Registered: May 2009
Technology and questions
Steve Jobs is never afraid to knife the baby. — Mike Daisey
Science works. It’s the best way we know of solving problems. — Sydney Brenner
Kubrick’s vision seemed to be that humans are doomed, whereas Clarke’s is that humans are moving on to a better stage of evolution. — Marvin Minsky, “The Emotion Machine”, 2007
http://books.google.com/books?isbn=0743276647 “The Emotion Machine”
Most of the great successes of exact science have ultimately come from finding mathematical formulas to describe the evolution of a system. But this requires that the evolution be computationally reducible, so that the computational work can just be reduced to evaluation of a formula. “A New Kind of Science” shows however that among most systems computational reducibility is rare, and computational irreducibility is the norm. This explains some of the observed limitations of existing science, and shows that there are cases where theoretical prediction is effectively not possible, and that observation or experiment must inevitably be used. — Stephen Wolfram
According to Warren Buffet, one of the problems with contemporary academic business administration programs is too much focus on what is measurable instead of what is meaningful. “Warren Buffett has observed that there is no need—indeed it is positively deleterious— for an investor to try constantly to come up with new ideas. He has said that it would better if the newly minted graduate of a course on investments were issued a punch card with twenty holes in it, or even fewer, which would represent all the investment concepts he would ever be entitled to try…” (p. 24, “The Midas Touch” by John Train).
http://books.google.com/books?isbn=1897597290 “The Midas Touch”, 2003
In the simplest terms of action, are there two main things to know: what to do and what not to do? If we think of physics in terms of the electromagnetic, strong, weak, and gravitational interactions, then might we say that physics is 95% electromagnetism, 2% strong force, 2% weak force, and 1% gravitation? In any case, is an understanding of electromagnetism and computational structure essential for understanding reality? If we believe Buffett and Wolfram then should we try to work within our circles of competence and attempt to be cautious and mentally flexible in dealing with computational irreducibility? Does problem solving sometimes require looking at things from two relevant but basically different viewpoints?
Consider some hypotheses:
WITTEN + WOLFRAM = COSMOLOGICAL REVOLUTION
CRICK + KURZWEIL = MAMMALIAN REJUVENATION
Reductionist Formulas + Emergent Irreducibilities = Conceptual Boundaries
da Vinci + Deming = OPTIMIZED QUALITY CONTROL
BEN FRANKLIN + DICK FEYNMAN = TECHNOLOGICAL OPTIMIZATION
Should you try to organize your life according to principles and goals? And, if so, how? Human short-term memory can contain 7 ± 3 items. Thus you might periodically put, for examples, 4 basic principles and 3 basic goals into your short-term memory. Consider some slogans:
KISS — Keep it surprisingly simple. (Or, Keep it simple, Stupid!)
DOPE — Discover other people’s emotions.
SITWET — See it their way, every time.
IBIS — Imitate best-in-show.
What should you ask yourself? How, when, and where can you use your talent, experience, motivation, knowledge, and opportunity? How can I find a mentor? How I become part of a self-help network? What experiences do I have and what experiences do I need? What are my basic motivations? What knowledge do I have now? What new knowledge should I acquire? What are my opportunities in business and other domains? Which opportunities are best suited to my situation? How shall technology affect my life over the next 10 years? According to S. George Djorgovski in his talk “Evolving Science and Technology in Cyberspace”, one important question for us is : ”What comes after the Web and Internet?”
http://tedxcaltech.com 14 Jan. 2011 Feynman Influence
Even the shrewdest men are apt to be wildly astray if they prophesy so much as ten years ahead. — Bertrand Russell, “Unpopular Essays”, 1950, p. 162
http://books.google.com/books?isbn=0415473705 “Unpopular Essays"
What are the 10 greatest questions in science, technology, and the psychology of consciousness? What are the 10 greatest insights from Archimedes, Leonardo da Vinci, Newton, Gauss, Maxwell, Einstein, Fermi, Pauli, Feynman, Edison, Tesla, Mendeleev, Robert Robinson, Linus Pauling, Darwin, Pasteur, Ben Franklin, John von Neumann, Stephen Wolfram, Ray Kurzweil, Francis Crick, and Sydney Brenner? Does ultimate truth unify science, technology, art, and religion? What are the 10 greatest questions that any human being can possibly ask? Is life a trade-off between meaning and purpose, on the one hand, and possibility and causality, on the other hand? What meanings and purposes might optimize consciousness? In terms of science and technology, what might be the possibilities for consciousness, meaning, purpose, and achievement? In terms of consciousness, what is real and important and what is unreal and unimportant? What are the basic possibilities for the origin and evolution of life? Translated from the Aramaic, Jesus of Nazareth said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” Translated from the Arabic, Mohammed of Mecca said, “I am the last and greatest prophet of God.” Are the 2 preceding statements profound clues for understanding human psychology? What is the best way to organize thought, action, and knowledge? What are the 10 most important truths, goals, and hopes for people? What is life beyond causality and randomness? What is the molecular psychology of belief in God? What is the molecular psychology of belief in prophecy?
Last edited by David Brown on 04-29-2011 at 03:03 PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged