#sooooooo it might be atrophy

[androidboy]

takes testosterone to take estrogen

[aureuscor-blog]

HW 11

1) Do you think we will find intelligent life in the universe? Why or why not?

I do think we will find intelligent life in the universe. It is arrogant and unreasonable to think we are the only intelligent life in the universe. The universe is so enormous, how could there NOT be other intelligent life somewhere? It is just a matter of time. Will we find them soon? No, perhaps not. Yet, to me it is very odd that we haven’t found anything yet, or actually the other way around… that some other far more advanced alien civilization hasn’t found us yet. Or maybe they have, and we just don’t know! This question doesn’t specify a length of time, so I have to yes without a doubt we will find intelligent life. It might just take a thousand years. Or a million.

2) Suppose you had a coupon for a free robot. The catch is it can only do one thing. But you can get a robot that will do whatever one thing you like, just not anything else. What would you want your robot to do, and why?

I would want a robot that could farm enough food for my family. The only thing humans really need to survive is food. If all else failed - if I lost my job and my home, if I had no access to money, if society crumbled, if the apocalypse came and went – the only thing I would need is a ramshackle hut in a year-round warm climate near a source of fresh water and my robot could farm all the food my family needs.

3) Imagine a robotic future. Would it possible in such a future for labor to be free? For example, suppose there was a law prohibiting anyone from being paid to do work. Could the human race survive in the face of such a law?

If being “paid” only meant in money/currency/gold, not any other bartering system, then maybe… But even so, I would have to say no. There would be no incentive for anyone to want to work. Unless it was something akin to a hobby now, something someone just did because they truly loved it, why would people do anything for free? And it would certainly be a limited number of trades people did for fun, and some others I would imagine would never be done.

Also, how would people buy things? If everything were free and available to all because robots produced everything, there would still be limited resources and a finite number of robots capable of producing a finite amount of “stuff.” So who gets what? Everyone can’t have a beach front mansion. Everyone can’t have any and every thing that they want. Without a form of currency who decides who gets what? Why should someone else have more than me? Why should I have more than someone else? Yet, why should everyone be limited if more “stuff” is available?

Would everyone need to be cookie cutter-ed into sameness? Even at that degree of equality, people would still have other wants and desires. Not everyone can have a home equal to X amount of square feet per each family member in a comfortable climate. We would run out of room in “nice” weather areas. Plus, some people would prefer colder climates if they like skiing or dislike bugs. And what about areas with natural disasters? Some people would be relegated to tornado alley for lack of space elsewhere. How is that fair?

This only considers living arrangements. There are sooooooo many other things that would suffer from the same fairness problem. Evil and unjust as it may be, money keeps things in check. And there is always the American Dream (carrot) that you can always make more money and buy more “stuff.”

4) Comment on the movie Transcendant Man. What do you agree with, disagree with, what do you look forward to, are apprehensive about, etc.

Even though he was a little… out there, I am most inclined to agree with the AI Engineer. I think Kurzweil is too optimistic, and some people are too pessimistic, and there is just no way to know what to expect. Also, the technology isn’t here yet for the kinds of things Kurzweil thinks are going to be possible. The neurobiologist made some compelling points as well. Kurzweil may be a very accurate future predictor, but he doesn’t know neurobiology. The brain just doesn’t work like “regular” technology. I don’t believe we will ever be able to make true artificial intelligence. The idea of enhancing ourselves has merit, however. And that I would be very interested in! I would absolutely relish the ability to integrate a computer with my brain to be smarter. And just think what the human race could accomplish if everyone were a genius! Not to mention the medical implications. I don’t know how I feel about the idea of immortality for all, but to be able to live longer, and always be healthy  - no more sickness, no more suffering and pain – that is an incredibly worthy goal to which to aspire. Overall, I think Kurzweil is an extremely intelligent man who has invented some amazing things and helped many people along the way. However, he is led by his emotions and wishful thinking with regards to immortality and merging with computers. It is unfortunate that his Dad passed away when he was so young (22ish?), but he is grasping at straws to bring him back from the dead while simultaneously trying to keep himself alive forever. I don’t think either will happen.

5) Create at least half of a first draft, or whatever is appropriate, of your presentation. (This is in contrast to your paper or other project.) For example, you could create some slides. If this requirement does not fit your situation, do something else equivalent, and explain what you did.

I made 15 powerpoint slides (with animations) for demonstrating the science in my story. I really wanted to include some drawings, but I have not had much time to sketch anything out. I am considering purchasing some relevant images from shutterstck etc to include. Although, it is not imperative that I illustrate every part of the story. Then I just need to record myself reading and it’s done. I am so excited - it’s turning out so well!

6) (Grad students only) continue with the book you obtained. Read the next 20 pages. State the book title, author, and page numbers you have read. Then, discuss those pages. Explain what you agree with, disagree with, and how your views compare with those of other reviewers on Amazon or elsewhere.

This week, I read pages 154-178 in Michio Kaku’s Physics of the Impossible: A Scientific Exploration into the World of Phasers, Force Fields, Teleportation, and Time Travel on Starships.

It is funny to read this now because quite a bit of my research for my project touched on some of the same topics – solar sails, nanoships, and a space elevator. Kaku’s discussion on these topics pretty much mirrors everything I read. The only novel thing he suggested was using the nanoships to push the solar sails. I hadn’t come across this idea in any of my research.

Kaku begins the chapter discussing the eminent demise of the Earth, as well as the rest of the solar system, when the sun burns it all up. This struck me as funny too when I read it because we just read Asimov’s The Last Question. Of course, the situation itself isn’t funny… just the timing.

He also discusses the dangers of space travel – muscle atrophy and nutrient deficiency, meteors, and radiation – and the idea of suspending humans during space travel. The latter touched on the problems with cryogenics too. I didn’t know freezing our brain isn’t actually a feasible way to “come back” someday. As Kaku explains, ice crystals can destroy cell walls!

I still agree mostly with positive reviewers of this book. And in this case, I very highly disagree with the negative reviews that complained of not enough actual physics. This chapter is one I am glad didn’t have more science. I am sure I wouldn’t have understood any of it! The light, casual conversation about these topics was perfect for me.