Imagination

 

Just plants

 

Semiotics

 

Some things about Space Life (part 2)

In "Extinctions" Tom and Al address the issue of extinction.

In 2011, an international team from Berkeley, led by Anthony D. Barnosky, checks the extinction estimates, integrates the paleontological data with current ones, considers all the necessary cautions and comes to a conclusion, somewhat worrying, published in Nature: the sixth extinction. mass is not yet underway, but we are close to it and we are doing everything to get there. The title of the article in Nature is: Has the sixth mass extinction already arrived?

There is nothing unusual about extinctions. They are part of natural history. The vast m ajority of the world's species have become extinct. What is unprecedented today is the role of a species in causing the Sixth Mass Extinction, the fastest of all time. A philosophical paradox emerges: Homo sapiens, descended from mass extinctions of other species (especially of large reptiles, whose disappearance 66-65 million years ago paved the way for adaptive radiation from mammals), is now the agent of a special mass extinction. The sad irony of history is that our efforts to slow or stop the sixth mass extinction may not be enough. According to Butchart et al., One of the results of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity is the successful multiplication of local conservation initiatives. However, this is not enough to reverse the general trends of habitat destruction. The comparison is disarming: the general indicators of environmental protection actions are moderately positive; those that measure the health of ecosystems are, on the other hand, all negative. We are not yet able to see the effects of our good practices. Even if we are so short-sighted as to endanger the conditions of our stay on the planet, some scientific models tell us that life will continue in other forms anyway, probably to the advantage of the most opportunistic species, such as rats.

Indeed, as soon as the human race is extinct, a cornucopia of new life experiments could blossom on Earth. From an evolutionary perspective, the extinction of the Anthropocene is a threat not to biodiversity itself, but to the ecological conditions that currently allow human survival. The end of our species would represent just another new beginning. Thus, from a philosophical point of view, the sixth mass extinction is an anthropological warning about the contingency of life and the fragility of our history as hominids.

Source: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/1/5/e1400253.full.pdf

The paradox of Homo sapiens, as the cause of the sixth mass extinction, is difficult to resolve for two reasons: one political, that is, the lack of international coordination; and the other psychological, that is, the lack of forecasting skills. A single nation can do little if the others don't cooperate. The ecological dynamics do not respect the strict timing of electoral campaigns and the laws of popularity, so the services provided by the ecosystem may suddenly fail.

Implementing a good conservation practice today will bear fruit in at least a couple of generations. Of course, it is not easy to invest money and make an ethical commitment in favor of someone who does not yet exist, but we must arm ourselves with imagination and try to do it (on this topic we recommend Ethics and future generations of Giuliano Pontara).  After all, it could be a clever way to mark what sets us apart from dinosaurs.

Old books is a quotes  from Philip K.Dick,'s "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"

In "Thoughts" the Beagle 5 encounters an apparently non-organic alien entity. Here is what Yuval Noah Harari in  Homo Deus: A History of Tomorrow, writes about it: 

"The idea that humans will always have a unique ability beyond the reach of non-conscious algorithms is just wishful thinking. The current scientific answer to this pipe dream can be summarised in three simple principles:

1.  Organisms are algorithms. Every animal – including Homo sapiens – is an assemblage of organic algorithms shaped by natural selection over millions of years of evolution. 

2.  Algorithmic calculations are not affected by the materials from which you build the calculator. Whether you build an abacus from wood, iron or plastic, two beads plus two beads equals four beads. 

3.  Hence there is no reason to think that organic algorithms can do things that non-organic algorithms will never be able to replicate or surpass. As long as the calculations remain valid, what does it matter whether the algorithms are manifested in carbon or silicon?"

Always in Thoughts we see that the alien entity has a form of fullerenes. Fullerenes constitute a class of molecular allotropic substances of carbon. The molecules of fullerene, made entirely of carbon, take on forms that arouse great interest in the scientific community.

These are large molecules with an approximately spherical shape (sometimes called buckyball, short for buckminster-fullerene, with reference to the geodesic domes designed by architect Richard Buckminster Fuller).

Fullerenes have also been identified in space (in a planetary nebula called Tc1, 6,500 light years from Earth) and in terrestrial geological formations.

Fullerenes are also a recurring element in science fiction. For example, in Stel Pavlou's short story, The Code of Atlantis (2001), buckyballs, nanotechnology and complexity theory are used to create nano-swarms that come together to form human-sized golems. The C60 is the basic building element of the lost city of Atlantis. In the television series Andromeda, fullerenes are a common material used to build very strong objects, such as spaceship hulls and body armor. In addition, instead of tractor beams, spaceships use buckycaves to capture and pull other ships towards them.

"Thoughts" and "Extinctions" are ambiented in elliptical galaxies. According to a 2015 study by Pratika Dayal and colleagues (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2041-8205/810/1/L2), giant elliptical galaxies are home to far more habitable planets than the Milky Way. 

This conclusion is contested by a 2020 study, which considers it a violation of the principle of mediocrity. Who is right? What types of galaxies are the most probable cradles of life?

How is it that we are in a spiral galaxy, if life is born and develops preferably in elliptical galaxies? Are we a rare exception? And, if so, isn't it curious that the only known case of an inhabited planet presents itself as a relatively uncommon phenomenon rather than the rule?

Similar reflections are the focus of another study, published in April 2020 in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. The author is a professor at the University of Arkansas, Daniel P. Whitmire.

According to Whitmire, the conclusions of the study by Dayal and colleagues represent a violation of the so-called principle of mediocrity. This principle is an extension of the Copernican principle, according to which the Earth does not have a privileged position in the Universe. For the principle of mediocrity, if you choose an element at random from a set of categories, the most likely thing is that the selected element belongs to the most numerous category, not to the rarest one. Let's say, for example, that I have to take a marble, without looking, from an urn that contains 100. Of those 100 marbles, 60 are blue, 20 are red, 15 are yellow and only 5 are green. What is more likely than drawing a blue or a green marble? Obviously a blue marble.

Applied to cosmobiology, that is, to the idea of ​​classifying galaxies based on their potential habitability, the principle of mediocrity suggests that the fact that a technological civilization has evolved on a Milky Way planet such as Earth is no exception, but the rule. Therefore, elliptical giants are not the privileged cradles of life, and of intelligent life in particular, but spiral galaxies like ours. If this is true, then there must be some element that the authors of the 2015 study did not consider and that, had it been evaluated, would have led them to reconsider the role of elliptical giants as the privileged incubators of life.

In "Thoughts" we read that Tom and Al are connected to each other.

Creating an interface that allows the perfect symbiosis between man and machine, through a microchip implanted in the head, and very thin connecting wires between the human brain system and Hi-tech devices is the new challenger.

It is not the script of a film like The Matrix or Blade Runner, but it is what they are already doing in the laboratories of Neuralink, a neurotechnology startup (founded 2 years ago) and another creature of the millionaire and visionary Elon Musk, already famous for giving birth the PayPal payment system, the Testla electric car and the SpaceX space travel agency.

Musk presented to the audience of the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco the results of Neuralink's research and development in the creation of a 'brain-computer' interface, which can allow the implantation of devices in the human brain, in order to put it in connection with Hi-tech tools.

A project for which the startup has already raised over 150 million dollars from investors, in addition to funding from the founder. And the results are already surprising: an 8 mm hole in the skull will allow the implantation of sensors connected to the brain, with the help of small flexible wires, to detect the activity of neurons, with a diameter of micrometers (about a third of a hair) injected into the head with a 24 micron cable.

This will be done by a special robot, programmed to minimize the risk margin for brain health and functionality, under the supervision of a neurosurgeon. The chips in turn will be connected to external computers capable of processing the information received.

"Another revolution lies in the design of the electrodes developed by Neuralink: in addition to reading the data, this particular technology allows information to be sent directly to neurons, bypassing the areas possibly damaged by trauma or disfunction", anticipates Elon Musk.

The system is completed with a small device, to be placed behind the ear and similar to hearing aids, which will be the prosthesis with which the machine will read our commands through our thoughts.

In this way, according to the forecasts of Neuralink experts, humans will be able to interact with computers and Hi-tech resources of knowledge, information and learning. Even going so far as to enhance the brain and human thinking, the scientists at Neurolink hope.

"The system was tested with encouraging results on mice and on a monkey, which was able to control a computer with its brain," notes Musk, who certainly does not need sophisticated devices to conceive, and develop, futuristic projects.

What Musk proposes goes beyond the head-controlled prosthesis: it is a neural loop for the brain that can synchronize it directly with the digital world, he is talking about thoughts and memories that mix with digital ones. When you think something like: "How long is the Nile?", The question is transferred to an artificial intelligence such as 'Google Neuro' (wirelessly, of course) and, after a quarter of a second, you will know the answer.

And he explains, or tries to explain: “the solution that seems the best is to create a layer of AI, attached to the brain, that can work well in a symbiotic way with the person. Just as the cortex works in a symbiotic way with the limbic system, the third digital layer could work in concert with the person ”. Simple, isn't it?

"Reality" is based on a quote from Philip K. Dick. Always him...

“There’s a one in billions chance that this is base reality,” announced Elon Musk at the Code conference last week in California. The billionaire entrepreneur stoked new fire under one of pop philosophy’s most debated questions: are we all living in a computer simulation?

While the idea of living in a computer simulation is fun to consider, the consequences of such a reality are quite frightening. If belief in a creator god lets humans off the hook for our destiny, or if belief in a mechanical universe drops us into nihilistic despair, what might believing that we are all sims in a video game do? The possibilities are both wondrous and horrifying.

Sci-fi writers have been imagining life inside computers for decades. Robert Heinlein’s They (1941) and Ray Bradbury’s The Veldt (1951) both toyed with simulated realities long before the computer technologies we take for granted today existed. A decade later saw Daniel F Galouye’s Simulacron-3 (1964), one of the first literary explorations of lifelike virtual reality. The story of a computer simulation so detailed its inhabitants believe it is real, the novel later inspired the cult movie Thirteenth Floor.

The Girl Who Was Plugged In (1974) reads almost like a factual account of life in 2021. Alice Sheldon, writing as James Tiptree Jnr, wove a terrifying tale of corporate society, celebrity culture and marketing as mind control, all driven by the power those who shape reality hold over those who merely inhabit it.

William Gibson’s Sprawl trilogy, beginning with Neuromancer (1984), features “simstim” entertainment and a virtual reality where the dead can be summoned back to life. The novels kickstarted the cyberpunk movement, with its fascination for directly connecting the human brain to technology, or “jacking-in”.

But the early master of simulated reality stories was, without doubt, Philip K Dick. In short stories such as The Electric Ant, and novels such as Ubik (1969) and his masterpieceValis (1981), the sci-fi master dived through the twisted philosophical consequences of not accepting reality as entirely real.

In many books that came after Dick – Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash, Tad Williams’s Otherworld, Jeff Noon’s Vurt, Iain M Banks’s Culture novels – simulated realties and the consequences of computer technology dominate the discussion.

These ideas born from sci-fi novels spread to movies - from Tron (1982) to The Matrix (1999) to Inception (2010) – and brought speculation about the nature of reality into mainstream entertainment. But audiences packed into today’s multiplex cinemas are far from the first to question our reality.

But why are we so fascinated by stories that question reality? Is it pure entertainment, or a deeper quest for truth? It’s one thing to believe reality is a video game if, like Elon Musk, you get to make up the rules, but quite another if you’re only a sim! Maybe our whole reality is running on a server in the basement of some geek’s parent’s bungalow – or, as is rather more likely, we just like the idea that it is. Whatever reality we’re in, sci-fi writers will be speculating about it for ever.

Have fun finding references and quotes in the next few episodes! feel free to write your ideas in the comments.

Have a good space explorer trip...

Reference:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2016/jun/10/how-sci-fi-simulates-simulated-reality-elon-musk

https://www.uaar.it/uaar/ateo/archivio/106/verso-sesta-estinzione-massa/

https://spazio-tempo-luce-energia.it/ipotesi-sulla-distribuzione-della-vita-nelle-galassie-a7484ee44afd

https://en.wikipedia.org/

Yuval Noah Harari, Homo Deus: A History of Tomorrow