Anthropocentric hubris aside, the galaxy should be buzzing with interstellar trade, if it isn’t, this is how humans will make it so with the use of present technology and scientific understanding: interstellar quantum communication laser relay stations outside the heliopause would serve as basis for interstellar transmission of data or in other words digital commerce (or in more  rational, Utopian  terms not smelling of greed and need of profit: free information exchange). Since the presence of a sentient spacefaring species is required to receive such a transmission it is logical to assume that informational delivery (at the speed of light) would be sufficient to build (or print) whatever goods the information exchange calls for (the prerequisite for the presence of a relay station on the other hand, is previous robotic or sentient presence to position it in any given star system). Transportation of physical objects in interstellar exchange would be delivered by spacecraft powered with anti-matter propulsion (harvested, or generated at the point of origin star system) much like the original colonization efforts that seed habitable planets. Life span of interstellarly space faring sentient life forms is either unlimited or even as compared to present human span of 90 years: completely sufficient for the hops from start to star.

Project Eden: panspermia of the galactic neighborhood with humans. To streamline the process and make it less of a psychological burden on the colonists, one would have to A. eliminate the tediousness out of the trip and B. make them feel indigenous to the world they are to inhabit. The first can be done by either keeping the occupants of the colony spaceship busy or hibernating them for the trip. This complicates things in a number of ways: it requires a ship with a greater mass that can support the life forms and leaves one with the point B unresolved. The best way is to send frozen embryos with incubators and robots who will raise the new humans as indigenous to the planet of destination. Upon landing the spacecraft would of course serve as self enclosed habitat until the time when founders build a colony and start interstellar information and technology transfers (say nature films and analysis of the newly colonized planet’s geology followed by original creative content of the newly founded civilization etc.) A relay station would detach in the heliosphere upon arrival in the star system being colonized to insure up to date technological information from the home world is fed to the new colony. Once the newly colonized star system reaches maturity in the sense that it can independently develop and undertake subsequent colonization efforts it serves as a linking point in the galactic internet of worlds and a stage for further galactic exploration.

This approach to panspermia has a number of other benefits: in the event of mission failure during flight no human life is lost. Upon discovery of a sentient species on the planet of destination that doesn’t welcome new inhabitants: the mission can be either aborted or changed to a purely scientifically observational one and/or  a communication link with an existing civilization can be established. However one can assume that the detection of a sentient civilization will be possible prior to colonization so appropriate approach can be planned for prior to launch.

P.S. I still contend that instantaneous space-time independent communication is viable and physically possible.

Life is neither linear nor sequential. Individual observer, in other words a conscious sentient person (a human) does not actually perceive events linearly nor sequentially. Information (story line or plot) is continuously altered as more information comes in and perception of the situation changes in accordance to new data. This in itself may seem sequential but that is a superficial fallacy, depending on the other informational paths that we come into contact with we change the content and the coherency of the story (our informational identity). Information from past events and told and retold by other observers can dramatically change the way the story goes and is told. People intertwine their stories in an entangled web to determine common highways of information making up stories that eventually form into a group or public perception of something intangible as truth.

The point is, none of this is reflected in narrative in linear static books even the ones that use foreshadowing, flashback, and try to develop several plots at once. Life is non-deterministic because we have choices. Each time we make a choice, however ridiculously insignificant it would seem, we choose a unique path in the information pathway of the universe. To reflect this effect and make the reader of any storytelling narrative there is a clear need for an interactive user to have the ability to determine a multiple choice plot line. Obviously this would be difficult to do with a paper book because one would have to refer the read to jump around through a voluminous hefty tome to the designated page numbers.

In electronic books the matter of volume is of no consequence, what’s more navigation through such a multiple choice plot chapter per chapter, can make a book unique each time it is experience by the reader (because of differences in the plot-line, not due to a new perception of them) if the number of permutations in the story is large enough. One could read the same book dozens of times and each time experience a different informational pathway. I’ll illustrate the idea on the most simplistic literally art-form: the romance novel. Generally such works pertain to two main characters who interact to develop romantic involvement and end up in coitus. Now this informational path could be quite different each time such a novel is read. For instance after introducing both characters the reader has a choice of how they’ll first become aware of each other. Depending on each choice, different path becomes available, some potentially leading to common threads. There could be multiple endings or all of it could narrow down into an informational bottle neck that implies some predestined fate. The book could be re-read each time as having a different unique plot line each time.

This is not a pitch to produce uniqueness of plot in order to increase the reuse value of literally publication, it is a call for a true literally reflection of the human experience. The sooner it becomes a reality, the more people will realize their intrinsic informational nature: their true selves.

Though it is true that many read to find commonalities, fact is that accumulation of common cultural, scientific or technical information need not be replaced by this literally form - it must come in addition to it.

I still ended up writing on this topic, thought it will appear incoherent and jumbled hopefully it will illuminate the vague mist of an idea I’m trying to convey. It goes something like this: robots will take manufacturing jobs, truly automated tellers and online banking will close down many branches, cars will drive themselves (so will all kinds of transport vehicles), robots will work in the service sector (fight wars, provide health care, work in gastronomy)… what will the humans that used to do those things do? How will that affect the global economy, how will they adjust and survive in such an economy? How rapidly will those changes combined with climate change take place and what effect will they have on global security and global economy?

The most basic law in micro-economics is that of supply and demand. Loosely translated into human terms it means producers and consumers - those who make and sell stuff and those who buy it. The more stuff there is for sale the lower the price if the number of consumers remains the same. The more consumers for a limited supply of goods, the higher the price of the product.  Intuitively most people have become accustomed to the fact that the production and creation of goods is the key in this equation. But what happens when you remove human involvement from the supply side completely? Let’s take air for instance, anyone who was short of it most definitively realizes its value, the supply doesn’t require human involvement because it is ubiquitous throughout the entire planet, without it you’ll die in under 4 minutes. The point is that when supply is ample enough for all consumers to have what they require, the product doesn’t cost a thing. Is air worthless or is it priceless? In a hypothetical economy with fully automated production, transport and services that don’t require human involvement and proper planning for a supply that satisfies all consumer demand… what will be the price of goods? Yeah you guessed it …. zero. Now that clearly shows that the supply and demand equation can do without a human producer, and in such cases the issue becomes one of distribution of goods to the consumers and the free market model fails, what results is a utopia where everything produced should theoretically be free. Obviously we’re not there yet, but we are starting to head in that direction and things are starting to fail… adjustments in the economic model must be made continuously while this transition takes place or severe social problems will occur.

The main point is that the demand for any product whether produced through a fully automated end to end manufacturing process fully managed, maintained and controlled by an artificial intelligence computer system with robot workers or with the hands of unskilled human labor, … the demand for product is purely dependent on the consumer base. Global development and elimination of poverty is the key to establishing a large consumer base that will demand the greatest variety of products and services, however, limited resources and environmental degradation must be taken into account as well. The picture of the global economy complicates increasingly when more such attributes are taken into account.

Take speculation in financial markets for instance and the price of gold.  There is a finite amount of gold on Earth that can be used to speculate against and thus hedge against volatility in stock prices, but when you think outside the planet, and reach for an asteroid that greatly increases the supply the whole equation goes out the window. In any case what good would that gold do just sitting there anyway? Companies that have real assets… tools, buildings, vehicles, patents, technology, human capital etc… can they realistically be compared to some metal stocked away somewhere that is of no use at all? What if you increase the global amount of that metal a thousandfold? How about a million times?

Diamonds are expensive… but as it turns out there may be entire diamond oceans on Saturn and Uranus. Then can also be made in a lab. What if they’re made in a lab through a completely automated process that extracts the carbon from the excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?

There is a saying that the best things in life are free. Should the food for the starving inhabitants of the Horn of Africa be free? Is that food aid the best thing in life for them right now… that and the Oxfam tents?

This brings me to Solyndra and I quote from a Bloomberg article:

“When you don’t have the demand, you can’t go into something with the attitude, ‘Build it and they will come,’” Ramesh Misra, a solar-industry analyst in Los Angeles for Brigantine Advisors said. “You have to make sure the customers are already there when you build it.”

This is only partially right: demand is necessary, but demand is CREATED through competitive pricing, having high quality and preferably niche product, and most importantly through ingenious, clever and persistent marketing!  If your distribution is nonexistent, your competitors stole your patents and sell the same thing at a lower price and you’ve done nothing to reach the potential customer and even less to take away customers from fossil fuel consumption… how can you possibly succeed? Anyway saying there are no customers for solar power is ridiculous. Right before Solyndra closed they were getting leads with Walmart. Every flat roofed commercial building in California, Nevada, Arizona and Texas is a potential customer, they just need to be reached and have means to finance the purchases. Paradoxically Solyndra went out of business precisely because prices for polysilicon fell. To sell a better product at a higher price one must educate the potential customer, but it seems most are motivated by superficial thrift nowadays and don’t take into account low quality, built-in-obsolescence, environmentally disastrous production process and inhumane conditions bordering on slave labor; forget taking into account such lofty goals as supporting you local economy, generating tax revenue for the state or using a product that will help limit the disastrous effects of anthropogenic global warming climate change.

Demand is key yes, but demand must flow from an educated, knowledgeable and conscious consumer. A consumer that has the means to acquire the goods. Do you see any illiterate Pashtuns with no electricity and internet access buying up iPads of Kindles? Even if such devices were distributed for free in areas where there is no infrastructure and knowledgeable consumers present, they would be completely useless.

In the utopian future where all production is automated I don’t just yet envision a Douglas Adams - like,  dispensing machines that figure out exactly what you’re in the mood for and make it for you, though a shake machine that makes exact nutrient content would be an excellent addition to my kitchen. Hey come to think of it… whoever wants to grab this idea and make one for gyms or something, hook me up with a few bucks to keep this page running. I can see it already: dispensing machines making shakes with a specified carbohydrate/fat/protein, vitamin and mineral content with some extras for those who train hardcore. It could be unglamorously called “the custom nutrient content milkshake machine”.

Now, lets get to the point. Any addiction is an action performed by the human mind that the human mind can choose to limit or not engage in at all. For instance, if you make a conscious choice not to smoke in the next two minutes, even if there is no reward for doing so - you very likely will be able to prove your strong will and refrain from smoking for that 120 seconds. It goes without saying that consumption of any kind, whether it be alcohol, excess fatty food, or drugs, can easily be limited in such a fashion. At the very basic level, modifying your behavior in such a manner as to be able NOT to do something at all - such as quitting smoking - comes down to the simple matter of whether you are capable to consciously control your behavior.

On surface it would thus seem that NOT doing something would be as easy as deciding not to do it - i.e. deciding not to smoke, and then simply remembering to consciously refrain from doing so for that 120 seconds every time one is tempted. The problem is thus compounded by several factors: one has to decide, one has to remember, and then be able to consciously resist the temptations of addiction every single time one gets a craving. This is what makes quitting once addicted such a difficult task. The task is difficult because we don’t normally function consciously, to the contrary, most tasks are performed by the brain automatically according to pre-programmed schemes. For instance as I type this - consciously I only decide on what words to formulate, but subconsciously my mind which was programmed to remember the positions of keys on the keyboard and trained to control my fingers to formulate those words I want input and spelled fast: does so automatically (and actually if you “stop and think about it” you may not be able to find the keys at all, unless you do so by sight). This ability was programmed into my subconscious over decades - including a couple of keyboarding classes in high school - that programmed my mind with the correct skills required to use an English language computer keyboard. Just imagine how many key strokes has my subconscious mind performed to consciously formulate words - through the decades of life in front of a keyboard: academically, socially and professionally?  Well, as the saying goes practice makes perfect - and so each time we perform a task it is hardwired into a scheme of automatic behavior - desired or not. Just as you may have learned to type with two index fingers and now learning touch typing is hard, so it is with learning to engage in something different than smoking, every time you want to light up a cigarette. This is precisely why the longer one has been an addict - the more difficult it is to quit. The longer the subconscious mind is programmed to do things a certain way - the longer it takes to learn to do things differently.

I’m not going to dwell on the reasons as to why an individual should quit smoking or argue that one should do so. Smoking kills: it slowly kills the smoker and those who inhale the second hand smoke: pets, children, family members and complete strangers. In effect every single smoker who exposes others to second hand smoke - is damaging that individual’s health and slowly killing them (i.e. setting up damage that later may develop into a debilitating fatal illness; what always intrigued me the most is that mothers very often do that to their children while at the same time heralding to the world their great sacrifice, love and caring for their offspring, worse they’re fully aware of their hypocrisy). Many countries now have laws that prohibit smokers from poisoning others, but still according to the latest statistics by the World Health Organization, passive smoking kills 600,000 a year and those numbers grow along with the population and the increase in the number of smokers in the world. Now, for the balanced net health effect for an individual, quitting smoking may not necessarily result in a longer life span. Smoking does usually act to suppress appetite and if one has to choose between food addiction or smoking addiction it may very well turn out that obesity turns out to be more deadly.

Needless to say, that quitting smoking and adopting a healthy nutritious diet is of enormous health benefit, but that’s programming your subconsciousness to develop a new desired habit and not quitting a detrimental addictive one - while similar in principal, it is not the subject of this discussion. What we’re concerned with is how to convince the subconscious mind to abstain from undesired behavior. To be able to do that - the mind has to first understand and realize that the subconscious drives it to do something against it’s own free will and conscious choice. Thus the first step in quitting smoking is understanding and learning why the subconscious drives us to smoke (oh, yeah and as I did smoke for a number of years and have quit, I can say “we” - and speak from experience). Let’s analyze. Under what circumstances did you have your first cigarette? Depending on age the situation and reason may have been different, but generally people start smoking because they’re led to do so by their immediate environment - the people they associate with. Teens may start to smoke because their friends do, and because they want to fit in. Some start smoking because it was socially acceptable within their family and they’ve been continually exposed to second hand smoke and developed a craving for nicotine. Others start in adulthood, maybe to pass time at lunch with a coworker or to have an excuse to take a break outdoors.  Many start smoking because they’ve started drinking - under the influence of alcohol they’ve been offered a cigarette in a night club and simply took it without questioning. Did anyone ever start smoking by planning to do so when reaching the legal age? Does anyone say “oh cool, I’m going to be 18 soon and I’ll start smoking?” Some possibly do, as this symbolizes entrance into an adult stage of life - so eagerly awaited by teens. Most start smoking for banal reasons that have to do with exposure to second hand smoke, peer pressure and the need to fit in. People extremely rarely start smoking as a result of a conscious, planned thought out decision. Thus, the realization of how your particular smoking habit initiated is crucial before you can make a conscious decision to eliminate it effectively.

How much time and money does it cost to smoke? If, 1 cigarette takes 3 minutes to smoke and a person smokes a pack a day (that’s 20) it comes to 20 cigarettes X 365 days X 3 minutes =  21,900 minutes or 365 hours that your subconscious has spent smoking and thus hard-wiring the habit further into your brain… how much time did you spend so far reading this in your attempt to quit? What if you’ve smoked for 3, 5 or 10 years? What one must realize that reprogramming the subconscious will not happen just by making a decision to quit - it must be reinforced continually until the habit completely fades away at every single instance of temptation or craving.  To do that the addict must first understand why the cravings occur so he or she doesn’t feel discouraged, belittled and demoralized when he gives in at that particular instance. Each failure to refrain from smoking without the understanding the driving forces behind it - will cause the person who is quitting to think they are failing, eventually they will give up in their attempt to quit.

Thus why do we need a smoke? Well, nicotine is the most addictive alkaloid there is, there is a clear biological mechanism that makes people who smoke to continue deliver nicotine into their organism. One would have to have a doctorate in biochemistry and biology to fully understand the complexities involved (at least at present level of scientific knowledge) but for most people it is sufficient to know that nicotine is addictive and it does have specific physiological effects on the body. Thus people smoke to calm down, to relax, to distance themselves from a problem, to literally set up a smoke screen between themselves and their immediate social environment to make themselves feel more secure and protected, they smoke as a social ritual to accompany others, use smoking as an excuse to take a break from study or work (as if they couldn’t take one and do something else like have a healthy snack, take a walk). All those reasons have psychological basis - in other words stimuli that drive us to smoke a particular cigarette are psychological and can be coped with consciously in other ways without smoking; while physical effects of nicotine only reinforce the addiction so the mind is tricked into thinking that a cigarette is responsible for the associated psychological effect. This is then continually reinforced on multiple levels each time one has a cigarette and the subconscious thinks the cigarettes are actually helping - it’s a huge lie that a smoker lives in. Oftentimes people chain smoke mindlessly starting a new cigarette without having finished the previous one in those cases the stimulation of nicotine is most likely subconsciously craved during a concerted continued mental effort - such as intensive study or work. Again, I’m not going to argue whether health risks associated with smoking are worth the extra boost, suffice it to say that such stimulation can be achieved by proper rest, regular exercise to keep a higher metabolic rate, oxygenation and a number of supplements and stimulants that are far less damaging, such as caffeine for instance. Still, just imagine smoking is used to relax and stimulate, isn’t that a paradoxical oxymoron? Like I’ve stated before - relaxation that is physically felt by smokers is felt simply the result of supplying their nicotine fix - it’s fake - if you don’t smoke - you don’t crave it and don’t feel the jittery nicotine withdrawal. So while increased cranial activity and sharper awareness due to nicotine stimulation by smoking is something that smokers effectively benefit from and on the surface it would seem as a sensible reason to smoke - the deterioration of smoker’s health is unjustified because such stimulation can be done safely - or rendered unnecessary altogether by lifestyle changes.

Now, that I’ve explained the elements involved let me present the method:

1.) First go over and analyze in what situations you smoke, how you’ve started smoking, how you’ve developed the habit, what psychological driving forces where responsible?

2.) Decide whether or not you want to quit smoking - if you do feel it’s wrong to slowly kill yourself and poison others, you should probably decide to quit and make lifestyle changes.  Making a decision to smoke will not mean you will stop right now and never have another cigarette again - it’s a gradual painless yet painstaking process.

3.)  You will need to print a neumonic device with graphic aids, I’ll prepare that later and make a the link available. This is how to make your own: on a standard sheet of paper 8 1/2 by 11 inch - write an affirmation that you will repeat each time before you make a conscious decision to smoke a cigarette. The affirmation should go something like this: “I am making a conscious decision to smoke this cigarette. I realize that my subconscious drove me to smoke it automatically but I’ve attempted to resist it yet at the present time was unable to do so. I am aware that smoking is killing me and others. I smoke this cigarette against my free will, but I am determined to stop.” Below the affirmation there should be the most revolting color photographs of people with rotten yellowed teeth,  cancerous growths and other severe health effects of smoking.

4.) Once you’ve made a decision to quit -inform everyone you know that you’ve decided to quit and ask for their support - tell them not to offer you cigarettes and ask that they don’t smoke in your presence.  Ask a family member or a person you live with to hold your cigarettes for you so they can ration them and listen to your affirmation (hopefully they’ll offer support every time they’re giving you a cigarette). If you live alone you’ll need to do this on your own.

5.) You can smoke as much as you want to - but you need to take time to do it privately, after reading an affirmation and with minimal distraction. The process cannot be associated by the subconscious mind with any psychological benefit other than to satisfy the physical nicotine craving and clam the senses. In time that nicotine addiction will diminish and fade away.  Eliminating all the other psychological triggers for smoking will be far more difficult and may never be complete. New social situations or situations of extreme stress may lead to renewal of the habit, but if the method is continued - relapses will be immediately curbed. Actually after quitting, smoke will begin to stink and become an irritant as opposed to a craving inducing temptation.

The idea of a multiverse that exhibits all possible outcomes for a particular set of physical laws is of course disputable, as is the ability to travel between such realities. Regardless - such beings omnipotance and clairvoyance is virtual - not real - in a sense that those are only desired choices picked out of infinite possibilities that coexist. This doesn’t change the fact, that the reality for all the other self aware entities within that path is the only one they know and pretty much deterministic.

Now, I would like to quote a Wikipedia passage on thought:

Thinking allows beings to make sense of or model the world in different ways, and to represent or interpret it in ways that are significant to them, or which accord with their needs, attachments, objectives, plans, commitments, ends and desires.

Below “Seven forgotten good deeds in perfect geometric form” - by Stanisław Fijałkowski

I think this work of art articulates the dynamic need for this technology to be the number 7 as yet unfulfilled good deed.