This is probably one of the last noticeable sub-atomic discoveries made somewhere else than at CERN since LHC is about to start the hunt for the Higgs particle that remains elusive even for the experiment that just discovered the Omega-sub-b.."
In actual English--with tenses--as it used to be used (which is now, as is evident, archaic):
"This recent discovery [of the Omega-sub-b particle] will probably be the last *notable* subatomic discovery made before the Large Hadron Collider at CERN begins to operate, which is scheduled to happen in October of this year. The LHC will be used to hunt for the Higgs Boson, which has thus far remained undetectable, even by experiments such as this one, which managed to find the Omega-sub-b particle."
* The author's clever-at-first-glance use of the adjective "noticeable" fails because it applies to "discoveries," and discoveries rarely go unnoticed, unlike grammar.
Did I say that people's spare CPU cycles should be mandated to SETI? As if that were feasible or even possible?
When I say that Protein Folding *should* take precedence over SETI, I'm simply making an appeal to people's personal priorities--and mine favor understanding and curing diseases over inconclusive alien signal-hunting every day of the week.
Yes, you're free to choose for yourself what cause you want to help out. As you should be. And I'm free to try to persuade others to help a very worthwhile cause:
The reason I "waste so many words on 'colonizing the universe'" is because that's exactly what I'm talking about. I unfortunately used the term "space exploration" in my post, once, as a synonym for the oft-repeated and unwieldy "space colonization," but in no way am I against the exploration of the galaxy: probes, landers, Spirit and Opportunity, Mir, the Hubble telescope...all of these are technologically-innovative-and-engendering endeavors, and undoubtedly imaginatively inspiring.
The source of our disagreement can probably be found in your assertion that colonizing space "is little different from exploring space." However, this is exactly what I was getting at when I said that "colonizing the galaxy--or, more in tune with the boundless vanity of the human species, colonizing the entire universe--is a structurally simple idea that consists in nearly all of its variegated versions as a fantasy of exploration, eradication of any species contrary to the human will (probably followed by their appropriation, sterilization, domestication and finally "appreciation"), and succeeded by a long reign of utter dominance by 'us.'" I listed "exploration" there as merely the first stage in my definition of colonization, but in no way does space exploration == colonization, as you wrote. By doing so, however, you inadvertently lent support to my having correctly linked these two different human drives into "what we might call the D&D drive, the seemingly irrepressable urge to Discover & Dominate."
It's also interesting that you wrote the following:
"...the part of the human psyche which instinctually strives to discover and dominate, like a slime mold which oozes away from the light and toward the darkness..." Riiight. Sorry. "oozing away from the light" does not really sound like "discover and dominate". Quite the opposite.
You evidently thought I was trying to simplistically link the drive to "discover and dominate" with the concept of darkness (the negative element in the light-dark binary pair), and wanted to reverse it so that discovery and domination are linked with "light," i.e. the "good." But I was really just sillily comparing images (the slime mold instinctively move toward the darkness just like geeks seek to move into outer space to colonize it) and, by extension, hyperbolically making the secondary point that the human D&D drive is as basic and instinctual as the drive of the slime mold's. Humor's strength again exhausted in explanation. Whoosh!
I actually agree with you 'mankind' doesn't fund research programs any more than 'mankind' sponsored Columbus to sail to the 'Indies'. Spain did. And she was eventually made very wealthy from her investment. So what is the problem here?
Yes, you're right: Spain did sponsor Columbus. And then the Spanish empire was "eventually," i.e. shortly thereafter, ruined by a severe recession brought about by inflation caused by the flood of New World silver onto the European silver market and Spain's consequent bellicose borrowing to pay her war debts. I suppose you could have also mentioned the wonderful effects that colonization had upon the native civilizations of the Americas, but why browbeat a point well-made?
You suggested that I "at least try reading some good sci-fi or 'speculative fiction;'" I suggest that you read some actual history, as you seem to ascribe to a "model is that is based on a false heroic image of Columbus created by the writers of high-school history texts." That quote is from an op-ed on spacedaily.com which starts with the author saying, "Lately I have been seeing lots of bad historical analogies drawn from a somewhat later time, the great age of European sea exploration," and ends with his remark that "today's space advocates...often show the same mixture of technical incompetence, slanted data, fanatical devotion to the cause, and brilliant salesmanship that led Columbus and Spain to disaster."
I originally wrote this in response to science fiction writer Charlie Stross's The High Frontier, Redux, which was recently posted to Slashdot under the article heading The Impossibility of Colonizing the Galaxy. I think I'll post it again in response to the parent's curse-laced rhetorical ridiculousness.
The very idea of "colonizing the galaxy," for all of its patent absurdity (which Stross points out very well) is one that the Slashdot crowd and sci-fi and geek hordes all have in common: it is a shared mass hallucination. Calling it a "hope," "dream" or "vision" does not transform something that has no possibility of occuring in one's lifetime--or one's childrens' lifetimes, or their childrens', etc. ad nauseum--into anything other than a mystical pipe dream.
But here is an idea which, despite its very absurdity and like many others of similar caliber, possesses phenomenal power to alter and organize the behavior of entire classes and groups of people. Colonizing the galaxy--or, more in tune with the boundless vanity of the human species, colonizing the entire universe--is a structurally simple idea that consists in nearly all of its variegated versions as a fantasy of exploration, eradication of any species contrary to the human will (probably followed by their appropriation, sterilization, domestication and finally "appreciation"), and succeeded by a long reign of utter dominance by "us." In short, "to colonize" is to rule or die trying, where the universe is the limit. Fundamentally, this favorite conceit of science fiction authors since the inception of the genre is merely the psychic expression of a biological organism's fundamental desire to survive, thrive, and conquer its environment. The fact that the idea of galactic colonization employs images of advanced technology in the imagery of its "vision," such as vast fleets of generation ships blasting off into the starry blackness-- something which exists only as pure fantasy--has done so since the beginning of the Russian and American space programs, and will continue to do so generations after everybody reading this post is dead and forgotten, is no argument against its actual simplicity.
In short, lots of humans, and Americans in particular, who generally consider themselves practical and not too ideological, entertain the fantasy of space colonization simply because the known world is just that, and is mostly conquered, i.e. "civilized," and the part of the human psyche which instinctually strives to discover and dominate, like a slime mold which oozes away from the light and toward the darkness, has nothing else upon which to feed. This drive must be satisfied, and therefore, in the absence of a means to do so, can only exhaust itself in the feverish masturbatory fantasies of science fiction.
Like every other human psychological drive, this one too is exploited, and not only by science fiction authors, video game publishers, and George Lucas. The political establishment exploits the desire because it shares it. Though we might entertain the exaulted and noble thought that space exploration is done for the benefit and glory of all mankind or some other such nonsense, the fact is that what the Apollo crew made sure to leave behind on that unexplored vista called the moon was a silly flag, and certainly not one representing the whole world or all of humanity, but of a single country. Territorial expansion psychologically concretized through symbolic branding.
The idea of space colonization is the primary and ultimate *delusionary* drive which props up and continuously feeds multiple sundry industries as well as the self-serving political and military establishments of several spacefaring countries, the US in particular. Films and television series such as Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate all serve to reinforce and satisfy what we might
This is an interesting post because the very idea of "colonizing the galaxy," for all of its patent absurdity, which Stross points out very well, is one that the Slashdot crowd and sci-fi and geek hordes all have in common: it is a shared mass hallucination. Calling it a "hope," "dream" or "vision" does not transform something that has no possibility of occuring in one's lifetime--or one's childrens' lifetimes, or their childrens', etc. ad nauseum--into anything other than a mystical pipe dream.
But here is an idea which, despite its very absurdity and like many others of similar caliber, possesses phenomenal power to alter and organize the behavior of entire classes and groups of people. Colonizing the galaxy--or, more in tune with the boundless vanity of the human species, colonizing the entire universe--is a structurally simple idea that consists in nearly all of its variegated versions as a fantasy of exploration, eradication of any species contrary to the human will (probably followed by their appropriation, sterilization, domestication and finally "appreciation"), and succeeded by a long reign of utter dominance by "us." In short, "to colonize" is to rule or die trying, where the universe is the limit. Fundamentally, this favorite conceit of science fiction authors since the inception of the genre is merely the psychic expression of a biological organism's fundamental desire to survive, thrive, and conquer its environment. The fact that the idea of galactic colonization employs images of advanced technology in the imagery of its "vision," such as vast fleets of generation ships blasting off into the starry blackness, something which exists only as pure fantasy, has done so since the beginning of the Russian and American space programs, and will continue to do so generations after everybody reading this post is dead and forgotten, is no argument against its actual simplicity.
In short, lots of humans, and Americans in particular, who generally consider themselves practical and not too ideological, entertain the fantasy of space colonization simply because the known world is just that, and is mostly conquered, i.e. "civilized," and the part of the human psyche which instinctually strives to discover and dominate, like a slime mold which oozes away from the light and towards the darkness, has nothing else upon which to feed. This drive must be satisfied, and therefore, in the absence of a means to do so, can only exhaust itself in the feverish masturbatory fantasies of science fiction.
Like every other human psychological drive, this one too is exploited, and not only by science fiction authors, video game publishers, and George Lucas. The political establishment exploits the desire because it shares it. Though we might entertain the exaulted and noble thought that space exploration is done for the benefit and glory of all mankind or some other such nonsense, the fact is that what the Apollo crew made sure to leave behind on that unexplored vista called the moon was a silly flag, and certainly not one representing the whole world or all of humanity, but of a single country. Territorial expansion psychologically concretized through symbolic branding.
The idea of space colonization is the primary and ultimate *delusionary* drive which props up and continuously feeds multiple sundry industries as well as the self-serving political and military establishments of several spacefaring countries, the US in particular. Films and television series such as Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate all serve to reinforce and satisfy what we might call the D&D drive, the seemingly irrepressable urge to Discover & Dominate.
It is very easy to anticipate a fair amount of hostility towards Stross's pointing-out of the absurdity of space colonization as some kind of goal, since fiction, film and television have insisted for more than fifty years that such things are within the realm of possibility. When considered rationally, however, as Stross has done and is being attacked for in a flu
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, now you have Java working in Firefox. Turn it off if you don't like it. Simple.
Nothing wrong with being vulnerabile to cocktails!
This is probably one of the last noticeable sub-atomic discoveries made somewhere else than at CERN since LHC is about to start the hunt for the Higgs particle that remains elusive even for the experiment that just discovered the Omega-sub-b.."
In actual English--with tenses--as it used to be used (which is now, as is evident, archaic):
"This recent discovery [of the Omega-sub-b particle] will probably be the last *notable* subatomic discovery made before the Large Hadron Collider at CERN begins to operate, which is scheduled to happen in October of this year. The LHC will be used to hunt for the Higgs Boson, which has thus far remained undetectable, even by experiments such as this one, which managed to find the Omega-sub-b particle."
* The author's clever-at-first-glance use of the adjective "noticeable" fails because it applies to "discoveries," and discoveries rarely go unnoticed, unlike grammar.
Did I say that people's spare CPU cycles should be mandated to SETI? As if that were feasible or even possible?
When I say that Protein Folding *should* take precedence over SETI, I'm simply making an appeal to people's personal priorities--and mine favor understanding and curing diseases over inconclusive alien signal-hunting every day of the week.
Yes, you're free to choose for yourself what cause you want to help out. As you should be. And I'm free to try to persuade others to help a very worthwhile cause:
http://folding.stanford.edu/Protein Folding should take precedence over pointless searches for noise-in-patterns.
The reason I "waste so many words on 'colonizing the universe'" is because that's exactly what I'm talking about. I unfortunately used the term "space exploration" in my post, once, as a synonym for the oft-repeated and unwieldy "space colonization," but in no way am I against the exploration of the galaxy: probes, landers, Spirit and Opportunity, Mir, the Hubble telescope...all of these are technologically-innovative-and-engendering endeavors, and undoubtedly imaginatively inspiring.
The source of our disagreement can probably be found in your assertion that colonizing space "is little different from exploring space." However, this is exactly what I was getting at when I said that "colonizing the galaxy--or, more in tune with the boundless vanity of the human species, colonizing the entire universe--is a structurally simple idea that consists in nearly all of its variegated versions as a fantasy of exploration, eradication of any species contrary to the human will (probably followed by their appropriation, sterilization, domestication and finally "appreciation"), and succeeded by a long reign of utter dominance by 'us.'" I listed "exploration" there as merely the first stage in my definition of colonization, but in no way does space exploration == colonization, as you wrote. By doing so, however, you inadvertently lent support to my having correctly linked these two different human drives into "what we might call the D&D drive, the seemingly irrepressable urge to Discover & Dominate."
It's also interesting that you wrote the following:
"...the part of the human psyche which instinctually strives to discover and dominate, like a slime mold which oozes away from the light and toward the darkness..." Riiight. Sorry. "oozing away from the light" does not really sound like "discover and dominate". Quite the opposite.
You evidently thought I was trying to simplistically link the drive to "discover and dominate" with the concept of darkness (the negative element in the light-dark binary pair), and wanted to reverse it so that discovery and domination are linked with "light," i.e. the "good." But I was really just sillily comparing images (the slime mold instinctively move toward the darkness just like geeks seek to move into outer space to colonize it) and, by extension, hyperbolically making the secondary point that the human D&D drive is as basic and instinctual as the drive of the slime mold's. Humor's strength again exhausted in explanation. Whoosh!
I actually agree with you 'mankind' doesn't fund research programs any more than 'mankind' sponsored Columbus to sail to the 'Indies'. Spain did. And she was eventually made very wealthy from her investment. So what is the problem here?
Yes, you're right: Spain did sponsor Columbus. And then the Spanish empire was "eventually," i.e. shortly thereafter, ruined by a severe recession brought about by inflation caused by the flood of New World silver onto the European silver market and Spain's consequent bellicose borrowing to pay her war debts. I suppose you could have also mentioned the wonderful effects that colonization had upon the native civilizations of the Americas, but why browbeat a point well-made?
You suggested that I "at least try reading some good sci-fi or 'speculative fiction;'" I suggest that you read some actual history, as you seem to ascribe to a "model is that is based on a false heroic image of Columbus created by the writers of high-school history texts." That quote is from an op-ed on spacedaily.com which starts with the author saying, "Lately I have been seeing lots of bad historical analogies drawn from a somewhat later time, the great age of European sea exploration," and ends with his remark that "today's space advocates...often show the same mixture of technical incompetence, slanted data, fanatical devotion to the cause, and brilliant salesmanship that led Columbus and Spain to disaster."
I originally wrote this in response to science fiction writer Charlie Stross's The High Frontier, Redux, which was recently posted to Slashdot under the article heading The Impossibility of Colonizing the Galaxy. I think I'll post it again in response to the parent's curse-laced rhetorical ridiculousness.
The very idea of "colonizing the galaxy," for all of its patent absurdity (which Stross points out very well) is one that the Slashdot crowd and sci-fi and geek hordes all have in common: it is a shared mass hallucination. Calling it a "hope," "dream" or "vision" does not transform something that has no possibility of occuring in one's lifetime--or one's childrens' lifetimes, or their childrens', etc. ad nauseum--into anything other than a mystical pipe dream.
But here is an idea which, despite its very absurdity and like many others of similar caliber, possesses phenomenal power to alter and organize the behavior of entire classes and groups of people. Colonizing the galaxy--or, more in tune with the boundless vanity of the human species, colonizing the entire universe--is a structurally simple idea that consists in nearly all of its variegated versions as a fantasy of exploration, eradication of any species contrary to the human will (probably followed by their appropriation, sterilization, domestication and finally "appreciation"), and succeeded by a long reign of utter dominance by "us." In short, "to colonize" is to rule or die trying, where the universe is the limit. Fundamentally, this favorite conceit of science fiction authors since the inception of the genre is merely the psychic expression of a biological organism's fundamental desire to survive, thrive, and conquer its environment. The fact that the idea of galactic colonization employs images of advanced technology in the imagery of its "vision," such as vast fleets of generation ships blasting off into the starry blackness-- something which exists only as pure fantasy--has done so since the beginning of the Russian and American space programs, and will continue to do so generations after everybody reading this post is dead and forgotten, is no argument against its actual simplicity.
In short, lots of humans, and Americans in particular, who generally consider themselves practical and not too ideological, entertain the fantasy of space colonization simply because the known world is just that, and is mostly conquered, i.e. "civilized," and the part of the human psyche which instinctually strives to discover and dominate, like a slime mold which oozes away from the light and toward the darkness, has nothing else upon which to feed. This drive must be satisfied, and therefore, in the absence of a means to do so, can only exhaust itself in the feverish masturbatory fantasies of science fiction.
Like every other human psychological drive, this one too is exploited, and not only by science fiction authors, video game publishers, and George Lucas. The political establishment exploits the desire because it shares it. Though we might entertain the exaulted and noble thought that space exploration is done for the benefit and glory of all mankind or some other such nonsense, the fact is that what the Apollo crew made sure to leave behind on that unexplored vista called the moon was a silly flag, and certainly not one representing the whole world or all of humanity, but of a single country. Territorial expansion psychologically concretized through symbolic branding.
The idea of space colonization is the primary and ultimate *delusionary* drive which props up and continuously feeds multiple sundry industries as well as the self-serving political and military establishments of several spacefaring countries, the US in particular. Films and television series such as Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate all serve to reinforce and satisfy what we might
This is an interesting post because the very idea of "colonizing the galaxy," for all of its patent absurdity, which Stross points out very well, is one that the Slashdot crowd and sci-fi and geek hordes all have in common: it is a shared mass hallucination. Calling it a "hope," "dream" or "vision" does not transform something that has no possibility of occuring in one's lifetime--or one's childrens' lifetimes, or their childrens', etc. ad nauseum--into anything other than a mystical pipe dream.
But here is an idea which, despite its very absurdity and like many others of similar caliber, possesses phenomenal power to alter and organize the behavior of entire classes and groups of people. Colonizing the galaxy--or, more in tune with the boundless vanity of the human species, colonizing the entire universe--is a structurally simple idea that consists in nearly all of its variegated versions as a fantasy of exploration, eradication of any species contrary to the human will (probably followed by their appropriation, sterilization, domestication and finally "appreciation"), and succeeded by a long reign of utter dominance by "us." In short, "to colonize" is to rule or die trying, where the universe is the limit. Fundamentally, this favorite conceit of science fiction authors since the inception of the genre is merely the psychic expression of a biological organism's fundamental desire to survive, thrive, and conquer its environment. The fact that the idea of galactic colonization employs images of advanced technology in the imagery of its "vision," such as vast fleets of generation ships blasting off into the starry blackness, something which exists only as pure fantasy, has done so since the beginning of the Russian and American space programs, and will continue to do so generations after everybody reading this post is dead and forgotten, is no argument against its actual simplicity.
In short, lots of humans, and Americans in particular, who generally consider themselves practical and not too ideological, entertain the fantasy of space colonization simply because the known world is just that, and is mostly conquered, i.e. "civilized," and the part of the human psyche which instinctually strives to discover and dominate, like a slime mold which oozes away from the light and towards the darkness, has nothing else upon which to feed. This drive must be satisfied, and therefore, in the absence of a means to do so, can only exhaust itself in the feverish masturbatory fantasies of science fiction.
Like every other human psychological drive, this one too is exploited, and not only by science fiction authors, video game publishers, and George Lucas. The political establishment exploits the desire because it shares it. Though we might entertain the exaulted and noble thought that space exploration is done for the benefit and glory of all mankind or some other such nonsense, the fact is that what the Apollo crew made sure to leave behind on that unexplored vista called the moon was a silly flag, and certainly not one representing the whole world or all of humanity, but of a single country. Territorial expansion psychologically concretized through symbolic branding.
The idea of space colonization is the primary and ultimate *delusionary* drive which props up and continuously feeds multiple sundry industries as well as the self-serving political and military establishments of several spacefaring countries, the US in particular. Films and television series such as Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate all serve to reinforce and satisfy what we might call the D&D drive, the seemingly irrepressable urge to Discover & Dominate.
It is very easy to anticipate a fair amount of hostility towards Stross's pointing-out of the absurdity of space colonization as some kind of goal, since fiction, film and television have insisted for more than fifty years that such things are within the realm of possibility. When considered rationally, however, as Stross has done and is being attacked for in a flu