Banner
Stephen Hawking's Final Theory On Many Worlds

Like sex, Stephen Hawking was and is mainly a cheap way to obtain publicity. They still publish...

Phil/Evo Fundaments Of Our Deceiving In Denial, Justifying With Obvious Lies II: The Very Bottom

Any justification is fundamentally deception because there is no link from fundamental meaninglessness...

Symmetry & Relativity, Sexy Virtual Reality (VR) In Modern Relativity Theory - All For Everybody

Relativity is a form of symmetry and for that reason already of fundamental importance for science...

Energy Is Not A Substance And How To Easily Understand This

Energy is not a substance, not something in the sense of “some thing”. Energy often appears...

User picture.
picture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Ilias Tyrovolaspicture for Quentin Rowepicture for Robert H Olleypicture for N. Sukumarpicture for Chris Delatorre
Sascha VongehrRSS Feed of this column.

Dr. Sascha Vongehr [风洒沙], physicist and philosopher, studied phil/math/chem/phys in Germany, obtained a BSc in theoretical physics (electro-mag) & MSc (stringtheory) at Sussex University... Read More »

Blogroll

Why should technology not go on and accelerate like it has before? Why should humanoids not get ever brighter; why should democracy not grow until true communism emerges? Techno-progressives emanate an air of renegade radicalism. They like to accuse critics of not thinking things through sufficiently and stopping at the point best befit to rationalize beliefs.


Yet both, the critics and many proponents of technological enhancement alike agree on where to stop asking: a racist ‘we (I, humans, our planet) must survive and conquer’ plus lip-service toward a pseudo-democratic doctrine so comfortably ‘coincidentally’ at the helm as we speak. As bad as that may be regarding other issues, it turns into Jules Verne stories when discussing future.

The disaster at the Daiichi nuclear power plant in Fukushima, Japan, is still unfolding. It is still not ensured that the reactors will stay under the partial control achieved. The media keep downplaying the problems, focusing on any good news it can make up: That electricity has been brought to all six reactors is “news” every day again for over a week now. The electricity, although brought in, is still neither connected to most of the reactor blocks, nor do you hear anybody asking what electricity is supposed to do with the broken equipment in those blocks.

We are developing past the merely human stage. We couldn’t stop it if we all really wanted to. Techno-future will be.


The transhumanism crowd has understood what evolution is all about while many other intellectuals still grapple with getting their head around mere old biological evolution. Evolution is true by tautology: Whatever there will be (successful, more numerous, …) in the future, will be there (successful, more numerous, …) in the future. This is the basis of what some call ‘algorithmic evolution’.

As we are already talking about light bulb jokes, the many useless comments to my rather more serious articles lately got me to compile the answer to the following question, although it is certainly not a joke:


Question: How many in favor of nuclear energy does it need to change a light bulb?

Yesterday I had to explain what a light bulb joke is - to somebody from Mongolia – they seem to not have discovered that joke yet or don’t find it funny. The joke in question was already highly on the meta level, that is, the answer was not involving a number at all and only funny if you already heard at least a few of those typical how many to screw in or change a light bulb jokes:

Question: How many Feminists does it need to screw in a light bulb?

Answer: THAT’S NOT FUNNY!

For decades we have been told that with the lessons learned from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, nuclear energy is safe. As the still unfolding mayhem at the Dai-Ichi plant in Fukushima, Japan, proves, nothing could be further from the truth.