The thing about Star Trek was all this tech was supposedly driven by matter-antimatter reactors which provided near limitless clean energy (unless, of course, they decided to use the failure of the reactors as a plot device). That's the worst part...that somehow there's some sort of clean, limitless energy source out there...fusion, hydrogen fuel cells, whatever.
The problem is, there isn't. Maybe there will be one day, but then again maybe there won't. But it really all comes back to energy.
It's easy to dream of utopian societies without having to take in to account what really makes even our non-ideal world possible; fossil fuels. Yet now our elites want to ban fossil fuels.
Yes that's one of the things I was getting at, thanks for putting it clearly. Probably should have used the matter anti-matter as an example rather than the transporter. I just like the transporter example because it's actually a very evil device that is made to look magical.
... resistance is futile - prepare to be assimilated. Borg Agriculture, Borg Medicine, Borg Education, Borg Monetary Systems, Borg Energy - technocrats always protect the systems that abuse them.
I wouldn't mind having 7 Of 9's mammaries -er- implants - for scientific purposes of course!
Star Trek and it's cousin, Star Wars are not so much science fiction as they are space opera. Very little of what passes for science fiction in my opinion is actually science fiction. Funny how I also find the writing of Philip K Dick and movies based upon his writings to be the best of the genre and more "science" than "fiction". His books are fairly dark for scifi. The dystopian hellscapes of Bladerunner or A Scanner Darkly in particular are probably closer to the truth than any other science fiction utopia I can think of.
Yes, have you read Valis, Ubik, and Flow My Tears the Policeman Said? Those are his 3 masterpieces IMO. Honorable mention for The three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, and The Divine Invasion.
The three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch is actually a pretty good look at what life on a Musk Mars colony would be like, hint they are very bored and do a lot of drugs, and get trapped in a sim world.
I am ashamed to admit that I have not. I will have to download them and read the. I read a lot of Heinlein when I was younger, but the older I got the more I found his views on females overly simplistic and too prone to idolizing them and putting on an undeserved pedestal.
OK when I was eight years old, I started watching the original Star Trek and I became obsessed with it. It was a rerun. When the next generation came out, I was ecstatic. I really enjoyed it in the late 80s early 90s.
However, the dark side is that it makes you way too tolerant.
I was one of those who thought everybody was racist for a while. I didn’t get Red Pill until 2015. The show made me hate racism because of that episode with the black and white people, and they got me to not like white people for a while as well.
But then they took it too far and even had very casual sex. It was a TV show that helped destroy America by enticing people to just sleep with each other instead of getting married or having any responsibilities.
Notice there are no children in Star Trek. Men and women both work and reproduction is apparently not a concern somehow. Diversity of accents and races somehow got frozen in aspic in the 20th century despite no visible bar to miscegenation. It is not a fully imagined world.
Well then: I suppose "they" fooked up when "they" made the decision to block out the sun or even the bombing of many of the ancient structures which were used for creating electricity in the not so distant past. Or even the repurposing of these types of buildings into churches, cathedrals and homes for example, can no longer create electricity needed, instead they consume it. When these bits of architecture now have no other use, other than for the latter and obviously we no longer have the ability to (re)create more of the same. Similar to that of having lost the tech to go to the moon (NASA admission) it's sounding more and more like total destruction and annihilation is a must to further their agenda of making way for a different type of population.
How is it going to work without murdering the original person, use logic it’s actually not hard to figure out. Let’s say a person was scanned and then the information was sent in an energy beam and the person on the platform isn’t destroyed, what is the outcome? The outcome is the original person is still alive and a duplicate is created at the new location. What you have then isn’t a transporter it’s a cloning machine.
Your but, but, but maybe some new thing will happen is exactly the sort of thing I am attacking with this essay this sort living in la, la fantasy land encourages people to defer dealing with real problems like grid capability, energy scarcity, vanishing farm land, etc.
I understand it far better than you do. It’s based on Bell’s theorem, do you even know what that is? The problem with science for normie articles is they translate complex concepts that can really only be fully and precisely laid out in math into imprecise metaphors, and while that can sometime help people roughly grasp a process like duplicating quantum states, it often conceals more than it reveals.
Reality is reality I do understand it better than you so I have been following experiments in the use of paired spin described by Bell’s theorem for years. And while they are interesting they aren’t transporters that is a flawed metaphor, they are quantum state duplicators that leave the original particle in place. If they could even be applied to the aggregate of particles in a large object which they probably can’t due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle you are still left with the conundrum I described in the article. Either the original is destroyed or what you have is a copying machine, not a transporter. Since you are obviously in over your head on this subject this will be my last response.
BTW the article you link is exactly an example of the fuzzy thinking encouraged by utopian sci fi. What we have done is not teleport anything, what we can do is transmit information about quantum states from one particle to a new particle. This leaves the same problem I talked above. Let’s say you scanned all the quantum states of an entire person and transmitted that information to a new group of particles you would create a duplicate of the original person while the original person is still alive. The precise name for the machine in the article is a quantum state duplicator, but utopian sci fi encourages people to use imprecise metaphorical language like quantum transporter for something that isn’t that. People dumbing down science for normies is another perpetrator of fuzzy thinking that enables technocracy.
I don’t dislike science fiction at all, did you actually read the opening paragraph? Philip K. Dick is one of my favorite authors. I have read most of his books and he was a prolific author. What I dislike is the use of a specific narrow subset of utopian science fiction by ruling class technocracy advocates to pretend we can have an all upsides technocracy without thinking about the costs to freedom and the environment of technocracy.
You missed the point entirely the point of the article wasn’t to discuss Star Trek’s transporter, it was to analyze how utopian science fiction gives us a distorted view of both what is possible and the social consequences of not accurately thinking through technocracy. If I made a mistake it was the one pointed out by the poster above that the example I should have used was the matter antimatter engine and power plant of the Enterprise and not the transporter as it’s more germane to one of the central flaws in technocracy.
You might want to look into 'predictive programming' - there's a reason behind everything.
Otherwise - yes - I realized what was being done a few years ago.
Generally speaking, technological progress and unabated acceptance of it was specifically pushed via the promotion of books and TV shows of this sort. There are, of course, a few films which feature the dystopian future possibility, but these are largely being ignored by the pushers.
Specifically regarding the transporter technology - it opens up a huge can of worms which never gets explored. It's essentially a cloning device - the cloning process is supposedly illegal - yet, Riker had a clone which was never destroyed. You would think that this would become very popular and there would also be clone wars here and there, but that's never suggested.
In another episode, transporter was used to reverse an aging disease - it's an immortality machine. Curiously enough, everyone in that world dies of old age, never to be brought back via that route.
Like I said - a lot of logical fallacies in that TV show. It was used to sell a narrative. It's a tech advertisement for those who lack critical thinking skills (perhaps 90+% of human beings).
PS. There were also a few episodes discussing holodeck - and only briefly do they mention that some people had addiction to holodeck, but that problem was supposedly sorted out (no explanation as to how this was done). Well - we got virtual world addictions via smartphones - and these are not being sorted out. Likewise - in that world, you see people interacting - being social - but in our world, I see people in groups but everyone is glued to their smartphone screens. This is basically a dead giveaway that the tech progress sold on that show does nothing even close to what it does in the real world - it's all a lie - and we are nowhere near the tech advancement that show depicts
Our understanding of the universe isn’t imprecise at all in fact we have a very good map of reality down to the granularity of the Planck length. We aren’t going to discover new laws of physics when we already have an adequate map of reality to understand most matter/energy processes in the Universe.
We need to stop using science fiction fantasy hand waving as an excuse to not deal with our very serious ecological and social problems like energy scarcity that we know actually exist.
Perhaps in the religious realm. We have it pretty nailed down to a Plank level resolutions and back to the first .0000000000001 seconds of the birth of the Universe.
A lot of new normal science is BS, to be honest. The corruption of science kicked off a while ago - a lot of former scientific journal editors talked about it. Narratives are being built - genuine scientific study papers are being censored. Something to be wary of.
Imagine making a comment that is nothing but ad hominem with no substantive content. What exactly is this holy point I missed oh wise and enlightened sage,
TL;DR? They promised you Star Trek, but what you are going to get is Brazil.
The thing about Star Trek was all this tech was supposedly driven by matter-antimatter reactors which provided near limitless clean energy (unless, of course, they decided to use the failure of the reactors as a plot device). That's the worst part...that somehow there's some sort of clean, limitless energy source out there...fusion, hydrogen fuel cells, whatever.
The problem is, there isn't. Maybe there will be one day, but then again maybe there won't. But it really all comes back to energy.
It's easy to dream of utopian societies without having to take in to account what really makes even our non-ideal world possible; fossil fuels. Yet now our elites want to ban fossil fuels.
Good luck with that.
Yes that's one of the things I was getting at, thanks for putting it clearly. Probably should have used the matter anti-matter as an example rather than the transporter. I just like the transporter example because it's actually a very evil device that is made to look magical.
... resistance is futile - prepare to be assimilated. Borg Agriculture, Borg Medicine, Borg Education, Borg Monetary Systems, Borg Energy - technocrats always protect the systems that abuse them.
I wouldn't mind having 7 Of 9's mammaries -er- implants - for scientific purposes of course!
Star Trek and it's cousin, Star Wars are not so much science fiction as they are space opera. Very little of what passes for science fiction in my opinion is actually science fiction. Funny how I also find the writing of Philip K Dick and movies based upon his writings to be the best of the genre and more "science" than "fiction". His books are fairly dark for scifi. The dystopian hellscapes of Bladerunner or A Scanner Darkly in particular are probably closer to the truth than any other science fiction utopia I can think of.
Yes, have you read Valis, Ubik, and Flow My Tears the Policeman Said? Those are his 3 masterpieces IMO. Honorable mention for The three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, and The Divine Invasion.
The three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch is actually a pretty good look at what life on a Musk Mars colony would be like, hint they are very bored and do a lot of drugs, and get trapped in a sim world.
I am ashamed to admit that I have not. I will have to download them and read the. I read a lot of Heinlein when I was younger, but the older I got the more I found his views on females overly simplistic and too prone to idolizing them and putting on an undeserved pedestal.
OK when I was eight years old, I started watching the original Star Trek and I became obsessed with it. It was a rerun. When the next generation came out, I was ecstatic. I really enjoyed it in the late 80s early 90s.
However, the dark side is that it makes you way too tolerant.
I was one of those who thought everybody was racist for a while. I didn’t get Red Pill until 2015. The show made me hate racism because of that episode with the black and white people, and they got me to not like white people for a while as well.
But then they took it too far and even had very casual sex. It was a TV show that helped destroy America by enticing people to just sleep with each other instead of getting married or having any responsibilities.
I look back and I see all the propaganda.
Kurt Vonnegut brought trauma into to his novels
Dissociation etc
Dresden
Steven Erickson
Malazan Book of The Fallen confronts power and injustice and a lot of trauma
Notice there are no children in Star Trek. Men and women both work and reproduction is apparently not a concern somehow. Diversity of accents and races somehow got frozen in aspic in the 20th century despite no visible bar to miscegenation. It is not a fully imagined world.
Great essay! The world needs more forests and farmland.
Well then: I suppose "they" fooked up when "they" made the decision to block out the sun or even the bombing of many of the ancient structures which were used for creating electricity in the not so distant past. Or even the repurposing of these types of buildings into churches, cathedrals and homes for example, can no longer create electricity needed, instead they consume it. When these bits of architecture now have no other use, other than for the latter and obviously we no longer have the ability to (re)create more of the same. Similar to that of having lost the tech to go to the moon (NASA admission) it's sounding more and more like total destruction and annihilation is a must to further their agenda of making way for a different type of population.
Thanks for the article my friend.
Blessings ~
Or maybe they tried to implement Star Trek but got DS9 instead. lol
I like DS9 tho, muh Ferengi space Jews. :-)
How is it going to work without murdering the original person, use logic it’s actually not hard to figure out. Let’s say a person was scanned and then the information was sent in an energy beam and the person on the platform isn’t destroyed, what is the outcome? The outcome is the original person is still alive and a duplicate is created at the new location. What you have then isn’t a transporter it’s a cloning machine.
Your but, but, but maybe some new thing will happen is exactly the sort of thing I am attacking with this essay this sort living in la, la fantasy land encourages people to defer dealing with real problems like grid capability, energy scarcity, vanishing farm land, etc.
as I've mentioned in my reply - it really is a cloning machine - that's what it actually is.
I understand it far better than you do. It’s based on Bell’s theorem, do you even know what that is? The problem with science for normie articles is they translate complex concepts that can really only be fully and precisely laid out in math into imprecise metaphors, and while that can sometime help people roughly grasp a process like duplicating quantum states, it often conceals more than it reveals.
Reality is reality I do understand it better than you so I have been following experiments in the use of paired spin described by Bell’s theorem for years. And while they are interesting they aren’t transporters that is a flawed metaphor, they are quantum state duplicators that leave the original particle in place. If they could even be applied to the aggregate of particles in a large object which they probably can’t due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle you are still left with the conundrum I described in the article. Either the original is destroyed or what you have is a copying machine, not a transporter. Since you are obviously in over your head on this subject this will be my last response.
BTW the article you link is exactly an example of the fuzzy thinking encouraged by utopian sci fi. What we have done is not teleport anything, what we can do is transmit information about quantum states from one particle to a new particle. This leaves the same problem I talked above. Let’s say you scanned all the quantum states of an entire person and transmitted that information to a new group of particles you would create a duplicate of the original person while the original person is still alive. The precise name for the machine in the article is a quantum state duplicator, but utopian sci fi encourages people to use imprecise metaphorical language like quantum transporter for something that isn’t that. People dumbing down science for normies is another perpetrator of fuzzy thinking that enables technocracy.
I don’t dislike science fiction at all, did you actually read the opening paragraph? Philip K. Dick is one of my favorite authors. I have read most of his books and he was a prolific author. What I dislike is the use of a specific narrow subset of utopian science fiction by ruling class technocracy advocates to pretend we can have an all upsides technocracy without thinking about the costs to freedom and the environment of technocracy.
You missed the point entirely the point of the article wasn’t to discuss Star Trek’s transporter, it was to analyze how utopian science fiction gives us a distorted view of both what is possible and the social consequences of not accurately thinking through technocracy. If I made a mistake it was the one pointed out by the poster above that the example I should have used was the matter antimatter engine and power plant of the Enterprise and not the transporter as it’s more germane to one of the central flaws in technocracy.
You might want to look into 'predictive programming' - there's a reason behind everything.
Otherwise - yes - I realized what was being done a few years ago.
Generally speaking, technological progress and unabated acceptance of it was specifically pushed via the promotion of books and TV shows of this sort. There are, of course, a few films which feature the dystopian future possibility, but these are largely being ignored by the pushers.
Specifically regarding the transporter technology - it opens up a huge can of worms which never gets explored. It's essentially a cloning device - the cloning process is supposedly illegal - yet, Riker had a clone which was never destroyed. You would think that this would become very popular and there would also be clone wars here and there, but that's never suggested.
In another episode, transporter was used to reverse an aging disease - it's an immortality machine. Curiously enough, everyone in that world dies of old age, never to be brought back via that route.
Like I said - a lot of logical fallacies in that TV show. It was used to sell a narrative. It's a tech advertisement for those who lack critical thinking skills (perhaps 90+% of human beings).
PS. There were also a few episodes discussing holodeck - and only briefly do they mention that some people had addiction to holodeck, but that problem was supposedly sorted out (no explanation as to how this was done). Well - we got virtual world addictions via smartphones - and these are not being sorted out. Likewise - in that world, you see people interacting - being social - but in our world, I see people in groups but everyone is glued to their smartphone screens. This is basically a dead giveaway that the tech progress sold on that show does nothing even close to what it does in the real world - it's all a lie - and we are nowhere near the tech advancement that show depicts
Our understanding of the universe isn’t imprecise at all in fact we have a very good map of reality down to the granularity of the Planck length. We aren’t going to discover new laws of physics when we already have an adequate map of reality to understand most matter/energy processes in the Universe.
We need to stop using science fiction fantasy hand waving as an excuse to not deal with our very serious ecological and social problems like energy scarcity that we know actually exist.
There's a lot left to discover -
Perhaps in the religious realm. We have it pretty nailed down to a Plank level resolutions and back to the first .0000000000001 seconds of the birth of the Universe.
A lot of new normal science is BS, to be honest. The corruption of science kicked off a while ago - a lot of former scientific journal editors talked about it. Narratives are being built - genuine scientific study papers are being censored. Something to be wary of.
Imagine making a comment that is nothing but ad hominem with no substantive content. What exactly is this holy point I missed oh wise and enlightened sage,