If it fails 100 times in a row, i`ll sue the researchers for killing me a hundred times in all those other realities.
Oh the humanity-ity-ity-ty-ty-y-y-y-y!
james5
Karma: −3
haha, reminds me of when i first got my gmail account almost four years ago. ah, but i still love it. i guess this theory explains why i keep my hotmail accounts even though i don’t use them anymore—they were grandfathered over from when syncing with outlook was free.
“Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.”—Larry Niven
I thought that was Arthur C. Clarke (RIP).
I agree with the basic argument of the post: magic is exciting because it’s unattainable. The moment it became real and in mass-use, the novelty would wear off. I’m happily smitten with current and upcoming technology. One example: I still get sufficiently blown away when I think about the ramifications of a camera that captures millions of frames per second. I read about it 4-5 years ago. Forget 1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi, think about counting the moments passing in 25 million, 50 million, 75 million…
http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=RSINAK000074000012005026000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes
Of course the future repeated failures of the LHC have got to seem non-miraculous though since the likelhood of each experiment failing becomes lower the more experiments you plan on running.
Perhaps some sort of funding problem after a collapse of the world financial system, but that`s not likely, is it?
It
s like the idea applying the idea of quantum immortality and the anthropic principle to my own experience. Wouldnt it make sense for me to observe my apparent immortality in a world where immortality wasnt miraculous, such as when technology had advanced to a point where it wasnormal`.A bit of a contradiction there, technology advances to the point where destruction of humanity is easy, but immortality is possible as well.