What I've been reading: 2008-06-30

• Spanish parliament approves 'human rights' for apes (Guardian)
  Great apes should have the right to life and freedom, according to a resolution passed in the Spanish parliament, in what could become landmark legislation to enshrine human rights for chimpanzees, gorillas, orang-utans and bonobos.
• The Science of Humour (More Intelligent Life)
  Apes do it.
• Should we care why people give to charity?(Peter Singer)
  Public displays of philanthropy are often frowned upon. But should we care what motivates the giver?

The art of William Scott (1913-1989)

Beans on a plate with mushrooms

Study for Still Life

Still Life With Orange Note

Tasty abstract minimalism and still life. More about William Scott.

What I've been reading: 2008-06-11

• The Genetics of Fear (Henry Greely)
  Sci-fi fantasies about the risks of genetic engineering can't get in the way of life-saving research. A response to Jamie Metzl.
• Top Pentagon Scientists Fear Brain-Modified Foes (Wired)
  There's concern in some corners of the U.S. military about "enemy activities in sleep research," neuro-pharmaceutical performance enhancement, and "brain-computer interfaces."
• Amputees fight caps in coverage for prosthetics (USA Today)
  There is a nationwide fight by amputees and the prosthetics industry to get the states and Congress to require fuller coverage for artificial limbs. The insurance industry is fighting the effort, saying such mandates drive up costs and reduce the flexibil
• Triumph of the Pill (Reason Magazine)
  Why brain doping on campus is no cause for concern

What I've been reading: 2008-06-09

• This Global Show Must Go On (Tyler Cowen - NYT)
  The last 20 years have brought the world more trade, more globalization and more economic growth than in any previous such period in history. Few commentators had believed that such a rise in trade and living standards was possible so quickly.
• How Do We Intelligently Discuss Politicized Geoengineering? (WorldChanging)
  Ever since I wrote about my support for a ban on geoengineering research, I've found myself more involved in a debate about geoengineering, climate science and politics than I anticipated being.
• Paralympics 2.0 (Andy Miah)
  Oscar Pistorius was right all along, at least for now. He was right to appeal the ruling from the International Association of Athletics Federations that forbade him from competing alongside Olympians in Beijing for one simple reason: he is an Olympian.
• The Top Ten Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems (Ronald Bailey)
  The final dispatch from the 2008 Copenhagen Consensus Conference.
• Military Supercomputer Surpasses Petaflop Milestone (NYT)
  An American military supercomputer, assembled from components originally designed for video game machines, has reached a long-sought-after computing milestone by processing more than 1.026 quadrillion calculations per second.
• Using Sci-Fi to Change the World (Analee Newitz)
  Science fiction isn't escapist; it can help us envision how to make the world a better place.

The art of Fred Harper

Fred Harper's website.

What I've been reading: 2008-06-04

• EU urged to review animal testing (BBC)
  A world expert on primates, Dr Jane Goodall, has urged Europe to find alternatives to experiments on animals.
• Study suggests holding in one's feelings is not harmful after all (Machines Like Us)
  Contrary to popular notions about what is normal or healthy, new research has found that it is okay not to express one's thoughts and feelings after experiencing a collective trauma, such as a school shooting or terrorist attack.
• Futurist Ray Kurzweil Sees a Revolution Fueled by IT (NYT)
  Do you have trouble sticking to a diet? Have patience. Within 10 years, Dr. Kurzweil explained, there will be a drug that lets you eat whatever you want without gaining weight.
• Aliens get a new switchboard: a SETI radio telescope in Northern California (LAT)
  An array at Hat Creek near Mt. Shasta points an ear to the cosmos. If E.T. tries to phone on any of 10 billion channels, Earth will be ready to listen.
• The day of judgment (Guardian Books)
  End-time thinking - the belief in a world purified by catastrophe - could once be dismissed as a harmless remnant of a more superstitious age. But with the rise of religious fundamentalism, prophets of apocalypse have become a new and very real danger, ar

Warren Ellis: Singularity 'indivisible from religious faith'

Science fiction author Warren Ellis has written a short and typically trite blog post about what he calls The NerdGod Delusion -- an attack against those who make the case for a technological Singularity:

The Singularity is the last trench of the religious impulse in the technocratic community. The Singularity has been denigrated as "The Rapture For Nerds," and not without cause. It’s pretty much indivisible from the religious faith in describing the desire to be saved by something that isn’t there (or even the desire to be destroyed by something that isn’t there) and throws off no evidence of its ever intending to exist. It’s a new faith for people who think they’re otherwise much too evolved to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster or any other idiot back-brain cult you care to suggest.

Vernor Vinge, the originator of the term, is a scientist and novelist, and occupies an almost unique space. After all, the only other sf writer I can think of who invented a religion that is also a science-fiction fantasy is L Ron Hubbard.

Wow, sounds like Warren has some special knowledge of his own. I certainly hope that, aside from this vacuous and inflammatory post, that he'll begin to share some of his expert views into AI theory and the potential for machine minds.

With the bold claim that there is "no evidence" to support the suggestion that SAI is engineerable, I'll have to assume that he's engaged the principle thinkers on the matter and offered sufficient critique to dismiss their findings outright -- thinkers like Eliezer Yudkowsky, Ben Goertzel, Hugo de Garis, and the many others devoted to the problem.

Otherwise, why should we take Ellis seriously? Or are we expected to take his position on mere faith alone?

The day is coming, my friends, when Singularity denial will seem as outrageous and irresponsible as the denial of anthropogenic global warming. And I think the comparison is fair; environmentalists are often chastised for their "religious-like" convictions and concern. It's easy to mock the Chicken Littles of the world.

And like the foot-dragging on climate change, there are consequences to inaction. The bogus and unfair memetic linkage between millenarian beliefs and the Singularity is a dangerous one, and the sooner this association is severed the better.

As I see it, there are four strategies to help us normalize the Singularity debate:

(1) We need to better promote and engage respected thinkers and public intellectuals who are sympathetic to the issue -- key figures like Ray Kurzweil, Robin Hanson, Nick Bostrom, Marvin Minsky, etc.

(2) A new generation of public figures is required -- renowned individuals who are willing to a) put their reputations at stake and b) use their popularity/credibility to raise awareness and help with foresight.

(3) Continue to frame the issue as a scientific endeavor and pitch the various scenarios as hypotheses; we need to keep the language within the scientific vernacular.

(4) Let the critics have it and show them no quarter. Particularly when their denial is mere contradiction and driven by sheer incredulity. We need to force them to better articulate their positions while defending our own with as much evidence can be mustered.

And in the meantime, don't buy into Ellis's empty anti-Singularity rhetoric, which is all that it really is.

What I've been reading: 2008-06-02

• What Does It Mean to Be Human? (Wired)
  A star-studded panel of scientists gathered to discuss those heady themes last night at the World Science Festival in New York City. Here are their answers in convenient nutshell form:
• IEEE Spectrum: Special Report: The Singularity
• IEEE Spectrum: Economics Of The Singularity (Robin Hanson)
  This is part of IEEE Spectrum's SPECIAL REPORT: THE SINGULARITY
• Caring or cruel? Inside the primate laboratory (The Guardian)
  The Guardian, given rare access to an animal research facility, talks to scientists about their experiments on monkeys.

What I've been reading: 2008-06-01

• SCREECH (More Intelligent Life)
  Ferrari is putting carbon-ceramic brakes in all its cars. Paul Markillie goes from 160kph to zero in four seconds flat ...
• Bayesian theory in New Scientist (Reverendbayes's Weblog)
  Is this a unified theory of the brain?
• Space particles play with the mind (New Scientist)
  IT'S hardly unusual to find things flashing into your head as you fall asleep, but as Christer Fuglesang was settling down on his first night aboard the International Space Station it happened quite literally.
• A Computer That Can 'Read' Your Mind (NSF)
  Research team's work with brain scans and computational modeling an important breakthrough in understanding the brain and developing new computational tools

What I've been reading: 2008-05-31

• The future of F1 videogames - exclusive with Codemasters' Rod Cousens (F1)
  Earlier this month Codemasters secured the exclusive rights to produce Formula One videogames in an agreement that will see the company develop a new generation of the multi-million selling franchise across multiple platforms.
• Who Decides? (Jamais Cascio - Open the Future)
  Who gets to determine the "right" climate for the Earth?
• Radiohead, Prince at Odds Over Blocked YouTube Vids (Pitchfork)
  It's hardly surprising that the numerous videos of Prince's cover of Radiohead's "Creep" at Coachella late last month that popped up on the video networking site.
• Testosterone gene could offer men competitive edge in sports (CBC)
  A new discovery shows that the way men process testosterone could potentially help them cheat in sports competitions.
• How We Carefully Observe And Protect The Last Uncontacted Tribes (Warren Ellis)
• Dean Kamen's Luke arm now has mind-control and 3D-spatial interfaces (Grinding)
  Inventor extraordinaire Dean Kamen spoke at D today about the latest developments in the Luke arm. Not that it wasn't already impressive enough.

A year ago on SentDev: The Drake Equation is obsolete

Just say no to N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL.

Copyright Lynette Cook
I'm surprised how often the Drake Equation is still mentioned when people discuss such things as the search for extra terrestrial intelligence (SETI), astrobiology and problems like the Fermi Paradox.

Fairly recent insights in such fields as cosmology, astrobiology and various future studies have changed our perception of the cosmos and the ways in which advanced life might develop.

Frank Drake's equation, which he developed back in 1961, leaves much to be desired in terms of what it's supposed to tell us about both the nature and predominance of extraterrestrial life in our Galaxy.

The Drake Equation

The Drake equation states that:

where:

N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which we might hope to be able to communicate and:

R* is the average rate of star formation in our galaxy
fp is the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne is the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fl is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc is the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L is the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.

Arbitrary at best

The integers that are plugged into this equation are often subject to wide interpretation and can differ significantly from scientist to scientist. Even the slightest change can result in vastly different answers. Part of the problem is that our understanding of cosmology and astrobiology is rapidly changing and there is often very little consensus among specialists as to what the variables might be.

Consequently, the Drake formula relies on 'stabs in the dark.' This makes it highly imprecise and unscientific. The margin of error is far beyond what should be considered acceptable or meaningful.

No accounting for cosmological development or time

Another major problem of the Drake Equation is that it does not account for two rather important variables: cosmological developmental phases and time (see Cirkovic, "The Temporal Aspect of the Drake Equation and SETI").

More specifically, it does not take into consideration such factors as the age of the Galaxy, the time at which intelligence first emerged, or the presence of physiochemical variables necessary for the presence of life (such as metallicity required to form planets). The equation assumes a sort of cosmological uniformity rather than a dynamic and ever changing universe.

For example, the equation asks us to guess the number of Earth-like planets, but it does not ask us when there were Earth-like planets. And intelligence itself may have been present as long as 2 to 4.5 billion years ago.

The Galaxy's extreme age and the potential for intelligence to have emerged at disparate points in time leaves an absurdly narrow window for detecting radio signals. The distances and time-scales in question are mind-boggingly vast. SETI, under its current model, is conducting an incredibly futile search.

Detecting ETI's

Which leads to the next problem, that of quantifying the number of radio emitting civilizations. I'm sure that back in the 1960's it made a lot of sense to think of radio capability as a fairly advanced and ubiquitous means of communication, and by consequence, an excellent way to detect the presence and frequency of extraterrestrial civilizations.

But time has proven this assumption wrong. Our radio window is quickly closing and it will only be a matter of time before Earth stops transmitting these types of signals -- at least unintentionally (active SETI is a proactive attempt to contact ETI's with radio signals).

Due to this revelation, the entire equation as a means to both classify and quantify certain types of civilizations becomes quite meaningless and arbitrary. At best, it's a way of searching for a very narrow class of civilizations under very specific and constrained conditions.

Rather, SETI should continue to redefine the ways in which ETI's could be detected. They should try to predict future means of communication (like quantum communication schemes) and ways to identify these signals. They should also look for artificial objects such as megascale engineering and artificial calling cards (see Arnold, "Transit Lightcurve Signatures of Artificial Objects").

The future of advanced intelligence

Although possibly outside the auspices of this discussion, the Drake Equation does not account for the presence of post-radio capable civilizations, particularly post-Singularity machine intelligences. This is a problem because of what these types of civilizations might be capable of.

The equation is used to determine the number of radio capable civilizations as they conduct their business on their home planet. Again, this is a vary narrow view of ETI's and the space of all possible advanced civilizational types. Moreover, it does not account for any migratory tendency that advanced civs may have.

The Drake Equation does not tell us about exponential civilizational growth on account of Von Neumann probe disbursement. It does not tell us where advanced ETI's may be dwelling or what they're up to (e.g. Are they outside the Galaxy? Do they live inside Jupiter Brains? Do they phase shift outside of what we regard as habitable space? etc.). This is a serious shortcoming because the answers to these questions should help us determine not just where we should be looking, but they can also provide us with insight as to the makeup of advanced intelligence life and our own potential trajectory.

In other words, post-Singularity ETI's may represent the most common mode of existence for late-stage civilizations. And that's who we should be looking for rather than radio transmitting civs.

Are we alone?

Michael Crichton once put out a very weak argument against the Drake Equation. He claimed that SETI was a religious endeavor because it was a search for imaginary entities. He is wrong, of course; we should most certainly search for data where we think we might find it. I believe, despite the low odds, that it is reasonable to assume that our search for life on other planets is warranted. Even a negative result can be meaningful.

Consequently, SETI should keep listening, but expect to hear nothing. If we should suddenly hear something from the depths of space, then we will have to seriously re-evaluate our assumptions.

At the same time we should find better ways to detect advanced life and tweak the Drake Equation in such a way as to account for the missing variables and factors I mentioned earlier.

Again, and more generally, we should probably adopt the contact pessimist's frame. Back in the 60's and 70's, when the contact optimists like Sagan, Shklovskii and Drake ruled the Earth, it was not uncommon to think that N in the equation fell somewhere between 10x6 to 10x9.

These days, in the post Tipler and Hart era of astrosociobiology, cosmologists and astrobiologists have to take such factors into consideration as Von Neumann probes, the Fermi Paradox, the Rare Earth Hypothesis, stronger variants of the anthropic principle and catastrophism.

Put another way, as we continue to search for advanced ETI's, and as we come to discover the absurdity of our isolation here on Earth, we may have no choice but to accept the hypothesis that advanced life does not venture out into space for whatever reason (the most likely being self-destruction).

Our other option is to cross our fingers and hope that something radical and completely unpredictable lies on the other side of the technological Singularity.

Amazing images of lost South American tribe

Anthropologists recently conducted a fly-by over a tribal village in the Envira rain forest near the Brazilian-Peruvian border. It is strongly suspected that these Amerindians have never made contact with the modern world.

Assuming this is not a hoax or error of some sort, the captured images are nothing short of incredible -- as if the anthropologists had traveled back in time. During the course of the fly-by (done by plane) the team was able to observe living arrangements, work areas, gardens, and even behavior.


After its first pass, when the plane returned an hour later, the tribe was ready having painted their bodies red and brandishing their weapons. Some were painted in black. The aboriginals were undoubtedly confused by the plane, probably figuring it was some sort of large creature or spirit.


Direct contact with the tribe was never a consideration; a number of anthropologists hope that tribes like this one remain untouched.


According to Miriam Ross of Survival International, a group that works to protect the world's remaining indigenous peoples, "These tribes represent the incredible diversity of humankind. Unless we want to condemn yet more of the earth's peoples to extinction, we must respect their choice. Any contact they have with outsiders must happen in their own time and on their own terms."


Aside from the fear of tampering with a primitive society, the risk of transmitting diseases is significant; these people have virtually no immunities and would likely be hit hard.


"These pictures are further evidence that uncontacted tribes really do exist. The world needs to wake up to this, and ensure that their territory is protected in accordance with international law. Otherwise, they will soon be made extinct," says Ross.

This discovery brings to mind a number of ethical issues and considerations:

What if some of these people need medical help and medicine?

Is it ethical for us to not let them know about the greater world around them?

How could we ever have consent for contact and/or cultural uplift? Should it be assumed? Why? Why not?

Are we sufficiently justified in keeping this tribe in a zoo-like scenario?

If eventual contact is unavoidable, why wait until then? Would contact with the modern world ever be 'on their terms?'

How would we feel if we discovered that we were being observed and purposefully held-back by a more advanced civilization?

Is this the kind of cultural diversity that we want to preserve? If so, why? To what end? Does cultural diversity benefit the lost tribe?

What does it mean to say that we risk their "extinction?" Is it accurate to equate the extinction of a culture with that of a species? What are the consequences of a lost cultural mode for a) those who used to participate in it and b) for those who will never be a part of it? What are the consequences relative to the benefits of adopting a new culture?

While I don't have all the answers to these questions, I did (peripherally) address a number of them a couple of years ago in my paper, "All Together Now: Developmental and Ethical Considerations for Biologically Uplifting Nonhuman Animals."

Here's the relevant excerpt:

UPLIFT HAPPENS
Nature versus nurture

Biological uplift is one of two major ways in which an organism can be endowed with superior or alternative ways of physical or psychological functioning. Memetic uplift, or cultural uplift, is distinguished from biological uplift in that it typically involves members of the same species and does not require any intrinsic biological alteration to the organism. While biological uplift is still set to happen at some point in the future, cultural transmission and memetic uplift have been an indelible part of human history.

Memetic uplift can be construed as a soft form of uplift. Memes are by their very nature rather ethereal cultural artifacts, whereas biological uplift entails actual physical and cognitive transformation. That’s not to suggest that inter-generational non genetic transfer of information is subtle. Society and culture have a significant impact on the makeup of an individual.

That said, human psychology is powered by genetic predispositions that function as proclivity engines, endowing persons with their unique personalities, tendencies and latent abilities. This is why the environment continues to play an integral role in the development of the entire phenotype. How persons are socialized and which memes they are exposed to determines to a large part who and what individuals are as sentient, decision-making agents. Consequently, people are constrained and moulded in a nontrivial way by their culture-space. Humans have moved beyond their culturally and phenotypically primitive Paleolithic forms owing to the influence of an advanced culturally extended phenotype and the subsequent rise of exosomatic minds and bodies.

An Example of Memetic Uplift

One of the most striking examples of memetic uplift was the colonization of the Americas by the Europeans. From a macrohistorical perspective, the clash of European and indigenous American civilizations was one between a post-feudal monarchist society and a Stone Age culture. The wide technological and cultural gap separating the two societies gave the Europeans a considerable edge in their ability to successfully wage an invasion that resulted in the embedding of their political, economic, and religious institutions on the continent. The Europeans were also proactive about “civilizing” aboriginal peoples -- in some cases forcing them to attend English schools or converting them to Christianity. Today, very few aboriginals, if any, are able to maintain a lifestyle that even modestly resembles life in pre colonial times. The colonization of the Americas resulted in the emergence of an entirely new set of cultures.

This period of history was traumatic in a real sense and it is often considered one of the more regrettable periods of human history. Yet the episode raises considerable food for thought and the opportunity for some thought experiments. Would it have been ethical to allow the aboriginals to continue living a Stone Age life? Assuming this is truly an example of cultural uplift, in which ways was it a success and in which a failure? These are difficult questions with complex answers. However, as history has shown, the intermingling and assimilation of disparate cultures was and is an indelible part of the human condition. Information swapping is a developmental reality that has been largely unavoidable.

Conceptions of progress and the rise of cultural relativism

The European colonization of the Americas, along with other similar episodes, is an extremely sensitive area of debate, often leading to discussions that skirt the fringes of acceptability in terms of political correctness.

Part of the problem is the rise of cultural relativism, particularly as it as it pertains to the assessment of ancient life and how it compares to modernity. Objective assessment is often difficult, in part the result of the romantic perceptions many people carry of pre-civilizational existence and the cynical take some have in regards to modern life. Factors contributing to this sentiment include the disruptive nature of technological advance on individuals and cultures, the failed totalitarian experiments of the 20th century, the two catastrophic world wars, the rise of apocalyptic threats, and the calamitous effects of modern society on the environment.

Driving this negative view of modern society even further is the prevailing pseudohistorical romanticization of primitive life evident in popular culture and perpetuated by a number of intellectuals. What the biblical "Garden of Eden" and Rousseauian "noble savage" myths often fail to take into account, however, is how nasty, brutish and short life used to be. A strong case can be made that social and technological progress happens for a reason, namely the steady improvement of conditions and the pursuit of a more dignified and fulfilling life for individuals. Humanity is a self-domesticating species. Virtually all episodes in which primitive cultures are influenced by more advanced ones represent precursors to the biological uplift of highly sapient nonhuman species.

Read the entire paper.

Growing Pains

Via Andart (Anders called it The Tree and the Singularity) via Digital Urban.

What I've been reading: 2008-05-30

• Where's the beef? Try the lab. (CS Monitor)
  Researchers attempt to make meat without killing livestock.
• Posthumans, Rise Up And Destroy Hollywood! (io9)
  Why is Hollywood trying to poison everybody against posthumans? Whenever you see someone going beyond standard-issue humanity in movies or TV, it's portrayed as monstrous and evil.
• Vegetarian is not vegan (The Red Scare)
  PETA claims to be an animal rights organization. Why are they claiming Oprah, who is very publicly going vegan for 21 days, is trying a "vegetarian diet?"
• The Heirs of Prometheus (Athena Andreadis)
  Ode to our previous Mars accomplishments.

What I've been reading: 2008-05-29

• Oral is Normal (William Saletan - Slate Magazine)
  The normalization of oral sex.
• All on the mind (The Economist)
  Prepare for drugs that will improve memory, concentration and learning.
• Monkeys Control a Mechanical Arm With Their Thoughts (NYT)
  Two monkeys with tiny sensors in their brains have learned to control a prosthetic arm with only their thoughts, using it to reach for and grab food and even to adjust for the size and stickiness of morsels when necessary.
• Seeking answers to asteroid deflection (Science Blog)
  An Asteroid Deflection Research Center (ADRC) has been established on the Iowa State campus to bring researchers from around the world to develop asteroid deflection technologies.
• Should the Government Make Us Happy? (Miller-McCune)
  In Europe and elsewhere, governments are using ideas from the new science of well-being to try to make citizens more content. Will America follow their lead?
• Lotus Therapy (NYT)
  Mindfulness Meditation, Based on Buddha's Teachings, Gains Ground With Therapists.
• Mashed Frontier Airline safety rules (Boing Boing)
  Funny -- you'll want to see this.
• Commercial DNA Testing Has Pitfalls (NYT)
  The deciphering of the human genome has prompted a number of entrepreneurs to cash in on people's genetic concerns.

Reaction to the Phoenix parachute photo

"Man, we've got Mars so heavily instrumented that a surveyor in Martian orbit caught the polar lander *on its way in*." -- Bruce Sterling

"See that thing in this image that looks like a Martian vehicle descending by parachute to the surface of Mars? That's the Phoenix lander, captured in mid-drop, still glowing from entry into the atmosphere, by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. How badass awesome is it to be a human? Super badass awesome." -- Cory Doctorow

"That is exactly what you think it is: Phoenix descending to the Martian surface underneath its parachute. This incredible shot was taken by the HiRISE camera on board the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. You can easily see the ‘chute, the lander (still in its shell) and even the tether lines!

Think on this, and think on it carefully: you are seeing a manmade object falling gracefully and with intent to the surface of an alien world, as seen by another manmade object already circling that world, both of them acting robotically, and both of them hundreds of million of kilometers away.

Never, ever forget: we did this. This is what we can do." -- Phil Plait

"OMG!! Parachute!!! Photo!!!!!" -- Emily Lakdawalla

"Whoa." -- me

Freeman Dyson on the 'religion of environmentalism'

Physicist Freeman Dyson reviews A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies and Global Warming: Looking Beyond Kyoto in the New York Times Review of Books.

Says Dyson,

"All the books that I have seen about the science and economics of global warming, including the two books under review, miss the main point. The main point is religious rather than scientific. There is a worldwide secular religion which we may call environmentalism, holding that we are stewards of the earth, that despoiling the planet with waste products of our luxurious living is a sin, and that the path of righteousness is to live as frugally as possible. The ethics of environmentalism are being taught to children in kindergartens, schools, and colleges all over the world.

Environmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion. And the ethics of environmentalism are fundamentally sound. Scientists and economists can agree with Buddhist monks and Christian activists that ruthless destruction of natural habitats is evil and careful preservation of birds and butterflies is good. The worldwide community of environmentalists—most of whom are not scientists—holds the moral high ground, and is guiding human societies toward a hopeful future. Environmentalism, as a religion of hope and respect for nature, is here to stay. This is a religion that we can all share, whether or not we believe that global warming is harmful.

Unfortunately, some members of the environmental movement have also adopted as an article of faith the belief that global warming is the greatest threat to the ecology of our planet. That is one reason why the arguments about global warming have become bitter and passionate. Much of the public has come to believe that anyone who is skeptical about the dangers of global warming is an enemy of the environment. The skeptics now have the difficult task of convincing the public that the opposite is true. Many of the skeptics are passionate environmentalists. They are horrified to see the obsession with global warming distracting public attention from what they see as more serious and more immediate dangers to the planet, including problems of nuclear weaponry, environmental degradation, and social injustice. Whether they turn out to be right or wrong, their arguments on these issues deserve to be heard."

What I've been reading: 2008-05-25

• Beyond Belief (The Nation)
  Religious freedom protects one's right to believe, but too often it has been interpreted as doing no more than that, and not just by sleepy executives who prefer golf and war to the subtleties of civil liberties.
• Cryonics movement leader deanimates (Accelerating Future --> Miami Herald)
  The Plantation psychologist was a funny guy who was serious about life after death.
• Is Aging Itself A "Disease"? (Anne Corwin - Existence is Wonderful)
  I now recognize...why the rhetorical device of "aging as disease" bothers some people.
• A Stroke Leads a Brain Scientist to a New Spirituality (NYT)
  Jill Bolte Taylor was a neuroscientist working at Harvard's brain research center when she experienced nirvana.
• Disgraced Human Cloning Scientist to Hawk Dog-Copies Instead (io9)
  BioArts International, a biotech company in California announced this week that they're partnering with South Korean cloning expert (and fraudster) Hwang Woo-Suk to deliver dog copies to the five highest bidders in their pet-cloning auction.
• Japanese super-thief uses GPS to steal rental cars (Engadget)
  The man -- a former auto factory worker -- used two ex-wives to rent the cars, and would then make copies of the keys and install GPS units or cellphones with GPS capabilities inside the vehicles.
• Unusual penetrating brain injuries (Neurophilosophy)
  Some of the more unusual penetrating brain injuries that I stumbled across while performing a quick search for the one above, starting with the least unusual, a self-inflicted nail gun injury.
• Where Are My Cybernetic Implants? (io9)
  As a disabled person whose body is basically falling apart (details too gross to go into), I've been wondering for a long time when I can get my cyborg transformation underway.
  

Accelerating change in effect: Blackberry on display at museum

I saw this ancient artifact on display at the Canada Science and Technology Museum in Ottawa last week.

One year ago on SentDev: How will our Universe die?

Last year at this time I tackled the question: How will our Universe die?
________________

An interesting theory has emerged which predicts that trillions of years into the future, the information that currently allows us to understand how the universe expands will have disappeared over the visible horizon. All that will remain will be "an island universe" made from the Milky Way and its nearby galactic Local Group neighbors. What's left will be a dark and lonely void.

The theory was put out by physicists Lawrence Krauss from Case Western Reserve University and Robert J. Scherrer from Vanderbilt University. Their research article, titled, "The Return of the Static Universe and the End of Cosmology," will be published in the October issue of the Journal of Relativity and Gravitation.

This brings to mind a number of different theories in the field of cosmological eschatology.

The Big Crunch

The work of Krauss and Scherrer stands in sharp contrast to another end-state theory, namely the Big Crunch. In this model, the momentum of the Big Ban will eventually wane causing the Universe to collapse in on itself. But due to the recent revelation that the Universe is not just expanding but that its expansion is speeding up, newer theories have suggested that the Universe will continue to expand forever.

The Big Rip

This has lead to some rather bizarre conclusions, including the emergence of a theory known as the Big Rip. According to this theory, the Universe will start to expand at such a rapid rate that all its elements, from galaxies to atoms, will be torn apart by the extreme expansion rate of the Universe. This is scheduled to happen about 20 billion years from now.

The force that is causing the Universe's matter to push outwards is what's known as dark energy. This is why galaxies are moving away from each other -- and why they will continue to do so until gravity will be too weak to hold them together.

Eventually, in the final months of the Universe, our solar system will be gravitationally unbound. In the last minutes, stars and planets will be torn apart. And in the Universe's final spastic salvo all atoms will be destroyed.

Heat Death

Another possibility is the Heat Death of the Universe, also known as The Big Freeze. In this model the Universe would continue to expand forever, but it would enter into a state of maximum entropy in which all matter and energy is evenly distributed; consequently, there would be no 'gradient' to the Universe -- a characteristic that is needed to sustain information processing, including life.

Other theories

Other possibilities include the False Vacuum, where the laws and constants of the Universe are subject to radical change, and various multiverse theories in which the cosmos is expressed in a infinite number of iterations for an infinity.

Another more radical possibility is that the future of the Universe will be influenced by intelligent life. Theories already exist in regards to stellar engineering -- where a local sun could be tweaked in such a way as to extend its lifespan. Future civilizations may eventually figure out how to re-engineer the Universe itself (such as re-working the constants) or create an escape hatch to basement universes.

Thinkers who have explored this possibility include Milan Cirkovic, John Smart, Ray Kurzweil, Alan Guth and James N. Gardner.

Read more here.