I don't see why we would need more than we have though. The problems we have aren't ones of a "lack of ingenuity" due to a "lack of population". The problems we have are that we live in The Matrix, and all of our ingenuity is micromanaged by the PTB. If we get rid of the PTB and find value in ourselves (we understand that we are the rulers of our own lives), all the problems will take care of themselves.
Our problem is not too few people, but a few thousand too many.
Is that true, though? The people who truly advance our knowledge of the universe are quite rare, and we don’t know how to make them appear. Playing the odds by having a hundred billion times our current population spread across the galaxy seems entirely reasonable to me. Interstellar distances also prevent any form of centralized elite, as multi-year travel times demolish any attempts at centralized control.
The people who truly advance our knowledge of the universe are quite rare, and we don’t know how to make them appear
I'm not sure you fully appreciate how long we have been suppressed. The reality, the history you believe in has almost nothing to do with Reality according to my investigations. History is a lie.
Playing the odds by having a hundred billion times our current population spread across the galaxy seems entirely reasonable to me
I have no problem becoming interstellar. I think that's a great idea. By all means, be fruitful and multiply, but the suggestion to do so, without first having the capacity to expand is putting the cart before the horse.
Interstellar distances also prevent any form of centralized elite, as multi-year travel times demolish any attempts at centralized control.
I'm not entirely sure that's true. I think the whole "FTL" thing may be suppressed tech.
I'm not sure you fully appreciate how long we have been suppressed. The reality, the history you believe in has almost nothing to do with Reality according to my investigations. History is a lie.
I don't have any trouble believing this, but I'd appreciate elaboration.
I have no problem becoming interstellar. I think that's a great idea. By all means, be fruitful and multiply, but the suggestion to do so, without first having the capacity to expand is putting the cart before the horse.
We aren't short on land or resources. Earth can support something like a trillion people before we truly reach carrying capacity(at that point our waste heat gets to be greater than we can radiate into space). I don't actually want to cram a trillion people onto Earth, but there's a lot of room between 8 billion and a trillion. And we're talking about the guy who is actually making strides towards getting us into space. Anybody else I might accept that criticism, but the guy actively developing colonization rockets? Nah.
I'm not entirely sure that's true. I think the whole "FTL" thing may be suppressed tech.
Not sure why you'd think that. There are FTL theories, but they all require magical negative energy density. We don't exactly have a lot of negative energy hanging around. And that's ignoring any and every form of FTL breaking causality in half.
I don't have any trouble believing this, but I'd appreciate elaboration.
This is a tough one to get started on. Just looking at the science is probably enough for now, but if you want more specific information just ask.
Not sure why you'd think that. There are FTL theories, but they all require magical negative energy density.
Not necessarily. That is only according to GR, which is a theory based on certain axioms that are not necessarily true. We don't even have any idea of what gravity is. We say its "the deformation of spacetime due to the energy contained within the volume", but that's an axiom. What if it's really a manifestation of EM? Why not? Everything else is.
You can say, "well people have been working on it for a hundred years and that line of reasoning has borne no fruit," but once you realize that all of research has been controlled by the same entities; a single source of all scientific funding for over a century (Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford Foundations et al (which are all the same entity)), everything we think we know becomes suspect. Scientific research is a controlled entity, just like everything else.
Take a look at cold fusion research, like, really look at it. The evidence for cold fusion (now rebranded as LENR) is overwhelming. There have been experiments going on since F&P first presented their research and the results, even the devices that exist are nothing short of miraculous. Starting with Dr. Peter Hagelstein from MIT is a good entry into that rabbit hole, but I warn you, it goes deep and goes through decades of research once you begin. The tech was purposefully suppressed; of that I have no doubt. And why wouldn't it be? How can you control the world if people no longer have any need for the energy you're selling?
In addition to the problems with GR, there is the fact that QM works perfectly well as a non-local theory (see Bohmian mechanics). If both GR and QM work perfectly fine as non-local theories, why do we insist on only funding research for things that adhere to the "local" dogma?
There's also the recent videos of "UAP"s (UFOs) from the Navy. I don't know if those are real or hoax, but if real, that is obviously an ability to manipulate gravity (inertia). You can't get that type of movement from reactive propulsion.
Anybody else I might accept that criticism, but the guy actively developing colonization rockets? Nah.
When we get there, be fruitful and multiply. We are not there yet. This is nothing but an appeal to authority, not an argument.
And that's ignoring any and every form of FTL breaking causality in half.
Warp drive doesn’t break causality. The causality problems come from solutions to metrics that also require “negative energy”; like wormholes through time. As long as we adhere to closed time-like loops than that problem is a non-issue, but even that is based on our current, very limited understanding of what space and time are.
Since we really don’t have any idea what those words even mean, its difficult to come up with physics that describes them. The Truth is though, the universe is limited only by itself. It is not limited by our mathematical models of it. Those models are not reality, they are models. People so often forget that the universe doesn’t give a crap about our models. It is what it is, not what we think it is. To suggest that we have any idea of what IT is, when our models completely fail on so many levels (QM/GR incompatiblities, the de novo creation of Dark Matter and Dark Energy to fill in the gaps of GR e.g.) is the ultimate hubris and trust in falsities.
It is not me that subscribes to The Matrix, but I'll let that one go, because that is a much deeper discussion of what that really means.
Moore's law has run out (by current tech) because there is not enough room at the bottom.
We don't need more. We didn't even need more RAM. What has it really done for us? By creating a "more connected" world we are less connected to Reality than at all times previous in humanity (not counting those who have woken up in the past year).
I'm not saying it has to be that way, or that more RAM is the reason. A tool is just a tool, but the idea that "more is better" has no evidential support once you get past the point of "enough."
Lets see what we can do once enough people wake up. We have probably 4 Billion people who are completely asleep, 3 billion that are mostly asleep (but partially awake) 500 million that are half awake, and maybe a couple hundred million that are almost fully awake (at least awake enough to realize they live in The Matrix at some level).
Lets wake up those 7.8 billion to their full potential instead of trying to populate the planet to resource capacity and hope a similar percentage remain awake.
I don't see why we would need more than we have though. The problems we have aren't ones of a "lack of ingenuity" due to a "lack of population". The problems we have are that we live in The Matrix, and all of our ingenuity is micromanaged by the PTB. If we get rid of the PTB and find value in ourselves (we understand that we are the rulers of our own lives), all the problems will take care of themselves.
Our problem is not too few people, but a few thousand too many.
Is that true, though? The people who truly advance our knowledge of the universe are quite rare, and we don’t know how to make them appear. Playing the odds by having a hundred billion times our current population spread across the galaxy seems entirely reasonable to me. Interstellar distances also prevent any form of centralized elite, as multi-year travel times demolish any attempts at centralized control.
I'm not sure you fully appreciate how long we have been suppressed. The reality, the history you believe in has almost nothing to do with Reality according to my investigations. History is a lie.
I have no problem becoming interstellar. I think that's a great idea. By all means, be fruitful and multiply, but the suggestion to do so, without first having the capacity to expand is putting the cart before the horse.
I'm not entirely sure that's true. I think the whole "FTL" thing may be suppressed tech.
I don't have any trouble believing this, but I'd appreciate elaboration.
We aren't short on land or resources. Earth can support something like a trillion people before we truly reach carrying capacity(at that point our waste heat gets to be greater than we can radiate into space). I don't actually want to cram a trillion people onto Earth, but there's a lot of room between 8 billion and a trillion. And we're talking about the guy who is actually making strides towards getting us into space. Anybody else I might accept that criticism, but the guy actively developing colonization rockets? Nah.
Not sure why you'd think that. There are FTL theories, but they all require magical negative energy density. We don't exactly have a lot of negative energy hanging around. And that's ignoring any and every form of FTL breaking causality in half.
This is a tough one to get started on. Just looking at the science is probably enough for now, but if you want more specific information just ask.
Not necessarily. That is only according to GR, which is a theory based on certain axioms that are not necessarily true. We don't even have any idea of what gravity is. We say its "the deformation of spacetime due to the energy contained within the volume", but that's an axiom. What if it's really a manifestation of EM? Why not? Everything else is.
You can say, "well people have been working on it for a hundred years and that line of reasoning has borne no fruit," but once you realize that all of research has been controlled by the same entities; a single source of all scientific funding for over a century (Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford Foundations et al (which are all the same entity)), everything we think we know becomes suspect. Scientific research is a controlled entity, just like everything else.
Take a look at cold fusion research, like, really look at it. The evidence for cold fusion (now rebranded as LENR) is overwhelming. There have been experiments going on since F&P first presented their research and the results, even the devices that exist are nothing short of miraculous. Starting with Dr. Peter Hagelstein from MIT is a good entry into that rabbit hole, but I warn you, it goes deep and goes through decades of research once you begin. The tech was purposefully suppressed; of that I have no doubt. And why wouldn't it be? How can you control the world if people no longer have any need for the energy you're selling?
In addition to the problems with GR, there is the fact that QM works perfectly well as a non-local theory (see Bohmian mechanics). If both GR and QM work perfectly fine as non-local theories, why do we insist on only funding research for things that adhere to the "local" dogma?
There's also the recent videos of "UAP"s (UFOs) from the Navy. I don't know if those are real or hoax, but if real, that is obviously an ability to manipulate gravity (inertia). You can't get that type of movement from reactive propulsion.
When we get there, be fruitful and multiply. We are not there yet. This is nothing but an appeal to authority, not an argument.
Warp drive doesn’t break causality. The causality problems come from solutions to metrics that also require “negative energy”; like wormholes through time. As long as we adhere to closed time-like loops than that problem is a non-issue, but even that is based on our current, very limited understanding of what space and time are.
Since we really don’t have any idea what those words even mean, its difficult to come up with physics that describes them. The Truth is though, the universe is limited only by itself. It is not limited by our mathematical models of it. Those models are not reality, they are models. People so often forget that the universe doesn’t give a crap about our models. It is what it is, not what we think it is. To suggest that we have any idea of what IT is, when our models completely fail on so many levels (QM/GR incompatiblities, the de novo creation of Dark Matter and Dark Energy to fill in the gaps of GR e.g.) is the ultimate hubris and trust in falsities.
Why would anyone want more than 640k of RAM? Currently I utilize 32 billion.
You subscribe to the Matrix, I choose Moore.
It is not me that subscribes to The Matrix, but I'll let that one go, because that is a much deeper discussion of what that really means.
Moore's law has run out (by current tech) because there is not enough room at the bottom.
We don't need more. We didn't even need more RAM. What has it really done for us? By creating a "more connected" world we are less connected to Reality than at all times previous in humanity (not counting those who have woken up in the past year).
I'm not saying it has to be that way, or that more RAM is the reason. A tool is just a tool, but the idea that "more is better" has no evidential support once you get past the point of "enough."
Lets see what we can do once enough people wake up. We have probably 4 Billion people who are completely asleep, 3 billion that are mostly asleep (but partially awake) 500 million that are half awake, and maybe a couple hundred million that are almost fully awake (at least awake enough to realize they live in The Matrix at some level).
Lets wake up those 7.8 billion to their full potential instead of trying to populate the planet to resource capacity and hope a similar percentage remain awake.