean the first thing -- is that “property” is a collection of legal rights.
They are mental abstractions. They were created in more or less their
present form in the middle ages by common law judges. ..."
Of course, the actual taxes taken out of our pockets and then spent mainly
on the military slow us down too, by making us "work" for income more and
taking time for volunteer work.
For the record, I'd be happy to pay even more in communal taxes if it was
spent better, like is often the case in Europe (although not always). Even
given NASA's bureaucracy, I'd gladly pay more taxes in the USA if NASA got
50X what the DOD got, and not vice-versa, on the assumption some of the
money would leak into good things even if unintentionally. :-) But
seriously, most of the NASA budget has gone to running the Shuttle (or one
space station). If NASA had 20X as much money, they would have a lot of room
for experimenting. So -- no aerospace contractors need go hungry with a
switch to a different "racket"
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm
-- just an issue of mythology and choosing whether to worship Athena
(Weaving and Wisdom)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena
or Mars (War)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_%28mythology%29
with that budget.
NASA could likely be improved, of course, to spend money more effectively as
to space habitation. But they would have to at least start laughing at the
idea of space habitation first instead of mainly ignoring it out of IMHO
fear of another "Golden Fleece Award" (see below).
Related:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/16a.htm
"Before you can reach a point of effectiveness in defending your own
children or your principles against the assault of blind social machinery,
you have to stop conspiring against yourself by attempting to negotiate with
a set of abstract principles and rules which, by its nature, cannot respond.
Under all its disguises, that is what institutional schooling is, an
abstraction which has escaped its handlers. Nobody can reform it. First you
have to realize that human values are the stuff of madness to a system; in
systems-logic the schools we have are already the schools the system needs;
the only way they could be much improved is to have kids eat, sleep, live,
and die there."
So let me rewrite this for NASA: :-) "Before you can reach a point of
effectiveness in defending your [space ambitions] or your principles against
the assault of blind social machinery [embodied in NASA], you have to stop
conspiring against yourself by attempting to negotiate with a set of
abstract principles and rules which, by its nature, cannot respond. Under
all its disguises, that is what institutional [space travel via NASA] is, an
abstraction which has escaped its handlers. Nobody can reform it. First you
have to realize that human values [or the Pro-Am revolution] are the stuff
of madness to a system; in systems-logic the [space programs] we have are
already the [space programs] the system needs; the only way they could be
much improved is to have [potential space habitat dwellers] eat, sleep,
live, and die there [without ever getting to live in or even visit space]."
For example, the OpenNASA site doesn't even render well in (my up-to-date
version of) FireFox/IceWeasel -- the left border is non-existent. What does
that tell you about the true feelings of NASA-the-institution about F/OSS?
Anyway, sadly, I would expect NASA makes it impossible for these OpenNASA
individuals in the course of their employment to be helpful in the useful
ways you outline, for the "systems-logic" reasons mentioned above. For one
thing, they'd worry about giving a soapbox to people like me. :-)
http://www.opennasa.com/2008/04/01/project-virgle/
Except maybe for naming comets, it feels like NASA as an *institution* has
no interest in (or understanding of) the rest of the "Pro-Ams" revolution
yet (regardless of employees' individual understanding):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_amateurs
These F/OSS and exponential and post-scarcity technology ideas are just too
threatening to the entire mythology organizing the UN Congress, and so the
US Government, and so NASA. My pessimistic prediction is that if OpenNASA
was really effective, since it threatens the elite status quo (with the
elite having its head in the sand about people starving, dying of
preventable illnesses, being bored in school. and losing their dignity at
work, etc.), it would soon get some version of a Proxmire "Golden Fleece
Award" again.
I feel space habitation research and development at NASA has never even
recovered even from the *last* time that happened in the 1970s:
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/5296
"Rather than rocketing construction materials into space, he proposed mining
lunar rock and then shipping it to an orbiting manufacturing plant. The rock
would be moved around by a solar-powered EM launcher—much cheaper than
shipping rocket fuel to the moon, he reasoned. Best of all, O’Neill
concluded, rather dubiously, these colonies could be created “with existing
technology.” ... To build Mass Driver II would require more funding, but
before NASA could approve it, Wisconsin senator William Proxmire got wind of
O’Neill’s space colonies idea. Famed for his “Golden Fleece” awards for
government spending he deemed wasteful, Proxmire went on television to
proclaim “not another penny for this nutty fantasy.” NASA quickly pulled the
plug on all its space colonies projects, including the Mass Driver."
Of course, I can hope times have changed and either the award would not
happen or NASA as an institution would find the backbone (and other support)
to stand up for everyone's dreams of a better future *both* on Spaceship
Earth and "out there". But until that day, it's up to us hobbyists IMHO.
And some people have a tough time forgiving NASA for that lack of courage to
this day. :-( But as my wife says, forgiveness is a gift you give yourself.
Ultimately, it won't matter what NASA does or doesn't do.
http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/SSI_Fernhout2001_web.html
"At this moment nearly every engineer on earth has a powerful and globally
networked computer in his or her home. Collaborative volunteer efforts are
now possible on an unprecedented scale. Moores's Law predicts continued
reductions See for example the writings of Raymond Kurzweil at
http://www.kurzweilai.net/ or Hans Moravec at http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm
in the cost of bandwidth, storage, CPU power, and displays - which will lead
to computers a million times faster, bigger or cheaper in the next few
decades. Collaboration software such as for sending email, holding real-time
video conferences, and viewing design drawings is also reducing in cost;
much of it is now effectively free. This means there are now few technical
or high-cost barriers to cooperation among engineers, many of whom even now
have in their homes (often merely for game playing reasons) computing power
and bandwidth beyond anything available to the best equipped engineers in
the 1970s."
But we can still hope NASA may change sooner rather than later, because for
every day NASA plays by the old fearful scarcity mythology, people die of
preventable problems in the rest of the world, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation
"According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,
more than 25,000 people died of starvation every day in 2003, and as of 2001
to 2003, about 800 million people were chronically undernourished."
Those deaths just go to show the power of myth to do evil, since there is
more than enough food to go around. Why doesn't everyone get enough?
Ultimately, it is due to social myths -- like the value of "free markets"
where ironically nothing is free, even is most place, "dying" (with or
without dignity).
There were "pre-scarcity" myths:
http://www.marcinequenzer.com/horn_of_plenty.htm
"In our Seneca Tradition, the Field of Plenty is seen as a spiral that has
its smallest revolution out in space and its' largest revolution near the
Earth."
There are now "scarcity" myths (including NASA's licensing policies. :-)
http://www.house.gov/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget
And after that scarcity bubble pops (assuming it does not "pop" too
literally and noisily :-( ), there will be "post-scarcity" myths:
http://www.debian.org/
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/14/1349202
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/motivation.html
(which are essentially a return to the pre-scarcity myths, but with the
technology for space travel and supporting quadrillions of people in the
solar system via self-replicating space habitats included as an upgrade from
suffering through the cycle. :-)
Personally, down the road, I have high hopes for recruiting *retired* NASA
people (and "retired" from other places too) to make OpenVirgle literally
take off. :-) A lot of those people hated the bureaucracy too and might be
willing to take their retirement on life support (pension) and do something
with their time.
I have multiple objectives with my posts, but eventually another source of
recruits for "retirees" as far as full-time devoted effort (we need no money
now or maybe ever as a group IMHO, even if we may need it as individuals)
are the Google Millionaires (not Billionaires, since those financially obese
guys will always be too busy managing their money to add much content or
metadata to OpenVirgle/OSCOMAK. :-) Anyway, there must be at least one
hundred to one thousand people working at Google who could quit tomorrow and
go the rest of their lives working full-time (as a volunteer hobby) on
Project Virgle and never miss a frugal meal or basic health coverage for
themselves or their family. Ultimately, just the *possibility* of even some
of these people leaving all at once may be enough to transform Google into a
subsidiary of OpenVirgle project -- once OpenVirgle/OSCOMAK has enough
content and momentum to be credible so these Millionaires think they can
change the word more and in better ways via that than, say, Knol. :-)
I know, wake him up, he's snoring in his dreams. :-)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=snoring
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snoring
"While snoring is sometimes considered a minor affliction, snorers can
suffer severe impairment of lifestyle. ..."
--Paul Fernhout
http://www.openvirgle.net/
Bryan Bishop
For those of us not able to follow the sources:
http://www.nabble.com/Everything-List-f18221.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20070812151435/http://www.weidai.com/everything.html
At first it didn't look legit, simply because on the mailing list
itself, over on Google Groups now (everything-list), the threads seem
to be talking past each other. However, below you'll see Wei Dai's
original announcement of the mailing list, and he's citing Tegmark,
Bostrom, and a Douglas Adams reference, so it may be that quality has
simply diminished over the years or something. Worth at least checking
out, although I'd be careful playing with MWIs, and suggest
the 'kantian quantum physics' website that points out Feynman and von
Neumann were alternative formulations to MWI, etc. etc. Rapidly getting
off-topic there. Anyway, here's what the page says:
Wei Dai's ``everything'' mailing list
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998
From: Wei Dai
Subject: ANNOUNCE: the "everything" mailing list
You are invited to join a mailing list for discussion of the idea that
all possible universes exist. Some possible topics of discussion might
include:
What is the set of all possible universes?
What is a reasonable prior/posterior distribution for the universe that
I am in?
Why do we believe that both the past and the future are not completely
random, but the future is more random than the past?
Before observing anything about the universe, should we expect it to
have (infinitely?) many observers?
How can we/should we predict the future and postdict the past?
Here are some papers that can serve as a basis for the discussion:
"Investigations into the Doomsday Argument", Nick Bostrom
"A Computer Scientist's View of Life, the Universe, and Everything",
Juergen Schmidhuber
"Is ``the theory of everything'' merely the ultimate ensemble theory?",
Max Tegmark
Because this mailing list attracts people from many different academic
fields, and many posts have high technical content, it is suggested
that after joining, you post a message to the mailing list with the
subject "JOINING post". In this post, please give a brief biography of
yourself and tell us your intellectual backgrounds. What fields are you
familiar with, what relevant books/papers have you read, etc.? This
way, if you don't understand someone's post, you can look up his
JOINING post in the archive and figure out what background he is
assuming.
Please use this link to subscribe or unsubscribe to the mailing list. An
archive is available at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list,
with an alternative/backup archive at
http://www.mail-archive.com/everyth...@eskimo.com/.
- Bryan
________________________________________
http://heybryan.org/
Paul D. Fernhout
checked though) those Saturn-V plans (as blueprints) are copyrighted by the
contractors and so OpenVirgle could *not* redistribute them under a free
license that allowed derivative works".
--Paul Fernhout
mike1937
> take.
http://groups.google.com/group/openvirgle/browse_thread/thread/80949962e775f893#
If you don't read it, thats fine. If you read everything online you
would quite obviously die. I just ask you don't use "TL;DR" as an
argument, don't argue with someone if you don't bother finding out
their points.
On May 9, 7:24 am, Spike <michael.al...@pferdusa.com> wrote:
> This has become the "I want to see myself talk" forum. And here's my
> take.
>
> more about me and my "vision"
>
Brian Tenneson
not only are they sensible and make sense, he does have some serious
credentials. I would say most theoretical physicists are aware of his
name.
I hope the everything list is not inundated with stuff about Nasa
politics as that is a small part of 'everything' (which I call the
universe or multiverse to suit my fancy), and not 'everything.' The
list you mentioned, Bryan, is supposedly to discuss the nature of
reality. With Bruno's posts, you'll see stuff about omniscient
mathematical devices called unviersal Turing machines (like that which
is the source model for the computer people use today with the math
developed by Alan Turing).
I do think the 'everything' list could be benefitted by some people
here although the reverse is, from my understanding, probably not as
true.
Thanks fo rthe contributiuon.
On May 9, 6:56 pm, Bryan Bishop <kanz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday 09 May 2008, Brian Tenneson wrote:
>
> > So....people are addressing a tiny aspect of reality, or so it seems,
> > but is anyone willing to discuss all of reality at once?
>
> >http://www.universalsight.org/conference_abstract/00-02-00.pdf
>
>
> - Bryan
> ________________________________________http://heybryan.org/