The accumulation point, the greatest phenomena since the big

Post Reply New Topic

Meta-evolution, the evolution of evolution, is revealed by the acceleration, by steps, of complexity acquiring ratio along time. 10,000,000,000 years were spent in order to create life. Then, 3,000,000,000 more years were necessary for life to develop sexual reproduction and become more complex than bacteria. 500,000,000 year were then needed for the creation of language, an extraordinary complexity accumulation machine. 200,000 years lasted then for the creation of computers, machines that will soon be projecting and creating, autonomously, other machines more improved than their own, machines that will project and produce other machines even more improved towards a non ending way. 100 years will have been spent for the computers, these projected evolution beings, to raise the next step, creating even more complex, and evolutively superior being than itself. Such beings will need only 10 years to create something new, entering at another evolutionary step. 1 more year will then be needed for the next step, 1 month to the following, and then 1 day, one hour, one minute ... and the meta-evolutionary develop will achieve the accumulation point, the moment in which a vast number of evolutionary steps will be surpassed. It will be the greatest event since the big bang.

In principle, such event should spend an unlimited amount of energy, a deep problem for us that will be burnt before it. There is a hope, anyway, that quantum mechanics is not the definite theory, the ultimate true. Thus, there is a hope that miniaturization can be indefinitely proceeded, as well as energy consumption. The impossibility of coping such obstruction will lead to apocalypse.

I didn't know, previously, about what was called “singularity”, that is basically what I described. Differences stem that accumulation point was inferred from the general evolutive scenario, and by the equation describing both phenomena. While singularity is described by a simple exponential function, the accumulation point is depicted by an exponencial succession function in which the following one is more biased than the previous.

Your equation is merely a loosely composed soup of vaguely related factors curve-fitted an exponential model. Wolfgang Pauli coined the phrase not even wrong, and that's all there is to say about it.