Skip navigation

Category Archives: Science

The idea that the biosphere of Earth is a single organism, whose cells are each of the life forms, and whose bodily fluids are the winds and rain and rivers, is no revelation, though the notion that it is scientifically accurate challenges our idea of an individual organism. The ‘Gaia Hypothesis’ is an attractive theory, since there are many aspects of other life-forms which the earth-as-a-whole shares. Typically, we think of an individual organism as a single, self-contained entity, which the Earth certainly is. But even we are the combination of trillions of individual, if closely related, life forms; an ecosystem comprised of our cells. Each is one of several hundred classes of cells, all separate aspects of one DNA molecule, living in their own evolved-to-order micro-environment which is created by the other cells.

All life forms do certain things.
If some entity doesn’t do all of them, we don’t consider it alive.

  • Absorption of energy and matter, with subsequent organization of the material, is the first identifying feature of life. Crystals and engines, however, are just two not-living things that can do this.
  • Death is only possible for life forms. Growth slows down, DNA loses it’s integrity, the old and the weak are lost to predators and disease. Even as part of normal development, most life forms cast off certain cells. Our skin is an example of such normal death. But ‘stopping growth’ equals ‘death’ for crystals or other non-alive things that fit the first part.
  • Evolution is the process by which life forms change their characteristics over long periods of time, measured in generations. The Earth’s biosphere evolves, at least as much as any one life form which lives there. But lots of not-alive things exhibit what might be called evolutionary behavior, since the mechanism is merely the disappearance of unfit things, and the preponderance of fit things: Fit organisms survive. Fit computers are Y2K compliant.
  • Reproduction is the critical characteristic for any life form to posses, as the replication and distribution of a molecular design code (the DNA, for earthlings) is the crux of what life forms do. Also, our health depends upon the accurate replication of DNA molecules multiple trillions of times, in the cell divisions required for our growth and repair.

Virii do all of the above, but they are somewhat parasitic upon cells, using RNA to reprogram the host cells so they will produce virii instead of important bodily substances. Because virii use RNA instead of DNA, and hijack cells, instead of honorably trying to just eat them, we question whether virii are alive. But humans have been hijacking (domesticating) other life forms for millennia. If the external nature of the virus’ ‘food’ is reason to call them non-living, then we are not alive either. And limiting the defintion of ‘life form’ to DNA alone is merely arbitrary, as the discovery of life on other planets may prove.

By the preceding definitions, Gaia is not a life form. She has not reproduced — yet.

A bacterium takes twenty minutes to reproduce; A mouse, three weeks; A human being, months. Elephants gestate for two solid years. For all life forms, gestation time is proportional to the size, so we might expect Gaia to take a few billion years.

The resource stress our civilization is experiencing just may be the resource drain on the mother which triggers birth in mammals. We can reasonably expect space based resources to get harvested more as planetary resources get scarcer and hence, more expensive. It has already started happening.
The resources of space and our place in it are already a reality:

  • Space tourism began in 1989, when the first ride was purchased, on the space station Mir.
  • Communications technology has been completely made over by space-based hardware. It may soon become the primary system – in many ways it already is. Satellite television, telephone, and weather forecasting systems are just the beginning.
  • The Moon has water ice. It doesn’t sound like a big deal now, but will probably become the most valuable space resource in our life times, unless some crazy longevity drug is invented.
  • 1996 marked the first year that private space funding exceeded public spending on space exploration, world-wide. Each year, the gap widens.
  • What’s the major symbol of the environmental movement? An image of Earth from space.

If there are sufficient resources in space, people will one day move there en masse. We’d have to find efficient ways to lift ourselves off the face of the planet, and find resources in nearly empty, unfamiliar, lifeless regions. We’d experience solar radiation hundreds of times stronger in a fluid thousands of times thinner than home. We’d need new sensory systems, and energy supplies.

And we’ll end up doing the same thing the first amphibians (or last fish) did to meet the same challenges millions of years ago: take our environment with us. It’s no accident that the blood in your veins and water in your eyes are the same salinity as the oceans. Our bodies are ecologies, of sorts; each cell type has evolved to live in the niche created by the rest of our cells, but the basic nature of that ecology is identical to the one within which our cells evolved: the oceans.

The point of all this is that when humans move into space, we will bring our ecology with us, or invent new ecologies to create, both of which will be based on the one we know: Earth’s.

The use of a non-living shell to protect a cell colony from the environment is an old idea. Insects, fish, snakes, and many other life forms use this strategy. Even your teeth take advantage of it. A space capsule is just a cutting edge technology application.

If we accept the notion that Gaia is a life form, then such colonies will be her first offspring. They will intermingle, and spread, and then isolated systems will evolve away from each other (as they always have) and Gaia will have reproduced, making her fit all the definitions of a life form, using sex organs made of humans.

After all, if it’s us doing it or Gaia, what’s the difference? We are as much of this Earth as anything else grown here.

People might be parasites, cancer, or neurons for earth. But if we take Earth’s forms across the galaxy, Humans will be the Gaia’s sporangia, and when we start carrying all kinds of DNA between our different planets (in some mid-term future with colonies throughout the solar system or galaxy) then we and our robots will be the sex-organs!

The planet doesn’t need saving – it needs us to spread it.

25% is a funny number.

25% is the number of people who simply would not go along with the Asch Conformity experiment.

25% is close to the number of people who would not go along with the Milgram Authority experiment. We might speculate that the extra stress of the pain and suffering made more people than usual relent (35%).

25% is the proportion of expressed recessive traits in a two-allele gene.

The funny thing about recessive genes is that they cannot be simply bred out.

In a typical Punnet Square, the quarter of the population expressing the recessive trait can be prevented from breeding, and half the population still carries the recessive allele, so they can still interbreed and bring out the recessive traits.

Recessive traits cannot be bred out.

Perhaps more to the point: killing all the non-conformists hasn’t ever actually made the population conform. Perhaps it’s because non-conformity is recessive.


Mutts have been studiously and violently destroyed throughout history because they are destined to be the master race.

Those who worship race hate the mixed couples most of all. Once the Mutt-baby is born, they have to deal with it, honorably or not, but, if they can discourage the pairing before the fact…then the purebreds can more effectively prevent their own eventual waning

ship_sunsetAll races were originally formed by biological response to particular areas of our planet

Mutts were created first by adventurers, travelers, traders, and others that roamed the planet, when it was still hard to roam.Race has been one of the most important causes of war and violence, second possibly to only religion, and mutts, besides often being the offspring of war, are the worlds longest and most violently oppressed class.

It is because of these influences, in combination with Hybrid Vigor (AKA, heterosis) that has made the ‘race’ of Mutts the strongest and will one day make us the most prevalence race.

freqmapIt is through hybridization that all genes will ultimately be saved and expressed.

Two identical looking people who aren't.

Katy Perry and Zooey Daschnel. I can never remember which is which.

Dave and I once got talking about all those dopplegangers a while back.

Both of us keep seeing pairs of people who are sooooo similar. For years we’ve been seeing it. Repeatedly meeting people who look like an old teacher or customer or boss. And not just their facial structures, but often their voices, body language, personalities or even preferences in humor or mates are similar.


Two fellow Monties in 1987

People don’t just have types.

We ARE types.

The Greeks and Turks started a race war 1,000 years ago. Nobody can tell them apart anymore. Ten centuries of fucking and fighting have turned them into each other.


Joan and Roger from “Mad Men”

Perhaps skin color, race, really is all surface and changeable for dealing with sun and humidity, while features like pheremones, skeletons and minds are more stable. That might explain why sometimes those dopplegangers … are different races, or even different sexes!

Particular collections of those more stable traits might only produce so many combinations. Dave and I guessed 700.

He looks like Giovanni Ribisi or Macklemore. I’m a poor girl’s George Clooney.

People can only keep track of about I look like WHO?150 types of people in their Ka. If there are substantially more than 150, it would feel the same as 10,000 or a million or a billion types; way more than we can possibly deal with. 700 is about three times the maximum which is plenty enough to feel infinite.alex_katie

“Separated at birth celebrity lookalike” in Google will find dozens of examples that you may already be familiar with.

Then, just a few years ago, The Human Genome Project made a fascinating discovery; humanity went through a genetic bottleneck, about 70,000 years ago. Humans nearly died out, possibly because of the Toba Supervolcano.

Humans were reduced to about 700 breeding pairs, or 1400 Prototypes. Our theory is that colors come and go but muscle, bone and even some processing preferences are less plastic.

Our entire population has less genetic diversity than any 12 randomly selected oragatans.

We’re keepin’ the original name:

The 700 Prototype Theory








Feminism is, in some regards, the triumph of the ‘cultural’ culture, AKA alpha-male culture.

Remarkably, it’s actually the nerds – the beta males – who are the ideological opposite of the feminists, because they represent Man’s intellectual and physical mastery over nature, plus they aren’t very cool or articulate ergo they get friend-zoned immediately.

Not coincidentally, denial of sexual favors is 1) something feminists relish and 2) what drove some aspects of evolution as betas moved on for lack of access to food and pussy, and thus had to learn to live in marginal habitats, instead. This favored a moral system based upon understanding the rules of nature and respect for the experiences3earth and thinking of the individual.

Then, once settled, those newly successful regions were encroached upon by the female-run beta male culture (because betas with money do get girls.) But one generation later, being ‘cool’ – knowing the rules of the culture, rather than nature – is what earns power, and usually that boils down to getting laid. Notice how seldom someone who gets laid regularly worries about being cool, and vice-versa.

Alpha-male culture is in fact female-dominated because it is they who ultimately choose the alpha(s), but the fact is, the alpha male culture can only *exist* with beta-male moral systems, because it was those systems which made Earth livable for humanity in the first place ( as opposed to some beaches and tropical islands where naked people can subsist on nuts, slugs and fruit without tools. ) Because there has never been a time in history when the alpha-male culture of the tribe / village / cities wasn’t surrounded by a ring of marginal-habitat beta-male humanity, it’s possible alpha can’t even exist without concurrent beta culture to support it.

To really see the stark clash in a confounding disguise, confront a feminist with the ultimate beta-male habitat-increasing principle-using resource-intensive nerd-pokes-girl endeavor; the colonization of space.

Feminists don’t know why, exactly, they hate it, but they surely do; bring it up in a positive light among a group of them and one of them will always get torqued off and immediately start floundering and raging.

It was very weird the first few times I saw the pattern. They usually come up with some nonsense about preserving the pristine state of a lifeless universe, as if crystals can be invaded or made extinct.

Also, did I drop a comma from the title?

boatfall A principle is a relationship, in every case.

When two (or more) items interact, the rules that describe their interaction can only be discovered, illustrated or applied by recourse to the behavior they cause in each other.  A single item cannot teach a principle.

Hence, The Principle of Unity, taught to each of us before we can remember:  Unity is Plural, and at minimum, Two.  We know darkness, because of light.  We know of coldness, because there is warmth.  As our minds were forming, we only become aware of ourselves, when we recognized that there are others.  Who do you suppose is the first person you can remember?

The Principle of Unity has been passed down through history in many ways, some accurate, some not:  There is only One; Opposites come in pairs; 1 + 1 = 3; the Law of Identity.
Many similar expressions exist, because the root notion is the foundation of all knowledge:  You can’t even begin to recognize a principle, until at least two items interact accordingly.  That’s the only way Principles manifest.

A rather cumbersome dialect holds it as the Principle of Category: pictures in the mind (vidéa) associate, based on their qualities, into different classes.  These classes have sub-classes, based on more specific properties and qualia, each member of which predicates the qualities used to recognize the super class.  Ugh! Latin.  Is anyone bored, yet?  Who can possibly trust the language of the nation that invented long-term inflation, some MM+ years ago?

As an example of a major weakness of this formulation:  The qualities you select to define your categories are demonstrably arbitrary, a fact which went unnoticed for 1.5K years, and is still widely unfamiliar, 2K years later, and despite our continued use of their symbols, words, and models — or is it precisely because we still use them?

Thinking in terms of classes / objects / substances is why it can be so difficult to recognize that a dimension of our experience is missing from our language: reification.

A fatal, permanent error exists in the Latin formulation, as well:  What’s the most-general class?

Answer 1:  Oops, I can’t trust this logical formulation to provide useful results.  Worse, I now know that I won’t be able to tell the difference between the useful and the useless, which is the only reason to have any logical formulation at all. (Back to the drawing board…)

Answer 2:  Ainu / Allah / Brahman / God / Yahweh / Zen /  The Rule(r) of Rule(s) / The Great Pumpkin
Translation:  I neither know, nor care.

Answer 3:  Geometry starry_logo_512xjpg(Pythagoras, to my knowledge, was the first to get this close – Kepler agreed)

Answer 4: A system of organization (Aristotle came up with this one – R. Buckminster Fuller agreed.)

Physical Principles

Unlike our planet and moon, the principle that keeps them bound weighs absolutely nothing at all.  Despite their ethereal nature, principles are completely real.  Some have even said ‘reality’ is made of nothing else; there are no items, only principles.  Modern Physics proves it’s possible, and the name of that idea is String Theory.

Though completely invisible, gravity operates on everything we know.  As the tools of science extends our senses into previously hidden realms, we’ve learned that 99.99+% of reality is totally unavailable to unaided human sensory equipment.3earth

It should be no surprise that Universe operates according to invisible recipes.

It seems that humans are designed to (re)discover them, however; such discovery is how humans survive, by employing some principles to improve and extend their biological functions, and being aware of others, as a way of avoiding mistakes. Some say that “man was made in God’s image” because our minds can develop ideas which match the “ideas” that God used to think the universe into existence. Perhaps more literally it means our minds can grasp, simulate and model the abstract relations we experience in the universe and which people really mean when they say “God.” Spinoza’s Pantheism, Deism and Einstein’s Non-Anthropomorphic Conception Of God are aternative names for approximately identical notions.

Speculation is unending about whether the Universe wants us to stay…and probably will be, as long as it hasn’t decided ‘no.’

Principles – the rules by which events occur – possess certain characteristics.  Only a True Principle has all of them.

  1. Always operating everywhere
  2. Have no mass or energy
  3. Expressible mathematically
  4. Learning allows prediction
  5. Employing allows achievement
  6. Ignoring one can be fatal
  7. None interferes with any other

They can certainly oppose each other, as does a star, balancing gravity and radiation to exist.  Throughout it (and, indeed, the Universe), both of the governing principles – matter attracts and radiation explodes – always operate … as does every other True Principle.


You can see this demonstrated in the operation of chemistry, as well:  Electric forces between molecules operate according to highly predictable and eminently employable principles.  All life is technology, designed in a manner to employ such principles, built of structures which resist deformations because of the strength and geometry of the specific principles which bind them.realityMT

Such structures are experienced as ‘substance.’  The geometry is their form.  Their integrity is why we know they are real:  We can ‘touch’ them, which means when we push on them they push back … though technically ‘touch’ never actually occurs; the resistance we use to notice something is real – the pushback – actually results from electrical interactions between items that aren’t in contact.

freqmapbluebigWhen you sit upon a chair, it is ultimately electric attraction between the atoms in the chair which keeps it from collapsing.  Your weight is transferred down, via electrical forces, into the chair or ground.  This down-pressure converts to an out deformation – a bean bag seems like a structureless chair, but the tension in the fabric that keeps it together is ultimately what stops the down-into-out transformation, and thus stops your down translation.  That is, the tension in the chair (the legs for a regular chair or the tensile stength of the bag for a beanbag chair) stop you from falling all the way to the ground when you sit down (and the chair keeps its structure.)

It is only the operation of structure – the resistance to deformation – which creates an experience of ‘stuff’ and simultaneously defines structure because of that experience. There aren’t really any things or substances. Only objects; event-complexes; something attended to.

Air, for example, doesn’t resist deformation at all.  Though any one particle does have structure, the ‘substance’ of ‘air’ isn’t even there; it just moves out of the way, infinitely deformable.

This is the beginning of General Systems Theory; Principles + Motion + Shape + Experience = Reality.