Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

To The Next Type of Civilisation

  1. Jun 2, 2004 #1
    I'm writing to you, whom I hope to call my friends, rather than write Dr. Kaku personally, which would not only be an unproductive step toward my goal, but I quickly realised that with the existence of this forum, my real goal is here, and is certainly furthered by my membership with you.

    I listen to Dr. Kaku at every opportunity, on the Pacifica Station where I live, and also when he appears on Coast to Coast AM. He is most stimulating and quite brilliant, of course.

    I adopt fully his theory of the evolution of civilisations, and I've begun a web space a month ago to try to effect positive global change of the kind that's truly needed.

    I in no way am attempting to "siphon away" good people from this forum, because you will hear from me often.

    I would like to invite only those people who are intrigued by the concept of mass consciousness having the power to effect positive global change.

    And to also draw the attention of those who may have read Dr. Roger Nelson's work at Princeton, where he demonstrated the effect that a collection of minds in concerted thought may have on computers generating random numbers.

    Would you consider paying a visit to the Project Global Consciousness web space when it's convenient for you?

    You can find it by entering the words, separated by hyphens, in your browser's address field. It is a dot org.

    Thanks, and I will be here again.

    Kenneth T. Davis

  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 2, 2004 #2

    I tried http://www.project-global-consciousness.org/ [Broken]

    and it did not work, please post the link

    Global Consciousness interests me, have you heard of M-Fields? I think that is what they are called. If you have I am sure you have heard of the 100th monkey story, but if not let me know or do a google search
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  4. Jun 2, 2004 #3
    In Response to Entheos

    Greetings, Entheos, it's a pleasure gnowing you.

    Sorry, just a sample of my witless wit. Forgive me, please.

    To your message, first: thank you for asking about the story of the 100 monkeys.

    I know it and I think of it often—whenever I have the frustrating experience (perhaps you've had it, as well), of "inventing" a brilliant notion; or I decide I've discovered something that's never before been seen, an idea never once imagined.

    Then, usually within a day or an hour, I find that it's been done to a fare-the-well. It's been thought of, written, copyrighted, for god's sake.

    One of the early discoveries I made after registering the domain name http://project-global-consciousness.org/ [Broken] —

    (yes, you got it right, Entheos. When you entered the domain in your browser you should have been taken to the opening page, which is a picture of the Earth spinning in space. One is asked to "touch" the earth to enter the forum).

    The forum, by the way, was revamped this past weekend. Newer and, I believe, more versatile software was installed. I'm still in the process of perfecting it, so you can imagine I'll be occupied busily for the next few minutes.

    I soon discovered, after believe me, that name came into my mind, Project Global Consciousness, Dr. Roger Nelson's work at Princeton which he calls the Global Consciousness Project.

    No one has to believe me, really. That's the beauty of what Dr. Nelson and I (and most assuredly others) are in the process of exploring: the connection that exists between and among the mass of human conscious thought. Unconscious or wide awake.

    You can follow the random number experiments and other things Roger Nelson is up to here: http://www.parapsych.org/members/r_d_nelson.html [Broken]

    He's quite a lovely chap. He's on my mail-shot list and he's stooped so low as to include me in his—telling me about his vacation and such.

    As to the concept of the "Noosphere," a few weeks ago there existed just one reference of any worth via google. Now, when one enters the word, myriad pages are presented. Parties of every imaginable persuasion have taken the sphere and run with it. Take your pick.

    Teillhard De Chardin is quoted:

    According to Teillhard, there exists, beyond the laws of physics, another fundamental principle of organization of the universe, another dimension: the infinitely complex.
    Starting from the simplest to the most complex, all matter can be put in allignement along an axis, from the most elementary particle to the most complex organism.
    In this progression towards an ever increasing complexity, of which the human being is the highest grade, evolution is not linear but proceeds by a series of quantitative then qualitative leaps.
    When a level of complexity reaches its point of maximum complexity, it jumps to a new different level and organization of its wholeness.
    The more matter becomes complex, the more it approaches to awareness.
    The propellent force of this evolution comes from the cosmic and all-encompassing physical-moral force of Love.
    With the human being, Love begins to actualize in tangible form its potential.
    Yet the human being is only one of the stages: the unification of humanity on a world scale coincides with the emergence of noosphere, the world of thought, the global consciousness.
    This process is inevitable: should it not happen, humanity would dissolve.
    There is no doubt though:
    "Willingly or unwillingly, all our directions and needs converge to the same place".
    We all converge to the final goal, everything is directed towards the Omega point, humanity's natural point of convergence, of access, through the second coming of Christ in glory, to the creative unification of the world in God. ​

    Please forgive the lengthy material, but I could not find this, once before having located it on the internet, so my notes are all that's extant, I'm afraid. At least the quote here is still attributed to De Chardin. I can't say for certain what the hands of others have done with the words.

    Please substitute whatever you wish for "christ." That was the point of common reference at the time of De Chardin.

    I write about love, most certainly, in my work. I am dedicated, at this stage of life more than ever. To do something, simply put, to leave the world better off for my having been here.

    That's more than enough now from me.

    The site where some of my short essays live is here:

    http://project-global-consciousness.org/weblog/ [Broken]

    Ken Davis

    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  5. Jun 2, 2004 #4
    What is your opinion on the first item of this thread

    Also, on the nature of http://superstringtheory.com/forum/superboard/messages4/138.html [Broken]? Do you believe consciousness could be attached this fundamental nature?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  6. Jun 2, 2004 #5
    Thank you for question, Sol2.

    But first, I feel an urge to bore you just a bit, with a familiar and oft-heard paranoid delusion heard at random moments when fine minds gather to confer collegially with other minds supremely disciplined, like yours.

    The fraudulent fear, which is essentially paranoia, and is most frequently muttered by insecure university freshmen; or worse, by their campus elders, who are so highly suspended aloft by the upward pull of the equisite rarity of their gifts. Such gifts must ascend, it may be, with their owner up and up to ever rarer air, without regard for their steward's need for richer breathing down below on solid earth.

    One says the air itself, by its nature—or because it lacks much natural stuff, is the cause of frightening psychoses of the type that scatter professors' wives at cocktails, to the cloak room, in preparation for the night to soon be done.

    So now to your first question: your kind request for my opinion re: the opening thread of this here bindle. I ask you, sir, is this a vetting? The qualifying test to order out the welcome mat or not. Quickly. Quickly now, pull it in. With shame's assistance with him we will be done!

    This is test? If not entirely so, enough of one to serve the vetting purpose, with which I wholeheartedly agree! This test I fail. Take comfort knowing you will not soon see me shaking hands with Brian D. Josephson, Department of Physics, University of Cambridge.

    I know only what I know, And of primary importance, were I to try a foolish, nebbishy thing like rate my knowledge on some 5-D plot (it would have to be 5-D, to allow for, perchance, the noosphere to count for number 5, just after Time, waiting to serve its purpose to describe the knowledge shared in common by the monkey-shines 100, one subject, among the others, contained in your first note to me.

    I only know enough to be sooo silent as it concerns those things about which my ignorance is truly flamboyant.

    Kenneth T. Davis

  7. Jun 2, 2004 #6
    But first, I feel an urge to bore you just a bit, with a familiar and oft-heard paranoid delusion heard at random moments when fine minds gather to confer collegially with other minds supremely disciplined, like yours.

    If I had the discipline you give me credit for, I can assure you, that I would have spent time with the best of them?:) But lacking the college scene, maybe in another lifetime, having spent almost thirty years in a postion that is far remove from the minds of those who gather here.

    I once attended a lecture by a theosophist, and listening, he made me aware that there are tendecies in some individuals to read and read, gather library's of books, and remain secretive about it.

    It so happen a man came to visit him and began to talk with interest about issues with this theosophist, and he decided to show him that library of books he had collected. Well, I'm sort of like that.:)

    Although seeing where minds venture, if I can see something might move them forward I would most certainly contribute. I'm not always right and I like to hope that better minds then mine will correct so as not to create a disturbance.

    Group mind. It has not past my attention, that many minds can gather here, and we do not know each other at all. Yet there something in common?

    The jest of what I wanted to show you was the imaging, and a emotive consequence of a planet like earth might have in the "weather"?

    There are many boards in which http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@148.xiSLb2mhfCp.1@.1dde3fdf [Broken] are taking place. I list a few of them in my heading
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  8. Jun 3, 2004 #7
    My Dear Friend…


    I'm quite relieved at your response.

    You took it in good fun and you accepted my self-deprecating style. I am very pleased and happy you responded at all, because I almost believed myself, that such exclusivity in a "far-from-the-Mensa-ing-crowd," such as the kind that assembles here, would definitely see through my feeblemindedness.

    You know, I understand, finally, why I couldn't sit through "Mommy Dearest," the story told by Joan Crawford's adopted daughter.

    My mother wasn't that bad, really. She was a teacher. The worst she did was bring me her prize student's paper and drop it in my face while I was watching Star Trek (the original).

    What I've lately been inspired to do, and this has grabbed my energy and left nothing for television (Thank GOD), but I do miss books—that is books other than CSS, Designing Without Tables.

    It was my chore to set the dinner table, what!?

    The truth is, I've read, and re-read the posts for which you asked me to offer my opinion. I can formulate a decent one. But for me, it would take the same amount of careful study and analysis to write the answer, that I'd feel I was deserving of an Associate Professorship somewhere, as well.

    I can't think on my mind that fast. But the concepts are the most worthy of thought I can think of.

    Thanks for the message,

    I look forward to another go.


  9. Jun 3, 2004 #8
    To The Next Type of Civilisation...

    It's got to be simple and easy then,right.

    If we considered the progression in evolution of our brains, there is something strange about the emotive states of existance, that can seem quite primitive in the brain structure. Steadily, through evolution, minds have been working the brain and have been taking a shape?

    I just believe the imaging is one direction that we are going and can contain a heck of a lot of information.

    Now are there comparisons to this global consicousness. I know of one that you might find interesting. Think about the possibility of seeing earth in its entirety the first time. It's more then just the challenge of longitude and lattitude, and the whole time we are just farmers in the field?

    While moving to the "three coordinates," all of a sudden we realize there is another dimension to the reality of living on this planet :smile: Whose going to start thinking outside the box?

    EM(Edgar Mitchell): Well, it's been a thirty-year quest. We still don't have all the right answers, but to reduce it to its quickest explanation, just in the last few years we've discovered something called the quantum hologram, which seems to be a major discovery to bring a scientific understanding of this subjective or inner experience. At least it's a major contributor to why consciousness as we experience it is what it is. It's a quantum physical mechanism. In other words, you have to understand quantum physics to be able to really understand how it works. But let me just give you a few comments about it.

    First of all, it's a non-local structure. What that means, for example, is whereas for thousands of years mystics have been saying that somehow the universe and everything in it is interconnected in some mysterious way, that way corresponds to what has been discovered and known in quantum physics for about seventy-five years. What hasn't been understood is how it applied to human beings. It's called non-locality that the universe has interconnection--which Einstein calls "spooky action at a distance" but which seems to be that which we're looking for and talking about--that will help tie the scientific experience and scientific expression with the mystical experience. To me that's very important. That's what we've been looking for, for a long time.

    http://www.lightworks.com/MonthlyAspectarian/2001/November/conversation.htm [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  10. Jun 3, 2004 #9
    Re: Edgar Mitchell; the rest of the story…

    You know, I remember now hearing about Dr. Mitchell's personal path and his founding of the institute. Thanks for the link. It will surely be a useful addition to my desktop database.

    Let me address what you said about imagery and the primitive "flight or fight" part of our lower brain—the lizard brain (the psychologists call it)—and it's also the place where paranoia and various other mental illnesses have their origin.

    That is, except for I think, the class of "neurotic" type illnesses, such as obsessive-compulsive, fear of elevators, and the like.

    They are a dysfunctional reaction to our environment, a higher mental process, I believe, than the chemical stew brewed up in the inner clump of grey matter involved, like the alligator slashing around.

    As for imagery, more specifically, I happen to have some experience in this area, and without going into all of it, let me just tell you my conclusions re: the nature of the human imaging process, its origins, how we use it, and so forth.

    In the days when we humans, -sapiens of some sort, grouped into families, tribes, little bands of nomads, you get the idea. This must have been just before the advent of fire, really, because my theory works better without the discovery. It is dark, dark, really dark.

    The men or women who hunted returned to the gathering place. It was probably a cave. If not a cave, then a rocky mesa, "box" canyon, or some type of strong, protective cover.

    When night came, the group were frightened. Language—then becoming more necessary due to the darkness—I mean, you want to know who or what it is that's coming up behind you. You yell out, or whisper, your identifier. What will someday become your name, and soon you'll get a surname. "Smog" of "Glog". "Klaus von Haus". And then where you're from becomes a blessing or a curse. It can get you killed even in this day! But that's diverging from the subject.

    Back then language brought comfort in the dark. Stories were told. Those individuals, (harry they were, I hope) those who had the intelligence—and the capacity to imagine took centre stage.

    You remember being read a story? You surely remember, as those fortunate enough to receive the BBC still know. When a story is told to you in the darkness, especially there in the dark, you form pictures in your mind.

    Importantly too, is the teller of the tale—she's back now, breathless. She's the individual returning from the hunt, she had to see the visions in her head as well, to be able to relate the story of the hunt back to her audience.

    Thus we developed the capacity to see in the dark, and to also remember and learn. Was this the dawn of sentience? The awakening of the consciousness we now enjoy?

    I think so. I think it's as plausible as any other method described of coming "awake."

    In one of my essays at my site I tell of my time with a "school of enlightenment," where one may pursue that exalted state and probably get there, too. Given enough discipline.

    The work set forth in the school is not easy. It is a daily, mid-day, nightly regime of exercises. Physical and mental. The mental exercises take the form of imagery.

    You can imagine yourself free of your life's accumulated pain. There is a method taught to do just that. It is a long, solitary, meditation wherein one "sees" himself in a geometric structure. Visitors arrive. Characters from ancient myths, or their archetypes. Maybe your mother comes in for a chat. It's all very marvellous. Effective, too.

    Going to see if Dr. Mitchell has an e-mail address—put him on my send list.

    Thanks, Sol2!

    Kenneth T. Davis

  11. Jun 4, 2004 #10
    If consciousness existed in finer states of being, then we have always believed, then what has entanglement in the matters done for us, as we evolve the brain to something better for seeing?

    This is part of a ole post I wrote in regards to the thinking in relation to Plato' cave and Heisenberg. Shadows are a interesting thing for consideration especially when it comes to defining the line? Geometry was born for some this way:)

    Originally posted by sol1
    Defining Position http://www.superstringtheory.com/forum/futureboard/messages9/122.html [Broken]

    Having trouble knowing where to begin with simple question from a global perspective. How do you put it together except under the holographical understanding of vision?

    http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/platoscave.html" [Broken]

    Now how often, have we seen and experienced the redention of the Allegory of Plato's cave, that helps us set up the thinking in terms of dimensional significance?

    Widing perspectives are necessary thing once we take in the whole earth? What are the chains that bind us?

    What is this awakening then, but the realization that neuronical firing becomes a massive thing when it lights up the world in a different way of seeing? Connecting the dots, and pavingthe way for this new civilization would require some ground work?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  12. Jun 7, 2004 #11
    To Sol2, et al, re: Another Look at the Future

    I have the hope that you'll check in here again, Sol, because I've been away for a long enough time to make me uncomfortable.

    As I mentioned previously, I have, for the past 2 months, been building up my own web space, http://project-global-consciousness.org/ [Broken] and that's taken an enormous amount of my time.

    I suppose my tight budget, but likely more so my pride, will not allow me to ask for any programming help to accomplish the things I need done. Really, though, I undertook this project, as I do most things technical, with the intention to learn applicable skills which will augment my income in the future.

    I've been involved with the hard- and software side of computers since the early 1980s, but I've not become wealthy investing in dot-coms as some have. I'm among the 98 percent of the U.S. population which owns the 50 percent of the capital extant, when considering that just 2 percent of the folks here own the other 50 percent.

    But I do not intend this to be a polemic about the distribution of wealth, because I honestly am content with what I have and with what I earn, although it's not much. My energy has long ago shifted from the political wrangling of the here and now, knowing full well the game of it, and the game is mostly rigged.

    No, I've decided to exert my attention, as mentioned above, toward the possibilities inherent in the future. Not the next term of an elected official, but rather, the next generation of children now being taught by their good parents, I pray, to lead us into a new world of the future.

    Having a stomach for politics or not, one must realise, I humbly suggest, that politics, the art and science of working with people in whichever system of orderly process that's available, is the only way to ensure the hope we have for a different future.

    Take the last century, please, take it ! The era when, undisputedly, there occurred more human misery than any other. Speaking of the suffering we brought upon ourselves; and excluding, for my purpose, the Black Death and Dark Ages, etc.

    Of course, one will also mention for the sake of argument that the 20th century saw the means developed whereby the same suffering was prevented or eliminated.

    I could counter each of the instances of advancement with its associated downside.

    But such is an argument belongs in a college discussion in a course of study which would necessarily focus on such topics. The debates there were always stimulating, rousing, and tended to get one's dander up and flying.

    I was the lonely soul in the class whose contribution to the discussion fell flat, because even that long ago, I realised I suppose, the futility of such thought. Thinking that's perfectly fit to the long-standing paradigm of left v. right, personal freedom v. need of the community for order, redistribution of wealth and compassion for the poor and infirm v. the need of capital and business to flourish and to provide jobs. Do I need to continue?

    In such classes, I would sit quietly and think, "how can we, in the future, invent a society where factions are not set one against the other?" "How will we survive this seemingly unending, insoluble debate: The belief it is inevitable that human society is destined to lay in strata. Locked there like the ages of the geological record! Classes!

    I knew then, as I know now more assuredly than at any other time, our future must be truly without class.

    People will work, of course. Not only for the good of the whole group, but because we humans are creative, and we derive pleasure and satisfaction from our accomplishments.

    At the risk of relying on a reference point used all too frequently in other forums with different, perhaps more frivolous foci, let's consider the Star Trek of the Next Generation, with Jean-Luc Picard, a fictional work where more revelations about the nature of future society were revealed than in any other television program I can think of.

    Why do I mention television, and not books? Because I fear that, no matter what book I refer to, the chances are that most of you who read this note of mine will have never read the book to which I might refer. Except "Stranger in a Strange Land," perhaps?

    Even that book, now, I'm afraid, is not as thoughtful and inventive as regards future society (in any meaningful way), as I once thought long ago. I recently re-read the story it and it reminded me not so much of what it got right—but of how much it lacked.

    Details. I want details.

    You tell me you don't use money in the 23rd century Jean-Luc? Explain that, please. Exactly. Tell me about the division of labour. Tell me about education and preparation for jobs.

    The Star Fleet Academy has a gardener. Tell me about all the people who work in jobs of that sort. Are they self-selected? Or channelled off in one direction or another at school? At what age is this determination of vocation made? How is it made? Is there an appeal possible?

    What has been done with the inherited wealth, the large estates? Today there exists many families with fortunes that stem from 3 or more centuries past. What about the 23rd? Is the wealth confiscated by an act of law? Has all the wealth been wiped out in war, anyway?

    The scenes in the TV show of a future San Francisco reveal no such cataclysm. In your dialogue, the period immediately following us in time is barely mentioned, and always given not more than a word or two.

    If there had been widespread destruction, would future inhabitants rebuild a city to replicate the way it looked in the past? The Golden Gate Bridge? Same colour paint?

    I'd love to hear from you about these questions.

    Kenneth T. Davis
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  13. Jul 8, 2004 #12
    Good News About The Future

    Hello, and thanks for stopping here, at my first post in little while (heh, like that should mean something to you, right?

    Last Saturday night, July 3, 2004 (the year is for posterity), I had the pleasure of listening to Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM.

    His show frequently features Dr. Kaku as his sole guest for 3 hours. I must say that I agree with Art Bell, when he told Dr. Kaku on the air, during his most recent appearance, that Dr. Kaku has taken the torch from Carl Sagan in terms of Michio's ability to popularize the field of astronomy, physics, and science in general.

    I also, I may have mentioned, listen to Dr. Kaku's own radio program which airs on the Pacifica Foundation station here in Los Angeles, KPFK. He most likely has the other stations listed on his website. You might find one in your area.

    Dr. Kaku's program is quite excellent. I believe it will be good for Dr. Kaku, and good for science, too, if we support his show by listening to it and telling others about it, as well (not only here, in this forum).

    Anyway, to the future. Art Bell had as his guest Saturday—withhold judgment, please—an expert on the writings of Nostradamus, the author John Hogue. He's really an expert on Nostradamus's life, as well as his quatrains.

    Well, the conversation with John Hogue filled me with much optimism. Because the impression I was left with at the end of the program is that the future is not fixed. Not set in stone.

    Despite theories to the contrary, predicting many thousands of timelines, all existing in different dimensions at the same "time," I don't believe it. Suppose not even one of those proposed time lines exists—yet.

    The future does not exist. We are creating the future as we travel forward into it. We determine our personal future by our present actions, and the sum of everyone's actions determines the collective future.

    Anyway, I was moved to write a little essay about this theory.

    It would please me tremendously if one or more of you would read my essay, which is titled "I Will Tell You How a Time Machine Works," at my web space called http://project-global-consciousness.org/weblog/ [Broken].

    Kindly respond with your thoughts. I'd enjoy discussing your point of view.

    Kenneth T. Davis

    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  14. Jul 10, 2004 #13

    Well I took the time to read your essay. Your writing is very good, but you like to take your time getting to the substance. On a simple level I agree with you, about the potential of those futures, existing now.

    One of the things that I like to do is to gather information, and see how the trend in thinking was developing.

    On the one hand you have quickly dismissed all aspects and issues of time travel and held firmly to your belief about time, that it would have sufficed I'd say, seeing your contentment. :smile:

    But like all generalizations, there is a greater depth to building that time machine, that must speak too, what is realized in that potential of self.

    Greater memory retention, reflection, corrective actions, projective meetings of new events? How so, completed circles and events that arrive back to where it all began?

    So now what?

    I do the dirty deed then and link, so that you see where the extension of such thoughts about self asked the question of how we could back in time, and know that we cannot change our grandfather. But we can indeed, go back and see what we can change, when ever such situations arrive in similarity, to act accordingly.

    Van Stokum's Cylinder(http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@131.agN2cHVQkdT.0@.1ddea281 [Broken] to understanding Mandalas)

    Mandalas are very symbolic of the time capsules we like to embedded in the soul, for a later time? What are paradigms for change, if it was not to change the soul's perspective, and allow it to the see the world in a way it had seen the world before? Or, to release this time capsule of energy into one's life, so that the progression of the soul would have begun to formulate from such paradigmal changes?


    http://www.the-looking-glass.net/images/alice_ou.gif [Broken]

    Type in google search Liminocentric structures and see what comes up. It is amazing, what can be encapsulated in a very small point. Imagine such structures within, arising from deeper levels of your own consciousness and changing your whole life?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook