Think about the future

Translate with Google Translate

Introduction

Is it necessary to think about the future in the first place? What will happen if we don't think about the future? It was I think everyone has once imagined the future. The world of the future will appear in movies and manga. I can almost predict what kind of future is waiting for me, but I thought about it again.

Is there a limit to the future?

This world had an image that would last forever. I thought it would last forever unless there was something big happening. But just as humans have a lifespan, planets have a lifespan.

Then, does the earth also have a lifespan? If the earth has a lifetime, how much time is left?

First of all, the life of the sun is said to be about 5 billion years. When it nears the end of its life, it gradually begins to expand and eventually explodes and falls apart. This follows this fate without exception, as the Sun is one of the stars. Unlike the earth and Mars, a star that shines like the sun is called a star. Stars emit light using "nuclear fusion reaction" as energy. The brighter the light, the younger the star is, and the redder the light, the closer its lifespan.

It is said that the sun was born about 5 billion years ago, so its lifespan is about half. It is true that the color of the sun is yellow or orange, so even if you judge from the color of the light, you can imagine that the life is about half.

Basically, it is said that the larger the mass of a planet, the shorter its lifespan. Since the sun is overwhelmingly heavier than the earth, the sun will reach the end of its life before the earth.

"5 billion years is too long to imagine", "I don't care because I'm not alive" I think that.

Certainly 5 billion years is a long way off.

If the life of the sun is 5 billion years, how long is the life of the earth? Since the life of the sun is 5 billion years, we sometimes see the story that the life of the earth is 5 billion years, but is the life of the earth really the same as the sun of 5 billion years?

It was If the sun suddenly disappears after 5 billion years, that may be the case, but the sun undergoes various fluctuations toward its lifespan. According to the current theory, it gradually begins to expand, becomes large enough to swallow the earth before its life, and finally explodes into dust. It is predictable that the earth will disappear if swallowed, but what about the process?

Now, the problem is that the environment of the earth is changing drastically due to the influence of global warming. Fluctuations such as the temperature rising several times will bring about a crisis for humankind. It is easy to imagine that climate change will gradually occur incomparably with that level. Even if the sun is twice as big as it is now, it may be hot every day and you may not be able to live on the ground anymore. Before that, seawater and all the water on the ground may evaporate. Life is said to have been born from the sea, but what if the source of that life disappears?

The sun gradually expands and becomes brighter. It doesn't change all at once after 5 billion years of life. "Gradually" is the point. Incidents beyond global warming, which are said to be caused by carbon dioxide, gradually occur in the sun. The fluctuation of the sun directly affects the earth. It is said that it will eventually swallow the earth, so it is hard to imagine how much global warming will occur considering the process, but I can only imagine that it is not about global warming. It will be attached.

Global warming may be prevented a little by human power, but the fluctuation of the sun cannot be stopped by anyone. As long as you are in the solar system, you have no choice but to accept it.

Considering this, even if the life of the earth is 5 billion years after the same as the sun, if you think "how long is the environment of the earth where life can live?", You can see that there is not much time.

According to one research hypothesis, about 1 billion years later, the temperature of the earth will become hot and life on the earth will not exist. By that time, of course, all the seawater will evaporate. Will it be like Venus now? Considering that it is 1 billion years, the time has become quite short.

If the earth becomes a scorching planet in another billion years, it seems that human beings will not be able to live properly in the near future. Let's assume that the time left for humankind to live on the earth is 100 million years away. Given the gradual rise in the temperature of the sun, most of the seawater may evaporate before 100 million years. For us, 100 million years is still a distant future, but what about the history of the earth?

Looking back 100 million years ago, dinosaurs were in their heyday. It seems that primates appeared about 6550 years ago. Considering that the time when dinosaurs were there was 100 million years ago, I felt it was quite realistic. It's hard to imagine that it was 5 billion years ago, but considering the length of time the dinosaurs were there, I think it would be a realistic range to imagine.

However, it may be optimistic even for 100 million years, and in fact, it may become a world where human beings cannot live properly in about 10,000 years.

How about that? Doesn't it feel like the end of the future is closer than you think?

The earth will eventually disappear

Regardless of whether it is early or late, it is inevitable that the earth will disappear.

Do you think "it doesn't matter because I'm not alive anyway"
Do you think "I have to do something for the future from now on"?

I think each person has their own way of thinking.

"If life cannot live on Earth, why not move to another planet?",
"There are plans to fly manned to Mars, so you will be able to live on Mars, right?"
There may be an opinion.

But if you think about it, Mars is also in the solar system. It affects Mars as well as the fluctuations of the sun. Either way, the sun will disappear in 5 billion years. It would be unrealistic for life to survive in the solar system if the sun disappears. Relying on Mars is only a matter of time. We have to think about the destination of Mars migration.

In order to continue the future, the first big hurdle is "Can we survive outside the earth?" And the next hurdle is "Can we survive even after the sun is gone?" Will be.

The word SDGs is overflowing now, but if you really think about the meaning of "sustainable", you have to think about this. If "sustainability" is "assuming the existence of the earth", it will not be "sustainable" in the true sense. It is 100% visible that it cannot be sustained if you rely on the earth.

How to achieve true "sustainability"?

Due to the longevity of the sun, we know that if humanity does nothing, there will be an end to the future. Will humankind have no choice but to end while enduring the large-scale disasters that accompany the fluctuations of the sun every day?

One way to sustain the future is to find a place where life can survive on planets other than the solar system. It's a story like science fiction, but the life of the sun is fixed, so if we can't do that, the future of humankind will end. It's a milestone that must be achieved for the future. And before the newly found planet comes to an end, you will travel in search of another planet. It is a repetition. You will be crossing the planet like human beings who have crossed the continents of the earth. Stopping without walking is the greatest risk to humankind. If you don't keep walking, it will end.

What can we do now?

The way to continue the future is to look for stars other than the Sun and find planets in an environment where life can live. I also learned that I need the ability and civilization to be able to repeat it. Looking back on the history of humankind so far, we can imagine that it will be possible in the future because civilization has developed exponentially.

However, the question is "whether it will be in time". As mentioned earlier, the earth and the sun have a limited lifespan. The time left is not waiting, so whether or not the goal can be achieved with the time left is a matter of life and death. If you don't make it in time, the future will end at that point.

It will be difficult for all humankind to contribute to space development. However, depending on each person's intentions, it is possible to reduce the risk of falling on humankind and increase the speed of evolution.

• Slow down the speed of environmental destruction as much as possible.

• Everyone in life, including humankind, cooperates with each other.

• Diversity is necessary for evolution. Respect for diversity.

• etc.

In short, "cooperation" is important. It may be difficult to keep in mind every day. But at least with or without awareness, the results after 100 years should change. It's not the case when you're fighting or pulling your legs. There is not much time left.

"It is possible that other animals will have a high degree of civilization, just as after the extinction of dinosaurs. Isn't global warming just the extinction of humankind, and other lives will survive and a new civilization will be born?"

There may be an opinion, but this is the theory when the remaining time is infinite. Considering the remaining time of the earth, there may not be time left for the birth of advanced civilizations other than humankind. Mankind must save the life of the earth.

Can humanity evolve to fit into the universe?

Some tribes in a country seem to be okay without breathing for more than 30 minutes in the water. It seems that they catch and fish while diving in the water for a long time. This is the result of the evolution of the lungs so that humans can survive in that environment.

This example is just one example, but humans are also evolving. Over the years, it has evolved over many generations. There will be some major differences between pre-Christian humans and modern humans. It should evolve further over time, such as 10,000 years, 100,000 years, and 1 million years. By that time, I think it is commonplace to go out into space, so it is thought that humankind is also a suitable body for living in space.

For example, it may be able to survive in an oxygen-free environment, or it may evolve to adapt to extremely hot and cold environments. Considering the history of living things in the past, I think that the feasibility of evolution adapted to the universe is not a difficult story but a reality. Evolution is realized as a function of living things.

By the way, how difficult is it to move to a planet other than the solar system?

In preparation for the end of the Sun's life, we will start by looking for stars similar to the Sun in advance. As the closest star to the solar system, there are three stars in Alpha Centauri.

A (Rigil Centaurus) Distance: 4.24 light-years
B (Triman) Distance: 4.24 light-years
C (Proxima) Distance: 4.39 light-years (red dwarf)

It is within 5 years in light years. It's still unrealistic to move because it's five years at the speed of light, but it's not a desperate distance.

One light-year is about 9.5 trillion kilometers. It's quite far when converted.

By the way, it seems that the fastest vehicle speed achieved by humankind in the past is 39,897km / h. (It's a rocket)

How long does it take to travel on this fastest vehicle?

9.5 trillion km (distance) / 39,987 km / h (speed) = 238,113,141 hours (hours)

238,113,141 hours / 24 hours = 9,921,380 days

9,921,380 / 365 days = 27,181 years → Approximately 30,000 years! (It takes 30,000 years to reach a distance one light-year away!)

This is a bit unrealistic, isn't it? Travel time is likely to be an issue.

I don't think it's possible to have a vehicle with food for tens of thousands of years, so you'll need to be self-sufficient in a spaceship. I think that garbage can be managed, but food is the biggest problem. Also, inside a spaceship, we need a system like a city, and we must be able to live for centuries and generations. At a minimum, an environment where a spaceship becomes one city is necessary. First of all, it will be necessary to prioritize the development of technologies that realize these.

I found it difficult with current technology. However, considering the remaining time, it must be achieved by 100 million years. Considering global warming, it may not be in time for another 10,000 years. It's a big deal for humankind just by changing the temperature of the earth by a few degrees.

Before you can move to the nearest star, you need to explore the planet to see if it can live. Previously, there was news that the Voyager spacecraft had reached the outside of the solar system, but like Voyager, we have to send a lot of spacecraft to Alpha Centauri.

It takes tens of thousands of years at normal speed, so it's a tremendous plan to see the results tens of thousands of years away, but if you don't make a plan now, you won't be able to make it.

I found some hopeful information here.

"Breakthrough Starshot" is. "Breakthrough Starshot" was announced in 2016 by physicist Stephen Hawking and Russian millionaire Yuri Milner.

Instead of injecting an engine and accelerating it like a conventional rocket, it irradiates a spacecraft with an extremely powerful laser from the earth to accelerate it.

If this is achieved, it will be able to move at 20% of the speed of light. It will be calculated that it will arrive in about 20 years to the star of Alpha Centauri.

Compared to tens of thousands of years, 20 years should be enough speed.

However, at present, there is no technology to realize this "breakthrough starshot" and it seems that it is in the research stage. However, research is underway, and it seems that it will be technically completed in about 20 years.

Information on the planets around the star of Alpha Centauri may be available around 2100. It seems that the future will be visible if we wait a little longer.

What happens to humans if they move at 20% of the speed of light?

Since the "breakthrough starshot" has not been realized yet, we do not know what will happen to the human body.

That's actually the case. If it seems to have a negative effect, there is no choice but to prevent it. You will start by creating a simulated environment where you can train and training. It feels like gradually increasing the speed and gradually increasing the adaptability of human beings.

It is often thought that life evolves with the change of generations, but even one generation evolves. If you train your muscles, you will build muscle and you will be able to play sports by practicing. This is also evolution. It seems that it is known that a part of DNA is rewritten by training and environment. We often use the term "adaptive ability", but the DNA is actually switched according to the environment. It evolves according to the environment in order to survive. The DNA switch can be switched in one generation without changing generations.

It may not be possible to acquire a body that can withstand the speed of light of 20% in about 100 years, but will it gradually become able to withstand it in about 10,000 years? It's hard to predict how many years it will be, but given the history of evolution, I think it's not impossible.

Humans and neo-humans

Mankind is believed to have evolved from monkeys. Darwin's theory of evolution is famous. Based on Darwin's theory of evolution, humans also follow the path of evolution. I have no choice but to imagine how it will evolve, but there is no doubt that it will evolve.

Now, let's call the species that humans have evolved "neo-humans", and what will happen after the birth of neo-humans?

Will all the current "humans" disappear and become "neo-humans"? Or will the current "humans" and "neo-humans" coexist? I don't know which one it will be, but I don't think there is any other option than these two.

If all humans become neo-humans, we may not have to think about anything particularly difficult, but what if humans and neo-humans coexist? Of course, neo-humans are more evolved, so they are smarter and will create a more sophisticated civilization. I think that there are various problems such as human rights issues and discrimination, but humans and neo-humans have different species in the first place, so I can imagine that even more difficult problems will arise.

By the way, the current "human" belongs to "Hominid"-"Homo". In the past, there were Neanderthals in the "Homo genus", but the current human genus is only the present human being called "Homo sapiens". The Neanderthals were better physique and had a more developed brain, but in the end Homo sapiens became more prosperous. The Neanderthals are said to have become extinct 40,000 years ago. There is a theory that it was "destroyed by Homo sapiens", but it is said that the Neanderthals were destined to become extinct naturally because they had only a small social structure in the first place. Also, in the hominid family, there are "Homo", "Chimpanzee", and "Gorilla".

Chimpanzees and gorillas are said to be close to humans. A monkey without a tail is similar to a human, so I think it's easy to understand visually.

Now, at present, only Homo sapiens exists in the "Homo genus", but a new species called "Neo-human species" will be created here. It would be nice if they could coexist well, but there are two species that are superior to other animals in terms of intelligence and culture. Since the species are different, it will not be the case of discrimination. Inevitably there will be a difference. It will be difficult to live together, just as chimpanzees and humans do not live together. Because the abilities are too different. Neo-humans may communicate using ultrasonic waves instead of using voice. Conversation is one of the means of communication, so it is possible to acquire more advanced means of communication such as ultrasound. Just as human language cannot be understood by chimpanzees, neo-human language will not be understood by humans. Using neo-human civilization, it is easy to make a device that can translate human language. However, on the contrary, neo-human words (ultrasound) cannot be understood by humans because they cannot be heard. Perhaps humans could have a device to elucidate the ultrasonic waves of neo-humans, but evolved neo-humans would be more advantageous in doing anything.

Inevitably, the composition of "human vs. neo-human" will be completed, and humans may perish just as Neanderthals perished. I think it is difficult for two civilized species to coexist on the same earth. Unless humans have merit for neo-humans, it is difficult to coexist on the earth where resources are limited.

Perhaps humans who started living on Mars will become neo-humans first, and humans who live on the earth as they are will exist as humans as they are, and if they live on different planets, they may be able to coexist. .. Just as chimpanzees can't beat humans, humans can't beat neo-humans. I think that there is a consciousness of "human beings" = "ourselves" now, but will the next generation of people change to the consciousness of "neo human beings" = "ourselves"? How our "neo-humans" deal with the slow-evolving species of "humans" is a difficult problem. Unless Darwin's theory of evolution is wrong, this problem will come.

In a world where humans and neo-humans coexist in any way, should we think of our descendants as "humans"? Or is it "neo human"? If we consider our descendants to be "humans," we may have to give wisdom to our descendants so that neohumans do not control humans. Since we humans are "homo sapiens" species, is it correct to think that another species, "neo-humans", is not a descendant?

By the way, at least at this point in time, the situation where "neo-humans" suddenly appear and are dominated by "neo-humans" is unacceptable to "humans".

It's the same situation as when aliens suddenly appear and dominate "humans." However, living things must evolve. From an evolutionary perspective, the emergence of "neo-humans" is on a natural and correct path. I think that "neo-humans" stand at the top of the "animal world" just as "humans" have dominated other animals. Fortunately, at present, only "humans" have high intelligence and civilization, so the dominant structure of "humans" is established, but it is difficult for two species with high intelligence and civilization to coexist on the same planet. is.

After all, I think it is good that there is no conflict and it is good to nurture different civilizations on different planets and to follow the path of evolution. Somehow it looks good.

What about AI?

Originally I was thinking about the theme of AI, but the story was far off. The topic is no longer about AI, but let's talk a little about AI.

AI is also a keyword that will have a great impact on the future. Currently, "specialized AI" is only AI that specializes in specific fields such as image recognition, translation, and autonomous driving, but in the future, we think that "general-purpose AI" that can be applied to anything will be realized. Has been done. It's still a dream stage rather than a research stage, but it will come true as long as humans take on the challenge.

When "general-purpose AI" is realized, machines with the same consciousness and will as humans will be created. Having consciousness and will will eventually give rise to an ego. In that case, it will be difficult to simply treat it as a machine. Like the coexistence of humans and neo-humans, the difficult problem of coexistence of humans and AI awaits.

Currently, there are three domains (bacteria, eukaryotes, and archaea) classified as domains in biotaxonomy. We humans belong to the "eukaryotic" domain. Under the eukaryotic domain, there are four groups called "Kingdom": the kingdom of protozoa, the kingdom of plants, the kingdom of fungi, and the kingdom of animals. As you can imagine from the name, we humans belong to the "animal world".

If AI begins to become conscious, one domain classification may be added and the number of domains called "AI (artificial intelligence)" may increase. However, it seems strange that "AI" is classified as "organism", so it seems cleaner to have one hierarchy above the domain. (What is the name of the hierarchy above the domain?)

It is thought that general-purpose AI will eventually exceed the capabilities of humans, so it seems that the composition of "AI" vs. "humans" will be completed this time. In any case, it will be difficult for people with high intelligence and civilization to live together in the same environment. The composition is dominated by either one, but it seems to be a natural flow. But at that time, I think that "neo-humans" will also appear, so if there is a conflict, would it be a composition of "AI" vs. "neo-humans"? Or is it "AI + human" vs. "neo human"? Of course, if humans can make AI, it is strange that neo-humans cannot make AI, so it seems that there is a possibility of "AI + human" vs. "AI + neo-human".

So, it's a little difficult to understand, but we can see the high intelligence and coexistence (or conflict) between civilizations that have never been seen in the history of living things. In the previous example, I assumed that AI had consciousness, but this is not limited to AI. In addition to "neo-humans," animals such as chimpanzees and gorillas may evolve to have advanced intelligence and civilization similar to humans. The world where there are two or more species with "consciousness" is unprecedented in the history of the earth, so it will be a big challenge for humankind.

After all it may be ideal to live separately for each planet. If they are close to each other, it is inevitable that they will be dominated by those with high intelligence and civilization. This can only be seen as inevitable in the process of evolution. Organisms have also evolved through this process.

In order to continue the future, such advanced intelligence, competition between civilizations, and coexistence are also necessary. If it does not evolve, life cannot survive in the first place. It will not be sustainable.

Competition and coexistence with "highly conscious people" are inevitable problems for future human beings.

About DNA

It seems that research on DNA is steadily progressing. It seems that it is already possible to create montage images of human faces from the DNA information of a single hair. Moreover, you will have a face that looks exactly like you.

By the way, the information in DNA is called "genome". There is genetic information in a part of this genome, and it is said to be 2% of the whole genome. The remaining 98% is called junk DNA, and although nothing was known in previous studies, it seems that research is progressing little by little. If we can understand 100% of the entire genome, we may know how to easily evolve and accelerate the evolution.

It seems that it will be clarified how to edit the genome to obtain a body that can withstand the "breakthrough starshot" that can move at the speed of light of 20%.

What are the candidates for the Second Earth?

Following the means of transportation, there is some hope for evolution. Another important point is whether or not there is a second earth.

There is the word "habitable zone". It is an area where life can exist, and is called "life habitable area" in Japanese.

It seems that there are already some candidates. Unfortunately, it seems that a strong candidate has not been found in the closest star, Alpha Centauri, but it seems that there is a candidate if the distance is extended a little. If you already have a candidate, that may be more reliable.

<Candidate for life habitable area>
・ Gliese 486b Approximately 26 light-years away from the earth
・ Planets around TOI-178 Approximately 205 light-years from Earth
・ Alpha star Ab in Candidate 1 about 4 light-years from Earth However, it may be a gas giant (it cannot live in the case of a gas planet)
···others

With the advancement of technology, observations have made it possible to find some candidates for the Second Earth. If the technology advances further, it may be possible to search for candidates while on Earth without moving at the speed of light of 20%. It is efficient to narrow down the target and send the spacecraft after the candidate is found.

Do you have all the materials to continue the future?

・ "Means of transportation at speeds close to the speed of light"
・ "Human evolution"
・ "Candidate for the Second Earth"

The evolution of technology and the evolution of humans are indispensable. If a means of transportation close to the speed of light can be realized, a candidate for the second earth should be discovered at an early stage.

Will the future continue after all?

Now that we have a chance to live on a planet other than the solar system, it's safe for the time being. Even if the earth and the sun disappear, life will survive on some planet. It means that "the future is safe" and "the future is eternal".

but please wait a moment. Does the fact that the sun and the earth have a lifespan mean that other planets also have a lifespan?

It was yes, I have. There are early and late, but all planets will eventually disappear. "A new planet will be born again," "The universe is expanding, so the number of planets may increase."

I think many people think that. But in reality, no new planet will be created. The life is also fixed. What happens is that the planet gradually disappears from this universe.

"Then, does it mean that even if you move the planet, you will eventually have no place to live?"

Yes, that's right.

Contrary to the time of the big bang, it will become more and more. The energy generated by the Big Bang will not be reborn, and eventually the planet will reach the end of its life and disappear altogether. No planet is born suddenly.

Then what should I do. After all, is it useless no matter what we do, even if humans evolve, technology develops, and global warming countermeasures are taken?

In fact, there are various theories about the end of the universe. In addition to the fact that all the planets have reached the end of their lifespan, the big crunch is called the big crunch, and the expansion of the universe slows down and starts to contract from a certain point and converges to one point on the contrary of the big bang. There is also a theory. In any case, I think that the "steady-state cosmology" that the universe lasts forever is unreasonable. Nowadays, even among scientists, the theory that "the universe will end in some way" is predominant.

[Reference] The end pattern of the universe
・ Heat death of the universe
・ Big crunch
・ Big Rip
・ Vacuum collapse, etc.

How to make the future sustainable?

I knew that this universe would eventually come to an end. Unfortunately, wasn't the future sustainable?

Let's think away from the real world once.

"If it's cyberspace or virtual space, it will last forever?", "If there is cyberspace, it's okay if the universe disappears."

There seems to be an idea. However, as long as cyberspace is realized on real-world materials such as computers, cyberspace will end as soon as this world ends. After all the end will come soon. Unfortunately, time cannot be stopped. If this universe disappears eventually, we must find a viable place other than this universe.

There is a theory called "multiverse". The theory is that there are innumerable other universes besides this universe. It is a powerful theory in physics, and it is said that it is more difficult for scientists to prove that "the universe is one". But if there are innumerable universes, how can we people in this universe go to another universe?

There is a theory that a black hole is the gateway, but this is not a valid story yet, so scientific investigation is necessary. In any case, the future is not sustainable unless we go from the universe we are in to another world, so we have to think about this. The future cannot continue unless we can go to another universe. It is not "whether you can go to another universe" but "you have to think of a way to go to another universe". The future ends when you stop thinking.

Is the Multiverse theory grounded?

It was discovered that this universe is expanding more and more. It has been spreading since the Big Bang. This is a fact from the observation data. I don't know why it's expanding,

but without the existence of another universe, it's impossible to explain the expansion of this universe, so a certain number of scientists support the Multiverse. Also, string theory and multiverse theory are compatible and do not theoretically break down. However, even though there are innumerable universes, it's hard to imagine.

There are many mysterious things such as "What is outside the infinite universe?", "How many are there?", "Is there so much physical resources?" There are still many things we don't know about the universe, so it is important to accumulate scientific grounds for the time being, but I feel that the Multiverse theory has some potential. It is unlikely that all the worlds will disappear and all will end with the end of this universe. We have a future. There must be another universe.

Next to interplanetary movement, multiverse movement

Even if there is another universe like the Multiverse, difficult problems have not been solved. How can I go to another universe?

In the world of science fiction, it seems easy to do warp and teleport, but is it realistic?

It seems that research on quantum teleportation is progressing. There is also information that it could be achieved with small atomic-level objects. Although it is still in the research stage, there is a possibility that the quantum world can realize things that cannot be imagined. If you can really teleport, you don't have to move at the speed of light. Teleportation may also be possible to go to other universes.

However, the problem is that it is very difficult to realize with a large substance. Even if we say "big substance", we say that a substance that is a little larger than an invisible atom is "large", so it can be expected that it will be quite difficult to quantum teleportate what is visible. If the substance is impossible, it may be a solution if only "information" can be moved by teleportation. For example, "consciousness" is computerized and only "consciousness" is moved by quantum teleportation. Then it seems that you can move to another universe. At least it's more realistic than teleporting humans themselves.

Upon closer examination, it seems that "quantum teleportation" is not simply a transfer of matter. It may be different from the general image of "teleportation", but there is no doubt about the potential research in the future.

We can't imagine the outside of the universe at all, just as we couldn't imagine the outside of the earth long ago. Either way, the future cannot be sustained unless we can move to another universe.

What is "time"?

So far, we have talked about the life of the earth, how many light years ahead to go to another planet, and "time".

By the way, what is "time" in the first place? What happens when time runs out? Although there was something I thought, I couldn't get an answer, so I hadn't thought about it until now.

"If you don't have time, it will stop like a stopwatch", "No time will advance, so it will remain stationary", "This world itself will disappear"

I can imagine the time when time suddenly stopped, but I'm not sure until "Why does time exist?"

If there is no time before the universe was born, we can imagine that this world would not be born because there was no big bang in the first place. What is "time" for? What is the purpose of "time"?

First of all, one of the purposes of time is "change". If time doesn't exist, no change will occur. In the morning, the sun will not rise, the earth will not rotate, and life will not evolve. Also, no planet would have been born. In the first place, nothing is born without "change". So "changing" means "there is time."

It is logically correct that time only advances in the future. Because "changing" is only the future. Even if it changes to the original state and returns, it will be the "future" when it "changes". As long as the purpose of time is "change," we cannot go back to the past. There is talk of what the time machine is like, but it goes to the "future" rather than going back to the past. It's a little confusing, but even if you could go to the past with a time machine, the world of the past is just expanding, and that is the "future."

We are advancing into the future of going to the past world. In short, when things "change", it's the "future."

If you go to the past with a time machine, you may think that you are going back in time, but when it changes, you are going to the future.

Time only advances to the "future". If it "changes", it is the "future".

It's fun. Happy thing. Sad things. It's painful. ... I don't feel it without "time". Of course, if you don't have time to think of "fun" in your head, you can't even say the word "ta". You won't be able to be impressed by the beautiful scenery, enjoy music, eat delicious food, play sports, sweat, or spend a relaxing time with your family. If there is no time, there is no consciousness and of course no thinking. It is possible because "time" exists.

How was the world without "time"? The only thing I can imagine is that the world of "nothing" is spreading. However, even if you think about the world of "nothing", it is difficult to stop thinking immediately and think deeply. It's not as difficult as "nothing". There is no matter, of course, no life, no light, no time. The lack of time does not change, so it is in a state of "nothing" forever. Now, if you think about it carefully, you can see that this world will not be born if there is no "time". This is because "there is no time" = "it does not change".

In other words, you cannot escape from the state of "nothing". With that in mind, it may be a natural idea that "time" existed from the beginning. This is because it takes "time" to "change." It is probable that there was some form of "time" in order to "change."

By the way, what did it take to make "time"? You have to "change" things, but how did "time" start to move? Did you need any energy to start moving "time"? What was it like at the beginning of "time"?

How was time born?

Let's change our perspective a little and think from an engineering perspective. What about the world of programming? First of all, I would like to code a program and execute it to see if the code works properly, but if you think of "execution" = "start of time", the code exists before the time starts. .. The code of the program. Since it is executed after the program code is created, the code is created first.

After the code is completed, "time" is born only when it is "executed". "Time" was finally born here. By the way, if there is no "code", nothing will work even if there is "time". You need a "code" before "time" is born.

For the time being, the concept of "time" was born by "execution".

To organize,
1. "Code" → 2. Press the "execution start button" (start of "time") → 3. Birth of the "world"

It will be in the order of.

Surprisingly, "programming" and "this world" have become similar. "Code" corresponds to the laws of physics in this world. First, we start by encoding various things such as the laws of physics and chemistry. Then the big bang occurred. It's like "Big Bang" = "press the execute button". It contains a very advanced and groundbreaking code that life is born from matter. And maybe there are no bugs. If this world is full of bugs, it will be a big deal.

So how did you get the "time" to write the code? After all, "time" is required to create code, so before the time in the program is born, "time" is required to create code again. By the way, nothing works if there is no code even if it exists only for time. It's the same as pressing the run button without writing any code and nothing works.

I could have imagined the situation where time was born, but before the first time was born, it remains a mystery.

This universe was born 13.8 billion years ago. I think that physics will eventually clarify the situation of the birth of the universe. However, it may be difficult to clarify the situation before the birth of the universe with physics.

It is said that this world consists of 3 dimensions + space-time (time). In order to understand this world, we need to solve the difficult problem of "the existence of time." Understanding "time" is also a necessary element in the future.

If there was no such thing as "time"

There is an "inflation theory" as a theory when the big bang occurs. The theory is that a sudden expansion called inflation occurred, leading to the big bang.

In order to realize "inflation theory", the existence of "time" is necessary before the birth of the universe. This is because "change" does not occur if time does not exist. There will be "time" when the "change" occurs. Then it seems that time already existed before the Big Bang. It is natural to think that "time was before the big bang" because some kind of "change" is required to reach the big bang.

But what was the situation before that "time" existed? Was it in a state of "nothing" with no substance or time? If there is no time, there is no time, so it is not possible to change to the state of "time exists". What should I think?

One answer is, as mentioned earlier, there are multiple universes in this world. It is the multiverse theory. Considering that this universe was born from another world, it seems that we can explain the difficult question,

"What was the state when we had no time?" "Time in this universe started when the code was created in another universe where time exists and the execute button was pressed."

It is also possible to think that. In other words, if you think of this world as a universe (single universe), you will get stuck in the answer, but if you think of it as a multiverse, you can derive a consistent answer.

however,

"What was the beginning of the time of the original universe that created this universe?" "What is the beginning of the time of the original universe that created this universe, and of that original universe?"

The difficult problem awaits. Time does not start unless someone presses the very first run (time start) button. Who pressed this very first run button?

It was What if you think that the world is circulating? Press the execute button Because there is time in the world, you can press the execute button. After pressing the run button, the new world (program) will start time, so you can write the code for the next world again.

Who does your "consciousness" belong to?

"My consciousness is of course mine", "My consciousness is not anyone's" ...

It's a matter of course, isn't it? There is nothing to wonder.

But it's a little strange, isn't it? I always recognize myself as myself after sleeping and waking up every day. You don't get up in the morning and say, "Where is that?" Or "Who am I?" Even though I may think "Is the morning coming again" or "I'm sleepy", I still remember yesterday. My memories of the past have faded, but I still have memories. This is because the brain remembers it.

For example, what about this case? While you were sleeping at night, something fell from above and hit your head hard, and you lost all your memories of yesterday. When I woke up in the morning, I was in the state of "Where is this?" And "Who am I?"

By the way, who does your "consciousness" belong to at this time? Originally, if you had a memory of the past, you would have been conscious of "you", but who is "you" who has forgotten about the past?

I think that "you" consciousness is "you" consciousness because the memories and experiences from childhood to the past are accumulated and accumulated in the brain. Is "your consciousness" that has lost all its past "yours"?

It was It may not be your consciousness because you are thinking based on your past experiences and memories, and your consciousness that you have lost all your past memories. So what about the "state where part of the past is gone"? Humans often forget, so if you forget even one thing in the past, will it no longer be your consciousness?

That's not true. I often forget when I sleep for a day, and the memory of the rice I ate yesterday is a little suspicious. Even if I forget the rice I ate yesterday, "I" inherits the "I" consciousness that has continued from the past.

Then, how much do you forget to be "I" and how much do you remember to be "I"? If you forget all your past experiences and memories, and if you say "it's not your consciousness", it's difficult to draw the line "how much you forget to be your consciousness?"

Then, even if I forget all my past experiences and memories, is it correct to say that "my consciousness is my consciousness forever, no matter what happens to me"?

From another point of view, what about a cloned human who copied your DNA? Of course, you have no past experience or memory. It's just the same DNA. Generally speaking, your clone is not your consciousness. This should be close to "forgetting all past experiences and memories", but is the clone's consciousness clearly different from "your consciousness"?

It is necessary to dig a little deeper to grasp the true nature of "consciousness". By the way, is there no consciousness in animals other than humans? For example, are dogs unconscious?I think dogs will be very happy to find their owner, but is that "consciousness"?

Before digging into "consciousness", we need to think about the definition of consciousness. What is "consciousness" in the first place?

What is consciousness?

So are the plants conscious? Sunflowers have flowers that turn in the direction of the sun. Is this "consciousness"? Dogs are happy to find their owner. Is this "consciousness"?

It was "It's because we are conscious that dogs are happy to find their owners", "It's also conscious that plants grow in the direction of the sun."

All are correct answers. In the first place, we have not defined "consciousness", so in a broad sense, none of them are wrong. I often see examples of what "consciousness" is, without defining words, and making it unclear, but in order to dig deeper into everything, it is necessary to define words.

So how should we define "consciousness"? First, let's define "I can think in anticipation of the future" = "consciousness". Can plants predict the future? It is possible to change the movement reflexively with the energy of the sun, but you would not predict the future, saying, "Because it seems that a high apartment will stand nearby, it will get worse in the sun and I will move to another place."
What about dogs? "The owner will always come back at this time, so let's wait at the front door." In this definition, it can be said that dogs also have "consciousness".
This is because "thinking that predicts the future is possible." With this, it seems that animals other than humans will also be "conscious". "Consciousness" is still vague, so is there any other good definition?

The true identity of "consciousness"

What does "consciousness" generally mean?

"Being awake (awakening)", "being able to recognize your own situation and surroundings", "being aware of things and conditions" ...

Seems to be defined as.

I understand somehow, but I don't really understand the essence of "consciousness". With these explanations, it seems that even plants and animals are "conscious". But it feels a little strange that plants are also conscious. Somehow, I have the impression that only human beings have "consciousness", so this definition doesn't seem to be neat. If you pay attention to one point, is "being able to recognize your own situation" the most important point?

Do plants understand "self"? You may be aware of it, but you probably don't understand what you are. Do dogs understand "self"? You may think "I am a dog", but I don't think "Why am I a dog?"

Here, one hint came out in defining "consciousness", "Why am I a dog?"

Humans will think "Why am I a human?", But non-human animals will not think "Why am I a chimpanzee?" Or "Why am I a dog?"

So, how about defining "consciousness" as "a state in which you can ask yourself" why? "". With this, it seems that "consciousness is something that only humans have." Perhaps insects cannot ask, "Why am I an insect?" Therefore, it can be said that "insects are unconscious". Dogs will not be able to ask "Why am I a dog?" Therefore, it can be said that "dogs are unconscious". Humans can ask, "Why am I human?" Therefore, it can be said that "human beings are conscious".

Finally, I have a clear definition of "consciousness". Let's think about the purpose of "consciousness" again once the definition is made.

Why did you need "consciousness"?

Why did humans become conscious? Animals other than humans do not have "consciousness". This is because I cannot ask myself "Why am I?" Technologies such as AI are also evolving, but AI itself does not operate with "consciousness." It just works according to the programmed process. Today's AI does not have the ability to think "Why am I an AI?"

Animals can live by instinct without "consciousness". Why did humans have to have "consciousness"? What was it needed for?

Research on "artificial consciousness" is also in progress. This is a study to reproduce human consciousness on machines and computers. However, at this point, it seems that we have not grasped the essence of "consciousness."

"If we proceed with the development of AI, we can naturally clarify" consciousness "", "The development of the field of brain science will reveal" consciousness "" ...

Maybe that's right. However, even if I do not dig deep into "consciousness" in the first place, I feel that it will take time to clarify. First of all, I think that it is an unexpected shortcut to dig deeper into "Why does consciousness exist?" And "What is consciousness?"

If you are conscious, you can see the distant future.

"Why is this world?", "Who am I?", "Why are you here now?", "Why am I a human being?", "What kind of world will it be in 100 years?" You can ask yourself, "Why is it?", "What will happen to the end of the world?", "Why does time exist?" ... and "Why?" You can see the distant future by having "why?" (Question). And those who see the future are driven by the urge to create the future.

Even animals may be looking at the future in the future. You may be able to see the immediate future, such as "If you go here, the grasslands that serve as food are spreading" or "Let's move here because there may be enemy animals". Just like humans, we can't think of the future for decades, hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of years. The degree of perfection of "consciousness" is different between humans and animals.

Humans are creating the future by looking ahead to the distant future.

The purpose of consciousness is "to create the future."

What is "virtual image space"?

Do you have a "virtual image space"?

I think there are people who say "Of course I have it" and people who say "What is a virtual image space?", But people who say "Of course I have it" do not need to explain. I will explain a little for those who are asking "what is a virtual image space?"

I think you can see the world you see with your eyes, but do you recognize the same world you see with your head as you see it with your head?

"Of course you recognize what you see with your eyes?"

You might think that. But what about when you're thinking? Are you thinking while recognizing what you see in front of you?

When I'm thinking, I think the things in front of me disappear from my consciousness. I'm looking in front of me with my eyes open, but I'm not in my consciousness. In short, I open my eyes when I'm drowsy, but I think of something else in my head. The "eyes" are looking at what they see in front of them, but the "consciousness" does not recognize what they see with their "eyes." Instead, I think that "consciousness" recognizes the "image" that you are imagining. The "image" recognized by this "consciousness" is called the "virtual image space". (I named the "virtual image space" arbitrarily, but it is the so-called "image" in my head.)

It may be easier to understand simply by saying "image", but for the sake of clarity, we dare to call it "virtual image space".

This "virtual image space" is also used in "image training" that is often used by athletes. It's a technique that can be used for training just by imagining it without moving your body, but it's common to imagine something other than sports before the actual performance. That is training "consciousness" by creating an image of a world similar to the actual physical space in the "virtual image space".

It's a little confusing, but what you see with your "eyes" is once taken into the "virtual image space", and the "consciousness" recognizes that image.

"Eyes"-> "Visual information (real world)"-> "Virtual image space"-> "Consciousness"

As another example of "virtual image space", it may be easier to understand if you think about what you often see.

that's right. It's a "dream". I think it's for people who haven't seen it very recently and people who often see it, but I think everyone has seen it once. Of course, my eyes are closed and no visual information is coming into my brain because I see it while I sleep. But the world is expanding as if you were looking at visual information, right?

That also uses the "virtual image space". The "virtual image space" created by the brain is expanding, not the visual information seen by the eyes, and the "consciousness" recognizes that image and becomes a dream. By the way, I dream about eye movements during REM sleep. It seems that brain waves similar to those when awake will appear on the brain waves. It is proof that "consciousness" recognizes "virtual image space" and is active. When you are dreaming, your athletic activity is stopped. It is said that motor function is stopped because it is dangerous if the body moves while dreaming.

The "virtual image space" is an important point for the existence of "consciousness". ("Virtual image space" is also important for AI)

Language and virtual image space

Humans use language. It is one of the wonderful functions that human beings have acquired as a means of communication. Language allows one to convey what one is thinking to another.

It is now possible to share "something" by language. "Sharing" is important for the evolution and prosperity of seeds. It is believed that Homo sapiens, a human being today, prospered more than the Neanderthals because of this "sharing" ability.

What can be shared by language? It is a "virtual image space". People can now share the "virtual image space" as information through communication. Often, "the values ​​match that person" also means that the "virtual image spaces" of each other are similar.

Although it is called "Tu-Ka no Naka", it can be said that the "virtual image space" can be shared considerably. Suddenly, when I first met him, he said, "How was that?", But it turned out to be "Huh?" That's what happened. ”I think that conversations often hold. Even if it is different once, I think that it may be transmitted in the second time, "It's not that. That's it."I can't think of it when I meet each other for the first time.

When I talk to a person I meet for the first time, the explanation becomes redundant unknowingly, and I feel like "I forgot the time and talked" or "I was tired because I felt like I was using a lot of energy after talking." I think that there are many things, but I think that there is less fatigue because I talk while omitting words when I am a TU-KA friend.

The "virtual image space" is shared by talking. The wisdom and knowledge for daily life will be passed on to parents and relatives, and the "virtual image space" will be shared more and more. Keep away from dangerous places such as "dangerous to swim in the river" or "mountains are easily distressed". As in the old tales, "If you do something wrong, you can be eaten by a demon", "If you don't hear what you say, Raijin will drop the Kaminari", or "When you go to the river, a kappa will come out and go to the river." "I'm dragged in" or these also share a "virtual image space". (In this case, it may be more correct to say "planting an image" rather than "sharing")

"Fear" also exists in the "virtual image space". When I walk alone in the dark at night, my spine gets cold and I feel scared. It is just visual information that a dark landscape spreads out in front of you, but it is the "virtual image space" that creates "fear". The "virtual image space" creates a "fear" image without permission. For example, the image of a ghost suddenly popping out. If you recognize only what you can see with your "eyes", you will not have "fear" at night, but "consciousness" will recognize what you have created in the "virtual image space", so you will have "fear". ..

The fear felt by "consciousness" is not only visible, but also imaginary images. In animals, you may feel "fear" with a visible physical enemy or a cry of danger from a companion, but you can imagine the future or imagine something that does not exist and feel "fear". It is not. This is because animals have not yet developed a "virtual image space". "Anxiety" and "worry" are peculiar to human beings because they acquired the function of "virtual image space" in the process of evolution. Even animals can be repeatedly stimulated to learn the "fear" of "this will happen", but you will not be anxious or worried about your own imagination of the future.

When reading a novel, you enter the world of the novel and the "virtual image space" expands, and even though you are actually seeing only letters, you can imagine the world written in the novel. This is not visual information, but linguistic information reaches the "virtual image space", which is recognized by "consciousness".

"Eyes"-> "Language information"-> "Virtual image space"-> "Consciousness"

In the same way, I think that the world of information heard by ear expands as an image, even though I have not actually seen the information heard by ear, such as radio and reading. There is also a difference between visual and auditory information, that is, whether it is light information or sound information, but both have reached the "virtual image space" as "linguistic information". "Consciousness" recognizes it.

"Ear"-> "Language information"-> "Virtual image space"-> "Consciousness"

Conversely, the "virtual image space" can also be output. How do you output it? Well, it is output as "language information". Output your own "virtual image space" by talking to people and writing letters.

By the way, for those who think that "my thoughts are hard to convey to people", there are many cases where the output of this "virtual image space" is not working well.

Information sharing and evolution

It's clear that language is an important means of sharing information, but what is "information sharing" necessary for?

Information sharing is necessary to accelerate evolution.

What do you think of as a means of sharing information?

"Telephone", "Email", "Chat", "Books", "Lectures", "TV", "Radio", "Internet", "SNS", "Politics", "School Education", "Religion", "Legend", "local customs", "village rules", "family" ... etc.

If there are no particular restrictions, you will be able to come up with ways to share information one after another. The means of "information sharing" is also evolving, and it is now possible to easily and quickly share information on SNS. SNS is more accurate and faster than TV information.

Why is "information sharing" necessary for evolution? That is because the seeds that excel in "information sharing" prosper.

Originally, life could only share information using DNA. Because it doesn't have a language, DNA was the only means of sharing information. Information learned by one generation of organisms was stored in DNA, and that information had to be shared with the next generation via DNA. Compared to information sharing using DNA, which is premised on generational change, the speed and amount of information sharing is overwhelmingly different from the fact that information can be shared between current generations. The acquisition of "language" has brought overwhelming benefits to the speed of "evolution".

There is the word "meme". Information that is stored in the brain and can be copied to other brains is called a meme. Information sharing is also the exchange of memes. Information in the brain can be copied to another person's brain just by talking. You can also copy information in the brain with a book. Now, SNS etc. can copy information in the brain at a tremendous speed and over a wide range at once. In particular, the "buzzing" state is a prominent example of this. In the past, information in the brain was exchanged through conversations and books, but now the copy range and speed of information in the brain have become orders of magnitude. When this amount of meme exchange occurs, it will naturally evolve at an accelerating rate.

"Information sharing" is an important point when thinking about "evolution".

What is the destination of "consciousness"?

Given that human consciousness is largely due to the development of "virtual image space", what is beyond "consciousness"?

How is a person's "will" born as a word similar to "consciousness"? "I want to do that" and "I want to do this" are "wills". Will comes after "consciousness". There is also "will" in the same language, but if anything, "will" has a nuance that has a strong feeling of the person himself, so at first, think about "will" which is a loose nuance. prize.

We sometimes act with "will" when we act.

"I'm hungry so let's eat rice"
"It's time to eat, so let's eat rice."
"I'm getting sleepy, so let's go to bed"
"It's time to go to bed, so let's go to bed."
・ ・ ・

I arranged two sentences with slightly different nuances. I think it can be divided into actions that have "will" and actions that do not have that "will".

"Let's eat rice because it's time to eat" would be "will". Even if I'm not so hungry, eating lunch at around 12 o'clock every day is a work of "will". On the other hand, "Let's eat rice because I'm hungry" doesn't have much "will", and I have the impression that I act only with "consciousness". You just eat sweets, regardless of time.

Similarly, "sleeping because I'm getting sleepy" is "consciousness", and "sleeping because it's time to sleep" can be distinguished from "will". What happens when a "will" with a stronger nuance comes in with similar words?

"If you don't eat here now, you won't be able to eat anything for the next two days, so be sure to eat here now."
"I'm on a diet, so I'll never eat rice tonight." ・ ・ ・

That is the "will". I feel a stronger feeling than "will". The order is as follows.

"Consciousness" → "will" → "will"

By the way, the famous words of "William James", a psychologist and philosopher, are as follows.

If you change your mind, your behavior will change.
If your behavior changes, your habits will change.
If your habits change, your personality will change.
If the personality changes, the fate will change.

When the "heart" changes, the "fate" also changes in the end. This is difficult to put into practice even if you understand it with your head. I think the great men of the past are the result of practicing this.

Philosophers and psychologists may not have imagined the existence of a "virtual image space", but human "consciousness" depends on the "virtual image space" that a person has.

In other words, the "virtual image space" theory would be as follows.

If the "will" changes, the "will" changes
If "will" changes, "consciousness" changes
If "consciousness" changes, "virtual image space" changes

Somehow, the relationships between "will", "will", "consciousness", and "virtual image space" have been organized. At first, it is necessary to have a strong feeling of "will", but once it is established in the "virtual image space" and a foundation is established, the principle is that it becomes a habit and the behavior changes naturally.

The reason why we can have a strong "will" for humans is because humans have acquired the function of "virtual image space" and have become conscious.

You can see the future with "consciousness", but "will" will be important for creating the future. A strong "will" will move the future.

Can consciousness be created artificially?

I think the story is easy at this point.

"Can robots be conscious?" Normally, the robot that assembled the machine will never be conscious.

A camera that can recognize images instead of eyes.
Mike instead of ears.
Speaker instead of mouth.
Tactile sensor instead of limbs.

Even if you make it to resemble a human being, you cannot be "conscious" with this alone. You don't have enough to be "conscious", right?

Yes, you cannot be "conscious" without a "virtual image space". If there is no "virtual image space", it is the same as a primitive creature that acts based on (or smells) the image projected on the image. There is no "consciousness" there.

So how do you create a "virtual image space"? For this, you would have to think "Why did you need a virtual image space?"

Without a "virtual image space", we cannot think of the future.

In short, I can't imagine the future. You need a "virtual image space" to imagine.

When I'm imagining something in my head, "virtual image space" is used.

Animals also needed the ability to predict the future, such as "It's going to rain tomorrow, so let's move away from the river" or "We'll have a drinking fountain over there this season, so let's move". As living things evolved their functions little by little in order to survive, the brain gradually acquired the function of creating a "virtual image space". A "virtual image space" is required to imagine the future and look ahead. As the "virtual image space" has been strengthened, humans have become "conscious".

If we can reproduce exactly the same functions as the human brain, a "virtual image space" should be born naturally. If a "virtual image space" is created, "consciousness" will be born at the same time. When we have a "virtual image space" that predicts the future, we can have "consciousness".

However, even if it is easy to reproduce the same thing as the human brain, it will be necessary for brain science to develop and elucidate the movement of the brain. There are still many things that have not been clarified yet, so I think we will proceed in parallel with that.

Can AI be conscious?

As with the story of artificially creating consciousness, "consciousness" cannot be achieved unless the "virtual image space" can be reproduced with AI.

"With the evolution of AI, AI (artificial intelligence) will become conscious."

As I often hear, most of the time it is told without defining the essence of "consciousness". Even if you say "get conscious" even though you haven't defined "what is consciousness?", You don't really understand.

"AI that behaves as if it were conscious" is still being realized. However, "genuine consciousness" has not been realized, and there is no prospect. You will not be able to create "real consciousness" unless you try to understand the essence of "consciousness".

Is consciousness sustainable?

Whether or not there is a post-mortem world, consciousness is thought to disappear as soon as the body dies.

If the body is eternal, is consciousness eternal? Immortality is quite difficult, but if the frozen storage of life is realized, does "you" have "your consciousness" after sleeping for 1000 years? In this case, "you" will surely have "your consciousness" because you just woke up after sleeping for a long period of time. If you still have your own consciousness 1000 years later, you will feel like you are on a time machine. You can go to the future 1000 years from now. However, it may be a little difficult because you can't understand the language.

Even if the body is lost, consciousness will be transplantable if the brain perfectly reproduces the movement of the brain on a machine. If the "virtual image space" can be reproduced, the "consciousness" can move. The rest is how to copy "consciousness". If you move your consciousness on the machine, you may not be worried about your health or longevity anymore. However, in the case of machines, it is a pity that eating rice does not feel delicious.

Is the same virtual space as this world feasible?

With the evolution of technology, the reality of virtual space has also increased. "Real" = "real space", "virtual" = "virtual space". It is still possible if it is a simple virtual space. However, unfortunately, it's only video now. VR also prepares video and audio to prepare a pseudo virtual space. In other words, at the moment it is only a "pseudo virtual space". The virtual space that can be realized now is just a "pseudo virtual space". In the case of "pseudo virtual space", it is necessary to prepare an image of broken glass in advance, even if it breaks when hitting the glass.

As the virtual space evolves further, a "complete virtual space" will be created by programming to the atomic level of matter. If you can reproduce by programming the point that the glass breaks when you hit it with an object of this strength and hardness calculated from the atomic and molecular levels, it will be completed as a complete virtual space. But if it's really "perfect," maybe it's necessary to reproduce string theory.

The word "Metaverse" has become a hot topic, but it is one of the "pseudo-virtual spaces". Through the avatar in the virtual space, you will be able to act in the virtual space. It can be said that this is also one world, but there is still an overwhelming difference when comparing the current "pseudo virtual space" and the "real world".

AI can learn by itself if there is a simulation environment. You can learn and act on what you should do to get the maximum "reward". The closer the "virtual space" is to the real world, the more the learning results in the "virtual space" can be fed back to the real world. For example, shogi and go are exactly the same in the real world as the virtual space on a computer in terms of rules. Therefore, what AI has learned on a computer (virtual space) can be used as it is in the real world, and even in the real world, it can demonstrate performance superior to humans.

One of the reasons why "general-purpose AI" cannot be realized yet is that "virtual space" close to the real world has not been realized. There is too much information in the real world, and I don't know what is the correct answer for AI today. A simulation environment is required to accelerate learning. However, the same "complete virtual space" as in the real world has not been realized, and learning is not possible because there is no optimal simulation environment for generalizing AI.

Towards a new world

It seems that research is being conducted to create another universe by simulating the Big Bang in this universe. It's a story with a future, but it feels a little far from reality. It will be more realistic in the near future to control brain waves and dream in a pseudo manner. Furthermore, having multiple people have a common dream is no longer a story of the science fiction world. Even if you don't bother to recreate the Big Bang and create another universe, the dream world is also a wonderful world. Dreams are also one of the "virtual image spaces". "Consciousness" can recognize the world created by the "virtual image space" of dreams. "Consciousness" can also be recognized in the world of "virtual image space" reproduced on a computer. If you can imagine it as a "virtual image space" with your head, "consciousness" will be activated. In other words, humans can think in the new world.

As you can see, there are various approaches, but the future of "informatization of consciousness" is finally approaching.

Even if the multiverse is a reality, moving the physical body to another universe would be a high hurdle. It is unlikely that a three-dimensional substance can move even though we do not know what dimension another universe is. It would be more realistic to think about how to move the "informationized consciousness" to another universe. If we can create a "virtual image space" in another universe in advance, "consciousness" will move.

"Consciousness" is working even in a dream. In other words, if you have a "virtual image space", you don't need physical visual information or auditory information. The need for physical and auditory information does not necessarily mean that the real world is needed. In fact, humans can think whether they close their eyes or close their ears.

"Consciousness" can be separated from the real world. If you have "consciousness", you can see the future. In order to create the future, we needed the ability to look ahead.

summary

Looking back, the text became longer due to the momentum, but I made it with the hope that it would convey the fun of "thinking about the future."

I also covered the topic of "consciousness", but even now there are AI products and services that behave as if AI has consciousness, such as AI for automatic response, but unfortunately they have "genuine consciousness". not.

When will AI with "genuine consciousness" appear? At that time, I think that the concept of "virtual image space" has been adopted.

Humans have evolved to think about the future. I gained consciousness to think about the future. At the moment, it is a right that only humans have. It is possible for non-humans to live in the present. However, only humans can imagine a sustainable future and create it.

I hope this article has helped you for a sustainable future.

[Future milestones]
1. Mars emigration
2. Emigrated to planets other than the solar system
3. Movement between planets
4. Informatization of consciousness
5. This journey outside the universe