zankaon

August 8, 2016

Biomass vs cultural ‘mass’ accumulation – any analogies?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , , , — zankaon @ 6:20 pm

Once life takes hold of a planet, might it almost be impossible to eradicate it? Mars would seem a counter example, due to limited biomass, as indicated by hemitite abundance.

For our planet, with it’s abundance of surface water, and long period of time, biomass has built up. Even extinctions might be irrelevant to such build up. For even extreme event of oceans drying up, still anaerobes in deep sediments would seem survivable in some form.

Analogously, once culture has taken hold of a planet, might it be almost impossible to eradicate; that is, if sufficient cultural ‘mass’ i.e. amount, has accumulated? Might this even be independent of it’s biological originator species? In other words, would culture continue to grow and açcumulate, of it’s own accord? Homo culturus, next in our descent? see SRM at  zankaon

For example, for so-called imachina, might a set or network continue to grow, adapt, and evolve? Might it so evolve, without being aware of it? Or would perception have to evolve; wherein perception requires judgment.

As a practical example, one might consider the perception for a driver of how fast a road curve is breaking, having been impaired by an alcoholic drink. Such judgment (i.e. perception) has been temporally ablated, rendering such biological organism to the status of just a machine, which can see, but not intrepret the situation.

For imachina, might the equivalent be to comment out a sub-routine? However perception i.e. judgment, for imachina, might seem to be modeled as involving adjustments to statistical weighing of internodes. But would this have to be of a general and widespread nature, and for a very complex imachina, or network? Is server software already rendering some judgment (rudimentary perception of a situation?) in regards to incomplete applets, yet functional because of a generic substitution?

Might it seem that culture could continue to evolve and accumulate, even without being aware of it, or of a sense of overall selfness?

Advertisements

February 15, 2012

Humanity: eventually irrelevant?

Filed under: Letters from Ionia — Tags: , — zankaon @ 7:57 pm
Classically one requires isolation for a new species to evolve. Today the trend is just the opposite, with greater mixing; hence hybrid vigor? Yet disease has had a strong selection effect in the past, as for Europe, Africa; this kind of selection indeed might not be over; such as for histocompatibility genes and there products. What about evolution of human nature; are we stuck with what we have? See Terrence Deacon’s Symbolic Species  commentary on brain and language evolution. If human nature is fixed more or less, but culture, such as technology, is exponentially (?) increasing; is there not then a time when humans might become irrelevant in comparison to sophisticated computers. Hans Morovec’s Mind Children places this at 10k years, based on processor speed. However cognition is much more complicated than that; perhaps 100k to 1M years might be a better guess when homo culturus (next in our descent; a pure cultural species?) supplants us in regards to logic, rational management of planetary resources; von Neumann probes for robotic space exploration etc. Perhaps implants for us in order to deal with the dark side of human nature; so that hatred and violence ends forever. Voila  TMM

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.