Live Q&A with Futurist Alex Vikoulov | Metaverse News Network

Live Q&A with Futurist Alex Vikoulov | Metaverse News Network

Show Video

And there we go! Hello, everyone! So, tonight on  Metaverse News Network night it's myself here --   Rich Mourant -- with, of course, Shauna, our ever-present hostess of the most's in the background tonight, and tonight we have Alex Vikoulov with us. Alex  is an author, a futurist and a large thinker   of thoughts that we all should wonder about.  So, Alex, it's amazing to have you here tonight   and we can't wait to to talk about what's on your  mind! Thank you for having me tonight! I'm sure   we'll have a fun conversation! That's the point! So, Alex, I'd like to ask you for the first   kind of question: I was watching into your  background a little bit and I saw that you were   actually from Siberia?  You grew up your childhood in Siberia?  I was born and raised in Russia, yeah in Siberia, to be exact, you got it right.   So, sometimes, you know, some people  call me "Cyberian" -- with a 'C' ... And my hometown is actually called  Novosibirsk which is if translated from   Russian would be a "New Siberian City." Wow! So, and  what was I mean for me as well I'm not from   America either. I grew up in a small little town  in the the desert of Africa, so not quite the same  

kind of thing but the experience of coming over  from that kind of desert state... Okay! now you got me   interested -- whereabouts? Just south of Namibia  in South Africa in the Namaqua desert. So, I mean   such a polar kind of a different upbringing  from what you would have had up in the snow   but kind of the the isolation of that  area, kind of I can feel in a kinship to.    And how have you felt from coming from that kind of  childhood to now living and working in the States? Well, actually, yeah, it's quite an experience  because right now I feel myself like I have   a stereoscopic picture of the world -- because two cultures, two worldviews and,  you know, being able to speak two languages and  think in two languages -- old world and new world,   you know, it's blending all together... And did you  find that that background gives you a different   view of looking at these problems that  you're looking at than the scientists here?   In a way, yes, but science has pretty much  the same foundation and it's not exactly   different but, you know, slightly different, of  course, I mean. We all are like "droplets on this cobweb"

of reality. We all could have different  worldviews anyhow. So, yes, in this particular sense, yeah...   So, we now took the fact that you're into the  science world, what exactly are you focusing on   at the moment? I'm a futurist, evolutionary  cyberneticist and philosopher of mind and   cybernetics in general can be defined as  a multidisciplinary study of evolutionary   processes and feedback-driven systems  of control between animal and machine.   My chosen field -- evolutionary cybernetics as  well as my chosen philosophical discipline,   philosophy of mind -- both are aimed  to tackle the issues of this new   human-machine paradigm. Evolutionary  cybernetics deals with the global meta-trends   and the phenomenon of radical emergence  on a planetary scale. So, The Syntellect Hypothesis, as the title of my magnum opus, refers to the  emergence of self-aware planetary mind as a result   of the so-called Cybernetic  Singularity... Okay, so, Cybernetic Singularity?

What does that fully mean to you? As a  species, we actually had two prior developmental   singularities with sudden powerful impacts on the  course of the species. The "linguistic singularity"   made us human. With the invention of language,  human biological evolution was superseded by the   technocultural evolution, some call "epigenetic  evolution," ever since. As a tool-making species, we  

have always strived to extend our reach:  We designed tools and tools designed us back   by shaping our minds and our societies. With  the invention of writing, we began to "outsource"   our cognition to alternative carriers other  than our biological wetware. The second big   singularity that we are currently going through  can be identified as a "Cyberdelic Singularity"  that coincided with the dawn of Space Age, at  the intersection of cybernetic and psychedelic   cultures. That was the moment in time with confluence of nascent information technology   aimed at augmentation of human mind and personal  liberation through boundary-dissolving, mind-expanding psychedelic experiences. This Cyberdelic  Singularity opened up the whole new realms  

of possibilities for our species: outer space, inner  space and cyberspace. So, we're going through this   Cyberdelic Singularity right now. But as a  broad umbrella term "Technological Singularity" -- ETA circa 2029 -- may arbitrarily encompass mini  techno singularity events such as the upcoming   AGI Singularity, the Simulation Singularity and  the main meta-systemic event that I refer to as   the Cybernetic Singularity. The Cybernetic  Singularity can also be referred to   as the "Syntellect Emergence." Akin to the Cambrian  explosion from unicellularity to multicellularity   that happened about 542 million years ago, we are  now on the verge of yet another event of cosmic   significance, some kind of "Intelligence Supernova" in  our corner of the Universe, the phase transition of   humanity. The convergence of biotechnology,  nanotechnology, artificial intelligence   and exponential growth of computing power  puts us firmly on the path towards Intelligence   Explosion, or the Cybernetic Singularity, phase  transition of humankind altogether to the   newly-cognized reality framework. So, here's  my thesis on the chronological progression of  

Technological Singularity we should be pretty much,  you know, on the brink of. Circa 2030, we should   reach the so-called "Longevity Escape Velocity,"  meaning that we'll add every year more than one   year to an average remaining life expectancy. By  then, we also should complete reverse engineering   of the human brain. We'll have reached AGI -- human  level Artificial General Intelligence -- and at  

that time, thanks to nanotechnology, humans  will start to use Cloud-connected synthetic   neocortices, greatly enhancing our natural  intelligence. Nanobots, the size of a blood   cell, will swim in your blood to keep you  from getting sick and transmit your thoughts   to a wireless Cloud... And you say we're on track  for that for 2030? 2030, yeah, that will be... Wow! Well, it's thanks to exponentials,  40 steps in linear progression is just   40 steps away but 40 steps in exponential  progression it's three times the distance   from Earth to the Sun! It's a trillion with a "T" -- so, this is a power of exponentials and this is how information technology is actually  developing right now... Do you see hardware being  

the base that's going to drive this first or  do you think that this is going to be software-led?   Well, software is actually evolving  much, much faster than hardware.   So, for software it might be five updates whereas for the hardware it can be one upgrade. Software is always more fluid, has more  evolvability potential... You were speaking before about  

big movements being the drivers of this like  quantum computing and AI, and nanobots and so on. These now as those are going forward I see a lot  of progression in quantum computing and a lot of   developments in AI that are happening but I think  there's definitely going to be kind of one that   leads on to the development of the others greater  like I see if we develop quantum computing to   the point that it's actually functional, that's  going to drive AI computing faster... Oh, absolutely! So, as we go forward in these kinds of  developments, there's also kind of things that   makes me intrigued about what's going forward about "unseen" inventions, you know, what like people didn't   predict that the Internet was going to come around.  I mean you looked through all the science fiction   books, you look back through all of the kinds  of future predictions that were built up until   the 1980s, and the Internet was never even something on anybody's   mindset but it's now here and it's the  thing that's changed the world and made   everything grow even further and it wasn't  even on our plate of expectations to come.   So, even though so yeah so even though we're  looking at these things to be the the nexus   of these singularities like the development of  quantum computing and AI I kind of wonder often   what is the kind of side track of the unexpected  inventions that's going to come that's going to   veer us off in a different pathway. I mean, look  like nobody expected electricity but look what  

electricity did to the world. Right, right! Well, "Singularity" is a term -- I'm sorry go ahead -- no, no, no, I'm interested   to see where you think that even though we've  got these great advancements coming in quantum   computing and this kind of things I don't  think they're going to be the thing that pushes   us towards the Singularity. I think it's  something that comes maybe from gene slicing   or something from this kind of side  ones that develop a technology   that catapults everything faster. I'm just  interested to see what you think is likely... Yeah, well, first of all, "Singularity" is a  term borrowed from physics that refers to the   cosmological singularity of Big Bang as well  as the singularity as the center of black hole that lies beyond its event horizon where  all known physical laws break down. The term   "Technological Singularity" was coined by sci-fi  writer Vernor Vinge in reference to the runaway   effect of technological progress -- the "Intelligence  Explosion." That's why we call it "Intelligence  

Explosion," when, generally speaking, machines, or  non-biological intelligence, become smarter   than biological intelligence, unenhanced biological  humans. We commonly use this term as a metaphor   to refer to this inflection point with whatever  lies beyond becomes utterly unpredictable.    So, yeah, whatever we can predict right now  might not turn out quite the same as predicted.   But then again, I mean, we can make educated  guesses and that's why I believe that we'll have these   "mini-techno-singularities" events that edge us  ever closer to the main meta-systemic event   of Cybernetic Singularity. So, this is why I'm  talking about circa 2030 the AGI Singularity based  

on humankind reaching the human-level Artificial  General Intelligence (AGI). It's gonna be a huge   event, right? Because, you know, at that point we'll  have the second intelligent species on this planet.   And circa 2035, we should hit another milestone -- I call it the "Simulation Singularity" which is   also kind of pretty "spooky," you know, for some  people because this is the event when our   immersive technologies would render artificial  realities perceptually indistinguishable from   the physical reality. It means that you don't even have to wear a VR headset. At that point,

we'll be past having Internet-enabled contact lenses and at that point, we'll have nanobots swimming our bloodstream and basically creating VR (virtual reality) from within our nervous system. They suppress the signals from physical reality and just render artificial reality from within your nervous system. Circa 2035, mid-2030s, we'll have the Simulation Singularity.   Combined with AGI and ever  accelerating exponential growth of computing and   all IT fields that you can conceive of, including  quantum computing as you mentioned, we'll have   our thinking predominantly on the Cloud by 2040, and we'll spend most, if not all, the time in VR.  By 2045, I agree with futurist  Ray Kurzweil, we'll probably hit this major   Technological Singularity event which I call the  Syntellect Emergence, or the Cybernetic Singularity,   with the emergence of the AI-powered  Global Brain. This globally distributed  

mind based on advanced quantum computing and  communication technologies, "Digital Gaia," in which   human and AI minds both participate, would collectively form a high level of intelligence and awareness.  So, by any means it will mean some  kind of phase transition. At that time,   the Global Brain will get smarter and  smarter at exponential rate -- completely   incomprehensible rate for unenhanced biological  humans. So, it is going to be like Intelligence Supernova...

I have a question for you, particularly  as we're starting to talk about a   a kind of omnipotent AI: What do  you feel is like the difference between   artificial intelligence and consciousness? I would say that artificial intelligence is kind  of oxymoron. Everything is in consciousness, it's   the same continuum. If you ask me about my thesis  on consciousness, I would say that we live in a   computational reality, everything comes down to  consciousness. Basically, there's one universal   substance, which is consciousness, and one medium -- information. Information and consciousness are two   sides of the same coin. Nothing else  actually exists -- only information and consciousness.   Consciousness is a subjectivistic wave  function collapse. It's a computation.  

It's a quantum computation by any means. We live  in this multidimensional experiential matrix.   So, everything is in consciousness. Today's  robots are only objects in our consciousness but   to your question: Could artificially intelligent  agents ever possess genuine consciousness and   sense of agency, I'd say it's just a matter of  time as long as we make progress in the field   and we do exponentially but not the way  most people and even AI researchers envision.   The ability of future superintelligent machines  and enhanced humans alike to instantly share   knowledge within this Global Brain in digital  format will lead to evolution of intelligence   from relatively isolated individual minds  to the global community of hyperconnected   cybernetic minds, the Global Brain, termed the  "Syntellect" in my book... I have a practical,   

there's a practicality for me, to ask about  this and talk about synthetic brain interface:   Do you mean something like the whole  planet ends up hooked to something like   Elon Musk's Neuralink? Is that how you  kind of see the practicality of that working? Well, at some point we'll fuse our minds, yes, indeed.  That's what's going to happen. At some point, the Global Brain will morph into its own kind of mind  upload and what's going to happen is that humans   will be enhanced with Cloud-connected exocortices  that act as natural neurons of the Global Brain   but embodied AGIs and cyberhumans would act as  artificial neurons. But we will share the same   mind space. These "newly-hatched" AGIs will learn  from this global neural network. Ultimately, they  

will learn just like our children do and they will  learn to think for themselves. But they will probably   have somewhat different subjectivity than humans... Do you think to kind of localize it a little   bit more as we're talking about the growth of the  Metaverse -- do you see the Metaverse as kind of   being our next kind of information platform of  communication where at some stage will actually   be able to start talking to these singularities  and other consciousnesses in the Metaverse? Well, absolutely! I mean, I call the Metaverse the  "Cybernet Internet." As a functional successor of   today's 2D Internet, this 3D avatar-based Internet  will allow us to customize our own virtual worlds. 

It's a digital layer on top of or in place of  physical reality, a digital twin in some sense of   the planet itself. So, the Metaverse now represents  an opening "Gateway to Transcension."   Are you familiar with the Transcension Hypothesis? I've read it but I think it's worth us   talking about and so please for everyone  else would you like to give a brief overview?  Right! So, the so-called Transcension Hypothesis  and my own the Chrysalis Conjecture postulate   that mature civilizations invariably leave  their initial bubble universe by creating   black-hole conditions, computationally optimal  density, dimensionality, that is virtual worlds of   their own design. That implies that the exponential  trend of miniaturization and virtualization will   eventually compress our space-time-matter-energy  into an ever denser computational substrates  so that our postbiological selves, our posthuman  minds, will live within the nano- to femto-scale,   and even smaller, all the way down to the Plank-scale  in order to harness more computational power.   Literally, our minds will live in VR and that's  why as one of possible solutions to the Fermi Paradox we don't see signs of alien intelligence  in the cosmos. With the Metaverse, we don't need  

to colonize Mars ever! We'll inhabit the infinite  cyberspace instead. I certainly understand what   Elon tries to accomplish but it's not  going to happen the way he envisions it...   How so? Because with the evolution of the  Metaverse and exponential miniaturization, as   I mentioned, will just transcend to this new  cyberspace. It's going to be like a "digital   habitat" for our minds. Our cognition is going  from one substrate -- biological substrate -- to  

a non-biological substrate. So, at some point, we'll  complete this transition and we'll become    posthuman minds living in virtual reality. We'll  still colonize space but it's going to be done   through self-replicating von Neumann probes for  the most part. So, those probes will colonize and   mine the planets for computronium so that, you know, we can have more and more computational power  to explore our inner space not outer space...  That's a fascinating concept of probes!

So, where else now you define the difference  between outer space and inner space?  Where do you see now the developments of  technologies that are going to help expand   people's education of accessing inner spaces?  Well, I would certainly bet on the Transcension   scenario -- we'll have this huge, huge inner  space that we'll share with AGIs and cyberhumans.   I mean, basically we'll be such "cyberhumanity"  of some sort. We'll enhance ourselves exponentially.   Our thinking processes, our mentation will  accelerate to such an extent that we'll think   maybe hundreds, thousands, millions of times faster  than biological computing does, right? At that   point, the physical world would look almost  static: Creatures of the physical world would look   almost like houseplants to us, you know, like slow-moving objects. The physical world wouldn't be   that interesting for us because like in virtual  reality that's where the whole exploration   of humankind will take place. I bet on Transcension  and my own Chrysalis Conjecture that states that we   occupy this dimensional cocoon, you know.  This is why we don't see alien life, 

alien intelligence out there... So, then you  talk about the transcendence and   and I think that there's a lot of places in   North America and in the first world where the   tech and the universities and these things  are being worked on so dramatically. How do you   see these kind of technologies and ideas spreading  out into more third world areas? Because getting   Transcension out into, say, Nairobi and Nigeria,  and moving that part of the equality chain   to allow not just the elite, few on the top to  have access to Transcension. How do you think that   the third world is going to (a) have access to this  or (b) utilize it? Right! Well, today's meta-trends   such as exponential acceleration of technological  progress and especially connectivity explosion   on a planetary scale makes me think that we'll  probably encompass other countries fairly easily   in the future. I mean, think about it, for example,  in Africa you can see little kids just playing  

with their smartphones already, you know, like it's  completely unthinkable even a couple of decades ago.  All these technologies may be a little  bit pricey in the beginning, at the initial   stage, but then the price drops significantly, so  digitalization and virtualization of everything   lead us to this convergent point we'll be in  the virtual Metaverse... Don't you think that once   the few have started to generate and, sorry, I like  talking about the risks of what goes forward, so   I'll just pray for that out. I like thinking of,  yes, we like these ideas but what are the inverses  

that could happen what is the balance out of that  and what does it play out with human nature   and if we think human nature is always  inclined to hold and keep power to   the few rather than the many. So, my kind of  theory or question would be: So, we have a few   that have access to this technology that are  going to get to it years and decades before   people in Africa and so on would. Are we creating  a new elite and an intellectual elite, then a   a cybernetic transcendent elite that will then  hold that power and not be able to share it out   to the countries and to the places that have not  been able to partake in the initial privilege   of the development of this technology? I agree  it's certainly a risk but and there are many, many   risks going forward. I'm pretty optimistic about the  future but I'm not overly optimistic, you know.   We'll always have a host of problems going forward... We always have to fight the nature of man...   Yes, but then again, I mean, all  all these risks and problems   I would rather describe them as challenges and  I'd say -- by contemplating the full spectrum of   scenarios of upcoming techno singularities,  many can place their bets in favor of Cybernetic Singularity, the scenario when we merge with AI. We cannot outcompete AI, so we have to form some kind of    human-AI symbiote collectively. So, talking about the elites, we'll need as many natural neurons of the Global Brain

than just a handful of billionaires  holding all the cards... My problem is human nature...   Well, human nature! Now we should talk  about transhumanism because transhumanism   is a techno-philosophical and cultural movement that aims at transcending the human condition altogether   and transforming humans into beings of superior  God-like capacities by the means of science and   technology. As for transhumanism -- I consider myself a transhumanist singularitarian -- the three pillars   of transhumanism are superintelligence, super longevity and super well-being. We talked about   superintelligence -- intelligence supernova. Super  longevity, as I said, by 2030 we should have this  

longevity escape velocity and super well-being:  Transhumanists face another kind of challenge   going forward and we might even see some kind of  speciation as well. I mean some people would love   to augment themselves, you know, become cyborgs  but the rest of population might linger and   not completely embrace the technological changes...  I think often people then    as soon as you say technological changes they always start thinking cybernetics and they think of how   do I augment myself with robotics when actually  the coding of DNA and the ability to   read DNA as a language and as an actual thought  pattern is a lot more interesting for what that   could actually scope out to with the gene  splicing technologies that they're starting to   develop and the genetical data flows that are  starting to be developed for like genetic digital   storage. I mean it's a fascinating idea that   you can instead of having a hard drive have a lump  

of fluid jelly that's sitting that you can plug  an electrode in and out goes your your storage.   I mean that the points of what gene therapy and  gene splicing is doing at the moment is so   incredible that cyborg might not necessarily mean  you've got a metal piece attached to the side   of your head, there can be entirely new sets of  evolution that are professed in any way... Absolutely!   Yeah, I don't think that, you know, we'll be like  ugly-looking kind of cyborgs not even resembling   a human being. Not at all! I think that we'll just -- by enhancement of human flesh -- we'll probably just   end up having these nanobots that will not only monitor our biological systems from within, we   may have any kind of appearance, if you would like,  especially in the Metaverse -- good-looking,   absolutely amazing kind of avatar, right? But in  the physical world you can do just the same,    I mean, it's via nanobots. At some point, we'll just  have all kinds of multiple cybernetic bodies that   can be assembled and disassembled at will with nanobots. That's the next step in evolution:

We'll just become cyberhumans that can live in VR and, if necessary, you can be in the physical reality   but then again, you'll have a cybernetic  body that, you know, can be assembled and   dissembled via nanobots... So, I'm fascinated to  ask how you think the transfer is going to happen   because at some stage or another we have  to take brain waves, record them and   input them into a machine and either get the  machine to respond to them or reenact them.   How do you see that kind of movement happening  between brain to machine? Nanotechnology   will pave the way to so-called "Cybernetic  Immortality." So, initially in the 2030s, each of us will have a personal exocortex on the Cloud -- the third non-biological "de-cerebral hemisphere" --   a synthetic thinking unit of some sort, right, that should be in constant communication with   other two biological brain hemispheres. Cloud-computing exocortices will be "us" in the ever   dominating cyberspace. The exocortex would be able  to eavesdrop on the activity of both biological  

hemispheres by neural nanobots, so at some point  this third hemisphere will have a threshold   information content and intimate knowledge of  your biology, personality and other physical world   attributes in order to seamlessly integrate with  your persona as a holistic entity. As your original   biological wetware fades away in comparison  to the more capable exocortex, perhaps, in   time billionfold more capable due to exponentials  because it's not limited by the cranial enclosure.   Right? So, this exocortex, digital mindware of yours,  would smoothly assume all functions of your    biological brain circa its expiration date. So,  gradually our minds will migrate to cyberspace,  this endless custom-built virtual worlds, that is  the Metaverse, the hottest buzzword of today, right?   And your mind pattern will persist there. By  any measure, it still be "YOU" even though your  

biological substrate is no longer here. It's going  to be like pattern transfer... You bring up something   of biological substrate, you know, what  I mean part of the drive of being   human, the part of the drive of being alive, the  positive life of being a natural entity is the   drive to reproduce and the drive to see that  gene pool go further. As we move into a more   digitized version surely there is some form  of the chemical balance inside ourselves   that runs us as humans that runs us as a chemical  experience more than just a physical experience   that we lose something in the  transfer? I'm very optimistic about   this particular issue because basically  what we mean here is that we cannot lose our   best abilities as humans, we only infinitely  increase them and we infinitely, as we move    forward in the future, we become God-like  in some sense, right, so with all these advances   in artificial intelligence, augmented and virtual  reality, cybernetics, biotechnology, nanotechnology,   genetic engineering, optogenetics will reprogram  our biology but at the same time we won't lose   our best abilities, I mean, even though we  become more and more perfect in virtual   reality, in cyberspace, we can always explore our  "imperfections" in virtual reality. So, maybe we, as I say in the book, we constitute  this kind of interactive database, kind of   historical database, you know, how we were back  in the day like when we were humans. I mean you   can always re-experience yourself as you were a  biological human, you know, that's how I see it.  With that joy of the fact that every human  is actually a brand new human every seven years,  I mean we already are renewal substances,  right? That's exactly right! Yes, yes, it's just   the pattern that persists. As Norbert  Wiener, the father of cybernetics, said that  

"we are not the stuff that abides but  the patterns that perpetuate themselves."   Well, that brings us an interesting seqway to talk about what you think of digital philosophy?   Digital Physics and Digital Philosophy are two  disciplines that are closely related. The father of   information theory, Claude Shannon, introduced the  notion of information that could be quantifiable.   In "Mathematical Theory of Communication," his  seminal paper from 1948, Shannon proposed that data   could be measured in bits -- discrete values  of zeros and ones. The hypothesis that  

the Universe is a digital computer was proposed by  Conrad Zuse in his 1969 book "Calculating Space."   The term "Digital Physics" was employed by pioneering Edward Fredkin who later came   to prefer the term "Digital Philosophy." In  1989, one of the most brilliant physicists   of the 20th century, John Wheeler, coined the phrase  "it from bit" to encapsulate the radical view   of the Universe: At the most fundamental level, all of physics can be articulated in terms of   information. Then came along the Holographic  Principle derived from the black hole physics   that posits that information is not contained  in the volume of space but is contained on the   surface of its boundary that it also implies that  our information-based reality well maybe a "metaverse"  in a universe up. Computational Physics,  then came Emergence Theory and other theories and  

theoretical models that actually confirm that,  you know, we live in some sort of computational   universe or computational reality. Computational  Physics suggests that there exists, at least in   principle, a program for a universal computer  that computes the evolution of the Universe.  According to Computational Physics, everything in  the Universe is made of information of which mass-   energy and space-time are merely manifestations to  us conscious observers from within a simulation.   In Computational Physics, existence and  thought boil down to, well, computation. The subjectivity arises from  computational universality,   all realities are virtual and information-theoretic, or better yet, code-based, or code-theoretic...  So, for me what is the difference between like  the Code-Theoretic Model and the normal physics, the Standard Model? Well, the Standard Model is based on the Standard Model of Particle Physics, so basically, the particle physicists  would say that, you know, like at the very bottom   we have elementary particles like photons and  electrons but photons and electrons may actually   have a very sophisticated internal structure as  well. So, what the most elemental is is binary code --

zeros and ones, yes/no, yes-universe/no-universe, right? There's like only this "Morse Code" of the Universe   that what truly exists and that what   actually holds the Holographic Principle also,  forced from the black-hole physics, implies. So, any universe run on qubits and digital bits is virtual and   everything is a simulation... Would you like  to just explain to people what a qubit is   so that they can understand? Yeah,  qubit is a quantum-mechanical bit, you know,    so it can be at the same time zero and one.  Computational machine gives you a whole   

new dimension and exponential combinatorics, you know,  because it helps you calculate  different paths to the ultimate solution. But what's really interesting is that  Digital Physics, or Computational Physics,    they say that physics and simulation of physics  are identical because information equals reality,   because everything comes down to  the elementary binary code but what makes a sense   out of it all, what assigns measurement values is  consciousness. So, now we come to this conclusion:   Only consciousness and information exist in the  world, so materiality is some sort of illusion   from what we experience, from within the  simulation... So, what do you mean by the simulation?  

You keep using the term and I'm  not quite sure where you where you put it well...   Simulation is basically, it's a computation.  Both terms can be used interchangeably...   So, you're kind of suggesting that the whole  planet is running a computation and that would   be the simulation that we're in? All of reality, the  whole reality is the simulation: There's no good counterargument to digital ontology. Digital ontology says that -- information is what? It is a distinction between things -- you can perceive  something in terms of something which is not,   right, discernible differences lie at the  bottom of every phenomenon and interaction.  

Yeah, it looks like the the basic human  difference between perception and intent.   I mean, looking at the exact same thing and  perception intent is a chasm of humanity.   That's exactly right! I mean you can look at  the same picture and perceive different things, you know. The computational approach attempts to deal  with the non-deterministic quantum theory   where quantum indeterminacy constantly results  into a digital reality -- I call it "digital reality" --   by the act of conscious observation. So, it's  all computation, you know and,   like, for example, if you know how cartoon is made, right? I mean you have to flip different images,   right, to see the movement, right? It  also moves us into then multidimensional   and multidimensional theories because  if we're going to say: "Reality is a dimension,"   then we're going to send the message to another  dimension and then we're just going to end   up in a whole lot of nested "perceived realities."  Yes! Well, basically we're talking about the   "Matryoshka" of embedded realities, like a Russian  doll of reality within realities, you know.  

And I'm currently developing the Cybernetic  Theory of Mind which rests on five   foundational axioms: The first axiom is the Emergence axiom -- it's just self-evident, the Emergence   axiom -- the whole is greater than the sum of its  parts. We know that everything emerges from   something else just like as we move  along through the complexity levels,    different emerging properties appear. Second is  the Network axiom talking about the embedded   networks: As a rule, it's a "Matryoshka" of embedded  networks. Each of us is a microcosm of a flesh,   a network intelligence in the human form  and universally this network feature of Nature   translates into small worlds within bigger worlds,  interdependent and interpenetrating networks of conscious agents, organisms within  superorganisms, minds within superminds,   higher interactivity and built-in dimensionality. Next  comes the Information axiom: Information is  

"modus operandi" of consciousness, as I mentioned,  information and consciousness are the two   sides of the same coin. By this axiom, information  is distinction between phenomenal states.   We perceive time because it flows from  one static world to another static world,   you know, like a projector flipping frames in  the movie... What do you mean by "static world"?  Static world is basically like a snapshot of space-time, it's not moving at all, right, but the perceived change is what really gives us the perception of time flow. So, again it's just computation, you know,  it's not like it's happening by itself it's just,   you know, you have to have a certain algorithmic  unfolding of these events, so, phenomenality is quantum computational but  then again reality is ontologically monistic   based on only one universal medium -- information  and one universal substance -- consciousness.   So, like for example, right now we are developing  this Metaverse, right, but if you extrapolate this   Metaverse by hundreds of orders of magnitude you  would come up that at some point nothing else   would really need to exist but the higher mind  that would simulate the multitude of ultrarealistic   realities, you know, that the higher  mind and consciousness that's what really needs   to exist, you know, with information as its operating mode. So, the next is the Interface axiom   which states that each conscious agent is  endowed with a certain sensory filtering system,   a unique interface to the larger reality,  right. So, a bat, an octopus, a human, although earthly  

actors would have incredibly alien interfaces.  The next axiom is the OS axiom: The acronym OS   stands for the "Omega Singularity" as well as  "Operating System." This "Axiom of Divinity" -- I would   call it -- is logically consistent with metaphysical  extrapolations based on the most advanced epistemic   knowledge of science. The Omega Singularity, presumably Nature's sole ontological source,   is understood as the holographic projector of all  possible timelines within this multidimensional   experiential matrix. So, basically materialism  is a "flatlander philosophy." We should think  

outside of the box so the Omega Singularity  is something that needs to be introduced,  you know, because, for example, the Big Bang  theory draws a lot of criticism as of late.   They use the starting assumption --  the Universe from nothing -- a proverbial miracle,   right, a "quantum fluctuation" as christened  by scientists, or the initial cosmological   singularity but aside from this highly improbable  happenstance we can just as well as operate from a   different set of assumptions and place the initial  cosmological singularity at the Omega Point,   the transcendental attractor. As McKenna said the  universal teleological attractor, the "Transcendental   Object at the end of time" would constitute the  holographic projector of all possible timelines...   So, you touch on it again and  I would to come back to it -- time...  

Okay... How do you see time  fluctuating through that because   you keep touching on the time thing and how  things interact with it but then how does it flow?   Okay! So, actually I formulated the D-Theory of Time, or Digital Presentism,  predicated on reversible  quantum computing at large. Have you seen the movie Tenet? A recent movie... I have not... Okay, so, Tenet actually introduced the  general public to this concept. It's sort of   like, well, now we know what quantum computing  is, right, I mean so it's basically what a   digital present constitutes is basically funneling  of all possible futures and all possible pasts   into this single digital reality perceptual  framework. As we move through time,  

we make this computation and we perceive  time from one perceptual frame to another.  It's sort of like a real-time streaming of  progressively generated content in immersive   virtual reality. The basic tenet of Digital  Presentism is that in the absence of   the observers, the arrow of time doesn't exist --  there is no cosmic flow of time.

That's a very interesting kind of way to think  about it! I mean, yeah, time cannot be absolute,  it's always subjective, so Digital Presentism  revolves around observer-centric temporality.  What we call time, or flow of time,  is a sequential change between static   perceptual frames, as I mentioned earlier, it's an emergent phenomenon, right, it's a "moving image of eternity" as Plato famously said more than   two millennia ago... I like that, it's almost like  a movie, that's movement of static images...  Real-time streaming of progressively  generated content in immersive virtual reality. You know, yes!.. That is absolutely fascinating! I know that I have found that absolutely  

eye-opening! Shauna, anything you would  like to say as we draw to the the kind of   close of the evening? I just have one question  and that is that as we move to this Global Mind... Yes... Hold on, she's paused... I've seen some... Am I there? Within the Metaverse development and  maybe you've seen the same type of thing where at   level 9, for example, we reach a hub-like state and  then an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent   state of being and I wonder if  you could touch on before we close   where do you see this Global Mind in terms of  your perception of a God? Wow! Big questions! Well, basically we become God, right, with all these divine attributes   talking about us becoming God, right, so like  for example, transcendentalism with Ralph Waldo Emerson as its biggest figure was marked  by the notion of divine unity of Man with Nature.  So, conditions seem to be ripe right now to   revive transcendentalism, or transhumanism/ posthumanism, as neo-transcendentalism.    Basically, yeah, we're moving towards this notion  of God -- only we ourselves are becoming God.

So, as I said, this is going to be like a  phase transition of humanity to a newly-cognized   reality framework, so we're becoming  something much bigger than ourselves,    we're basically transcending our  low dimensionality of Man and this inner space   exploration, this Metaverse, this is like  an opening Gateway to Transcension...  I love what you said earlier that's that  to wrap this up that the next voyage is not   outwards, it's inwards and I think that is a great  focus to think for people to think of as we go   forward is sometimes exploring in is a lot more  fun and exciting than going and looking out...   Yes, absolutely! Well, Alex, thank you very much  for being here this evening! We're going to end   the stream and say goodbye to everyone, so thank  you all for being here and thank you, Alex, for   joining us! All right! Thank you so much, guys! Tell  us where we can best find you -- I know you have some   Facebook pages and you have a website where can  we best find you to learn more about the subject?  Absolutely! So, I would suggest  to go to as well as my personal blog -- you can browse  

through my works: I'm an author of 10  book titles and co-author of 3... Wow! I also just released a documentary based  on my works -- Consciousness: Evolution of the Mind   which can be accessed on different networks such as Tubi or Vimeo   But you can find me -- I'm pretty active on social media   You can find me, you know, on the Internet pretty  easily... The good old-fashioned Google..  Yes! That's exactly right! Alex, thank  you so much! Thank you, Richard,   so much! Thank you so very, very much! Shauna, my pleasure! It's a pleasure to have you here, there's   a tremendous amount embedded in this short  one hour and it definitely shows us that we   have a long way to go in terms of our own  understanding of concepts but we're so glad   that you shared it with us tonight. Thank you so  much! Thank you, Alex!

2022-01-30 15:09

Show Video

Other news