(“Hah-Chee”)
HelpHachi.com
The Help
Hachi Project
The purpose of Help Hachi
is to help the dog Hachi find his owner. If successful, billions of persons
will be helped in the process. Let us explain:
Who is the dog
Hachi, and where is his owner?
Hachikō (“Hah-Chee-Koh”), informally
known to many as Hachi (“Hah-Chee”) due to the American “dog story” movie
starring Richard Gere, is a dog who in real life lived in
How will billions of persons be helped
by Help Hachi?
For the Help
Hachi project to be successful, it will be
necessary for future science-technology to resurrect both Hachi and his master.
This level of technology would allow the resurrection of billions of (“legally
dead”) persons, some of whom would have been “temporarily dead” for many centuries
or even millennia.
(released 2009 and 2010)
“A TRUE STORY
OF FAITH, DEVOTION AND UNDYING LOVE”
Also Known As (AKA)
|
Хатико:
самый
верный друг |
|
|
Hachi |
|
|
Hachi: A Dog's Tale |
|
|
Hachi: Yakusoku no inu |
|
|
Hachiko |
|
|
Hachiko - Eine wunderbare
Freundschaft |
|
|
Hachiko - Il tuo migliore
amico |
|
|
Hatchi |
|
|
Sempre ao Seu Lado |
|
|
Siempre a tu lado |
|
What did the real Hachi look like?
Hachikō (“Hah-Chee-Koh”), informally
known to many as Hachi (“Hah-Chee”) due to the American “dog story” movie
starring Richard Gere, is a dog who in real life lived in
type in: hachiko
Hachikō
(1923-1935)
Picture of Hachikō
|
Born |
|
|
Died |
|
|
Resting place |
National Science Museum of Japan
in Ueno,
|
|
Owner |
Dr. Hidesaburō Ueno |
|
White |
Owner of Hachikō
(1871-1925)
Statue of Dr. Hidesaburō
Ueno
(at Tokyo
University)
Will you help Hachi?
Hachi needs your help. Hachikō’s
owner, Dr. Hidesaburō
Ueno, died of cerebral hemorrhage in May
1925 while giving a lecture. Hachikō waited for his dead master every day at the Shibuya train station until he died himself a decade later.
For the Help
Hachi project to be successful, it will be
necessary for future science-technology to resurrect both Hachi and his master.
This level of technology would allow the resurrection of billions of (“legally
dead”) persons, some of whom would have been “temporarily dead” for many
centuries or even millennia.
The Help
Hachi project is a true story of FAITH, DEVOTION
AND UNDYING LOVE. Your ideas, activities, and financial support are
urgently needed. Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
What kind of future science-technology
will be needed?
At this point in time we do not know
precisely what kind of future science-technology will be needed or used to
resurrect Hachi and his master. Presently we are attempting to build up support
so that the project will eventually be successful – and be successful as soon
as feasible instead of merely someday or never. The three articles below
suggest some future science-technology approaches that may or may not prove
successful. The three articles are:
► Time Travel
Technology (By Charles Tandy)
Perhaps Dr. Tandy’s approach
to time travel will work, or perhaps a different approach to time travel will
work to help Hachi.
► Computational Emulation
Technology (By Frank J. Tipler)
Perhaps Dr. Tipler’s approach to
computational emulation will work, or perhaps a different approach to
computational emulation will work to help Hachi.
► Unknown Future
Technology (By Greg Jordan)
Perhaps time travel or computational
emulation will work, or perhaps a different technology will work to help Hachi.
Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
► Time Travel
Technology ◄
(By Charles Tandy)
More than
a half-century ago, Robert Heinlein published a science fiction novel, The
Door into Summer. The protagonist lived not with a pet dog but with his
pet cat, Pete. On snowy winter days Pete would search their large house for a
door into summer. (Pete believed that his master should be smart enough to
outwit winter by constructing at least one door that would always lead into
summer.) Anyway, the protagonist undergoes suspended-animation and travels to a
point in the future where past-directed time machines exist. In this way one
may travel in time to the future or to the past as one wishes.
Nice story
by Heinlein – but now let’s look at the logical possibilities. Here
is one way to
formulate the alternatives
with respect to past-directed time
travel:
● Time travel is impossible. More
than a decade ago, Stephen Hawking published his “chronology protection
conjecture” – namely, that the laws of physics conspire to prevent
past-directed time travel on a macroscopic scale. Notice that it is only a
“conjecture”: Perhaps Hawking wanted scholars to get on with serious work
instead of wasting their time on wild speculation about classical (i.e.
macro-level) time machines? (I understand that Hawking has since changed his
mind.)
● Time travel is possible but
changing the past is impossible. Many experts are willing to at least
entertain the idea that time travel just might be possible. But many are
unwilling to go further and think seriously about changing the past. One may
argue that past-directed time travel is not
logically impossible – but that changing the past is logically impossible. For example, movie-goers may interpret one
of the Harry Potter movies this way: the protagonists (including Harry) travel
into the past and interact with the past but do not change the past. Their
travel into, and interaction with, the past “always was” part of the past!
Another alternative here would have been to have the protagonists not interact with the past but simply
(holographically) observe it; this
is sometimes called “time viewing” (rather than time travel).
● Time travel is possible and
changing the past is possible. Is it possible to evade or outwit the
apparent inconsistency (logical impossibility) of “changing the past”? The answer
is “yes”: the “many-worlds” or “parallel-worlds” or “multiverse” theory (or
theories or versions) does indeed allow time-traveling mathematicians,
physicists, and philosophers to “have their cake and eat it too.” For example,
movie-goers may interpret the “Back to the Future” series of movies in just
this way. In this interpretation of the parallel-worlds or many-worlds
multiverse, going back to the past and changing it engenders a new timeline
additional to the timeline from which the time-traveler came.
Here are eight “types” of (hypothetical) time
machines (both forward and retro):
●1. Basic Biostasis: Experimental long-term suspended animation.
●2. Advanced Biostasis: Perfected long-term suspended animation.
●3. AOK Superfast Rocketry: “Astronaut(s) OK” (AOK) near-light-speed rocketry.
●4. SEG Superfast Rocketry: “Self-sufficient Extra-terrestrial Green-habitat community(ies)” (SEG) near-light-speed rocketry.
●5. Simple Time Viewing: Viewing the past without changing the past.
●6. Simple Time Travel: Interaction with the past without changing the past.
●7. Complex Time Viewing: Viewing the past that also changes the past (generates
an additional timeline).
●8. Complex Time Travel: Interaction with the past that also changes the past (generates
an additional timeline).
With respect to what has been called
“practical time travel” – and matters related thereto – a previous analysis of
the temporal realm (Tandy, 2007) draws the following six conclusions:
●1. The past exists as
an expanding fixed unity.
●2. The present is the
leading edge of the past as it expands.
●3. The future is not
yet fully determined/fixed.
●4. The underdetermined
future as it proceeds to become more nearly past (fixed) is influenced by the
expanding fixed unity (the past), including by free agents of good will [and
ill will and misinformed will].
●5. Sooner or later,
barring catastrophe, it seems highly likely that technology will advance so
that the capacity for forward-directed time travel is possible.
[Suspended-Animation (per molecular nanotechnology) and Superfast-Rocketry (per
relativity physics) are examples of forward-directed time travel. Note that
conclusion 5 is not controversial; yet its profound implications are rarely
discussed.]
●6. Sooner or later,
barring catastrophe, it seems likely that technology will advance so that the
capacity for past-directed time travel is possible. [Time-Viewing is one
example of past-directed time travel.]
A more tentative seventh
conclusion was that the concept of intrinsic time or intrinsic history (i.e.,
the intrinsic-temporality of the time-traveler, as distinguished from either
merely-subjective time or literal-clock time) “is especially helpful in
characterizing whether time travel did or did not occur in a particular
circumstance.” (pp. 383-384) If one
travels backward in time in the (“many-worlds”) omniverse, one does not come
from the past but from the future (i.e., from the unique time or history
intrinsic to the unique time-traveler). The temporal realm (the omniverse’s
temporal environment as such) has its own (“arrow” of) time, but it is another
(different) matter that (in addition) each temporal entity within the
temporal environment has its own unique intrinsic time (history). According to my
proposed general-ontological schema, but unlike almost all physical-scientific
theories of backward time travel, it would seem that in principle any
past time and any universe is a candidate for visitation. With my
approach it seems logically possible in principle to circumvent the problems of
(1) traveling to times before the first time machine is invented; and, (2)
returning to one’s own “original” time. (The ethics of time travel or
inter-universe travel is another matter.)
Moreover, the time-traveler – a temporal entity having its own unique
intrinsic time within (and thus different from) the omniverse’s temporal
realm as such – may be an atom, a dog, a human, a planet, or a universe.
SEE
Tandy,
Charles (2007). “Types Of Time Machines And Practical Time Travel” Journal
Of Futures Studies vol. 11, no. 3. [February 2007]: Pages 79-90. This
is available free on the internet at:
http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/11-3/A05.pdf
ALSO SEE
http://www.ria.edu/time-travel
Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
► Computational
Emulation Technology ◄
(By Frank J. Tipler)
Interview with Frank J. Tipler
Frank J. Tipler is a Professor at the
Department of Mathematics,
Giulio Prisco – November 2, 2002
Q) In "The Physics of
Immortality" you make very specific predictions for the masses of Top
Quark and Higgs Boson, and say that an experimental confirmation would be a
very clear indication that the Omega Point Theory is correct. Do you see any
indications from recent experiments that your predicted masses for these
particles are more likely, or less likely, to be confirmed?
A) The top quark was found
shortly after my book was published. The current value the experimenters give
is 170 GeV. I predicted 185 ± 20 GeV. So (unless the experimenters drop the
value) my prediction seems to agree with reality. My Higgs prediction of 220 ±
20 GeV is still open. The current lower bound quoted for a Standard Model Higgs
is about 100 GeV ("lower bound" means that the actual value must be
above the "lower bound"). I imagine that we will have to wait for the
Large Hadron Collider to go on line in 2005 before we see the Higgs. My
prediction of the top and Higgs came from my deduction that the Higgs field
would be only marginally stable. (I inferred marginal stability from
acceleration in the collapse phase of the universe.) I then used the standard
stability curve to get the particle masses. Given that the top quark is in the
correct position for marginally stability, the Higgs boson pretty well has to
have the marginally value also, given the shape of the stability curve. Since
my book was written, the stability curves have been improved, and I think 190 ±
20 GeV would be a better estimate for the Higgs mass, using these improved
stability curves.
Q): The Omega Point Theory
requires a "closed" universe, where at some point the cosmic
expansion is reversed by a contraction phase terminating in a gravitational
collapse. What do you think of recent measurements from novae in distant
galaxies indicating that cosmic expansion is accelerating?
A) I think the evidence that the
universe is currently accelerating is VERY strong. Besides the direct evidence
for acceleration from the supernovae which you mention, we have observations of
flatness from the acoustic peaks in the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
(CMBR). Recall my predictions 1 and 5: the first is for closure, and the 5th
for near flatness, so my prediction (and inflation's) for flatness is looking
good. Near flatness plus insufficient Dark Matter to close the universe means
that there HAS to be Dark Energy, hence the acceleration.
I unfortunately overlooked the
possibility that acceleration could occur in the expanding phase of the
universe. Acceleration in the expanding phase of universal history invalidates
my prediction of Hubble's constant (Second half of prediction 5). The current
value of Hubble's constant is 70 km/sec-Mpc rather than the 45 km/sec-Mpc I
predicted.
I SHOULD have predicted
acceleration in the expanding phase, since the existence of a net number of
baryons in the universe implies the Higgs field would not be in its true vacuum,
where we would expect the positive cosmological constant (which is the
mechanism for acceleration in the collapsing phase of universal history) would
be exactly cancelled.
So, if the observed acceleration
were to continue forever, the Omega Point Theory would be refuted. But the
expansion of life to engulf the universe is EXACTLY what is required to cancel
the positive cosmological constant (a.k.a. the Dark Energy): as life expands
outward, life will require energy, and before the collapse of the universe
provides gravitational collapse energy, the energy source will be the
conversion of baryons and leptons into energy via electroweak quantum
tunneling, a process I describe in Section N (relativistic spacecraft) of the
Appendix for Scientists. What I did not realize when I wrote my book a decade
ago is that this electroweak process would also act to cancel any positive
cosmological constant today, and that the net baryon number in the universe
would REQUIRE such Dark Energy today.
Q) What are the implications for
the Omega Point Theory of dark matter and dark energy?
A) The Omega Point Theory
suggests that the particle physics Standard Model (SM) is sufficient to explain
both: the Dark Energy is just the currently uncancelled part of the positive
cosmological constant, and the Dark Matter is just the Standard Model
SU(2)_{left} field, coupled to the SM Higgs field. I was very worried when I
wrote PHYSICS OF IMMORTALITY that the entropy in the CMBR would make an
acceleration in the collapsing phase of universal history impossible. I propose
to solve this problem by claiming the temperature of the CMBR --- currently
"measured" to have a temperature of 2.2726 degrees Kelvin --- is
actually at absolute zero! I show in a paper I put on the lanl data base (xxx.lanl.gov)
last November that such an apparently ridiculous claim is possible, because any
quantized gauge field in a homogeneous and isotropic universe would NECESSARILY
have a Planckian spectrum, even at zero temperature! What the measurements of
CMBR showing that it is Planckian --- which it most certainly is --- are really
measuring is not the temperature, but the size of the universe. In my paper, I
show how to convert the quoted "temperature" of 2.2726 into the size
of the universe.
I describe a simple experiment to
check my claims. Such an experiment would be important because it would check
three things simultaneously: (1) it would show what the Dark Matter is, (2) it
would show what the Dark Energy is, and (3) it would provide another test of
the Omega Point Theory: it would test the idea of computers taking over the
universe. My proposed experiment could in principle be done by anyone familiar
with microwave techniques, using very cheap equipment. An accelerator like the
billion dollar machines at Fermilab or CERN would not be required. A few
thousand dollars worth of equipment would do it. Any takers?
As an added inducement, I point
out in the above-mentioned paper that the effect I'm predicting has probably
already been seen! An outstanding anomaly in astrophysics has been the
existence of Ultra High Energy (UHE) cosmic rays: they shouldn't be able to
propagate through the CMBR, yet they do. If the CMBR has the properties I
claim, UHE Cosmic Rays WOULD be able to propagate through the CMBR.
Q) In "The Age of Spiritual
Machines" Ray Kurzweil suggests that perhaps even a universe that left to
itself would expand forever can be engineered into a collapse by future
civilizations, or the other way around. This would be some amazing cosmic
spacetime engineering indeed! Do you think this may be possible, and can you
imagine any plausible mechanism?
A) The universe would collapse
even if spatially open, if a negative cosmological constant were to exist, and
could be turned on. But only if a negative cosmological constant already
existed could this engineering be done. The experimental evidence is strong
that the cosmological constant is POSITIVE, not negative. Furthermore, no
engineering could change the spatial topology of universe. This would violate a
fundamental law of quantum mechanics called unitarity.
But note that what I have
suggested above to cancel the observed acceleration would in effect be a
universal engineering project to force a collapse, where without the action of
life, there would be no collapse.
In another paper (also available
on the lanl, and in the published technical literature) I have argued that the
known laws of physics REQUIRE life to engage in this engineering project.
Q) Andrei Linde has recently
theorized that the universe may indeed collapse rather than expanding forever.
But in Linde's theory the collapse comes a mere 10 to 20 billion years from
now. How would this affect the Omega Point Theory's requirement for intelligent
life to expand relatively quickly and manipulate the contraction into a Taub
collapse?
A) Linde and I have different
approaches to physics. I refuse to use anything other than the known laws of
physics. I assume that these laws are correct, until an experiment shows that
they have a limited range of applicability. Linde decides what he wants the
universe to be like, and invents whatever laws are required to give him what he
wants. Linde's laws are invented to eliminate anything like the Omega Point
Theory, so it is likely that the Taub collapse won't work.
Notice in particular that Linde's
Eternal Chaotic Inflation theory is played out in a spatially infinite
universe. It is a mathematical theorem that the universe has to be spatially
FINITE if it is to end in an Omega point.
Q) In the Omega Point Theory, humans
colonize the universe via space probes that travel to distant planets and
literally synthesize human beings on the spot rather than carrying them the
whole way as full-grown, oxygen-breathing passengers. How can we be sure that
each Adam and Eve (so to speak) that are placed on all of those distant worlds
will cooperate in the grand effort to engineer a Taub collapse of the universe?
A) It is in their selfish
interests to act locally to force the universe into a Taub collapse. If they
cooperate they live, if they don't cooperate, they die. Also, I have argued, as
I said above, that the laws of physics will ensure that they cooperate.
Q) In their SF novel "The
Light of Other Days" Sir Arthur Clarke and Stephen Baxter imagine a near
future civilization resurrecting the dead of past ages by reaching into the
past, through micro wormholes, to download full snapshots of brain states and
memories. Do you think that some of us might be restored to life, much before
the Omega Point, by similar means?
A) No. Wormholes involve a
violation of unitarity, because they involve topology change. Can't happen,
unless the laws of physics are wrong. Where is the experiment showing that they
are? Until I see the experiment, I will continue to believe in the known laws of
physics.
Q) Have you, or Prof. Wolfhart
Pannenberg [NOTE: he is a well known theologian who supports Tipler's views],
managed to convince any religious leaders to accept all, most, or any
significant portion of the Omega Point Theory?
A) No. I ascribe this rejection
to the same reason that no religious leader has ever accepted "any
significant portion" of the Transhumanist Credo. Most if not all religious
leaders reject the idea that we humans are just special types of computers, and
that human downloads and/or artificial intelligences are possible. Most, if not
all, religious leaders reject the idea that the human mind (or soul) is just a
program running on the wet computer we call the brain. Instead, they believe in
an "immortal soul" which appears to be some sort of "stuff"
not subject to the laws of physics.
In theology, this belief is
connected with the gnostic (or Manichean) heresy, which holds that there is a
"spiritual realm" superior to the material realm, which, since
inferior, is uninteresting, or evil, or both. The goal in the gnostic heresy is
to escape from the world of matter into the spirit world. Unfortunately, this
heresy is widespread even among Christians (who should know better), and it
prevents the Omega Point Theory --- or transhumanism --- from being taken
seriously.
But I expect this to change in
the future. I have just come back from a conference on Christianity, and when I
pointed out the connection between the gnostic heresy and their rejection of
transhumanism, the Christians at the conference began --- for the first time, I
think --- to take transhumanism (and hence the Omega Point) seriously.
I was also told by a German
reporter that the Lutheran Bishop of
Q) You point out that many of the
tenets of Christianity and Islam are similar, perhaps even identical in a
fundamental way. Yet many bloody wars have been fought between Christians and
Muslims, and now these two worlds seem headed for another major clash, perhaps
much worse than the previous. Any thought that you wish to share?
A) I discussed the problem which
Islam faces on pages 302-304 (the last part of the "
Q) Suppose the human race becomes
extinct before colonizing the universe. Then it is up to some other race to
build the Omega Point scenario. Why should these superaliens want to resurrect
us, today's humans?
A) We are so close to beginning
the colonization --- after colonization begins, our descendants would be too
spread out to be completely wiped out --- that I would claim the laws of
physics would make it impossible for us to become extinct before giving rise to
our descendants (human downloads and/or AI's). If the laws of physics be for
us, who can be against us!
Q) You seem to accept the Many
Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum physics. Does the MWI mean that the
universe splits into separate branches when a measurement is made, or that our
mind splits into separate branches when the result of a measurement is
observed?
A) I definitely accept the MWI.
The MWI is not an option, but as I show in my book, a necessary mathematical
consequence of quantum mechanics applying at all levels: not just atoms, but
also humans are quantum mechanical objects. So if the MWI is actually false,
then quantum mechanics must also be false at some level of complexity. All
competent mathematical physicists know this perfectly well. Roger Penrose in
his THE EMPEROR'S NEW MIND makes this point. It's just that Penrose explicitly rejects
linear quantum mechanics at the level of the human brain. But as I have
mentioned, I accept the known physical laws as being true, until an experiment
shows them to be false.
It is better to think of parts of
the universe as splitting. As
Q): After the tremendous amount
of thought, research and writing that you put into your book, how do you feel
about the hostile reception it received? Does the criticism bother you? Do you
ignore it as much as possible? Or are you just waiting to be resurrected at the
Omega Point so you can say "See, I told you so!"?
A) "Sticks and stones may
break my bones, but words will never harm me." Criticism is the driving
force of science. Much of the criticism has consisted of insults, and hence not
useful. But my improvements in the Omega Point Theory, described above, are due
in large part to technical criticisms. My explanation of the Dark Matter and
Dark Energy, and the simple experiment to test it, derive from criticisms I
received from Gordon Kane, a professor of physics at the
What I was unprepared for was the
hostile "stone throwing" I received at
In the past I could have made up
the salary shortfall by writing books. But Tulane changed the terms of my
employment (the
Q): If the Omega Point Theory is
true, we shall be resurrected at the end of time and live in a very pleasant
world. So why shouldn't we just relax and enjoy life instead of working hard to
improve our life in today's world?
A) The selfish answer is that we
don't know what the far future people will know about us. If they record that
we slack off now, this slacker will be the only version of us emulated in the
far future computers. With a slacker personality, we cannot enjoy the future to
the fullest extent, to say nothing of the trouble we would be in for if we
adopt an evil attitude, and THIS info make it to the far future.
The unselfish answer is that it
is our duty. By working hard now, we can reduce the amount of suffering
between now and the resurrection time. So in spite of my difficulties at
Tulane, I'll keep trying to develop the OPT: if I succeed, human knowledge will
be advanced --- especially if I can persuade someone to do the simple
experiment I describe!
Q) The Omega Point Theory deals
with the far future. Most of our readers are more interested in the short and
medium term future, and in particular in the possibility to improve the human
physical and mental characteristics by applying nano/bio/info technologies.
What timeline do you imagine for the gradual merging of biological and machine
intelligences that many contemporary thinkers foresee? For example, when do you
think we may develop working interfaces between biological brains and machines,
or technologies to upload minds to machines?
A) I think we'll see AI's and/or
human downloaded some time this century.
Introductory note
Some familiarity with Frank Tipler's
writings, such as the books listed below, is required to enjoy this interview.
The author's web site also contains some introductory material. If you cannot
wait, here is our own very brief and incomplete version of "The Omega
Point Theory in a nutshell": intelligent beings of a far future epoch
close to the gravitational collapse of the universe (the so called Big Crunch)
may develop the capability to steer the collapse along a specific mode (Taub
collapse) with unlimited subjective time, energy, and computational power
available to them before reaching the final singularity. Having done so, they
may wish to restore to consciousness all sentient beings of the past, perhaps
through a "brute force" computational emulation of the past history
of the universe. So after death we may wake up in a simulated environment with
many of the features assigned to the afterlife world by the major religions. We
are using a weak "may", but Prof. Tipler thinks that there is plenty
of evidence for the Omega Point Theory in today's universe.
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle
SEE
http://transhumanism.org/index.php/th/more/312/
Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
► Unknown Future
Technology ◄
(By Greg Jordan)
Universal Immortalism
Universal immortalism is the belief that human beings should
endeavor to bring back to life all who have ever lived using material,
technological methods.
Universal immortalism is distinguished
from immortalism, or pursuing the goal of personal physical
immortality (by such means as life extension or cryonics), because universal
immortalism is universal in scope. However, universal immortalism and personal
immortalism are typically compatible, congruent notions.
Universal immortalism is also
distinguished from beliefs about an inevitable resurrection authored by a
divine or supernatural agent because universal immortalism advocates a
human-engineered resurrection using material, technological methods.
Historical Antecedents
The founder of Zoroastrianism, Zarathustra,
taught that all the dead, no matter how their bodies were destroyed, would one
day be physically, bodily resurrected, with their memories and personal
identities intact.[1]
This idea of resurrection later found
its way into Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Zarathustra held that even the
most evil people would eventually be reconciled to the rest of humanity, a form
of universalism or universal reconciliation also maintained
by the Christian theologian, Origen.[2]
The Epicurean philosopher Lucretius
speculated that the atoms of a person who had died and disintegrated could,
over infinite time and random recombination, eventually return to the same
form, thus in some sense resurrecting the person.[3]
The philosopher Nietzsche
reasoned similarly, arguing that over infinite time, there must be an
"Eternal Recurrence" in which every person and life must be recapitulated
exactly.[4]
Contemporary Thought
Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov (also spelled Nikolai
Fyodorovich Fyodorov)[5] was the first person
to propose universal immortalism.
He believed that human beings had a
special, cosmic responsibility to make blind nature accord with human reason
and love. He proposed that the "Common Task" of bringing ancestors
back to life would unite common people and scientists throughout the world.
The scientific methods he proposed
investigating were calculating particle positions backwards in time, with the
assistance of artificial intelligence.
Dandridge M. Cole[6] saw universal immortalist
resurrection as a natural complement to cryonics. "The men of the distant
future may not be content with the revival of the frozen dead, for there were
still be those loved ones lost irrevocably in body
destroying accidents." Cole suggested, as possible future methods of
resurrection, human cloning, artificial ("deduced") memories, and
reverse-determinism, avoiding the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
Other suggested methods for universal
immortalism include time travel, exploiting other time or space dimensions, and
copying from near identical parallel universes.
Max Tegmark has noted that infinite
numbers of exact duplicates of every person are a necessary consequence of
ordinary cosmological assumptions.[7]
The most prominent recent proponent of
universal immortalism is Frank J. Tipler.[8] Building on the
Omega Point Theory of Teilhard de Chardin, he suggested that resources in a
contracting universe might provide a future intelligent "Omega Point"
with enough resources to compute simulations [emulations] of all past human
beings and restore them to life in a simulated [emulated] Paradise.
David Deutsch[9] criticized some of the Christian
assumptions of Tipler's theory, but found the overall idea sound. Tipler later
revised his theory to account for accelerating cosmic expansion rather than contraction[10].
R. Michael Perry[11] brought together philosophical
arguments for the nonlocality of personal identity and showed how short-term
methods of life extension such as cryonics could be compatible with long-term
methods such as universal immortalist resurrection.
Giulio Prisco[12] wrote about the importance of the
high level concept of universal immortalism regardless of the means that might
be used to implement it someday. He also related universal immortalism to
general trends in the importance of science in contemporary society, especially
transhumanism.
Fictional Portrayals
Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter, in
the very warm and moving science fiction novel, The Light of Other Days,
portray a future universal immortalist resurrection using tunneled wormholes in
spacetime to capture and transfer information content.[13]
Sources
[1] Greenlees, D. The Gospel of Zarathustra.
[2]
Trigg, Joseph W. Origen: The Bible and Philosophy in the 3rd Century Church.
[3]
Lucretius. On The Nature of the Universe (De Rerum Natura). Trans. R.
E. Latham. 1951.
[4]
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Trans. R. J. Hollingdale.
[5] Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov. What Was Man Created For? The Philosophy of the Common Task. Selected Works translated
from the Russian and abdridged by Elisabeth Koutaissoff and Marilyn Minto. N.p.: Honeyglen
Publishing/L'Age d'Homme,
1990. Selected NFF
quotations – Click HERE.
[6]
Dandridge M. Cole. Beyond Tomorrow: The Next 50 Years in Space.
[7]
Max Tegmark. "Parallel Universes." In
Science and Ultimate Reality: Quantum Theory, Cosmology, and Complexity. John D. Barrow, Paul C. W. Davies, and Charles L. Harper, eds.
[8]
Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Immortality: Modern
Cosmology, God, and the Resurrection of the Dead.
[9]
David Deutsch. The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes - and
Its Implications.
[10]
http://www.math.tulane.edu/~tipler/.
[11]
R. Michael Perry, Forever for All: Moral Philosophy, Cryonics, and the Scientific
Prospects for Immortality. Universal Publishers, 2000.
[12] Giulio Prisco,
"Engineering Transcendence."
http://futuretag.net/index.php/Engineering_Transcendence,
http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/more/engineering_transcendence/
[13]
Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter, The Light of
Other Days. Voyager, 2000.
SEE
http://www.universalimmortalism.org/WDraft.htm
Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
Will you help Hachi?
Hachi needs your help. Hachikō’s
owner, Dr. Hidesaburō
Ueno, died of cerebral hemorrhage in May
1925 while giving a lecture. Hachikō waited for his dead master every day at the Shibuya train station until he died himself a decade later.
For the Help
Hachi project to be successful, it will be
necessary for future science-technology to resurrect both Hachi and his master.
This level of technology would allow the resurrection of billions of (“legally
dead”) persons, some of whom would have been “temporarily dead” for many
centuries or even millennia.
The Help
Hachi project is a true story of FAITH, DEVOTION
AND UNDYING LOVE. Your ideas, activities, and financial support are
urgently needed. Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
Hachi Movie YouTube Video
The following is a review of the movie by T.
Mason:
I want this movie to fail.
Why do you ask? Because every time we see a movie like this come out, we soon
see a demand for the breed by kids and emotional adults.
Will you help Hachi? If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
Unfortunately soon after that, we also see a large increase on abandoned and
abused dogs of that breed as people loose interest or people find that the
breed is not what the movies portrayed.
I work in
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
Celine Dion sings
“Immortality” with the Bee Gees (lyrics by the Bee Gees)
► Immortality ◄
(Lyrics by the Bee Gees)
Celine Dion sings “Immortality” with the
Bee Gees
So this is who I
am
And this is all I know
And I must choose to live
For all that I can give
The spark that makes the power grow
(But I will stand for one dream if I can)
[And I will stand
for my dream if I can]
Symbol of my faith in who I
am
But you are my only
And I must follow on the road that lies ahead
I won't let my heart control my head
But you are my only
(And we don't say goodbye)
[We don't say
goodbye]
We don't say goodbye
And I know what I've got to be...
Immortality
I make my journey through eternity
I keep the memory of you and me
Inside
Fulfill your destiny
It's there within the child
My storm will never end
My fate is on the wind
The King of Hearts
The Joker's wild
We don't say goodbye
We don't say goodbye
I'll make them all remember me
(Cause I have found the dream that must
come true)
[Cause I have
found a dream that must come true]
Every ounce of me
must see it through
But you are my only
(I'm sorry I don't have the role for love
to play)
[I'm sorry I don't
have a role for love to play]
Hand over my
heart I'll find my way
I will make them give to me...
Immortality
There is a vision and a fire in me
I keep the memory of you and me
Inside
(And we don't say goodbye)
[We don't say
goodbye]
We don't say goodbye
(In all my love for you)
[With all my love
for you]
And what else we
may do
We don't say goodbye...
Will you help Hachi?
If you
find this free website useful and would like to help
Hachi, click the DONATE button.
► Click The DONATE Button To Help Hachi. ◄
This website is sponsored by
Dr. Charles Tandy <www.segits.com>
This Page Was Last
Modified On