Earlier today I saw a Saturday Night Live skit mocking the idea of building a settlement on the moon.  I don’t like Newt Gingrich, but when he spoke of building a moon colony, I was proud that a popular leader was trying to inspire people to think about space again.  To dream.  We as a nation used to dream of exploring the cosmos and was dedicated to funding its exploration.  We believed in ourselves, our scientists, and we took pride that we’d be the first to accomplish such a great feat.  We used to have great presidents like JFK.  You mention his name and he’s unanimously praised, and rightly so.  He was a great man.  A great president.  But you know what?  He wanted to go to the moon.  He wanted us to explore space.  Have you ever seen his 1962 speech?  I rarely hear words that inspire me, but his do.

“We choose to go to the moon in this decade, and do the other things, not because they are easy but because they are hard.  Because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win.”

- John F. Kennedy, in a speech to Rice University, Sept 12, 1962

Mock me if you want to.  When Newt mentioned space, it made me happy.  I saw a glimmer of a leader trying to inspire us again, even if just a little.  Listen to the crowd when JFK exclaims, “We choose to go to the moon…”   They burst into applause and cheers.  He has to stop and wait for them to quiet down.  That was America in the 1960s.  Now look at us.  We as a nation sit back with our arms crossed and give derisive looks to anyone who mentions the idea.  What happened?

I haven’t done a lot of research into what happened with NASA and the space program after our initial voyages to the moon.  All I know is we’ve completely lost faith in all of it.  I’ll have to search Amazon.com for a book on the history of the space program, and find out what all has happened, and what went wrong.

If you’ve been following the news, one of the front-runner candidates for president is Newt Gingrich.  Looking at the Republican candidates, I’m pretty much universally disgusted.  I’ve watched the debates and sat in abhorrence as the crowd cheered on bizarre, inhumane ideas.  They roared in applause at the mention of Rick Perry’s record number of executions during his administration as governor of Texas.  When Ron Paul told them that attacking other nations that have done nothing to us violates the golden rule, the entire hall boo’d and roared in disgust.  At another time, I think it was Wolf Blitzer, asked Ron Paul what he would do if a 20~30 year old needed medical attention yet lacked health insurance at the time.  Would he let him die? Paul basically replied, “In a society with personal responsibility…” and the crowd cheered ecstatically.  Though he basically avoided the question, he doesn’t seem to feel there’s anything wrong with saddling that young man in $50,000 of debt, or if he can’t afford it, and the hospital won’t finance it, just letting him die.  He thinks that some charity organization will always be there.  I seriously doubt it, and should we really play around with people’s lives like that?  It’s disgusting.  The crowd boo’d hysterically when Rick Perry mentioned that he was proud that he’d taken measures to help educate illegals who had come into Texas from Mexico.  Oh, and on the most recent debate, the moderator brought up the issue of Newt having abandoned his sick wives (yes, he’s left two different wives on different occasions when they were sick and in the way), Newt basically responded with, “For you to bring up the issue of my past wives in a presidential debate is despicable.”  And the crowd roars in applause!  What happened to the family values they’re supposed to stand for?  Don’t half of them vote solely on ethical issues?  The only thing that seems to unite the current conservative base is the deep desire to start another war in Iran.

I don’t understand mainstream conservatives at all.  They talk about Jesus, the Bible and “family values”, but then at the same time could care less about Newt and his past affairs.  That’s an attack from the lamesteam “liberal” media.  It’s pretty ingenious how conservative politicians play that made up narrative to their advantage.

Or take universal healthcare.  They hold up their Bibles, but in that same book Jesus taught that if you find a sick man along the roadside, put him up in an inn and leave the innkeeper with money to take care of him until he recovers.  But when the issue comes up, it’s the evangelicals who are up in an uproar.  ”It’s a government takeover of healthcare!”  What?  And half of them are old people on Medicare, which they all universally love!   Sometimes I just don’t know.

And Rick Perry, the family man.  How could these people cheer on executions?  Jesus taught to forgive your enemies, pray for those who have done evil to you, and to turn the other cheek.  Jesus died for others; he never called for execution.

Regardless of what you think of Christianity and its teachings, it just disgusts me is how these people run around with crosses and Bibles, decrying everyone else as heathens, and wanting prayer in schools, yet haven’t even read the book they want to cram down our throats.  They cheer for wars. If Jesus was a presidential candidate, they’d boo him off the stage. Jesus and Christianity are just crude bumper stickers they attach to.  Tribal “logo” decals these people put on themselves.  It’s like the American flag.  To appeal to this crowd, you just need to understand a few buzzwords.  You talk about freedom, the red, white, and blue, and finally, mention that you pray to Jesus and look up to Ronald Reagan.  But don’t think too hard about it, because if you do, it won’t make any sense at all.  Ronald Reagan was all about free-markets, and their other supposed master, Jesus, was a communist.  After all, Christ’s apostles formed a completely communist society where everything was owned in common, and nobody had personal property.  Didn’t Jesus send his apostles out to preach his message, and not demand any financial compensation in return?  But who has actually read the four Gospels, or book of the Acts of the Apostles these days?

I say all of this to point out the sheer stupidity of what goes on in these debates.

It’s painful to support any of the candidates that are out there today.  I don’t like any of them.  So I actually came out and reluctantly supported Ron Paul.  But don’t get me wrong, I don’t like him much either.  I do admire his consistency.  The others?  Well, all I’ll say about Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry is that I’m glad they’ve dropped out.  Mitt Romney, I have no idea what he even stands for.  I don’t trust a word out of his mouth.  I at least know Ron Paul believes what he says, and will respect personal liberty.  After seeing signs of Big Brother emerging here within the United States, and our civil liberties being trampled on, I don’t have much faith in President Obama.  Anyone who could throw a person in jail indefinitely, without a trial, will never have my vote.  I HATE Guantanamo Bay.  Everytime I hear that place is still in existence, I grit my teeth in anger.  People being locked up without a trial, indefinitely, it’s just against everything I stand for and believe in.  It’s pure evil.  Worthless wars, erosion of liberties, huge debts and deficits.  I want it all to end.  I hate seeing these SOPA bills and PIPA, and I want a president who would veto that shit into the trashcan.  Ron Paul would veto all of them for sure.

So as I was out for a walk the other day, I just was thinking, “I can’t find any redeeming quality in any of these people other than Ron Paul.”  I look at them all and they come up lacking.   But even with Ron Paul, I just cringe at the thought of him cutting foreign aid, cutting the National Science Foundation funding, completely privatizing everything he can get his hands on.  The list of things me and him disagree with on is large.

I’m not a socialist, and I’m not a free market libertarian.  I’m someplace inbetween, wanting compassion in our society yet at the same time still desiring a large degree of personal responsibility, transparency, and efficiency.  It just seems possible that we can have a society where we get the benefits of corporations and our collective working power, without brutally exploiting one another in abhorrent working conditions (like the Chinese factories I’ve been talking about), without insane wealth disparities, without people going broke if they come down with a medical condition, and a commitment that everyone deserves a shot at a decent life.  People need access to the skills and training required to work in today’s information economy.  If that means funding their college education, then so be it.  I don’t want to get into the university system though.  Costs are skyrocketing, and there’s a lot of things that need to be done there too.

My main desire is to see an educated society which respects and funds science research.  It’s what drives progress.  Cures for diseases, new forms of transportation, new forms of innovative manufacturing, and so on.  Reading over the history of science and progress inspires me.  I’d like to help be a part of that progressive trend of improvement.  That’s mainly why I’ve chosen to be a physicist.  I want to build things which improve our lives.  I want to build AI systems which can drive cars, construct new robotic arms using nanotechnology, or write the code running our future virtual reality systems.   Maybe even more than any of those things, I want to see space exploration.  There’s an entire universe out there.  I’ve always wondered why nobody ever has a vision to explore space.  I guess they feel our society’s resources could be better used elsewhere, and I can understand that, but I also feel our generation needs a vision.  Something to be proud of.  All I hear about is decline, decline, and decline.  I get tired of it.

But my mouth dropped when I actually heard a presidential candidate wanting to do something truly daring and exciting.  The media has been deriding Newt Gingrich about his commitment to building a moon base, but I may be somewhat changing my opinion of him.  I thought, “A moon base?!  Wow… that’s pretty, awesome.”   During his second term, he tells us we’ll have a moon base.  But will Congress fund a moon colony?  If so, I’ll vote for Newt.  I’d love to see mankind construct a moon base.  Obama’s just going to indefinitely detain me and I will NEVER vote for someone who doesn’t even believe in due process.  But I’m sure Newt will just continue those same policies too… *grits teeth*  Why does every candidate have to suck?  I haven’t read if he has a position on the Patriot Act, SOPA, PIPA, and all that.  I didn’t feel Newt was even close to electable considering what he did to his past wives.   Should I even vote?  I don’t want any of these people running our country.

Vote Ron Paul?  Eh’, Ron’s going to cut every government service, and though I’d like to see a lot of waste eliminated, I know there are vital government services that we need.  It’s just too radical of a position.  So why not Newt?   I don’t like any of these people, but if Newt is elected, maybe we will build a moon base.  I could be proud of my generation.  I’d be an old man, my great nephews would visit me in my cabin out in the middle of nowhere, and I’d have photographs in my album of me working on the moon base.

“…twice recently Governor Romney has made fun of me for having bold ideas in space and has suggested that the idea of having a permanent lunar colony – he actually didn’t catch the weirdest thing I’ve ever done and I’m going to tell you all because sooner or later his researchers will find it – at one point early in my career I introduced the Northwest Ordinance for Space, and I said when we get – I think the number was 13,000 – when we have 13,000 Americans living on the Moon they can petition to become a state [laughter and applause].

And here’s the difference between romantics and so-called practical people. I wanted every young American to say to themselves: I could be one of those 13,000. I could be a pioneer. I need to study science and math and engineering. I need to learn how to be a technician. I can be part of building a bigger, better future. I can actually go out and live the future looking at the solar system and being part of a generation of courageous people who do something big and bold and heroic.

And I will as President encourage the introduction for the Northwest Ordinance for Space to put a marker down that we want Americans to think boldly about the future and we want Americans to go out and study hard and work hard, and together we are going to unleash the American people to rebuild the country we love [applause].

So, I’m going to give you a set of goals and then I’m going to make a set of observations about how to achieve those goals.

By the end of my second term we will have the first permanent base on the Moon, and it will be American [applause].

We will have commercial near-Earth activities that include science, tourism, and manufacturing, and are designed to create a robust industry precisely on the model that was developed by the airlines in the 1930s, because it is in our interest to acquire so much experience in space that we clearly have a capacity that the Chinese and the Russians will never come anywhere close to matching [applause].

And by the end of 2020 we will have the first continuous propulsion system in space capable of getting to Mars in a remarkably short time, because I am sick of being told we have to be timid, and I’m sick of being told we have to be limited to technologies that are 50 years old [applause].”

- Newt Gingrich, during his speech January 25th Space Policy Town Hall speech

Not only the moon, but new propulsion systems which can take us to Mars and beyond.  That’s about the only cool thing I’ve heard out of any of these candidates.  If that’s not all rhetoric Newt, I’ll consider voting for you.  You fund it, I’ll help build it.  But I have my doubts about you.  Can you seriously get Congress to fund something other than yet another middle-eastern war?  Our needing to “stop” Iran from getting imaginary nuclear weapons seems to be the only issue our two parties agree on.  I would have hoped we’d learned our lesson in Iraq.

*Sigh*  Why do I even bother following politics.  It just makes be depressed.

Just a few days ago I felt compelled to blog about the conditions of workers in Chinese factories like Foxconn.  These factories are responsible for assembling our iPods, iPads, Xboxes, and other electronic devices.  Workers in these places are slaves.  If you can’t see that, you’re completely blind.  They can be at times worked for 35 hour long shifts, paid a whopping 35 cents an hour, and are often caught attempting suicide within the factory.  What kind of workplace has nets hanging from the walls to catch suicide roof jumpers?  I’m really tired of hearing people praise Steve Jobs.  Companies like Sony, Apple, and Microsoft are earning billions of dollars in profits as they exploit the poor and helpless.  35 cents an hour?  Twelve year prison sentences if they try to form a union?  Eight people to a small dorm, crammed together like sardines?  It’s evil.

Jon Stewart covered the issue, and I think you should watch him.

I don’t know where I sit on the political spectrum, but I know I don’t fit into any particular party or ideology.  I’m not a socialist, nor a communist, and I suppose you could say I reluctantly advocate free markets, though I don’t think the invisible hand deserves much praise.

I feel that large amounts of money in few hands is a dangerous thing.  Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  My views toward the rich could be summed up with this quote,

‘To convert the business man into the profiteer is to strike a blow at capitalism … The business man is only tolerable so long as his gains can be held to bear some relation to what, roughly and in some sense, his activities have contributed to society.”

- John Maynard Keynes

As long as businesses create products and services that improve people’s lives, in fair competition, then I won’t complain about large profits or even a large degree of income inequality.  I’ll bear it.  As Mark Zuckerberg rakes in billions of dollars selling our private information to marketing firms and private corporations, I’ll turn away because I know of the millions of people, like my mom, who love Facebook, and it really does provide a service people love.

But there are those who worship the free market.  They lose all common sense and spew out total nonsense.   Many if not most hardcore libertarians are this way, and that’s why I can’t associate myself with them.  One of their central websites is the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and I occasionally read their articles.   Just a few days ago I came across the most ridiculous post entitled Defending Kim Kardashian.

I saw the title and immediately rolled my eyes.  I thought, “Are you kidding me?  Are you seriously going to defend the millions of dollars Kim Kardashian is making?”  I read on to find gems like these,

Unlike the majority of us who live relatively boring lives, Kim Kardashian has made a career out of selling the public an up-close-and-personal view of her private affairs. This recently included a rumored farce of a wedding to NBA superstar Kris Humphries, which fizzled after only three days but made the reality star millions.

…

Whether or not you agree with the type of life Kim Kardashian leads is ultimately a question of morality and ethics. However, her ability to attract fans and monetary compensation is something to admire. Unlike the government, Kardashian forces no one to purchase the products she endorses, view her television reality shows, attend her birthday party, or cover her exploits for various media publications. What she gives up in terms of a private life has brought her and her family a financially comfortable standard of living.

Oh yes, Kim Kardashian lives such a fascinating life.  *rolls eyes* We all know reality television is poison for the mind.  American culture has went down the toilet, and it’s really an indictment against our society that anyone is interested in Kim Kardashian at all.  I’ll admit she earned her money in the free market, and nobody was forced to participate in her wedding, or watch her television show, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t a parasite to society.

Of all the people in this world, you think she’s the one who deserves millions of dollars in the bank, which she earned through a sham wedding, to a man she obviously didn’t love?  Just a few weeks after the fact, both her and her ex-husband were bad mouthing one another.  ”You’re only famous because you made that sex tape!”  ”Oh yeah!  You’re just an inconsiderate bastard!”

She’s the one who deserves to have the best of everything life has to offer?  Are you seriously trying to defend this woman, in the midst of our economic crisis?   This is what I mean.  The free market is their religion, and it blinds them to common sense.

After babbling on about capital, the free market, and the importance of saving, the article proceeds with,

The act of savings both forestalls present consumption and, when placed into a bank or financial institution, adds to the amount of funds available to be lent to aspiring entrepreneurs. With more funds available, longer-term and better methods of production can be sought to increase the supply of consumer goods. In an economy not subject to continual monetary debasement and inflation via a central bank, prices are allowed to fall, thus raising real income for consumers.

Reality stars such as Kim Kardashian aid in this process as their revenue-generating ability allows them to set aside more of their income. This accumulation of savings leaves more money to be invested in base capital, which increases the productive capacity of the economy. This isn’t supply-side economics; it’s a simple acknowledgement of the scarcity that dominates our world.

This libertarian author is trying to convince us that it’s ok that Kim earned all this money, even through she contributes zero benefit to society.  She’s going to deposit her millions in the bank, and they’re going to lend those funds out to entrepreneurs who are going to do wonderful things for all of us.  So don’t worry.  It’s all going to be ok.

That’s ridiculous.  But do I want to live a society where all of our decisions are regulated and controlled by government bureaucrats?  No.  If you want to support such a worthless woman with your time and money, then I suppose I can’t stop you.  But please, stop defending her.  I can understand that you don’t want the government to tax her, and feel that bureaucrats would just spend it all on wars and payoffs to their buddies.  I get it.   Just don’t worship the invisible hand.  You look like an idiot.

Some days I just lose hope in humanity.

Around 300 Chinese workers who manufacture XBox consoles took to a factory roof and threatened bosses with mass suicide over a dispute about pay, unconfirmed reports have claimed.

The workers were employed at the Foxconn Technology Park in Wuhan in Hubei province. Foxconn is an independent, global manufacturing partner to companies including Apple, Microsoft and Sony.

- Source:  Huffington Post

Think how miserable you’d have to be to even make demands like this.  With this in mind, look at these tweets from American children, complaining how their parents didn’t buy them the latest iPad, iPhone, or XBox for Christmas.

Across the world, those devices are being made by despondent Chinese workers, so poor and miserable that they’re threatening to kill themselves in mass by jumping from the factory roof.

Lawrence Krauss, a theoretical physicist from ASU, has just written a book called A Universe from Nothing: Why There is Something Rather than Nothing.   I highly recommend you get yourself a copy.  I also really enjoyed the book’s promotional video.

Krauss finds something in nothing from ASU News on Vimeo.

I love to read Nature magazine.  It’s probably my favorite of all publications.  On their website, I stumbled upon an article that many people are likely to be interested in.   Though I’ve heard about this years ago, scientists can now implant electrodes into a person’s brain (subcallosal cingulate to be exact), and by artificially changing firing patterns connected to the frontal cortex, they can remove depression and bipolar disorder.   It’s now going through testing and is proving itself effective in most people (11 out of 12 people are cured).

The effects aren’t necessarily immediate though.  Most patients require a year before drastic effects are seen, but studies are showing that most who undergo this treatment are cured.

Patients who have received the surgical implant describe it as lifting a dark cloud off of them.  They’re once again interested in what’s going on in the world.  It’s no longer a struggle, feeling as if each day they’re having to swim against the tides of a black vortex trying to suck them in.  It’s like a calm.  It’s a change in the brain’s rhythm.

Other patients have described it as turning on the lights.  It takes their focus away from themselves and invites them back into the world.  With that vortex gone, they’re able to climb their way out, their thoughts and feelings begin to change, and over the course of that year they’re able to reprogram their brains.  The device doesn’t give a person happiness, but it takes away what was keeping them from being happy.

I should note that it’s not a total cure though.  Once you turn off that electrode, their depression comes right back.  Even so, it’s wonderful that people can be relieved of such a terrible disease.

Here’s a lecture on the topic if you’re interested.  This seems to be from 2009, so it’s a few years back.  Back then, only around 60% of patients were treated successfully.  You can see that over the past few years they’ve been able to tweak their methods and improve upon them.

Yesterday I came across an article which really caught my attention.  It contained a rather harsh analysis of the worldview behind science.

Is there a god? No. What is the nature of reality? What physics says it is. What is the purpose of the universe? There is none. What is the meaning of life? Ditto. Why am I here? Just dumb luck. Is there a soul? Is it immortal? Are you kidding? Is there free will? Not a chance! What is the difference between right and wrong, good and bad? There is no moral difference between them. Why should I be moral? Because it makes you feel better than being immoral. Is abortion, euthanasia, suicide, paying taxes, foreign aid, or anything else you don’t like forbidden, permissible, or sometimes obligatory? Anything goes. What is love, and how can I find it? Love is the solution to a strategic interaction problem. Don’t look for it; it will find you when you need it. Does history have any meaning or purpose? It’s full of sound and fury, but signifies nothing.” I take this cutting-edge wisdom from the worst book of the year, a shallow and supercilious thing called The Atheist’s Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions, by Alex Rosenberg, a philosopher of science at Duke University. The book is a catechism for people who believe they have emancipated themselves from catechisms. The faith that it dogmatically expounds is scientism. It is a fine example of how the religion of science can turn an intelligent man into a fool.

I wish I had a strong rebuttal against these accusations, but I don’t.  That is the worldview that science leads you to.  It’s incredibly bleak.  It’s not empowering, and as the author points out quite vividly, I don’t think it’s a worldview a person wanting to “Enjoy Life” is going to take on.  But do we need illusions and superstitions, and do they improve our quality of life?  I’d argue that those won’t help either.

There are probably critical ideas missing from the scientific way of viewing the world, but I have to be really careful with this one.  Bear with me.  I suspect that there are aspects to our existence beyond our sense organs, and therefore beyond testability and reason.  You may want to exclaim, “Jason, what are these aspects of our existence which you claim are beyond our ability to understand?”  First off, I don’t know whether they’ll always be beyond our understanding.  Maybe one day we will understand how it all works, but for now, I suspect we’re still in the dark on many key issues.  As for why I feel this way, I can only point you to vague feelings within me.  For a key example, take subjective consciousness.  Science likes to say, “Look, we’ve defined who you are.  You’re activity in your brain.”  I’d argue that that’s a half-truth.  I don’t deny that what I experience is directly correlated with that brain activity, but I just don’t believe that what goes on in my brain is the entirety of my existence.  When I eat an orange, there are rich, vivid personal subjective experiences of tasting the fruit, smelling it, and feeling its texture.  That’s different from the electrical pulses shooting through neurons.  There is no way to test and observe these things outside of experiencing them for ourselves.  I don’t know how things taste and feel for you.   Considering there are people who hate oranges, whereas I personally love them, we must not be having the same subjective experience.

The reason scientists fear this line of thought is because it opens a big nasty door to superstitious nonsense and humanity has suffered so much pain from superstition.  If I can propose there’s more to our existence than what we can observe with our senses, why can’t religious priests claim there’s gods, goddesses, and evil spirits?  We don’t have any tools to keep people’s minds in check, and before long people are irreconcilable conflicts.  ”My God is the true God, and if you don’t believe in Him, you must die!  Infidel!”  ”No, you’re the infidel!  Your culture and your ways are blasphemous.  All of you must be wiped off the Earth to cleanse it!”

What I think most scientists, including myself, want from our fellow humans is simply this.  Once we open that big door, and you all speculate about higher aspects of yourself and what may be beyond our senses, beyond death, and so forth, realize that it’s all speculation and that you don’t know for sure.  When you claim to have a personal revelation from the heavens, realize that it isn’t the highest form of truth, it’s the lowest form.  It’s mere guesswork.   It might be true, it might not.  You’re dealing with an empty hypothesis with nothing to back it up.  And since other people aren’t likely to have the same personal revelations you are, accept that many people will be believing widely different things, and they’re not evil for doing so.  If we just can just all live together peacefully and say to one another, “There are many mysteries to the world.  In the end, we just don’t know a lot of things” we’ll be fine.

Next I’d like to share my own feelings on the idea of truth.  I hear a lot of atheists say things like, “I don’t like a lot of the conclusions I come to anymore than you do, but if it’s true, it’s true.  I want to know the truth.  That’s what matters to me.”   There’s a lot of courage to that position and I greatly admire it.  Even so, deep down, I suspect it’s based on a fundamentally wrong way of viewing the world.  These are vague feelings I haven’t fully fleshed out, but I’ll share what I’ve came up with so far.

I’ve noticed a trend as I’ve studied science:  the more we understand about the universe, the more powerful we become.  This leads me to believe that “truth” only matters when you’re powerless to the forces of nature.  We seek the “truth” about this world when we’re so clueless as to how things operate, we’re not skilled enough to remold reality how we wish it.  But I suspect that as humans grow in knowledge, the “truth” will matter less and less.  The more relevant question will become, “What do I want to experience?”

I have another vague feeling that we’re not properly understanding what knowledge is.  We have a flawed idea of inside and outside.  Self vs the world.  I doubt it’s the correct way of viewing things.  Long ago, I can’t remember where on my blog, I raised a thought experiment where a man was merged with a super-computer, and this man wanted more and more mental power to understand and control the world.  He consumed the entire Earth and turned it into computational machines connected to his brain.  Craving more understanding and thought power, he consumed the entire galaxy and turned it all into computational thought machinery, used exclusively for his thinking and storing the vast knowledge he’s acquiring about the world.  After all, we have to remember that all knowledge has to be stored in some physical form as data, just like information on a computer disk.  It takes energy to store it, and energy to retrieve it.  This can be made highly efficient, but ultimately you won’t get around the law of conservation of energy.  There will be limits.

As this computational super-being expands, imagine the eventual limit.  That being would consume the entire universe and make every piece of matter its own personal mind.  At that point there is no distinction between the self and the outside world within that universe.  The whole nature of knowledge debate is thrown out the window.  The “world” is what you want it to be at that point.  You just change the data within your machines, and then simulate whatever environment you wish for.  You may say, “Well, the REAL truth is that you’re in a machine, like the Matrix.”  Yeah, and so what?  I guess if you want to build a probe and waste some of your energy flying around looking at your machinery, go for it.  But understanding the “truth” about that reality isn’t going to do anything for you.  Truth seems irrelevant at that point.

Knowledge of the outside world wouldn’t necessarily even have to exist in that universe.  It’d be a waste of energy and space.  Knowledge of the past wouldn’t matter.  All the transitions the matter had flowed through until reaching that almost God-like state of pure control and harmony.  To store knowledge of history and past states of existence requires space in a brain, or in a computer, or whatever.  The more of the past you try to store, the more you limit your own future potential because you could use that energy for your own creations.  You probably would and should only keep knowledge of the past things and forms which you find beautiful, so you could use them in your creations.   I’d keep 3D models of plants, lovely animals, birds, and so forth, but I don’t think I’d ever resurrect a virtual mosquito.  Send those to oblivion.  *hits delete button*

We humans need to know the truth about the world because we’re subjected to so many dangers and are weak.  The stronger we become, the less truth matters.  There might be some sort of evolutionary big picture where science is one of its first stages.  We move from an age of discovery to an age of creation.  I don’t know.  We’re still pretty far from that transition, but it seems to be the direction science is taking us.

I have a few more thoughts to share on this idea of “truth”.  There’s a good chance that we live in a universe with infinite parallel universes along side us.  The universe may well be a cyclic process with new big bangs happening all the time.  A universe is born from random quantum fluctuations, expands and expands, until it’s so thin it’s basically nothingness, and then random quantum fluctuations cause other big bangs, and so on, indefinitely.  The random fluctuations provide the initial conditions and raw material for us to work with.  We’re dealing with an eternal creation machine making every possible reality, with every possible law of physics.  What would the “truth” be?  That is there is no absolute truth?  That anything is possible?

Now let’s take a look at the ultimate end of science — complete mastery of the universe.  Once we achieve some sort of perfect state of harmony, what do we do with ourselves?  Say we built this grand computer out of ever spec of matter of the entire universe and immerse ourselves in every conceivable fantasy and paradise.  What then?  We’d have to periodically erase our memories to free up space for new memories.  Otherwise the entire universe would be consumed with storage of our past memories.  So in time, its inevitable that we’d have to forget things that have happened to us.  No matter how precious the memory, a romantic encounter from 2 billion years ago would eventually have to be thrown out to make room for new experiences.

If you think this through, imagine what you would you use your computational power for?  Say you enhance your brain and powers.  What are you going to want?  I’d presume you’ll want a virtual experience that’s very difficult to overcome, pushing you to the limits of your abilities.  Otherwise it’d be boring.  The only way to enjoy harmony is to rid ourselves of emotions as we know them.  I can’t conceive of a world without our emotions.  They make life worth living.  Emotions and feeling.  Being challenged.  They’re core laws and important creation factors of the universe.  And you’re definitely not going to want the “strategy guide” loaded into your mind, telling you all the answers to beat the game.  What fun is that?

Maybe we all complain about this world because it seems the difficulty setting is too high.  Most of us are so weak, without working together we can’t accomplish anything.  But maybe long long ago, we’ve beaten this game of life before.  We all sat in virtual reality and said to ourselves, “I’m bored.”  ”Me too.”  ”Let’s erase everything and immerse ourselves in the beginning.  We’ll work together and do it all over again.  I wonder how we’ll solve this game of infinite solutions this next time?”  Just a thought.  But if we’re finite beings, I don’t think many of us realize what the word “infinite” really means.  It never ends.

My conclusion these days is to embrace the world’s struggle as it is.  Try to overcome it as best you can, and find ways to work together.  This is some sort of cooperative experience.  I say this all with reservation though.  There is a lot of suffering and misery here.  As I said before, you have to realize that any speculations about the “big picture” of life are just that — mere speculation.  If you don’t agree with me, I’m not going to stone you to death, and I don’t believe you’re going to hell.

Well everyone, it’s official.  Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law.  You can be thrown into prison indefinitely, without a trial, without evidence being brought against you, all at the executive branch’s whim.  What a way to start the new year.

This is a sad time.  Almost pathetic.  I’m sure most of you have taken a civics class.  We all know this is not American.

I may be a bit of a recluse at times, but I know, I just KNOW that people can see that this is the wrong direction.  People know the government has no right to spy on them.  They know they should be innocent until proven guilty and have a right to proper due process.  They deserve a speedy trial, should be given a lawyer if they can’t afford one, and shouldn’t be tortured.  People know that locking up a person indefinitely in a prison, without a trial, is wrong.

By signing this into law, our president has shown that he doesn’t stand for freedom or American values.  I could never vote for Barack Obama in good conscience.  And this isn’t the only issue I have with him.  He bailed out the banks and has failed to properly regulate them.  The global economy is still in struggling, in large part because of Wall Street’s casino, with its corruption and financial derivative schemes.  We’ve seen no pressure for regulation and the restoration of a sane financial system.

Many people seem to believe Obama saved us from a major depression.  All he did was stuff the banks full of money when they were going bankrupt and now they’ve returned to business as usual.  Certainly you haven’t forgotten about the record bonuses Wall Street executives were paying themselves with bailout money?  Even so, I’m not surprised.  Half of Obama’s cabinet members are bankers and former Wall Street executives.

We have police state legislation being passed and our civil liberties are becoming a thing of the past.  Our government is continuing to spy on us.  Worthless wars continue to be waged in the middle east, draining our resources.  Criminals are being locked up in publicly traded, privately owned prisons, which are raking in huge profits by imprisoning our citizens over petty crimes.  The drug war continues on.

Our infrastructure in in shambles.  I want Obama out of there.  He’s not standing for you or for me.  All I see is a man consolidating power in the executive branch and socialism for the rich.

So who else do we have to choose from in our next election?  Mitt Romney will tell you anything you want to hear.  He’s the cardboard cookie-cutter politician.  He has about as much backbone as a piece of taffy.

Newt Gingrich is a career politician who left his wife as she was dying of cancer.  A friend of his said that Newt was worried she wasn’t young or pretty enough to be the wife of the president, and of course, she had cancer.  He was paid millions of dollars to consult Freddie Mac before it went bankrupt.  He’s morally bankrupt.   Just look at him.

Rick Perry can’t even remember his simple talking points.  He’s outside praying for rain.  Michelle Bachmann can’t seem to get her facts straight three quarters of the time.  It seems we can’t have a single debate without her throwing out a real zinger from the twilight zone.  Rick Santorum, well, he’d be much happier if he lived in the middle ages.  And let’s all hope Sarah Palin stays out of the mix.  We’ve had enough of her.  I don’t expect her to run, but I wouldn’t put it past her to try to keep us all in suspense.  The more media exposure, the higher ratings for her reality show, and I’m sure her and Bristol have books to sell.

There is one candidate we mustn’t forget about – Ron Paul.

It’s been strange watching things unfold.  It’s obvious the media has been trying to shut him out.  Even after winning the Iowa caucus, he’s still ignored.  That tells you something is up.  Politicians wish to be viewed as an outsider.  John McCain’s entire campaign last year tried to brand him as an outsider maverick, ready to change things in Washington.  Well if you want a real maverick, take a look at Ron Paul.  He fits that description better than anyone I’ve ever seen.  The mainstream media hates the guy.  The man rocks the boat, that’s for sure.

Here’s the issues I support him on:

1.  He’ll end the wars and bring the troops home, saving us trillions of dollars.  The terrorism threats are greatly exaggerated, and people know it.  Ron Paul will help calm the nation down.

2.  He’ll restore our civil liberties, end the privately owned prison racket, and put an end to the worthless war on drugs.

3.  He’ll fight for transparency in the banking system, and demand audits of the Federal Reserve’s books.  Ron doesn’t take any nonsense when it comes economic issues.  After all, that’s the very reason he entered politics to begin with.

4.  He’ll balance our budget and save our country from bankruptcy.

The White House has a lot of control over the initial framing of the budget, as well as the military, FBI, and CIA.  That’s why I think he could actually do the four things I just listed.  As for his more extreme positions, I don’t think Congress will let him have his way.  They won’t let him abolish the FDA or EPA.  They’ll probably let him lower taxes, but not by much.  All in all, they’ll hold him in check.

I think he’s the best candidate out there, even if I don’t agree with him on everything.  His main message is we’re broke, we need to balance our budget, stop policing the world, and respect the constitution.  I’m with him on all those things one hundred percent.  I know he’s a honest guy who believes in free markets, and he’d be tough on wasteful spending.  Though a lot of people think America is invincible, and that normal economic laws don’t apply to us, I assure you they do.  We can’t continue the deficit spending.  It has to come to an end and it might as well be now.  Things will only get worse the longer we prolong things.

Many will tell you that voting for Ron Paul is throwing your vote away.  They say he’s unelectable.  But I can’t take any more of the standard, run of the mill Republics or Democrats.  Barack Obama, a Democrat,  promised to end Guantanamo, promised to bring the troops home, we were going to have a public option, Wall Street was going to be reformed, he was going to get our spending under control, and our civil liberties were going to be restored.  But what happened?  Nothing.  All we’ve received is excuses.  The typical blame game.  I’m tired of excuses.

Obama was elected on a huge swing of momentum.  Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate.  He could’ve done many of the things progressives wanted, but he didn’t.  Why?  He’s not serving you.  He’s serving his corporate masters.  He told us all we wanted to hear, and then when he got in office, he ignored us.  But as election time rolls near, he’s going to come back to us on hands and knees pleading, “Baby forgive me.  I know I did ya wrong, but I’ve been doing some thinking.  I’ve changed.  Hear me out.  We can make this work.”  It’s time for us to move on.

Do we go back to the Republicans?  No.  There’s a reason Obama had the massive initial momentum he did.  Remember all the boo’s during Bush’s farewell parade back to Texas?  We didn’t like that guy.  A vote for Romney or Gingrich is basically asking to put Bush back in office.  Don’t do it.

That leaves us with only one choice:  Ron Paul.  Even if you don’t like some of his ideas (and to be honest, a few of them scare me as well), consider the points I made.