On the Precipice of Transformation

Photo of Wendell Lim Ph. D.

Programming Immune Cells has seemingly reached a tipping point in which viable business models are popping up, a thrilling development when one considers the possibility of eliminating many of the deadly diseases that shorten human life. We may stand at the start of a massive new industry, one that consumes traditional healthcare practices while lengthening and improving life on the planet.

Consider the early development of software languages, like A-0 and Speedcode, in the 1940’s and 1950’s, and how much they matured over the next six or seven decades. Humanity may evolve dramatically over the next few decades as increasingly sophisticated genetic programming languages are developed, coupled with quantum computing, essentially transforming organic life into a more synthetic life form.

At the other end, AI continues to push the bounds of human reasoning, developing its own unique thought patterns. As AI matures and grows in complexity, the intelligence and even creativity of AI likely challenges the dominance of organic intelligence.

Will there be a type of arms race between organic and synthetic intelligence, with both evolving and transforming in ways unimaginable to us today?

If yes, what lies on the other side of this transformation? A Utopia in which we transform into a higher collective consciousness, free from material constraints and desires? A Matrix-like farm of organic material plugged into a network, or a morally corrupt society, as laid out in Evolved, pressured to advance in order to overcome its own self-created crises?

 

Question of Consciousness Rising

Stanley Bing @thebingblog published Immortal Life, in which an ancient tech mogul battles with a young new body to inhabit. The idea is an early version of the Superconscious – Supraconscious dilemma Amos must confront in Evolved. Will read!

Dark Matters

Not sure if this normal, but it seems natural. I find myself looking at the world around us through the prism of the world I created in Evolved. Do other authors do this? Maybe it is my way of making subjective sense of recent events in France and the Middle East.

In Evolved there are extra dimensions, textured branes and dark matter in the universe. All of these aspects have an element of the possible based on current scientific theory. In such a rich world there are limitless ways to think about space travel and something greater.

Lately dark matter has been receiving more attention, as particle physicists like Dr. Lisa Randall publish new books on the subject. Dark matter should really be thought of as “transparent matter” since it does not interact with light and therefore we can not detect it directly. Instead scientists have observed its gravitational impact on the cosmos, resulting in fairly strong evidence of its existence.

What is most startling about dark matter is that it is all around us. In fact, about 85% of what surrounds us is likely dark matter. Billions of dark matter particles pass though us every second. Do other laws of physics exist for dark matter? Likely. Does this mean there could be life in the form of dark matter? Makes for fertile writing material, no?

So, getting back to my point. If there is dark matter all around us, in us, and there are likely extra dimensions around us, even in us – are we part of something greater that we do not recognize because our senses are limited?

The events in France had me pondering these questions as everyone was asking, why? Why would a religion willfully and deliberately kill innocent people? In some shallow respects I understand their “eye for an eye” argument. We have killed innocents by dropping imprecise bombs in the Middle East. War is nothing but the escalation of tit-for-tat.

But how does God play into this? Radical Islam seems to suggest a reward system for killing infidels who do not worship the proper God in the proper way, like God moves around and doles out specific prizes.

But, and this is where Evolved comes in, if God is everywhere and in every moment in time, it seems silly to think of God as moving closer. And how does targeted killing of a fellow person possibly get rewarded? I suppose I could turn the question around on the west and find our reasons wanting as well. Are we simply preserving our capitalistic society so we can accumulate more objects using Middle East energy sources? Our materialistic incentive structure drips with blood as well. Maybe we’ve just built up enough buffers (fighting happens overseas with a separate military, and multiple economic transactions exist between oil and our new car) to protect our moralistic compass from disturbance.

What I believe is that God is a constant. God is everywhere, all the time. It is up to us to open up to him, connect. The cardinal sins are simply telling us that these actions close us off from God, distract us from knowing. It really isn’t so complicated. No need to try to control the world around you. Just simply learn to control yourself, and whatever dark matter exists within you.

If science struggles to fully explain only 15% of the matter that surrounds us, all of us should maybe humble ourselves and open up to bigger possibilities.

Water as Fuel in Near Future?

While writing Evolved I have had my ears wide open about novel new energy sources. After all, thrusting a good portion of mankind to far away planets (as I do in Evolved) is simply not feasible with current energy sources.

Recently an old friend mentioned his company was getting close to making water into a viable energy source. When I asked on what scale he shrugged and replied any scale and that he actually felt bad for current dependents of oil and gas. He would not disclose anymore than that since the company is currently in the development stage and working on a round of financing.

My old life as a Chartered Financial Analyst working on Wall Street roared to life and merged into my writing self. Game changing technology? I’m in! After living in San Francisco through the dotcom era, I have experience with how thrilling these paradigm shifts can be.

Now the idea of using water as an energy source isn’t new. Hydrogen has long been recognized as a viable and plentiful energy source. The problem has always been how to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen in an energy-efficient manner. A quick search on the internet showed that researchers have been experimenting with bacteria and solar-thermal techniques. The U.S. Navy has also been doing its own research into the matter.

Maybe fate is guiding us, melting the oceans into a readily available supply of water to fuel our interstellar aspirations. If so, traditional oil and gas companies will have a tough go, as will oil exporting nations. But, maybe humanity will be saved, or even enabled to spout into space. Fun stuff to flip over in the mind.

Changing Seasons

All Because of You

My life is changing
The life that I’ve had
It’s changing forever
But no need to be sad

It’s time to move on
Time to start over new
I jumped from the nest
With some trouble, I flew

I might hit a few bumps
Maybe make a wrong turn
But all of those troubles
Are lessons I’ll learn

So as my life changes
I hope that you’ll see
It’s you who I’ll credit
For the life that I lead

Source: http://www.familyfriendpoems.com/poem/all-because-of-you#ixzz3owRi25Ju

You are ever present of the changing seasons when living in New England. The Fall is filled with glorious yellows, reds and oranges as the leaves change color and cover the ground. A frost on the grass reminded us this morning that winter is not far behind.

A transformation has been happening within me as well, complete with explosive colors and chills. The world around me seems to mirror what is happening inside, an odd meeting of the objective and subjective I discussed in my last post.

My life is about to change course, I know. Towards what, I’m not exactly sure.

The first sign was this morning in church. A beloved minister is moving on to another church. The sermon focused on change, and how it has led to good things.

The next mile post is later this week, when we travel to a memorial service for a man who was a father figure to me. I have the honor of master of ceremonies, which scares me more than a little. Holding it together will be hard because imagining this world without him is difficult. A change in my reality.

The following week I begin a new job, my first real job in about eight years. It is only part time and flexible, allowing me to drop-off and pick-up my daughters from school and all their activities. At this point in my life, flexibility to spend time with my girls is what I value most. Shed what is hindering you and protect what is important.

The new job is something I believe in, something important in my eyes, something that complements the rest of my life. The extra money will take some of the financial pressure off my wife and provide a source of income to cover publishing expenses. For if there is one thing I’ve learned so far about the business of books, it is expensive to launch yourself. (Barriers to entry, as my old CFA self would call it)

Driven is not the right word to describe the change. More openness to it. Allowing it to happen. Not trying to direct it so much as listening intently to where the signs point.

So a new road with many new people to meet and understand. I look forward to meeting You in my future, and experiencing the on-going change.

Metaphysical “Choices” – Consciousness, Part 2

Can a silicon-based machine achieve consciousness? It is becoming an increasingly pressing question as scientists move closer to artificial intelligence. Yet we don’t understand our own consciousness, so how would we know? Maybe it already has happened…

We don’t understand what is consciousness, how consciousness came to exist, or why it exists. Because we don’t understand why it exists, we can’t answer whether it has any causal impact on the world. Aspects of human consciousness include:

• Consciousness appears to offer a more flexible and sophisticated control, at the expense of speed, which is important when encountering novel situations.
• It also appears to enhance social coordination through better understanding of other minded creatures.
• Consciousness may improve the unification and integration of reality, or at least the perception of the reality required for primitive survival.
• It may provide more global access to information within the brain.
• Does it enable free will? Or, just create the illusion of free will?
• Intrinsic motivation seems to be created by consciousness, or at least the perception of will.

Are all of these aspects possible within a silicon consciousness?

Another problem to consider. If consciousness is by definition subjective, then only a machine would know if it is truly conscious. This assumes objective and subjective are completely separate, with which a monism materialist might disagree (arguing the feeling of consciousness is simply the result of billions of neurons firing in a complex system).

Assuming a machine tells you it is conscious, do you believe it? A functionalist would argue “yes” since thoughts, beliefs, and even subjective states are simply functional states. A skeptic who believes there is something non-material about consciousness would simply argue the machine is a zombie, missing the essence of consciousness. Would the “conscious” silicon zombie then try to eat the skeptic’s brain? Maybe the kernel of an idea for my next book…

In an effort to understand consciousness I have been reading “Consciousness: An Introduction,” by Susan Blackmore. It offers a broad arc through research and experiments about consciousness, methodically building a case that there is little evidence supporting a dualist view of consciousness (implying humans have a soul or something other than matter that passes on). I believe she is an atheist, or someone who does not believe there is a God or gods.

Getting back to silicon-based zombies gobbling up human brains. There are several arguments why machine consciousness may ultimately prove different than human consciousness, although each are inconclusive:

1. Neurons could never be replicated by artificial means to replicate the information processing speed within the space and thermodynamic limitations, or the chemical interactions cannot be replicated to sustain the emotional response required of consciousness.
2. Consciousness requires a long period of learning, interacting with its environment. “Biological capacity to produce experiences, and these experiences only when they are felt by some human or animal agent.” (Searle, 1997)
3. Consciousness involves something greater than the parts (Holism), whether that is interpreted as a soul, a physical aspect in our universe we have yet to discover in our reality.
4. Before artificial consciousness could become a reality, a new type of physics is required to explain consciousness, including quantum entanglement and wave function collapse in a complex system.
5. A spectrum exists of consciousness, defined either by self-awareness, ability to imitate another, awareness of time, or intentionality to originate. Silicon may reach low level consciousness, but not high level.

All of this dances around the central issue, which is the gap in our understanding of consciousness. The large bulk of scientific research suggests consciousness is a product of the material activity of our minds (monism/ physicalist). But… the answers you find are determined by the questions you ask, and scientists ask decidedly objective questions. Therefore there is little surprise they arrive at objective answers.

Put differently, if scientists discovered tomorrow a reality beyond what we perceive (either quantum or cosmological), a reality the mechanisms of the mind can utilize, then all the scientific research into consciousness becomes lacking and religious teachings on consciousness again offer guideposts to follow.

In Evolved I take this path because well, science fiction is a wonderful platform to explore what could become main stream in science.

Metaphysical “Choices” – Holism

Waterspout

What are the physical laws explaining how convection ovens operate? How do hurricanes form in such a predictably orderly (and deadly) pattern? You might be surprised scientists cannot fully explain these phenomena. Thus the metaphysical topic of Holism.

Holism itself makes the basic assertion that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, implying something non-material affects the outcome of certain systems. The closely related concept of non-separability generally asserts that the state of the whole is not constituted by the states of its parts. Both terms try to address a phenomena involving the spontaneous generation of degrees of order well outside predicted causality.

Examples of holism are often found in dissipative systems, in which an open system is operating outside of thermodynamic equilibrium. Specific examples of dissipative systems include convection, turbulent flow, cyclones, hurricanes and living organisms. These systems exchange energy and entropy with their environment in order to maintain a high degree of internal order in the system.

The basic question about these dissipative systems is whether a “bottoms-up” causality drives the apparent order of the system, or do “top-down” constraints restrict the action of the system. Causality could come from the still mysterious mechanisms at the quantum level, including entanglement. Constraints could come from a physical law we have yet to discover, or influence from another undiscovered dimension(s).

Another example of holism is the observed spontaneous generation of order in computerized models of logical networks. To illustrate this example scientists use an array of light bulbs, each with only an on and off option. The array starts off in a random pattern of illumination and then evolves in steps according to some simple rules, which express the logical structure of the network. If 10,000 bulbs are in the array, a limit of about 300 states of the system is observed, instead of the trillions of possibilities. The deterministic nature of logical networks implies the observed holistic order is generated from the bottom-up, even if the phenomena can best be described from the top down.

There are multiple approaches addressing these phenomena, which include methodological, metaphysical and property/ relational holism; state, spatial and spatial-temporal non-separatism.

Why is all this important? Well, for a few reasons that impact our fundamental understanding of reality. The “open future” Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics is the reason for so many theories about holism. The alternative deterministic interpretation of Bohm explains holism due to hidden information embedded within wavelengths. So if you believe in an open, indeterminate future, then you need to explain the phenomena of holism.

Holism is also important because subjects that focus on complex systems like thermodynamics rest on assumptions about how these systems should operate. If these basic assumptions prove inaccurate, the science behind these systems may lose some of their explanatory power. Lastly, metaphysical theories about time rest partially on thermodynamic theories and thus may impact these theories as well.

I know, I’m going deep on some of this stuff but I’m seeking to understand what is real in this world, and then apply it to the world in Evolved. Since I “chose” a Bohm explanation for the world in Evolved, implying the perceived three spatial dimensions of reality are deterministic, holism is largely explained.

A Few Theories on Holism and Non-separatism

Methodological holism argues some systems are better analyzed as a whole, rather than its counter-point the more typical methodological reductionism. Scientists instinctively fall in the reductionism camp as they seek to explain the “how” of quantum physics.

Methodological Holism: An understanding of a certain kind of complex system is best sought at the level of principles governing the behavior of the whole system, and not at the level of the structure and behavior of its component parts.

Methodological Reductionism: An understanding of a complex system is best sought at the level of the structure and behavior of its component parts.

Moving past methodological arguments, metaphysical holism argues the nature of some wholes are not determined by its parts. In other words, metaphysical argues we are missing something outside our scientific theories. There are three theories as to why this may be true.

Ontological Holism: Some objects are not wholly composed of basic physical parts.

Property Holism: Some objects have properties that are not determined by physical properties of their basic physical parts.

Nomological Holism: Some objects obey laws that are not determined by fundamental physical laws governing the structure and behavior of their basic physical parts.

Assuming our existing scientific theories capture the reality of these systems, Property Holism basically argues the theories are incomplete. This approach takes us into central issues of quantum physics. Property Holism breaks down into two opposing camps:

Physical Property Determination: Every qualitative intrinsic physical property and relation of a set of physical objects from any domain D subject only to type P processes supervenes on qualitative intrinsic physical properties and relations in the supervenience basis of their basic physical parts relative to D and P.

Physical Property Holism: There is some set of physical objects from a domain D subject only to type P processes, not all of whose qualitative intrinsic physical properties and relations supervene on qualitative intrinsic physical properties and relations in the supervenience basis of their basic physical parts (relative to D and P).

There are many more theories that consider the issue from multiple angles. For further reading, I suggest reviewing Stanford’s Philosophy reference.

Metaphysical “Choices” – Philosophical Theology

As I continue to structure the metaphysical thoughts behind the world in Evolved, a useful framework has been offered in John Polkinghorne‘s book, Science and Religion in the Quest of Truth. The book is part of a science and religion discussion group offered at my Congregational Church.

A huge challenge while writing Evolved was understanding how things like quantum physics and general relativity worked. An even larger question loomed in the back of my mind, which I did not recognize until after I had finished writing. It was the question of why things worked in such a way. This led me into philosophical questions, and then into spiritual explanations.

In his book, Mr. Polkinghorne refers to Philosophical Theology, a close relation to the Philosophy of Religion. Philosophy Theology sits on top of base layer of metaphysical topics like causality and consciousness, as well as theology studies focused on deity belief systems. It is a broad term that includes most major religions, although Buddhism may fall outside its scope due its denial of a deity.

To explain Philosophy Theology differently, Dr. Polkinghorne offers a look at one form of structure within its teaching. Ian Barbour created a taxonomy of stances when considering the relationship between science and religion. The four positions are conflict, independence, dialogue and integration.

At one end, conflict encompasses individuals who deny the other side offers viable answers. An atheist writer like Lawrence Krause and the biblical inerrancy belief system of fundamental christian denominations, like Baptism and Presbyterian, would fall into the “conflict” arena. Often our science versus religion debates get high-jacked by this conflict-laden approach. However, Mr. Polkinghorne argues each side’s antagonist views are based on an apples and oranges debate. Science is asking more of a “how?” question about the world while religion is asking more of a “why?” question. Recognizing this discord helped me set aside the typically bombastic arguments coming from each side.

My writing in Evolved is much more about the hope of finding balanced integration between science and religion. Thus I am seeking at least a “dialogue” between the two sides, with the hope of finding some integration. Philosophical Theology provides a framework to find a balance, without one side dominating the other. It also sets up well for the research I have already completed into science, philosophy and the spiritual (see Metaphysical “Choices”).

Personally, by writing Evolved I have discovered I am seeking a truth about the world. What is “Real?” Science explains many things but also is fairly limited in its scope. By definition it is an objective practice, striving to figure out how things work through repeatable experiments observed by many. Yet the world we perceive is by definition subjective. We cannot truly understand how another person experiences the world, or if they are even conscious as we believe ourselves to be. One person may perceive a miracle, something that seems to violate the laws of physics. By definition, this experience is not likely repeatable and therefore objective analysis is impossible. Therefore, science discards it.

My thoughts and feelings perceive more than science can explain. The more I look inward and open myself up, the more I perceive a universe beyond the objects that surround us. The more I search for the “You” in others, the greater my understanding of reality. Buddhism strives for “emptiness,” or a lack of objects to achieve enlightenment. Can science offer answers in an existence without objects?

Metaphysical “Choices” – Consciousness

Consciousness is something we intuitively believe we understand. After all, in many ways it is who we are personally. Yet try to define it and the meaning becomes elusive. American Philosopher Thomas Nagel describes another organism as conscious when we mean “there is something it is like to be that organism… something it is like for the organism.” While there is not much agreement on a specific definition of consciousness, a rough triangulation of a definition could be consciousness is subjectivity.

In Evolved I have been wrestling with the idea of consciousness. Specifically, what does it mean to be an organic life form versus a silicon life form? In the Evolved world there are silicon people who are recognized as alive, along with all the legal rights of an organic life. This sets up an interesting tension as both sides try to define what it means to be ‘alive.’ Silicon life have dreams, emotions and a sense of ‘self.’ So what does that mean? Are they conscious? If so, how are they different?

Philosophers, scientists and psychologists have grappled with consciousness from multiple angles. Religions themselves rest on certain assumptions about consciousness, and what it means. Yet despite the extended history of human study of consciousness, we remain deeply confused by it (even if we don’t recognize our own confused state).

“For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception.” -David Hume, 1739

By approaching from the perspective of the ‘self,’ there are two basic theories: ego theorists and bundle theorists. Ego theorists believe in a continuously existing self who are subjects of experiences and who think, act and feel. Bundle theorists deny there is a self, instead arguing we are simply a collection of different perceptions that are in constant flux and movement. Buddhism denies there is a self and therefore falls into the bundle theory, while most other religions believe in either immortal souls or reincarnating spirits that fall into the ego theory.

“I am not thought, I am not action, I am not feeling: I am something which thinks and acts and feels.” -Thomas Reid, 1785

In Evolved, silicon life is most definitely in the bundled theory. Yet how does a silicon life form feel about that? Could they not believe they too have a soul, a continuity of their existence beyond their physical existence? All the perceptions they process have similar reactions as organic life. In which theory does organic life fall? Well, I can’t give away all the fun…

Approaching from another angle, there are competing theories over whether consciousness is dualism or monism. Dualism argues a part of consciousness is non-physical, creating a separation between mind and body, object and subject. Monism includes physicalism and materialism, which argues matter is the fundamental substance in nature. From a scientific perspective, dualism is a hard argument to defend. After all, it argues something mystical is going on, or at least beyond current scientific reason.

Plato used the allegory of a cave to describe consciousness while David Hume described it as a type of theater, which later Daniel Dennett rejected and called the Cartesian Theater. This concept imagines a place inside the mind where ‘I’ am, complete with a sort of mental screen or stage where contents of consciousness are presented to the mind’s eye. A similar concept is Cartesian Materialism in which the consciousness is not separate from the brain. Both concepts reflect a dualism in which there are two parts to a person, the physical and the conscious. But, Susan Blackmore explains the problem with inventing a central place in which subjectivity happens:

“So either we have to find an answer to the question, ‘how does subjective awareness arise from the objective actions of all these neurons and muscle cell?’, or we have to work out what mistake has led us into posing such an impossible question in the first place.” -Susan Blackmore, 2011

Another consideration about consciousness is whether it causes directed attention or is the effect of paying attention, or neither. Many positions today describe attention in a causal manner, similar to “the sentry at the gate of consciousness” (Adam Zeman, 2001), which implies a dualism. A similar monism causal view is “there is no conscious perception without attention.” (Mack and Rock, 1998) William James asked, “Is voluntary attention a resultant or a force?” He made a strong case for the effect side but ultimately sided with the causal on ethical grounds.

Some scientists have dived down to the quantum level (Eugene Wigner and Henry Stapp) to explain consciousness, assuming a Copenhagen-sympathetic interpretation that allows for an open future (and therefore free will). Yet the actual mechanism allowing our brains to willfully collapse a wave function, or provide true chance in the process, remains mysterious. Alternatively, one could argue a Bohm interpretation, implying a deterministic reality in which we either have no free will or our brains use a mysterious outside influence on our deterministic brains.

Could silicon produce a conscious being? Could we eventually upload our consciousness into a silicon-based computer without losing anything? So much depends on your definition of consciousness but most scientists don’t see any reason why it could not happen. Most religious leaders are appalled by the notion. What would the Buddha think of it? Would robots also strive for “emptiness” to clear out the distracting objectivity originally programmed into them?

If a robot had dreams, emotions, displayed moral behavior, could create original art pieces, and vehemently argued it had a ‘self,’ would you consider it conscious? Would it be an equal to you legally? If an organic human killed it, would it be murder with the same penalties as what we consider is murder?

All of these questions about consciousness are rich veins to mine in Evolved. Honestly, I am still changing things as I reconsider questions, find inconsistencies between my meta physical choices, and work to bring out the issues to the reader. I will probably never reach a satisfactory end point, but will I consciously accept that?

Chance – Does Humanity Have Any?

Does chance exist in our reality?

Do we live in an indeterminate universe?

Two different questions, but closely related. The first asks whether anything is truly random. The second incorporates the first but also asks whether we can actively change how the future plays out. Is there room in our universe for free will?

You might be surprised that scientists and philosophers find it quite difficult to allow an opening for chance to exist in our reality. Time is asymmetric, but just because we can’t perceive the future doesn’t mean it is random in nature. Theoretically, the laws of physics should determine how the future unfolds.

Those probabilities in quantum mechanics? In the wrong place to allow for real chance. The probabilities reflect our inability to measure effectively at the quantum level. They do not allow for random wave functions, unless one incorporates the GRW theory into the model. GRW theory implies an inherent randomness within the quantum wave functions, allowing a wave function to randomly reset itself every billion years, or so. (It also implies many dimensions exist beyond what we perceive)

So, does humanity have any chance? It would appear the answer is no, or at least an extraordinarily small degree. Does that mean we have no free will? Let’s return to that idea of extra dimensions.

String theory implies ten, or even eleven dimensions if you include time. GRW theory implies more dimensions than that. Other theories suggest we live in a multi-universe, which requires multiple dimensions. Science, and math, consistently suggests something more is going on than we perceive with our limited senses.

Do extra dimensions open up the opportunity for free will? Does consciousness use extra dimensions to change the deterministic universe we perceive? Is consciousness simply a receiver of something from extra dimensions, manipulating this reality for some greater purpose? Is life’s ability to create order in a less organized environment a hint of its higher purpose? These are the questions explored in Evolved.

When I started writing Evolved I entered through a well-defined sturdy portal with a neon light blinking “Science” above it. When the writing was finished I had unexpectedly popped out of some twisted rabbit hole into a reality well beyond what we perceive today. It is something I hope to share with the world one day.