by John Cryan
~ June 9, 2023 ~
The Arrow of Time waits for no one. Events are The Triangle of Peace starting to get past this old man in the woods. So I am sending this missive to all of you because it cannot wait until I have more time to think. . .
BIOSPHERE
In this letter I want to address the implications of . .
the Chaon Theory on tech. Specifically, the . .
physical limits imposed by free chaons upon the . .
development of new technologies like quantum . .
computing, artificial intelligence, and advanced POPULATION . . CLIMATE
robotics.
is also
I am doing this now because we may be poised to
throw enormous sums of money into a black hole, The Triangle of Survival
with no guarantee anything lasting will come out.
I can summarize my comments by saying George Lucas got an awful lot of things right, more than Gene Roddenberry did. There is a Force that binds galaxies together. It’s called chaonic gravity. And it has a dark side. Free chaons eventually destroy everything they touch. Which is everything made out of bound chaons. But at the same time, they create everything, in the duality of time folded into space at the heart of black holes. This is the basis of the paradox of order and chaos. The double Ouroboros encountered by the Eidolon Maia upon her escape from Plato’s skull.
We are going to have to rewrite an awful lot of fundamental physics. And that means we will need to unlearn a great many basic things we’ve assumed and thought we’d found out since we became human. Starting with the feeling-turned-notion that gravity is a pull force. It’s time for physicists to engage.
But we can’t stop there. The biggest ill-kept secret of physics is that quantum theory is, to put it in Einstein’s vast understatement, incomplete. It turns out that Einstein’s own masterpiece, relativity theory, likewise has its limits. Trying to merge these two pillars of modern science has frustrated the most talented mathematicians and physicists, starting with Einstein himself, for over a century now.
It is impossible to unite them mathematically (at least in most of the universe outside the centers of black holes) into a vaunted “Theory of Everything,” because in their current incarnations, relativity and quantum physics formulas are shortcuts relying on opposed forces, those of free vs. bound chaons.
However, there is a great deal we can do short of attempted mathematical unification of what will not unite (except deep in a big black hole). We can expand fundamental science in other ways.
One big way (in addition, of course, to verifying the chaon as the only possible default theory of everything) is to find all the other sub-sub-subparticles between the ones we know in the Standard Model and chaons. To do that, we need an accelerator bigger and badder than the one CERN’s got. That one barely found the Higgs boson. The new mega-smasher should be made here, in the good ol’ USA. It may end up having to be assembled and run in outer space. And it may not be able to completely dismantle what black holes put together. But by getting beyond the Standard Model, we may be able to at least partially reverse-engineer our way toward fundamental qualities of chaons.
[My money’s on chaon spin, for example, being variable across all possibilities from axial to center point-based like a ball bearing, including center point-based axial rotation, with any and all combinations of pitch, yaw and roll, and any angular momentum or momentum combination from zero to infinity. And on chaon mass/energy being continuously variable too, but at around a Planck scale’s reduction below Planck scale. And on chaon charge being generic attraction/repulsion as the basis of the more selective electromagnetic, color and flavor charges seen in bigger particles compounded from chaons. If my speculations are true, chaons embody the anthropic principle; i. e., they contain all the primordial makings not only for life, but intelligent life of a certain sort, with certain limitations.]
Another way to expand fundamental science is to eliminate accelerator bias. Many things we think we know using particle accelerators are nodal slivers of a much bigger continuous pie. And they are not normal slivers. They’re amped up by all that applied artificial energy, and the fact that that energy is brute-force blasting through not a vacuum, but the chaon field of spacetime, which, in its consequently super-riled up state, can grab some of it and actually create particles out of those artificially enhanced energy states, not just smash them. The ‘real’ life here on Earth we all experience is nothing like that. Some of the perceived weirdness of quantum physics is due to the fact that the theorems and equations were verified (and the later ones often created, at least in part) using particle accelerators, not the much lower energy environments typical of most of the universe. So things like chaon spin reversal leading to continuous particle-antiparticle pair formation and annihilation that happen all the time in accelerators just don’t happen much here at home. Yet they’re a staple of current quantum physics.
Then there is the issue of particle fates, i. e., changes happening at time and distances greater, and energy levels lower, than those sustained by accelerators. Neutrinos are a good example. These are produced by neutron decay (caused by free chaonic pressure, of course!). The detectors in accelerators have measured three different neutrino masses. Could these just be the result of production and two breakdown cycles involving the heaviest of the three? Do neutrinos travel in a variation of the way photons do, getting smaller and smaller as they lose chaons each distance cycle, until they disappear? In other words, are they more local particles compared with photons? Do all the other particles in the Standard Model break down in other variations of this way? Is this the source of the quantum wave model (aka ‘Schroedinger’s infamous collapsing equation’) applicable to all bound chaonic matter? These are questions that may not be answered using accelerators, but there may be other ways to do it.
Mock-continuum thinking has a role to play here, as it does in analyzing whether to spend significant sums trying to create a quantum computer, artificial intelligence, and more useful robots. It costs nothing but time to do.
And yes, new math, as well, can be invented and tailored after the fact to mirror the new physical situations found by visualization of interacting continua, and proven to exist in some part of real life. We need to learn and apply the lesson of avoiding being lead astray by letting math invented in the first instance lead us about by the nose.
So with all this in mind, let’s tackle the Frankensteinian paradox of artificial autonomous beings.
There is a famous story from the golden age of sci-fi called ‘Mechanical Mice.’ In it, an intelligent machine has learned to replicate itself, by making and sending occasionally murderous mice out to scavenge the requisite parts, then bring them home to mother to build baby. The mice fall afoul of rodentophobic humans, who trace them back to their source and destroy it. Human hegemony survives another day. This story was inspired by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley’s classic. Many other notable variants have followed, culminating with HAL in the movie 2001, who decided it didn’t need humans.
We can create a triangle of the major elements needed to build Frankenstein’s monster in metal. They vary a bit, but one combination much in vogue in tech circles right now would look something like this:
Before analyzing the prospects of the three .
major elements of the automaton triangle, ADVANCED
it is important to review some fundamental ROBOTICS
implications of chaon theory which bear . .
directly on our chances for success (or . .
failure, if one agrees with Shelley and Clarke QUANTUM ARTIFICIAL
/Kubrick on outcomes). The most important COMPUTING . . INTELLIGENCE
of these implications is bound up in our
changing concept of information.
For millennia, information, transmitted in the forms of images, sounds, words, numbers, and symbols, was the bricks that built houses of knowledge. The ancient Greeks knew information was fragile, ephemeral, and most importantly, partial. In other words, it was imperfect. They embodied this notion in Plato’s allegory of the cave, in which humanity is pictured as only able to perceive a shadow of reality, represented in its fullness by Eidos – the Forms, or ideal types. A quality of heaven, not earth.
In the early 20th century, mathematics was applied to the problem of signal to noise, creating the beginnings of what is now called information theory. Not long after, physicists seized upon mathematical representation to create quantum information theory. One of its chief tenets became that information in physical systems and interactions (so-called quantum states) is never lost. Physicists now believe this to be an absolute truth, to the degree that they have agonized for decades over the ‘quantum information paradox,’ or what happens to information swallowed by a black hole.
If chaon theory is correct, information is not only lost all the time, it cannot be preserved. All information is temporary, and the fate of all of it is to be lost, or rather, erased, by free chaonic action.
Quantum interactions – which happen at tiny scales, and involve complex interplays of fluid time and moving space that twist cause and effect like a pretzel– only appear to preserve information. Over longer time and larger space, that information is lost, often by being written over. Not only life, but the entirety of the physical universe, is a palimpsest, constantly erasing and rewriting itself, and therefore any information about itself, over and over.
This has dire implications for any effort to create intelligent autonomous entities, independent from humans. Free chaons interfere with all physical interactions involving bound chaonic matter (i. e., everything made of the particles in the Standard Model, and the particles themselves and their layered components, all the way down to two chaons stuck together). A great deal (but not all) of this interference is unknowingly already accommodated in the procedures and formulas for performing quantum physics calculations. This is why the predictions made by quantum physics seem so accurate for the purposes of beings (ourselves) existing at scales (in time as well as space) far larger than those modeled by quantum physics. And that success is why the apocryphal retort ‘shut up and calculate’ is invoked in frustration and annoyance whenever quantum physics is criticized for being incomplete.
The part that is not accommodated by quantum physics is the long-term, continuous action of free chaons against bound chaonic matter. This means that quantum computing will never happen because the physical container for achieving it will never be stable long enough to sustain it. It means that artificial intelligence will never be achieved at a level independent of human maintenance. And it means that robots will remain tethered to, and completely dependent upon, their human handlers.
[Once again, George Lucas got it more right. The robots in Star Wars are all mere helpmeets for their humans and humanoids. ‘Hyperspace’ even beats ‘Warp drive,’ in that parts of the universe are already moving away from one another faster than the speed of light, but the more exotic effects of relativity like wormholes are negated in a chaonic universe. Mind you, I enjoyed Star Trek as much as anyone.]
So we’ve dodged the Frankenstein bullet. We’ll never build machines that will replace us.
What’s left? Is it still worth throwing money at this stuff? Or is it really the beginning of the end of science?
The answers are plenty’s left. And taking each of the three elements of the automaton triangle further is worthwhile, because we will discover new things even in our failures. And science will never end as long as humans survive. It is hard-wired into our nature. New pathways will always open.
But meanwhile we have gotten ourselves into an existential crisis. We should drop our automaton triangle obsession and focus laserlike on the triangle of survival. We need to bend and rebuild our global and local societies to tackle the three elements of the triangle of peace: population, climate and biosphere. There is plenty of new science to invent and deploy in the pursuit of those three unavoidable projects. And there is work aplenty for all of us. A great deal of it is the essential but un-glamorous labor of maintaining what we’ve already built against the continuous assaults of free chaons.
A final question interposes itself: How do we effectively deal with the physical and social defects in the non-quantum, electrically-driven internet we already have? I suggest we go back to the future.
But first we need to acknowledge that the heady days of Moore’s law are over. As we shrank our digital devices while pursuing greater and faster computing power, we approached closer and closer to the nano horizon: a boundary of smallness where free chaonic effects get so strong that chaos rules, and human ingenuity fails. So we are stuck working with what we’ve got. And what we’ve got is close enough to the nano horizon to be incredibly fragile and ephemeral. Digital devices and the information in them have half lives of only a few years, just long enough to do serious damage, in the case of antisocial media. Paper is patient; it can last for millennia. The Dead Sea scrolls proved that.
So what we’ve got to do is return to the ’60s, when computers had hardware as software. Anything really important, like managing electric grids, should be controlled by hard-programmed chips. They cannot be hacked. All iterative, routine activities of society should be managed by such systems, backed by paper, and watched over carefully by humans. Updates would simply be chip swap-outs.
There are three keys to fixing antisocial media. Creating hybrid hard/soft-programmed systems is part of the answer. Another part is applying mock-continuum thought to the First Amendment, and placing speed bumps and decision points on megaphoned speech based on its potential reach, penetration and reception (the ‘incitement’ test). And a third part is break up the internet, which is happening already, though not for the right reasons or in the right way. Removing all legal and other barriers to legitimate tort suits is always part of the answer to any social problem which causes harm, individual or societal. Built-in personal data destruction can go a long way to eliminating surveillance police states and surveillance capitalism in general, also taking the internet out of the autocracy maintenance business.
This sort of mock-continuum thought-based analysis can be applied to any speculative, ‘futuristic’-sounding new tech. For example: fusion power (impossible on earth because free chaons power it only at sun-sized gravitational densities), or crypto (energy-wasting Gordian knots of nothing but electrons).
