Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Jonathan Dickau: on 6/7/14 at 3:46am UTC, wrote Something to think about.. Your central thesis stands well on its own, and...

Peter Jackson: on 6/2/14 at 16:30pm UTC, wrote Rodney, And there was me thinking it was just ME that crammed too many...

James Hoover: on 5/27/14 at 17:59pm UTC, wrote Rodney, I was told, I think last year, by a fellow participant in this...

Michael muteru: on 5/16/14 at 11:45am UTC, wrote hi rodney Very prophetic essay that is.to me i give you 6/10.In my essay...

Aaron Feeney: on 5/11/14 at 2:14am UTC, wrote Hi Rodney, Wow, thank you for your kind words. I'm glad you liked my essay...

Rodney Bartlett: on 5/10/14 at 8:32am UTC, wrote Your essay is a breakthrough, Aaron. I love it! Everyone is preoccupied...

Aaron Feeney: on 5/10/14 at 3:40am UTC, wrote P.S., I will use the following rating scale to rate the essays of authors...

Rodney Bartlett: on 4/24/14 at 6:43am UTC, wrote My essay is questioning one aspect of biology (by stating that complete...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Robert, thank you. I now understand the difference between decisions and..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: "Making a decision, means selecting between discrete, a priori established..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Eckard,you seems persuaded by your Words and thoughts.I don t understand..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "In Darwinism/Weismannism there is no first cause, just a causal chain...." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Steve Agnew: "There are three assumptions...is that a lot? The aether particle mass, the..." in The Demon in the Machine...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 15, 2019

CATEGORY: How Should Humanity Steer the Future? Essay Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: New Physics Suggests Darwin's Origin of Species Is Incomplete, and That Godlike Humanity Will Emerge by Rodney Bartlett [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 11, 2014 @ 15:35 GMT
Essay Abstract

The world is at a crossroad today. There is so much we have no understanding of – dark energy, the hypothetical form of energy that permeates all of space and tends to accelerate the expansion of the universe, is perhaps the best known example. If humanity is going to steer the future, we need to remove ourselves from the darkness we’re immersed in and discover the light. I believe this light will reveal what dark energy is, where it comes from, and how it originated. Further, the light could give us a new perspective on where WE came from, how the human race was born, and the role of present humankind in the grand scheme of not only our own, but the universe’s, origin and destiny. The basic outline for a different perspective on the Theory of Evolution has been described in this article. When contemplating the theory of evolution, people assume evolution belongs exclusively to the biological sciences. I maintain complete comprehension also requires physics. Without a conviction that time travel is possible, I’d have to totally agree with the evolutionary concepts Darwin proposed. But since I have no doubt that time doesn’t exclusively operate in a straight line (my reasons are explained below), I can propose a different origin of species – though all the species subsequently undergo adaptations throughout the centuries. In 1870, Wallace (one of Darwin’s major “disciples” and the man who is often reported to have independently reached the same conclusions about evolution that Darwin did) suddenly converted to spiritualism. “Darwin’s Armada” (26) states – “Wallace surmised … that man must have been programmed for civilisation by some higher intelligence.” (27) Assume Wallace’s “higher intelligence” happens because, as this article puts it near the end, “eternal God and humanity of the far future are not separate...

Author Bio

I'm not a professional of any kind - just your average citizen, with a burning desire to understand how everything works (my main interest is the universe). I feel that I've been hard at work on this essay for the past 30 or 40 years. To tell the truth, I don't how I wrote it. Maybe all information already exists - and if you've got enough curiosity about something (like the future of science), all your reading and thinking assembles itself like a jigsaw puzzle. I only hope my jigsaw of the future has been put together correctly.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Feb. 13, 2014 @ 13:16 GMT
I've used elements from my entry to write the following article for vixra.org. Enjoy!

Title –

DEFINING DIVISION BY ZERO (MAKING IT NOT JUST POSSIBLE, BUT ESSENTIAL) AND RELATING ZERO TO INFINITY

Author – Rodney Bartlett

Abstract –

Mathematics books say division by zero is undefined and you should never divide by zero (the special case of 0/0 is termed...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Feb. 13, 2014 @ 16:15 GMT
I found your essay quite engrossing Mr. Bartlett.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Feb. 14, 2014 @ 13:58 GMT
Unfortunately, man is the only animal that has ignored natural evolution. Instead of survival of the fittest, man has introduced the concept of domination by the weakest. What Darwin described as adaptive process, man calls disease. Instead of allowing cancer to be bred out naturally, certain select men profit immensely by pretending to be able to cure it. Modern man is now so contemptuous of himself, he cannot wait to build a robot that will be able to pilot a spaceship capable of traveling faster than the speed of light that will zoom far away where imbecilic man cannot go.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Kimmo Rouvari replied on Feb. 15, 2014 @ 07:51 GMT
Hmm... maybe the next step in evolution is the rise of machines. They are more potent than human beings, at least in couple of centuries.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 19, 2014 @ 02:10 GMT
Hello Rodney,

It's good to see you have an entry here. Since I agree with your premise that humanity's destiny is to evolve toward a more godlike state, I am eager to read what you have to say.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Rodney Bartlett replied on Feb. 19, 2014 @ 13:21 GMT
Hello Jonathan,

It's good to be here. I somehow got into deep discussion at "Quark Stars - A New Form of Matter" (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1971) and I'm having fun! The fun is going to end very soon because I've enrolled in some university courses that will take up all my time (but they'll be a different kind of fun). I remember your kindness from last year, and am glad you agree with my premise. I hope you had a good time reading my thoughts.

All the best,

Rodney

Bookmark and Share


Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Feb. 19, 2014 @ 18:17 GMT
Cool!

I expect to finish reading today.

More later,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Feb. 19, 2014 @ 05:29 GMT
Dear Rodney,

Evolution is based on Beneficial mutation and Natural Selection, whereas the manifestation of Harmful mutation is prevalence in the higher order of species in the taxonomic hierarchy on biological classification. Margin of Beneficial mutation for ‘Survival of the Fittest’ that drives Evolution, is more with the lower order of species and thus Virus have maximum range of Beneficial mutation for them to fight against immunity. Another factor that is observational with Humanity is that, though the quantum of ‘Survival of the Fittest’ is prevalence with the socio-economically backward Humanity that is due to immunity development, there is emerging limitation due to incomparable benchmark of Virus and other lower order organisms in mutation.

Thus physically, Godlike Humanity Will Not Emerge and moreover if we do not Steer the Future in an environment friendly pathway, only Evil like Humanity Will Emerge from the present Humanity. As the implications of all scientific developments converges to healthcare, précised scientific principles to be determined, in that investigating the nature of time is profoundly imperative.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


sridattadev kancharla wrote on Feb. 28, 2014 @ 19:52 GMT
Dear Rodney,

You are absolutely right about describing "GOD" as a fully quantum entangled being. If we realize our self we are that being. A simple question

"who am I?" will reveal the universal truth.

Please see the blog and videos about this universal truth at

Conscience is the cosmological constant.

Love,

I

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Dunn wrote on Apr. 18, 2014 @ 15:51 GMT
In a million years, we will have god-like abilities. Civilizations likely pre-existed us by billions of year.

God-like versus God

http://jamesbdunn2.blogspot.com/2008/01/god-like-versus-g
od_11.html

We cannot know the difference between advanced species and what we consider God. Every atom of our body may be influenced by untold numbers of advanced intelligence. Us in a million years.

James Dunn

FQXi Submission:

Graduated Certification for Certification of Common Sense

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2045

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on Apr. 21, 2014 @ 01:47 GMT
Hi Rodney,

I have read your essay. personally I found it rather too theoretical for ease of reading and comprehension. The abstract helped. You have,it sounds, got a lot of ideas that you have wanted to share and, at least for me, too many to take in all at once.Though others may find the dense 'matter of fact' style to their liking. I find the time travel ideas too far fetched but appreciate that according to certain interpretation of relativity theory alone, time travel to the past is theoretically feasible. I appreciate the desire to find a place for God in all of that theory. Thank you for sharing your many ideas. Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Rodney Bartlett replied on Apr. 21, 2014 @ 03:30 GMT
Thanks a lot for reading my essay, Georgina. I couldn't understand why my essay was rating so poorly. Now I see it's because most people would also feel that there's too much to take in all at once. You're right - I do have a lot of ideas I want to share. And the contest limited the amount of space I had to explain those ideas (hence the dense "matter of fact" style.

I've been developing the ideas for years and years, which is probably why the dense style doesn't bother me. I appreciate that it might be a bit overwhelming for anyone reading it for the first time. Perhaps reading the steps taken to arrive at these conclusions would be easier reading. The 51 short articles I've writeen during the past two years and posted at my vixra.org page might make my essay's development clearer.

If it doesn't help, the essay should be here for a very long time. In that time, time travel should become reality, and there will be many other advances. The advances and reality of time travel, plus the long availability of the essay, will contribute to making it readable.

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Apr. 22, 2014 @ 03:22 GMT
Dear Bartlett

I also affirm that : evolutionary theory must be consistent with the theory of physics or theology, and vice versa - it would really be the truth.

Therefore, Physics and Theology at present there are many problems also inappropriate.

Assessment by the highest score for the passion and enthusiasm of you.

Along with best wishes - Hải.CaoHoàng

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Rodney Bartlett wrote on Apr. 24, 2014 @ 06:43 GMT
My essay is questioning one aspect of biology (by stating that complete understanding of biological evolution requires what we could call "new physics"). So I'll be self-consistent, and question another aspect of biology -

Does cholesterol actually help prevent vascular disease?

In "Essentials of Human Anatomy and Physiology" (Tenth Edition) by Elaine N. Marieb - Pearson Education Limited 2014, it's stated on p. 80 that "The cholesterol helps keep the (cell, or plasma) membrane fluid." Could this mean cholesterol is innocent in causing cardiovascular disease? Heart problems might actually be caused by decades of activity of that organ's moving parts gradually causing the heart to wear out, while deterioration of blood vessels would be the result of decades of friction with the blood. This deterioration can cause arteriosclerosis and the rough patches resulting from constant friction could cause blood clots. With increasing age, the liver produces more and more cholesterol in an effort to keep the cells lining the blood vessels in an elastic state. If this is what really happens, the increased cholesterol accompanying the increased cardiovascular disease would lead to the understandable, but incorrect, assumption that the former causes the latter.

Bookmark and Share



Michael muteru wrote on May. 16, 2014 @ 11:45 GMT
hi rodney

Very prophetic essay that is.to me i give you 6/10.In my essay i have written about the great transition and addressed challenges and solutions during this transitory periiod.take your time to read/rate my essay - LIVING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE SUN: REALITIES, PERILS ESCAPADES MAN, PLANET AND KARDASHEV SCALE.MAKING THE GREAT TRANSITION by Michael muteru -here http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2101.wishin you all the best

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 27, 2014 @ 17:59 GMT
Rodney,

I was told, I think last year, by a fellow participant in this contest that I shouldn't reference Kaku because his ideas are too unorthodox. Like you, I don't believe that any idea is out of consideration, and my essay speaks that when I say "Look beyond" the accepted and to the unorthodox. We are not close to understanding the brain's capacity, which many have called the neural universe.

We are a type 0 civilization, in Kaku's eyes, and as such we cannot begin to know the affect of type 2 discoveries on our doctrines.

Sometimes the unschooled in physics like us consider the unorthodox like surpassing the speed of light, which I speak about in my essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 2, 2014 @ 16:30 GMT
Rodney,

And there was me thinking it was just ME that crammed too many things in too little space. Well done, you beat me hands down. That was an interesting and vibrant trip round the universe. You finished with;

"Einstein's Unified Field is, for now, a vastly unappreciated success!" True except for it's present complete discordance with QM. But that's resolved by my own essay. Do read my own allegorical trip across the universe to make QM fit (an only very slightly re-interpreted) relativity with a unified field. Much misunderstood it seems, but hey that's the universe for you! (do check out my cyclic model in the Academia preprint link(s) in my blog)

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Jun. 7, 2014 @ 03:46 GMT
Something to think about..

Your central thesis stands well on its own, and the modern Science you cite does support your conclusions, but you seem to make the story overmuch about how your interpretations or proposals for new science would lead to a godlike future. We might get that anyway, even if your theories are not true. But it was good to read your effort to express these ideas.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.