Surveillance, Sousveillance, and Self-Understanding

As I write this article it is possible for me to be observed remotely in a number of ways:

-Activating my smartphone's camera or microphone and retrieving data
-Taking a picture of me via my computer's webcam
-Intercepting data packets between me and the web
-Putting in a request to Google for the information being saved to my Blogger account

The NSA is known to participate in surveillance in all of the above ways and more. You can learn more in a number of places online - this video explores some of the leaked NSA documents in detail and is worth a watch if you are so inclined.

Clearly this is bad. Of course, such surveillance is done in the name of National Security but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who buys into the idea of the NSA truly benefiting the public. More realistically, these systems are used to keep an eye on any potential dissent - conveniently labelled as terrorism - so that it can be dealt with pro-actively. As surveillance technology becomes more sophisticated and the world's elite more terrified of a discontent public, this trend will only intensify.

One often discussed outcome of this trend is a 1984-like surveillance state era. This could last a year, a decade, or many generations, but I don't believe it is possible for such a world to last forever - it simply is not a stable state. There will always be a seed of dissatisfaction in the minds of the repressed. As long as that seed exists it will eventually grow to a mighty branch and dismantle the repressive power structures in a (hopefully quick and non-violent) revolution.

How, then, do we handle this situation? How can we avoid an era of repression, however long? Should we destroy the evil cameras, mute the dark microphones of repression, and break the World Wide Web of deception? The impossibility of such notions aside, it is ultimately incorrect to attribute morality to technology. Human beings can use technology to destructive ends, but it is the human doing the deed. Furthermore, as any piece technology is merely an idea manifested in the physical world, it seems impossible to eradicate any particular tech entirely.

Like any idea, the best way to handle our discomfort with technology is to attempt to understand and incorporate it into our reality in such a way that our discomfort disappears. Thus, I will attempt herein to understand our relationship with surveillance technologies and explore some potential implications of this sticky situation.

First, let us consider where the problem lies. I would feel a lot better about being watched if I knew that I could watch my watcher as well. This is called sousveillance - turning the one-way street of surveillance into  mutual observation. Surely this would eliminate some of the negative aspects of surveillance such as political repression - the repressors have a lot more to hide than your average terrorist (read: political activist), and so this forced accountability would certainly bring some positive change in the world.

So, a big part of what makes us uncomfortable with surveillance is the imbalance of access to such technologies and the power structures that arise from this imbalance. Of course, many people are a little uneasy with the idea of their personal lives being put on display, but I consider political repression to be a far bigger problem than personal privacy. I would much prefer the embarrassment of a personal moment being publicized to being jailed and/or killed for my political views. That said, the same logic would apply to personal privacy - being watched in the bathroom would be easier to handle if I could watch those watching me as well. It would be difficult to condemn anyone for an embarrassing personal moment if yours were on full display as well. "Let him without sin cast the first stone". I will discuss the issue of privacy in more depth below.


Now, for the sake of discussion I'm going to make a few assumptions and discuss their implications. I make no claims as to the physical plausibility of the details here, so please spare me any such argument.

A thought experiment.
Let's assume that in the near future nanotechnology (or, perhaps more appropriately, femtotechnology) has progressed to the point where we can embed surveillance devices into atoms themselves. These devices are made of subatomic particles and can be churned out by the mole. These don't change the physical/chemical properties of the universe at all, but quickly become manufactured in such quantity that nearly all of the atoms on our planet have these devices embedded in them. They record every sound and sight (including electromagnetic radiation beyond the visible light spectrum) and store it in perfect fidelity. They are networked in such a way that any one of them has access to all of the information stored in the entire cloud, and can be retrieved at any time by absolutely anyone.

If you're not convinced or don't understand the above, the mechanism here is really irrelevant. The point is that at any time, any individual can access any information about any other individual, past or present. This is a powerful idea with some intriguing implications.

Let's consider first the result this would have on our political power structures. The political, financial, and corporate elite would have all of their secrets laid out on the table for everyone to see. Their deceptions and agendas would be clear as day, and this alone would likely lead to some fairly wide-spread social and political changes. Even the court of law would change drastically, as evidence would be easily acquired to prove or disprove any individual's guilt. Suffice to say, existing power structures would potentially be uprooted completely.

How about our personal lives? It would be nigh impossible to be dishonest - your claims could be verified with ease at any time. What about your darkest secrets? Sorry, not secret any more. That embarrassing fetish of yours? Yeah, your mother knows about that now...alllll about it. This sounds pretty uncomfortable to most people, myself included, but this discomfort should raise a flag in our minds - does it arise from the situation itself or from our relation to it? Perhaps the discomfort can be alleviated not by changing out situation but by understanding and changing our relation to it.

Well, why do we keep secrets? Why don't I want my family watching me have sex, or someone I'm attracted to watching me evacuate after a night of beer and tex-mex? Where does this shame come from? After all, everyone poops and sex is a beautifully human phenomenon. Is our tendency to keep things private a neurosis borne of fear? Fear of ostracism, of rejection, of inferiority, of God etc...these fears are so strong that we carry some of our darkest secrets to the grave. Can we be blamed for such secrecy? Many cultures as well as social circles condemn aspects of natural human behavior to such an extreme that it would be social (and sometimes physical) suicide to fully expose ourselves.

So, how would it impact our lives to have all of our doings on full display for anyone who cared to look? One potential result would be for everyone to behave as if in a panopticon, neurotically conforming as much as possible to some behavioral ideal to avoid social condemnation. This stage would necessarily be temporary - like the surveillance state described above it is simply not stable. There would always be a seed of neurosis resulting from repressing natural behaviors in favor of a social ideal. People would become exhausted by the constant effort required to conform, compounded by the knowledge that everyone else is just as messed up (read: human) as them, and let go completely.

This letting-go is the key takeaway from this thought experiment. A great deal of suffering in the world comes from people lying and hiding themselves in a misguided attempt at protecting themselves. The truth is that we are strongest when we are completely vulnerable, if only we had the wisdom to let our defenses down. Perhaps by showing the absolute extreme of self-censorship and displaying the imperfections of others we can exhaust that part of our minds that tries so hard to maintain composure and show that it was never worth it anyways.

In the end, it comes down to self-love - a quality sorely lacking in modern society. There are some who would be totally unaffected by such a change - those who faced their inner demons long ago and who love themselves so completely that they need not keep any secrets. These are spiritually, emotionally, and often physically healthy individuals. It is unfortunate that not everyone's path leads them to such freedom, but perhaps such a ubiquitous surveillance system would force the entire planet down the uncomfortable but fruitful path of self-understanding.

Certainly there are other less extreme ways to arrive at a place of global self-love, but I don't believe it outside the realm of possibility for surveillance technology to play a big part in re-defining humanity. Just look at the way the internet has altered how humans interact in such a short time!

As a final note, remember that this was a thought experiment founded on some fairly significant initial assumptions. I don't by any means suggest that such a path is one we should strive for, but simply mean to show that it is one potential conclusion of our current relationship with surveillance technologies, and that in the end it may not be a bad one. At the very least I hope that exploring these possibilities will tell us a bit about ourselves. I've had some intense conversations surround this idea and find it prone to producing strong reactions from people - this is excellent and I welcome any criticisms or comments below!

On December 21 2012

At first I felt a little disappointed about the lack of anything huge happening today.

I never saw 12/21/2012 as an apocalypse. I suppose part of me was really hoping that something greater than us would come and fix all of our problems. Mass enlightenment - the dissolution of boundaries between us as individuals, and the collective realization that we are all one eternal being. The rest would simply fall into place - mere details.

The hard truth is that this sort of change can only arise from within us. Whether it be aliens, super-human AI, a change it earth's magnetic fields, or the return of Jesus/Buddha/Abe Lincoln/Whatever savior figure, it is somewhat irresponsible assume a passive role in this. It's a long path, but we are well on our way to moving past this age of individualism. And we have to do it ourselves.

While I knew rationally that nothing was likely to happen today, some part of me, the part that sometimes feels hopeless in face of today's atrocities, really hoped for the punchline to the cosmic joke.

Today's lack of events has shown me that this shit is in our hands. Whatever small part of me held onto this idea of being saved can now turn its efforts to making it happen. For this reason, today was a success in my books.

-----

These thoughts were partly inspired by a speech given be the Tea Faerie, who is always so good at taking my own thoughts and feelings and articulating them such that I understand them better myself.

It's a long speech but worth hearing.

link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jb9zQVbvy0

Non-Duality and Artificial Intelligence

Here's a link to download a PDF version of my honors thesis. Turns out I got an A+!

Get it here

A Sketch of a Bright Future

I haven't posted on here in 2 years, so it's about time now. When I hear of global issues today in the news, it never seems like news to me. Just the same inane process unfolding, getting closer and closer to bursting of its own hypocrisy. Hence, this post. Surely these views and ideas are not all my own, though some are.

The world is full of passionate, intelligent, caring, open people. Human beings are a beautiful species, and the limits of our abilities are virtually non-existent. I believe these statements to be true, but when I take a look at our world today I see something different. Somehow there is a disconnect between the brilliant ideas, the compassionate individuals, and the yearning for a sense of harmony on our planet, and the trajectory of the nations that make up our planet earth.

The reason for this is that there is a small subset of the human population that is in control, using its power to serve its own interests. Of course, this is old news - the people's interest has often been overlooked in favor of special interests such as wealth and power. This is a necessary aspect of the system of hierarchical governance that is ubiquitous throughout our planet today and throughout the course of our history.

Whether a leader assumes power through a violent coup or is voted in democratically, the outcome is similar: once people are in power, they are subject to being overcome by greed and special interests, and public opinion goes out the window. In the case of a democracy, our leaders serve us only insofar as to get re-elected. This is a form of manipulation, not cooperation, not leadership, not servitude. These politicians cannot be blamed, because the problem is at the root of our system - the individuals in power are merely placeholders in a program fraught with error.

Electing a leader or even a party is an extremely low-resolution image of public opinion, both temporally and spatially. I'll use Canada as an example for the rest of this, as it is the country I live in - but I believe that my points will hold universally.

In Canada, we vote for a party in the national elections once every 4 years given a majority government (with a minority government it may be less than that). That is a snapshot, if you will, of public opinion, that only occurs once every 4 years. Imagine watching a video that was composed of stills taken once every 4 years. Perhaps this would be useful for documenting glaciers receding, but surely Canadian public opinion evolves more quickly than that!

Now consider these snapshots of the glacier to be of extremely low fidelity, and you start to get an idea of how Canada (and the rest of the world) is governed. The issues discussed in the months leading up to an election are the issues that the political industry wants to discuss. They are safe issues, easy to understand issues. Issues that are easy to take a side on, and most are discussed with emotionally loaded rhetoric that is engineered to drive the population to take strong, emotionally-based stances on issues. There are also issues that come up during the 4 year period of a party's power. These issues never see the influence of public opinion, unless it is clear that it could influence the next election. The image I hope to describe here is one of an extremely low-resolution representation of the people. Mind you, this is a dramatically simplified overview of Canadian politics, but even if one considers the roles of the various levels of government the same applies.

Our system discourages politicians from being honest. It is not in their interest to be honest about their opinions - they must instead carefully craft them in order to ensure popular vote in the next election. This cripples the chance of any real dialogue between politicians, and turns politics into a popularity contest for power. Again, these people cannot be blamed for this dishonesty - they are playing by the rules (for the most part). The rules are imbalanced and broken.

Once in power, politicians are often indebted to their financial benefactors - the ones who made it possible for them to win the popularity contest through expensive campaigns, which amount to social engineering and quasi-propaganda. Another nail in the coffin of the now comical ideal: "A government of the people, for the people and by the people."

These are the reasons for the staggering disconnect I mentioned above. This system is outdated, conducive to corruption, and every day proves its own inadequacy in a new way. There is a logical method of proof, called reductio ad absurdum, which is Latin for, roughly, "reduce to the absurd". What it amounts to is suggesting a proposition, and following its logical implications until you reach a contradiction. You can then conclude that your suggested proposition is false. This is the point that we have come to with our democracy. We have followed our current system's logical progression, and have now entered the realm of the truly absurd.

How then, do we move on from here? Until recent years, I believe the current system was really our only way - the best we had. Today, we have technologies that can facilitate a new form of government. What I present here today is a rough sketch of a new form of self-governance. One which is non-hierarchical, self organizing, dynamic and truly democratic.

The crux is that for any decision that needs to be made, the entire population is encouraged to contribute to discussion, and ultimately to vote. What makes this system truly organic is that absolutely every aspect of it is open to change, if that is what the people decide. This is a crucial point. No civilization or mode of governance has survived indefinitely, and often they fall through violent revolution. This system removes the necessity of revolution, because built into the system itself is the ability to change its very foundations. I've heard it said that people today find it easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism. Why should any ideology be so rigid that we cannot imagine its end? Clinging to ideas is a source of suffering. It is only by being completely open - considering nothing to be axiomatic - that we can be truly free as individuals and as a society.

I'll begin by describing the voting process, which is likely simpler to implement than the discussion aspect. Rather than voting for a leader who then makes decisions, in this system every person would vote on every decision that the leader would have had to make. Of course, not everybody would want to vote on every issue. Personally, I would probably not participate on decisions regarding the Newfoundland elementary school board. If I cared to, though, I could, and my opinion would matter. The idea here is that people would only vote on issues that concern them in some way. This would result in the votes being in general more informed. If I were forced to vote on the Newfoundland school situation (and every other decision), I would likely vote at random on the votes that didn't concern me, just to get it over with. Switzerland employs a system of (limited) direct democracy that has some similarities with what I describe here.

The discussion aspect of this system is central to the system producing informed, mindful decisions, and is what makes this system, to my knowledge, unique. This would take the form of an online forum and/or wiki, where people could discuss upcoming decisions, what their opinions are and why. Individuals could gain credibility within certain domains of discourse, resulting in their posts having more weight, or possibly their vote having more weight. One possibility is that this form of discourse could render actual voting unnecessary. If a consensus can be reached through discussion, there is no need to vote, and everyone is happy. Of course, comprehensive guidelines would need to be in place to ensure that the discussion doesn't denigrate to emotional mud-slinging and name-calling. More on that topic in a later post.

This level of dialogue has been impossible before such enabling technologies as personal computing and the internet. With today's myriad gadgets in our pockets and on our laps, people are always connected. Social media websites such as Blogger, Twitter and Facebook have shown that people have a strong desire to share their opinions. Intelligent conversations occur online constantly, concerning issues that affect millions of people worldwide. You would never guess it if you turned on a television - that level of discourse is not represented through mass media, because it is impossible to control. The system I propose would make those views heard and allow them to truly influence the trajectory of societies on a municipal, national, and global scale.

As I said, this is a rough sketch of what this system could possibly look like - and it is intentionally vague. Because I am only one person, my conception of this system is probably incomplete and full of holes. The beauty of this system is that an early version could be used to determine its own details. In the form of a wiki, online forum or both, the system would self-organize into something that everyone could get behind. So, all that is necessary is for the seed to be planted, and with some luck and global participation it could grow into a democratic system of governance that is truly of, for and by the people. As far as I can tell, this is the best way to get the highest fidelity image of the public's opinion (short of reading our minds in real-time), resulting in a world that truly reflects the interests of its inhabitants.

Of course, even with a completely horizontal form of government there will be individuals who seek to steer policy in their favor, possibly ignoring the well-being of others. The public discourse, however, would bring these arguments to light. At the end of the day, decisions would be based solely upon reason; any emotionally, selfishly, irrationally, or spitefully conceived propositions would be seen and dismissed as such, hopefully enlightening their proponents in the process. It is in this way that people who seek personal gain over mutual benefit would have no power. In today's society, this self-serving behavior is revered and rewarded.

In fleshing out this idea, I've thought of some potential issues regarding implementation. If anybody has any others, I would love to discuss!

Voting fraud: I've though a lot about how to ensure that every person has a singular presence within this system, and the conclusion that I've come to is that some sort of online ID would be necessary - but one that retains anonymity while being unique. The issue of a global online ID that is directly linked to your person is frightening to some, and with good reason. Perhaps a later post I will discuss the risks, benefits and implications of such a thing.

Accessibility: In discussing this system with others, many have mentioned that not everyone has access to the internet. Sure, not everyone has access at home, and not everyone can even get to a public library. To ensure that everyone is able to participate, some funding would need to go to providing much more accessible internet - perhaps even treating internet access as a basic human right, which has been done by the UN, but (as many things with the UN go) little action has been taken to reflect this declaration.

It is important to note that our current system is not perfect with regards to voting fraud and accessibility. In fact, corrupt leaders have put effort into preventing people from voting, and dead people have even voted in some elections.

Final thoughts:

In my previous post, I discussed the ever-increasing complexity of energy - the tendency for energy to form patterns of patterns of patterns. If a system like this were to be implemented on a global scale, the human race (perhaps even the planet) could begin to take the form of one immensely complex organism, all of its parts functioning in harmony. Here, people start to look strikingly like neurons in a global brain, perhaps signalling the next leap in the evolution of organization. It has been speculated that artificial intelligence will not be realized within the realm of computing but will instead take the form of a global mind. The global adoption of this system, or one like it, could certainly lead us in that direction.

If one considers the human brain, the analogy is strikingly appropriate. Huge numbers of cells, each its own organism, but working together to create something larger than themselves. The cells all have their own unique perspective, and it is not uncommon for a person's mind to be filled with contradiction or mixed feelings. However, the macro-scale trajectory of the person is singular. Likewise, us humans may have different ideas, perspectives, and desires, but the days of isolated countries and colonies are over. The time has come to identify as a planet - the distance between us shrinks every day as our population grows and our communication becomes more sophisticated. We must act accordingly - as a whole, made up of billions of unique parts. The system I propose is the central nervous system of this being - the neural framework necessary to facilitate such unity.

Achieving such global unity signals the end of the zero-sum game, and the beginning of a world which is more like a dance among brethren than a battle between enemies. In dancing, there is only the joy of being, both as an individual and as part of the dance, the music - part of something greater than one's self.

The next step: Where is life headed?

There is a lot of talk of an endtime for the human race. The rapture, the singularity, the end of the Mayan calendar, massive cosmic collision, call it what you will. Regardless of the nature of this end-all event, or eschaton, the theme is clear amongst its many interpretations. It is believed by many that in the (near?) future the world as we know it will be unrecognizable.

This post will be somewhat a continuation of my last post, which outlined a fractal model of the universe.

In order to understand where we are headed, it is important to consider from whence we came, and more importantly to define what is meant by "we". It is rather egocentric to consider this future as a future concerning only human beings. Perhaps a more appropriate perspective would be to consider homo sapiens as merely a part of the ever-evolving entity that I will henceforth refer to as life. For the purposes of this essay, under the term "life" I include any form of organized energy.

In this sense, "life" can be used interchangeably with "enthalpy". Enthalpy is the opposite of entropy, or disorder. According to the laws of thermodynamics the overall entropy in the universe must always increase over time, although in smaller systems it may decrease. For example our computers may organize data on a hard disk plate, creating an increase in enthalpy - order - within the system of the hard drive, but the process of doing so releases heat and thus creates an overall increase in entropy within the universe as a whole. Right then...

Having defined my terms, I will trace life's evolutionary footsteps since the big bang:
*The actual times of these events are more or less irrelevant for my purposes - their order of appearance is what's important here

1) Planck time following the big bang: massive amounts of energy exist in a tiny amount of space. Energy and matter are interchangeable, with particle/antiparticle pairs coming in and out of existence. This is the first step: the ascent from energy to matter. This is the scale that theoretical physicists focus on.

2) As the universe cools and expands, subatomic particles come together to form atoms. Over time more and more complex - heavier - atoms are created via various stellar phenomena. This is the second step: the ascent from subatomic particles to atoms. This is the scale that particle physicists focus on. You can see a pattern forming here - each milestone of complexity coming together with others of its magnitude to form a higher order structure. Moving on..

3) As these atoms collect together, their very nature causes them to bond such that they form molecules - structures made up of two or more atoms. You guessed it, this is the third step: the ascent from atoms to molecules. This is the scale typically studied by chemists (my assignment of professions to these scales is for illustration purposes only and is intentionally vague). Keep in mind that as life evolves into organization of higher orders, the lower-order processes are all still occurring, but if you choose to focus on a given scale the workings of lower order scales can be implied. This is why modern chemistry for example can exist at all without having a complete understanding of, say, quantum mechanics. Of course, a more complete understanding of lower levels certainly sheds light onto higher levels, but we are able to explore phenomena at various scales simultaneously without our models of the lower scales being complete.

4) In the case of our planet earth, molecules began to grow more and more complex, as did their interactions. Amino acids - the building blocks of biological life - formed and, through some process - against all odds, some would say - cellular life came into being. This was a rather large leap in complexity: multitudes of different molecules working harmoniously to form one organized entity called a cell. Cellular life is also the first form of life that strives for self-preservation. Molecules are formed and destroyed constantly, but cellular life seems to do whatever it can to ensure its own survival, including reproducing in order to perpetuate its species. This is the fourth step: the ascent from molecular to cellular life. This is the scale that biologists - specifically bacteriologists - focus their studies upon.

5) After some time, groups of cells developed an altruism that allowed for them to work together to create multi-cellular life, or eukaryotes. Self-preservation became second to the survival of the group, and over time a eukaryotic life form would lose all of its original cells during its lifespan, but would remain the same overall structure and function due to the reproduction of its individual cells. This is the fifth step: the ascent from single-cell life to multi-cellular life. This is the scope of many scientific discourses, for this level of structure includes us homo sapiens as well.

Between each of these steps exists what I will refer to as an eschaton - an ascent from one order of complexity to a higher one. Each order of complexity, however, undergoes massive increases in complexity between eschatons. The fifth level is perhaps the most dramatic case: moving from structures as simple as a bi-cellular life form to a structure as mind-bogglingly complex as the human brain (no pun intended)!

What this model suggests is that in the future we will experience a similar leap to a higher-order complexity. In many cultures there is reference to cyclical time - history repeating itself. In that sense, history has repeated itself, and it certainly is cyclical but I would suggest that the analogy of an upward (for lack of a better direction) spiral would be more appropriate. The reason I choose the spiral is because with each revolution the amount of time between eschatons is smaller than the last. Also, the upward motion of the spiral represents the increase in complexity with each revolution.

Now, I said this would be related to fractals didn't I? Well, if this model has any truth to it, we will be experiencing the very same phenomena as the highest-order life form experienced at each preceding eschaton, but on a larger scale. The larger scale of things is why things manifest differently. On this scale each of the lower levels is present and thus the level of complexity is proportionately larger.

It is possible to take analogies from lower-order eschatons to make some vague predictions as to how our coming eschaton will manifest. For example, take the ascent from single-cell life to multi-cellular life. The single-celled organisms had to develop ways to communicate with each other and had to lose their self-serving behaviors in favor for altruistic ones in order to benefit the whole. If there is anything to be said about the way technology has shaped the world, it is that communication has become much easier and faster. Indeed, communications technologies are evolving at an accelerating rate, aided largely by the growth of the internet.

So, we've got communication in the works, but what about altruism? Why do we humans find it so difficult to see past ourselves and to work harmoniously with one another? It is clear that when two or more humans work together towards a common goal, there is a certain synergy and they function more effectively than the sum of each individual's efforts - it's no news that two heads are better than one. So what is lacking that would allow the human race as a whole to function as one cohesive unit of a higher-order complexity?

This is an age old question, and one upon which we can only speculate. I would suggest that a common goal is the answer. The problem today is that there are still individuals who lack the resources for even self preservation. On the individual level, each member of the species must have their needs met if they can be expected to expend energy towards a common goal for the species as a whole. Think of cellular life: how can a cell contribute to the well-being of the whole multi-cellular being if lacks the resources to function on an individual scale?

Now, if we must have a common goal, what should that goal look like? The sustainability of our species and - more importantly - our planet seems like a good place to start. Many of us are already on that track, however there are certainly those whose motives are more self serving. What's upsetting is that it's often those individuals who have a great excess of resources who exhibit the most hedonistic behavior.

To throw a sci-fi spin on things (if I haven't already!), consider how contact with an alien race would affect us. Having a race against which to define ourselves as a cohesive unit would certainly contribute to a sense of unity. These aliens could be malevolent, causing us to unite in a military sense, or benevolent, sharing their cosmic wisdom with us and stimulating our growth towards the eschaton.

All things considered, this is really all speculation, which is arguably valuable. At the very least, these things are interesting to consider and doing so is certainly a good mental exercise!

What I personally think is in store for us is related heavily to technology, specifically artificial intelligence...but I will cover this in detail in a later post! For now, I hope this has been as fun to read as it was to write.


"But wait! Hold the phone, Chris! Evolution is a random process! There is no purpose, no direction!"
Absolutely - evolution of complexity is certainly a very chaotic process with no predictable outcome, no absolute vector. One property is constant, however, and that is the fact that life tends to evolve into more and more complex structures. The details of how it gets there are chaotic and unpredictable, but those are irrelevant. What's important is that life becomes more complex over time.

The Universe as a Fractal

Today I will attempt to show that the universe in its entirety can be thought of as a fractal.









First off, we need to establish what a fractal is, and what this means for the universe. A simple example of a fractal would be the Sierpinski Triangle:



To make this triangle, we start with an equilateral triangle - a triangle whose sides are all equal in length, and angles are all 60 degrees. Within this triangle, we draw a smaller, upside-down triangle by connecting the midpoints of each of the original triangle's sides. We then have 4 smaller triangles that all interlock into the shape of one large triangle. We can repeat this process within each of the small triangles to create even more triangles. Indeed, we can do this infinitely.

Now, what's interesting about fractals - including this one - is that each triangle contains all of the information that the whole system does. Given a Sierpinski triangle that continues infinitely in both directions (increasing and decreasing in magnification), you can choose a triangle at any level of magnification and the formula to produce the rest is exactly the same. It doesn't matter where you choose to begin, you will always find the same pattern. This phenomenon is known as self-similarity.

But how does this apply to the universe? I will borrow a concept from Buddhist monk Thich Nat Han called interbeing to illustrate this idea:

Think about a wooden chair. You may look at it and say "this is a chair". The chair is, in fact, everything but a chair. Contained within the information of that chair is the information of the sun, which grew the tree that the chair was made from. The person who made the chair is also within the chair. The lumberjack who cut down the tree, as well as his breakfast that morning are in the chair. Indeed, everything in the universe is within that chair except for the chair itself. The chair is empty of a separate identity. The only way to define the chair is by describing everything but the chair. But then, things other than the chair - your desk, for example - contain the chair within them. But they are in the chair! This makes it difficult to come to a concrete definition of anything.

For those who are more technically inclined, on a smaller scale things are indeed intimately related. The phenomenon of quantum entanglement, where subatomic particles communicate at great distances instantaneously shows that information is indeed exchanged between particles on a level that is imperceptible to us. It has also been shown that shortly after the big bang everything in the universe was entangled.

So, within each piece of the universe exists all of the information of the universe as a whole. Does that sound familiar?

Of course, your chair certainly doesn't look like everything else - it looks like a chair. But the Sierpinski triangle is a simple example of a fractal. The Mandelbrot set, for example, exhibits vast complexity, and there are certainly perspectives of its visual representation that look nothing like the original. But they do represent the same formula, despite their different appearances. What I am suggesting is that the universe, in all its complexity and beauty is realized through a single fractal formula.

Fractal patterning is often found in nature, such as the growth patterns of ferns and other plants, as well as the human circulatory system. Recent studies even suggest that genetic code has a fractal nature.

















A fractal fern

Well, I hope that this has been informative. Later I will describe some further implications of a fractal model of the universe.

Aleph

I'm about to tell you my story. Indeed, it is your story as well. And everyone you know. But it started with a guy named Clyde.

Clyde woke up that fateful morning feeling excited. He was getting paid well for his participation, with the promise that he could very well be a part of something huge. Getting out of bed, he had no idea how huge.

The procedure was to increase Clyde's mental control, much like meditation. He wasn't told much else, not even how long he'd be there. "Be here on time, and expect to be here for a while", was all he was told.

Once Clyde had arrived and been processed, he was sat in an operating room chair and put to sleep. Upon waking, he didn't feel any different, but he was in a much more comfortable room, with beautiful sofas and a roaring fire. Out the window Clyde looked out over a fabulous mountain. This struck him, because when he went to sleep he was hundreds of miles from so much as a large hill.

As this thought came to him, so did the voice:

Clyde, what you are experiencing is a virtual reality. None of this actually exists outside of your mind. During the operation, we implanted a remote beacon to each neuron in your brain. These beacons transmit information about the activity and location of your neurons to our computer, which analyzes this data and sends information back through your sense organs. The information you receive is thus dependent entirely on your brain state. As you might imagine, it is very difficult to produce anything coherent...

Instantly the room disappeared and Clyde's experience became a static abyss. His mind clawed desperately for some coherence but the static overwhelmed him, and for what felt like an eternity each of his five senses felt pure, agonizing chaos.

Then he was back by the fireplace, feeling again the comfort of coherent sensory data. Then the voice:

That wasn't very pleasant, was it? Luckily, you can learn how to control your virtual environment. Let's start with something simple. Look at the screen on the wall opposite the window. We will link its display to your brain state in such a way that it will be capable of displaying any one of the 26 letters of the alphabet, but nothing else. Go ahead; try to manipulate it with your will.

Clyde looked at the screen, which presently looked like any normal television static. He thought of putting the letter "A" on the screen, but to no avail.

Keep the screen out of your thoughts, Clyde. Empty your mind of everything but the letter.

Clyde pictured a large, bold letter "A" in his mind, and tried to clear his mind of anything else. The letter "A" flickered onto the screen.

"I did it!” exclaimed Clyde, becoming excited.

Don't get too excited, you've a ways to go before we're through! Take a while and get comfortable with the alphabet, and then we'll move on to what's next.

It wasn't long before Clyde could manipulate the display to show any letter he wanted. He even started moving between letters to make words. "H-E-L-L-O-W-O-R-L-D", he thought with a smile.

Now you're coming along! Now that you're feeling good about your abilities, we're going to make things a little more complicated. We're going to add color. Now try to create letters with different colors.

Clyde wasted no time. Before long, he was creating multi-colored words on the display with ease. The feeling of having such intimate control over something external filled him with glee. The display became an extension of his consciousness, albeit one with limitations.

Now things are going to get more complicated...the display will consist of a 5*5 matrix of pixels which will either fire or not fire. Try to control the pixels at will, and we'll move onto the next step.

Clyde took to the new task with relative ease, and things went on this way for a while. The display grew in resolution and in color. Before long, Clyde's mind was creating intricate patterns on the display. The display was intimately entwined with Clyde's brain state in real-time, and he began to create beautifully colored, morphing patterns reminiscent of his college days as a psychonaut.

Have fun exploring your abilities, Clyde. We'll know when you want to move on.

What Clyde felt was what artists wish they could feel. Complete continuous control over their medium. The difference between Clyde's situation and that of a conventional artist was that the nature of this experiment had abolished the discrepancies between his mind and his medium. Indeed, his mind was his medium. His creative juices needed no outlet - they were on full display.

Although this sort of pure expression was beautifully fulfilling, Clyde began to wonder what could be next. As this thought came to him, the display went blank.

Already want to move on, do you? We’re going to teach you how to create sounds now. There are speakers attached to the display. They will play a continuous tone of anything within a twelve note octave. Try to produce notes at will – it should be easier now that you have trained visually.

Clyde thought of an old nursery rhyme that his mother used to sing to him, and focused on the first note. His concentration had indeed improved considerably since he began learning to manipulate the visual display, for within moments he had the speakers playing that first note to Mary Had a Little Lamb. Before long, he was moving up and down the chromatic scale with ease.

Like with the visual display, his interactions with the speakers grew more complex. Initially the tones he produced were similar to those of a PC speaker. Soon he was producing sounds from a variety of instruments, and finally he was again limited only to his imagination. Music theory became an unnecessary tool for Clyde, as it is simply a means of describing what sorts of sounds are pleasing. There was no need to understand why these sounds were pleasing, but his ear knew that they were. It became clear to Clyde – who always though of himself as unblessed by any creativity – that what people thought of as creative talent was simply the ability to retrieve their creative insight with minimal loss of information. By practicing and dedicating hours to practicing their craft, artists hone their skills to be able to effectively express their creative essence through their medium. Everyone is able to imagine, it is only a matter of translating inner experience to something that can be shared. Now, for Clyde, imagination was the only step.

Once Clyde had had enough free musical expression, he was trained rather quickly to control the senses of taste, touch, and smell. Possessing impeccable concentration and mental control, he sat on a leather couch feeling proud.

You’ve learned quickly, Clyde. Do you remember how uncomfortable it was when you had complete control over your experience? We believe that you’re ready to try that again…

The room disappeared, and Clyde was thrust into a world which mirrored his mind. The shock of such a drastic and sudden change made it difficult at first to sustain a clear experience, but Clyde knew how to take control. In short order, Clyde was in complete control over his experience. The data coming through his sense organs was entirely determined by his mental state, which in turn was completely deliberated. His control was like that of an experienced lucid dreamer.

Clyde used his God-like powers to experience things that he had always wanted to experience, as well as things he never thought would be possible to experience. He flew over vast mountaintops, dove into deep oceans, made himself the size of a planet and soared through galaxies of his creation. There were limits, however, to the experiences he could produce. Because his brain had a finite – albeit enormous – amount of neurons, the complexity of his experience had a proportionate limit. As much fun as it was to have such control over his experience, Clyde felt that he would grow tired if this was all there was. To reach a plateau – even one so wonderful – meant no more growth.

Suddenly his world distorted, and as hard as he tried he could only maintain minimal control. He knew something was up even before the voice came to him.

You crave more, do you? We’re not surprised, Clyde. You see, people don’t like to feel stagnant. It is human nature to thrive, to grow. Lucky for you, there is still room for growth.

Clyde found himself again in what he now thought of as the lobby. Across from him sat a…person. This person was seemingly genderless, and with the most indescript features.

Clyde, this person – you can think of them as Frank – has undergone the same procedure as you. You will share your control over your experience. You will train together in the same way that you trained individually, but you will have to cooperate in order to produce anything coherent. To keep things simple we have removed any distinguishable features from his representation in this room. It will make the transition much easier, we believe…

The two pioneers shared a glance, and got right down to business.

“Let’s start with an ‘A’” said Clyde…

Letting go of his control made Clyde feel vulnerable at first, and he was reluctant to share with Frank. Soon, however, he learned that letting go was more rewarding than keeping his protective walls in place. Frank’s indescript appearance indeed made it easier to let him into his mind. The two were flying through the training process. With each advance the distinction between Clyde and Frank faded, and they experienced the joy of interpersonal connection. Their brains slowly learned to share the work, similarly to how multiple computer processors can work in parallel to perform complex tasks. By the time they were in complete control of their shared sensory experience, they were functioning as one, and the feeling of being so intimately entwined with another’s creative experience filled the pair with ecstasy. With twice as many neurons at their disposal, the two shared an experience twice as complex. This new frontier of experience kept the pair – it may be more accurate now to refer to them as one…we’ll use the name aleph – busy for some time, exploring this newfound potential. Of course, after a time, aleph began again to long for growth. As this longing took hold, he felt a slight disturbance in his ability to control his experience.

Back in the lobby, aleph met another newcomer. Aleph immediately knew what to do, and trained with this newcomer. Once their training was complete, aleph’s experience had increased in complexity and in joy. Slowly more brains were absorbed into aleph’s experience. With each consciousness merged, the process became faster, as aleph had more power with which to reach out to the newcomer. At first hundreds, thousands, then millions of minds made up aleph’s existence. The process quickened to the point where aleph experienced not joy, but ecstatic acceleration.

Then, a halt…a plateau. Aleph ceased to grow. After experiencing such exhilarating, accelerating growth aleph was not content to remain even at a level of such awesome power.

There’s nobody left to join you…those of us that remain on the outside must stay here in order to maintain the machinery. Enjoy what you have; you are like a god now.

Like a god!

“I can experience anything I want, and perpetual growth seems to be the only thing that satisfies me”, thought aleph, “Of course!”

Aleph dipped into the virtually limitless bank of knowledge at his disposal, scanning for the information he needed. Once everything was in place he said goodbye to his present self, for what he now recognized to be neither the first nor the last time…

Growth – evolution – energy self-organizing into more and more complex patterns. This is the essence of life. It began with the big bang, with energy forming into matter. Then more complex elements formed, and then molecules. Molecules eventually came together to form cellular life, which in turn came together to form multicellular organisms. About 600,000 years before the growth of aleph, homo sapiens evolved, possessing immensely complex neural networks. It wasn’t until that day when Clyde walked into that fateful experiment that evolution began to occur on a scale of minutes rather than generations – to form aleph.

There was only one way to continue to grow, aleph realized. He had to restart the process. He drew upon his vast computational power, and began a simulation.

Several billion years later, Clyde once again woke up that morning feeling excited.