Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
This would work fine, except in terms of success.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                             

LifePreserver

plant spaceship for the long now
  (+1)
(+1)
  [vote for,
against]

Just in case Porno Planets scenario (link) is in our future, one "hail mary" way to try to preserve life would be to send a long-now-like spaceship with a plant in it as far away from this star as possible, or to distribute that process and preserve life so that a porno planet-like scenario doesn't end everything.

The porno-planets-scenario is basically that complex biological evolution and morality is really just the backwards- in-time-moving fluid dynamic ripples and echoes of astronomical-sized impacts.

JesusHChrist, Apr 08 2013

The original PornoPlanets http://netfreedombl.../porno-planets.html
[JesusHChrist, Apr 08 2013]

Long now http://longnow.org/
[JesusHChrist, Apr 09 2013]

Pioneer 10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_10
[JesusHChrist, Apr 09 2013]

Etymology of I http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_(pronoun)
[JesusHChrist, Apr 10 2013]

[link]






       Have you read "A Philosophy of Stars" by Bethwick C. Kwarts? He was nuts too.   

       Anyway, the basic idea is to send samples of terrestrial life out on big spaceships in case it gets wiped out here?
MaxwellBuchanan, Apr 08 2013
  

       Is 'long-now' anything like [beanangel]'s 'happylong'? That is to say, is it a term you just made up and assumed everyone would understand?
Alterother, Apr 08 2013
  

       Am I the only one who's going to admit that he's disappointed that there's no link to porno planets as pledged?
normzone, Apr 08 2013
  

       Basic idea: to send out, on one end of the spectrum, a gigantic spaceship/archive/Noah's arc of all of the life forms representing bio-diversity on earth, consciously organized and executed by the democratically acknowledged greatest minds on earth, and on the other end of the spectrum, to distribute the process of preserving life by ensuring that somehow life gets out there so that if there is a Porno Planets-like scenario and there is some kind of way out of it but only at the perifery, that we are there to take the opportunity when it arises, in that case most likely by seeding through chain reaction from big to small the eventual grand impact of another astronomical-sized object on some other planet around another star.
JesusHChrist, Apr 08 2013
  

       # a third try would be to say that, since biology is only the impact echoes (in backwards time) of grand-scale astronomical disruption, that, even though any peripheral niche-finding would seem to be tautological, that, since we have nothing to lose anyway, and since, if we are truely free we should be looking for every possibility, that we should be looking at the most remote distance and at the most infragile level -- with bacteria, viruses etc in little space ships. So I guess the idea should be for a way to optimize the panspermia delivery method --spores of deep purple, with maybe little sun sail wings?
JesusHChrist, Apr 08 2013
  

       I think "we" in language always means first the ancestors of this logical construction - of this contractual transactional exchange, whether you look at that as the sentence itself or as the act of some "one"understanding it, it is always linguistic and always a multiplicity of perspectives that go into giving whatever point you are making its richness. Selfish genes is a book by Richard Dawkins who says that we are our genes or our memes and not something to be shot "towards" as in an impact -- so I would say the answer to that question is "we" in the personal as in the increasing multiplicity of threads feeding backward into time from the impact, rather than "we" the multlicity of "causes" of our complex behavior going forward.
JesusHChrist, Apr 08 2013
  

       'We' in the English language is a plural of the article 'I', which is a designation of or reference to the self in 1st- person narrative. I don't know what the hell it means in your language, which you seem to be making up on the fly.
Alterother, Apr 09 2013
  

       No, [JHC] isn't making it up, somebody else did that. He's just dynamically misunderstanding it for you, and he is time-forward of the point at which he 'got it' - but as it is a time-backward based understanding, his clarity on the point will probably continue to drop.
lurch, Apr 09 2013
  

       I completely understand.
Alterother, Apr 09 2013
  

       I'm shocked that it costs $8 a month to join the Long Now site!!
xandram, Apr 09 2013
  

       I dont know what you mean by "we" or "I" but when I say "I", I dont as much refer to the meat and bones that surrounds any supposed physical or physically located soul as much as I refer to the language and ideas that keeps the meat and the bones erect and running back and forth to work every day -- and to all the great people and all of the great work that went into making that language possible.
JesusHChrist, Apr 09 2013
  

       Its kind of more like a wei.
JesusHChrist, Apr 09 2013
  

       Everything [JHC] has said here has confused me.   

       And by me I mean the sum of matter enclosed proximately by the exterior of my skin. I make no inferences that "me" or "I" includes anything other than the corporeal form I currently occupy.
Custardguts, Apr 09 2013
  

       Yes, it does confuse "me" if that's what you mean by "me", as in it confuses the definition of "me", but the loophole is that the new definition also "gives eternal life to" "me", as in language grows stronger through use as opposed to meat which wears out.
JesusHChrist, Apr 10 2013
  

       Why not invent different language rather than changing meanings of existing terms. Feel free to invent a new pronoun or whatever.   

       Saves confusion.
Custardguts, Apr 10 2013
  

       No need to invent a different language; there are plenty of words and phrases in the English language describe such concepts, although for some reason they aren't being used here. Consult a thesaurus, perhaps?
Alterother, Apr 10 2013
  

       It looks from the etymology of "I" (link) that I has historically been used in a spiritual or non physical way -- PIE root "ego", as opposed to a material sense of the body contained by my skin or "eye". I couldn't find the etymology of the Rastafarian "I and I" online, but I could guess that it is at least partly related to this issue.   

       Besides, it seems pretty simple to me that if you are referring to your physical body by "I" and not everyone can agree on what constitutes a complete physical body, then somewhere along the line we are going to run into issues.
JesusHChrist, Apr 10 2013
  

       That's why we (lit.: 'we', plural of 'I' or 'me') have words like body, mind, soul, corpus, psyche, id, ego, consciousness, material form, mortal coil, etc. You should check them out sometime, they can be pretty fun.
Alterother, Apr 10 2013
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle