Scientific Sense ® Podcast with Gill Eapen: Top episodes in March 2021

Prof. Richard Lebed, Professor of Physics at Arizona State University on quarks and hadrons
https://lnkd.in/dcg_HSZ

Prof. Ryan Hickox, Professor of Astronomy at Dartmouth College on Black holes
https://lnkd.in/eBXSxsT

Prof. Scott Baraban, Professor & Chair in Neuroscience Research, University of California, San Francisco on epilepsy
https://lnkd.in/dHt-6MT

Prof. Maria Kazachenko, Assistant Professor of Astrophysical & Planetary Science at the University of Colorado Boulder on the Sun
https://lnkd.in/dDmGwzA

Prof Erik Berglöf, Professor of economics at the The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) on pandemics and developing countries
https://lnkd.in/dU6nUcC

Prof. Jonathan Tan, Professor of Astronomy at Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg on star formation
https://lnkd.in/dUUMAEb

Prof. Randall McEntaffer, Professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics at the Penn State University on suborbital rockets
https://lnkd.in/dgfmAZT


#science #technology #economics

Concentrating Solar: The right first step toward zero cost energy

Nearly zero cost energy is a real possibility for humans living in close proximity to a large fusion device with billions of years of fuel left. However, the immediate need to push away from fossil fuels has led to massive investments into inefficient alternatives such as photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. Both of these have inherent limitations and in the absence of hitherto unknown materials, these technologies could never reach the required efficiencies to be useful. This is another reminder that a focus on incremental innovation is not the right approach to solve big problems. Recent news (1) that concentrating solar with an array of reflectors driven by Artificial Intelligence could generate temperatures exceeding 1000 degrees is welcome news. Although initial applications could be industrial, power production cannot be too far behind.

On the other hand, room temperature superconductivity, something engineers have been dreaming about for many decades is yet to materialize. Just like photovoltaic cells, the focus here has been incremental. Because of this, we are not too far from where we were a few decades ago. A few 10s of Kelvin higher temperature, albeit interesting scientifically, has no real practical implications. Rather than nourishing this toward room temperature slowly, engineers should throw out the templates they are working on and start with the requirement of finding superconductivity at room temperature, nothing less.

With efficient harvesting of heat through well designed concentrating solar devices moving toward central power production, it is imperative that we make advances in superconductivity as the transmission and distribution of power will become more important in the future. If concentrating solar wins, we will have to shelve all the contemporary inefficient and costly attempts for distributed power production.

Incrementalism is not a good approach to solve big problems.

(1) https://www.businessinsider.com/solar-power-heliogen-bill-gates-2019-11

Quantum computing and the reversal of time

The search company’s recent announcement (1), that it has a breakthrough in quantum computing, albeit with highly overinflated benchmarks, is interesting. Just the fact that a few dozen qubits could substantially change the landscape of computing has been known for a while. The applicability of such hardware may still be limited to highly specialized problems. Just as the over-inflated expectations at the intersection of conventional AI and neuroscience are dying down, the latest news may provide a shining toy for engineers to fool around for a few years.

However, orders of magnitude improvement in the speed of computing is a profitable path for humans to pursue. The most interesting application could be in Physics and not in Medicine as the company appears to speculate. In the former, a recent experiment (2) that appears to show the possibility of a reversal of time in the state of a quantum computer provides new avenues for next-generation cosmology. As the universe itself appears to be a quantum computer, humble efforts by humans to pull together a few coordinated qubits could, at the very least, open our minds. On the latter, in spite of the best efforts of engineers to programmatically understand biological systems, nothing much has happened for a century. The primary reason for this could be that biological systems are fundamentally different from engineering systems and just crunching ignorance faster may not lead to anything. With the missing theory of consciousness, humans still seem to be seeking deep answers to who they really are. And, their inability to arrest the deterioration of their infrastructure as well as prevent catastrophic wars from within is ample evidence that we are nowhere close to a fundamental understanding. One cannot just throw fast and raw computing power to problems she does not understand.

Efforts expended in materials science and increasing computing speed likely have much higher returns than other popular ideas such as searching for ET and habitable planets. One may be able to find a needle in an accessible haystack but not in haystacks that are beyond the space-time limits. And, there should not be any worries that ET will interfere with the Earth as she will not have much interest. It is amazing to see the happiness gushing out of experimentalists at the discovery of yet another exoplanet; one would have thought it would be tempered after finding 4000 of them. Even theoreticians have been taking a cue from the novelists, as they spin up beautiful stories about the universe. High-speed computing could bring a level of sanity to this field as realistic simulations could provide better avenues to explore for meaning.

A few thousand orders of magnitude improvement in computing speed is in the cards. It may be better to direct it to engineering problems that are well articulated. Speed is not something that cures a lack of fundamental understanding.

(1)    https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-claims-breakthrough-in-quantum-computing-11571843751

(2)    https://phys.org/news/2019-03-physicists-reverse-quantum.html

Next wave of Artificial Intelligence

As Artificial Intelligence matures over half a century, we may be fast approaching the limits of independent developments in software and hardware. Consulting companies seem to have embraced "data science," an ill-conceived and confusing area. Hardware companies, pressured to sell Silicon at any cost, have been creating Pizza sized "smart boxes." and "cognitive networks.". Not to be left behind, companies that specialize in "IoT," things that are on the internet, have been struggling to define how they are different. All of these, aided by massive hype, will likely destroy shareholder value in many ways.

There are two important avenues to make progress in this area. First, the hype created by consulting companies has to be tempered - data scientists do not add value, they typically destroy it. R and Python do not automatically add any value if the users of these somewhat obsolete tools do not understand the problem they are trying to solve. Most of the "new math," has been around for many decades, it is just that fast and cheap computers now have made the incompetent look smart.

It is time to focus on the assimilation of hardware and software to move the field forward. Lack of a theory of consciousness automatically means that humans are better off abandoning the idea of "modeling," the brain. However, we could learn a lot from observing the brain - it is an efficient learning system that gets tired and ages over time. No machine based on conventional computing architecture exhibits these qualities. This means that it is futile to throw more Silicon to a foreign design in an effort to make it act like the brain. In other words, intelligence is never artificial.

Human intelligence, albeit impressive, cannot be the end game. The inability of individual specimens to form a network has substantially restricted their ability to advance. So, replicating the human brain in silicon is not a good idea both because contemporary designs do not allow consciousness and the lack of network capabilities disallow scaling.

It's time software and hardware came together to advance AI.

Policy and politics

As 8 billion identical human specimens churn across the blue planet, separated by idiotic leaders, religions, science, countries, wealth and ignorance, it is clear that we are heading to predesigned exits. As the speculation of a holographic universe and multiverse mount, it is sad that humans will likely exit before finding the truth. There is no policy questions for the elected, just politics. The system their forefathers handed down in good faith, failed them. Autocrats with no respect for the failing system, democracy, shall rule again. Some of them deriving power from the color of their skin and others by the lack of it, some asserting superiority by belief and others by the lack of it, some by perceived knowledge and others by the lack of it, some in the East and others on the opposite side, some by predicting catastrophe and others by simply drawing bubbles, some by attracting attention and others by mocking it.

It is clear that the human is an inferior life form and she was never expected to survive. It is a miracle that she persisted for hundred thousand years. With crude and simple objective functions borrowed from single cell organisms, this complex life form has been attempting to differentiate without luck. As the scientists ponder the Fermi paradox, they are missing a simpler idea - no extraterrestrial intelligence will ever be interested in making  "contact," with the crudest construct that simply maximizes entropy.

Policy is far fetched - politics is more attaiable. As the cycle continues in predictable 4 and 6 year frequencies, electing those with no concern for humanity, we have to accept what we deserve.

Shape of the brain

Research from the University of Chicago (1) that demonstrates brain scans that show distinct differences between criminals who have committed homicide and those who have not, is interesting. If generalizable, such an observation could provide early indications for behavioral health issues. Mental health, often overlooked and treated separately from physical health harbors significant risks for individuals and society. It is a powerful early diagnostic and until healthcare policies treat an individual holistically and not attempt to segment interventions in convenient and legacy packages, we will continue to slip down the quality to cost ratio.

The complex organ humans carry on their shoulders that is speculated to be a quantum computer, is likely the origin of most disease states. As life sciences companies try to tease out meager therapeutic indexes in an overwhelming ocean of placebo effect, it is clear that no therapy can be effective if it is unable to influence the brain. This energy hungry and inefficient mechanism is finely balanced on a knife edge. It is actually surprising we find billions of properly working samples around the world, given the complex design and high maintenance requirements. Prescriptive medicine has laid down strong demarcations between what can be physically intervened with and those less so. Attempts at "curing," a malfunctioning brain using the same principles of crude chemical interventions have led many astray.

If we can understand the brain electronically and magnetically, it could open up a new avenue for diagnosis and treatment. However, it will require educational institutions, providers and manufacturers to work together. But then, that remains to be a dream.

(1) https://news.uchicago.edu/story/scientists-studied-brains-more-800-prisoners-heres-what-they-found

The inverted U of closed biological systems

Many have been worried about the existential threats to humanity – asteroids, climate change and ignorant leaders. However, there could be a more systemic and possibly unavoidable threat as long as Earth and its inhabitants continue to be a closed system. It is difficult to hypothesize based on a single observation of the emergence of life in the universe but the theory of evolution appears unassailable. Just as the accepted big bang theory in cosmology that seems to explain a lot after the point of origination but not the event itself, evolution seems to explain most observed biological specimens and their interactions but not the origination of life itself.

The accepted principle of evolution – the survival of the fittest – seems to be fine-tuned to optimize in short horizons. This is understandable as the survival of a species depends on adaptation to the present conditions and not a set of forecasted and uncertain conditions in the future. Thus, evolution creates fitter biological entities in the short run. It has led to more complex entities over time, the reasons of which are less clear. It is possible that the process is driven by underlying laws of physics, that has an arrow of complexity in biological entities aligned with that of time. This may be a side effect of unilaterally increasing entropy in the universe.

Thus, biological entities on Earth have been increasing in complexity. However, more complex entities also seem more fragile – with single cell organisms showing highest level of robustness and the latest iteration in complexity, the human, showing the lowest. In the past, we see several cycles where catastrophic events eliminated complex entities and returned the system to a much simpler state, albeit with differing initial conditions. This implies two things – closed biological systems in steady state will create more and more complex specimens and unavoidable and random catastrophic events will wipe out the more complex members and return the system to a simpler state at regular intervals.

Closed biological systems, thus, may have an inverted U curve on complexity and that may repeat over time. Humans, arguably the most complex in the contemporary system, could be primed for extinction in any large event. What have not been observed in the past are self-destructive internally generated events that humans appear to be very capable of initiating. So, the probability of cataclysmic events now is a lot higher than the past.  The laws of physics may be driving complexity of entities in a closed system higher over time, the laws of nature may be building complex but more fragile systems over time and in the presence of a catastrophic event, internal or external, the most complex entities are removed returning the system to a simpler state with different initial conditions.

The Earth may be due for a reset. This could also provide an alternative explanation for the Fermi Paradox.

Weird stars and aliens

As astrophysicists find weird observations, the fallback position for an explanation appears to be the presence of aliens (1). It is about time, as green women have so far failed to show themselves in spite of the space agency's assertion that they would be found before 2020. So, it is important to speculate about the presence of aliens on anything one could not explain by status quo theories and expectations. What the "smart humans," appear to be missing is that civilizations that could run circles around nearby hydrogen furnace would be so technologically advanced that either they make contact or hide from the low life.

The inexplicable dimming and brightening of HD 139139 (1) do not appear to fit with what humans have found and know. Hence they argue there could be aliens there as the first instinctual reaction. Ego and ignorance have the same fingerprint for those harboring the former will never let go of what they thought they knew and those suffering from the latter will never ask questions. Such is the state of science that new entrants to the field shall be brainwashed to believe in what is "known," and trained to fit observations to the accepted theory. It will be anathematic to challenge the status quo as doctoral defenses, tenures, and even careers will be lost in the courtyard, surrounded by ivy walls.

The two axes, the desire to prove life exists elsewhere as proclaimed by those "in the know," and the requirement to fit data to theory (and not dream of a different theory), hold humanity back. As science deteriorates to a level of comedy and speculation, there are real costs to humanity. Sending a billion $ "dragonfly," to the famous moon of Saturn is not an accomplishment, just a revelation that technology has not advanced enough to delegate the source as lifeless. Shooting robots at planets and satellites is not really science, it is engineering gone bad.

It is an intellectual zoo. Most do not want to let go of a theory that is over a century old. And, they are surrounded by engineers, standing ready to prove anything that is hypothesized - aliens and all.

(1) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/astronomers-dont-know-what-to-make-of-this-incredibly-bizarre-star/

Quantum health

A recent article (1) poses an intriguing question that if information such as one's genetic composition and proclivity to diseases are available to a patient, whether that could change her physiology. As argued in the article, the outcomes of a quantum phenomenon are intricately connected with the observer and analogously, this could happen in health. It is an interesting thought experiment.

My company, Decision Options, is currently involved in helping a speciality hospital identify patients at high risk so that a higher level of care could be provided to ameliorate such risk. In the status-quo, this knowledge is available only to the medical professionals, attending to the patient. However, it is fascinating to think about the possibility of providing such information to patients if beneficial effects could be garnered. It is a double-edged sword as humans are notoriously prone to suggestions. Psychosomatic illnesses command a measurable portion of healthcare expenses.

The observer does define the outcomes in quantum physics. In medicine, a plethora of complex phenomena including the placebo effect as well as the structure of observers - patients, providers and payers and the interactions among them, complicate matters significantly. However, it may be time to think about a regime driven largely by unconstrained information as it likely leads to better outcomes.

There are two orthogonal axes in medicine - how does an informed observer change outcomes and how does the availability of information result in negative effects related to human internalization of such information. We need a few experiments to tease this out and it may well be worth it.

(1) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-knowing-your-genetic-risk-change-your-physiology/?redirect=1

Quantum initiative: Lifting humanity from mediocrity

The US National Quantum Initiative (1) is arguably the most important science and technology initiative today with far-reaching beneficial effects. With a foundational change in computing, humans could possibly begin to understand themselves, their genes, approaching diseases and their date of expiry. They could seek consciousness in Silicon, costless energy and space travel. They could attempt to mend a broken planet and provide resources for the next generation to rise. They could invent materials that aid space elevation, instant terrestrial travel, and skyscrapers that truly scrape the sky.

It is late. Conventionalism has dominated science and technology lately, most constructing careers by proving what has already been proved. They have slipped further into mediocrity, some taking pictures of black holes and others proving gravitational waves exist. But, if the technologists are truly practical and would like to make a difference, why don't they try to solve problems that are more difficult than collecting data and deploying supercomputers on it. The answer is that there is no money in it. The ones who made a difference did not seek money and for the last hundred years, it was money that drove science and technology.

Not even those sitting on top of mountains of data have any interest in advancing technology in a step function fashion. If they do, their own technologies and R&D would be rendered instantly useless. It is an ironic state of affairs - the technologists without an understanding of sunk costs attempt to protect it, while the governments who play second fiddle to the monopolies, play along.

Humans are a funny lot.


(1) https://science.sciencemag.org/content/364/6439/440

Bypassing the infrastructure

Recent news (1) that brain functions can be translated to speech outside the human infrastructure is interesting. More generally, it is likely that most human senses can be replicated with inputs from the brain. As humans live a lot longer than their design life, their infrastructure is likely to fail before their brain. If the brain is still able to function, most outputs could be replicated outside the ill-designed body.

Humans have been struggling to optimize a horizon that is increasingly predictable. Their infrastructure was likely selected for long distance running, something that has become less useful in the modern context. But their brains, likely overdesigned for survival, seem to be robust, perhaps able to go twice the design life of the hardware. Hence, connecting the instruction set from the brain to outside systems may become necessary for the species to survive.

Lack of understanding of the brain has kept the humans guessing. It is likely that a brain is a quantum machine and that is enigmatic in the status-quo. In the long run, pickled brains could store and process information in such a way that the network can be expanded exponentially. The failure of the infrastructure should not be considered final, as long as the brain is able to function, outside its enclosure.

We could create a new meaning to "plug and play." The brain appears to last a lot longer and conventional metrics of expiry may not be optimum. The human network could incorporate significantly more information than what contemporary societies allow. 


(1) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-take-a-step-toward-decoding-speech-from-the-brain/

The hype of AI

A recent article (1) further reinforces what autonomous vehicle industry has been doing. Neural net systems with feedforward and feedback control architectures trained by historical data on specific surfaces and conditions. Remnants of 1960s technologies, ably assisted by zero cost computing, have been percolating across the autonomous landscape. This trajectory is problematic for many reasons.

First, a brain trained on historical data selected by a biased human is a disaster waiting to happen. The situation is no better with hand-coded heuristics as demonstrated by recent aircraft failures. What computer and data scientists have to understand first is that their own brains still remain to be vastly superior to code they write running even on a super-computer. Hence, blind attempts at removing the human from complex decision-making processes are likely to fail.

Second, hype and ignorance have propelled AI to the stratosphere without significant practical use cases. AI is a tool and it is not a panacea. AI still fails when it encounters the unexpected. This is important as it indicates conventional computing and Silicon based architectures, albeit great engineering innovations, have nothing to do with "intelligence." We have not advanced AI much from the 80s, when the "oldies," used to call it expert systems. Granted, simulated voices, believable human faces, and incredible jumping robots are great inventions, but unfortunately, these have nothing to do with AI.

And finally, high human resource intensity in model building often leads to costly failures. For practical AI, two important things need to come together - rapid and flexible prototyping with automation and considering AI to be augmenting the human, not replacing her.

(1) http://robotics.sciencemag.org/content/4/28/eaaw1975

Alzheimer’s - we fail again!

Recent news (1) that high profile experiments, targeting a solution for the famous disease, Alzheimer's, has failed again is sobering. It clearly indicates that life sciences companies are on the wrong track to improve a condition, most dread. It is also a constant reminder that systemic problems cannot be solved by treating symptoms or tactical observations. The engineering view of medicine has run its course and it has been very successful in fighting opponents that can be clearly identified. But now, a system failing because of overuse, cannot be mended by such crude methodologies.

Immortality is prohibited by contemporary Physics. So, the optimization problem narrows to maximizing utility within an afforded time horizon. Humans have been naturally optimistic, an evolutionary advantage. They have been attempting to extend life rather than optimizing within constrains. Therein lies the paradox for healthcare. As artificial intelligence progresses, it is conceivable that a human could have reasonable estimates of life span and disease incidences, at birth. For the first time in history, we may be in a position to focus on optimization of utility rather than extending a highly uncertain horizon.

It is clear that the human hardware deteriorates in predictable ways. Most of it appears to be related to plumbing, an inability to remove waste at an optimum rate. From the brain to the kidneys, waste removal efficiency seems to decline over time, just as in any physical system. We may need to accept this as an unbreakable law and find ways to slow down the deterioration. In this context, research in the direction of cure for auto-immune diseases may be misplaced. What could be more important is predicting the likelihood of disease early and slowing its progression.

Artificial Intelligence could have a significant impact on human utility and happiness. If one can get over the hype and confusion, it will become clear that AI could provide useful guidance for humans to best utilize their limited time in the universe.

(1) https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/03/another-major-drug-candidate-targeting-brain-plaques-alzheimer-s-disease-has-failed

The era of bioelectronics

The most complex electromagnetic and chemical system known, the human body, so far has substantially avoided manipulation by electromagnetic means. This may be changing. Recent news (1) about a transistor design that enables integrated, real-time sensing and simulation of signals from living organisms, could lead to better diagnostics and treatment. Low cost Silicon has impeded innovation and applications in non-conventional substrates. There have been few biocompatible designs for the lack of appropriate materials and incentives.

Chemicals have been easier and in the presence of many low hanging fruits, researchers did not spend much time on alternatives. As they solved simpler problems, auto-immune diseases start to dominate the human architecture. The heart-breaking failure of a recent drug for Alzheimer's (2) is symptomatic of the end of the chemical era. The brain likely responds better to electromagnetic stimuli but contemporary pharmaceutical companies are ill-equipped to pursue this line of thought.

Simple diseases such as Hypertension and Type 2 Diabetes, that command over half of the healthcare costs in the log run, could be positively influenced by better monitoring and treatment mechanisms that are integrated into the body. CHF and other Cardiovascular events could be picked up earlier and intervened optimally by the same mechanisms. As the sun gets hotter and nastier, embedded devices in the skin could shield the body from harmful rays. Organ failures could be arrested, nutrition deficiencies could be remedied, better food and treatment regimens could be suggested and humanity could possibly move to a more advanced health regime.

It is exciting. Integrated bioelectronics with embedded artificial intelligence could be a game changer.

(1) http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau7378
(2) https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/21/health/alzheimers-drug-trial-failure-aducanumab-bn/index.html

Reducing software by hardware

New transistor designs (1) may help surpass the daunting constraints faced by contemporary software as we move toward solving highly specialized problems. The dominance of software over general computing architecture may be coming to an end. Until architectures can practically incorporate quantum computing, there is an impasse. And, quantum tunneling has brought conventional transistor designs to an asymptotic and predictable lethargy.

It is time to return to customized hardware for specialized problems. This will require more engineers again and less programmers and mathematicians. Educational institutions, grand masters at following the latest trends, while they teach the students "strategy," are incompetent in understanding what tomorrow will bring. And, that will certainly dampen innovation in the required direction.

However, this could be a short term phenomenon. Either of the two directions, squeezing more out of Silicon or finding better materials, may yield interesting designs that may allow a return to software in the future. The latter has much more potential but is also more risky. That would mean that the giants of the industry will shy away from it as they try to tie the quarterly numbers for the shareholders. And some of them may realize that the "cloud," is not a solution, just a sojourn.

The hardware regime is beginning again. We have to give electrons a more direct way to shuttle for efficient computing. Anything less will tie us down to the status-quo.

(1) http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau7378

Options for the blue planet

As the policy makers try hard to curtail the options left for the tiny blue dot based on ignorance and ego, there could still be a few left for humanity to consider. The planet appears to be sick and is under constant threat from space, both intra and extrasolar. Any external observer to this closed system is unlikely to bet on its survival. The existential threats to humanity fall largely into two buckets - a slow environmental deterioration that will lead to massive biological extinctions with an anticipated culmination and a catastrophic event that will wipe it out from the vast universal map.

So, what options are left? On the former, most scientists and policy-makers are focused on curtailing greenhouse emissions. It is a bit like studying how brakes work on an automobile that is falling down the mountain slope. Policies that incrementally curtail emissions will do nothing - that time has long passed. Data will show that it was never a reliable option -just an academic notion and a feel-good exercise. The only option is a technological leap - an invention that can substantially change the composition of the greenhouse we all breathe in, within a decade. This is fundamentally a material science and energy problem. If we get the best minds focused on it, we can certainly solve it. It is a waste of time trying to influence the nincompoops in the nation's capital and elsewhere.

On the later, the space agency has been a disappointment. Packed with a bimodal distribution of engineers, some very old and some very young,  they have completely missed the boat. The older ones want to make rockets and land on nearby planets. The younger ones with stars in their eyes want to time travel. Neither is going to be helpful in any way on an impending threat of collision with a large-sized body. Here again, the only option is a technological leap. Engineers have a tendency to rely on what they know, such as exploding an approaching asteroid with a nuclear bomb. What they need to focus on are inventions that will render the status-quo obsolete. Universities, money hungry machines, have not been helpful in teaching the next generation what is really important. The professors seek tenures, the administrators seek handouts and the students seek degrees with irrelevant rankings and stamps.

It is truly a comedy. As they run faster and faster like hamsters on a treadmill with no end goal, humans have to wonder how they can break out of the shackle.

Gene editing: There is no turning back

Recent news (1) that gene editing could successfully create a mutant form of a gene that makes the host, resistant to HIV, is likely to create scientific awe and ethical concerns. It is important to understand that the technology has arrived and there is no turning back. We will use it to solve identified tactical problems and gloss over the unknown and the unanticipated. Logically, this is the best decision.

Humans are in a bind - they have not been able to meaningfully extend life but they have found many band aids that will keep the recipient breathing, pulsating and alive for short periods of time. The constraints are clear and the micro-optimization problem, relatively simple to solve. But the relevance of their innovations and actions in the societal context, is less clear. Now that we can gene edit out of one problem without considering future ones, the technical minds will be happier than ever.

As we manage life bottoms up as the individual desires, we are approaching a discontinuity in which those with resources to accommodate the micro-objectives win over the rest. But the victory is short lived, literally. The larger question is why the individual makes decisions for herself even though the expected outcomes are utility diminishing for her, given the current technology. One reason could be the option value the individual computes with the uncertainty in emerging ideas and technologies. In this case, sustaining life even with debilitating disease states, could be dominant.

However, the individual has to consider the trade-offs systematically. Given a small probability of hitherto unknown technology that could reset pre-existing disease states with potential pain and disutility that are most likely otherwise, it is a difficult problem to solve. This problem is easier to analyze at the societal level, if the objective function can be clearly defined. For most on Earth, it appears to be perpetuating their genes and humanity in general. It is unclear if that is objective.

A thought experiment on the formation of objective functions in an advanced society could be interesting. If the individual is perpetual, you could effectively remove the noise emanating from micro-objectives. In such a society, only the macro-objective remains. Since the individual's desires are already maximized, society can extend overall objectives without constraints. What would an advanced society like to maximize? They will likely incorporate universal ambitions in a beneficial way.

Humans do not have to fear an "attack," from an advanced ET. They are unlikely to "attack," if they are advanced.


(1) https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/ethics-aside-does-crispr-baby-experiment-make-scientific-sense

Wealth destroyers

Black boxes, Artificial Intelligence and FinTech - likely a deadly combination that is going to destroy a lot of wealth. We have seen this before - fresh graduates from business schools coupled with mathematicians and physicists, descending on Wall Street to make the world go around in the opposite direction. As they appear on TV after hours - mad and fast - to confuse and pillage small money, ascertaining where every stock is going and even the market, there are 20 million fat fingers across the world chasing the illusion. 

The theory underlying financial markets has been robust in spite of the recent confusion about "behavioral economics." New information moves markets and unless one has insider information, it is impossible to create alpha from fundamental or technical analyses. A lot of careers are made and destroyed on this false idea.  For some of us, theory still matters and it can be shown without any empirical uncertainty that alpha is a white elephant. If an adviser is demonstrating consistent alpha, one has to wonder where the information is coming from. The SEC has gotten a lot more sophisticated lately but a simple heuristic of alpha consistency will tell you that there is something wrong.

Business schools need to rethink their focus. Some even have classes in "trading," and that idea is utterly inconsistent with everything we know. In the presence of uncertainty, it is easy to make returns and lose them quickly. In spite of all the academic literature behind this, not many involved in "money management," really talk about alpha (only returns). Granted, a single factor model is woefully inadequate to measure risk but not considering risk in your returns, like the TV moguls do, is a prescription for disaster. The fact that conventional finance education and even the high-end certifications do not prepare the professionals adequately is symptomatic of education chasing trends and not sticking with what is known.

The financial industry appears to be dominated by engineers and accountants, the former unaware of economics and the later unaware of the fact that we have computers now to count money. Adding mathematicians and physicists on top of this already deadly combination can only result in tears. 

Oumuamua

Recent transit of cigar shaped Oumuamua that raised hopes of galactic panspermia (1) is a double edged sword. Hitching rides on stable objects over millennia appears plausible for robust life but the implications of such transference could be catastrophic for the blue planet. It is not the green men and women we have to worry about but deadly single cell organisms from another galaxy. If the space agency ever stops taking shots at everything near in an effort to prove life exists elsewhere, they may have enough resources to explore the extra-solar bodies that seem to frequent this quiet corner of the Milky way. There they may indeed find life but possibly of a different kind. The half a dozen plausible building blocks including Carbon and Silicon narrow the shape of life and that should allow profitable exploration.

Science may need to borrow from philosophy as it attempts to prove extra-terrestrial life. The fundamental question remains to be what qualifies as life. Even in the narrow context of Earth, we find entities that show dual properties of life and non-life, as we define it. It appears to indicate that life is a spectrum with entities spanning the full scope. The closer to non-life, the more robust they appear, possibly pointing to efficient panspermia of materials that are close to life but have not yet crossed the threshold. So, near life materials could be freeze-dried and transported over time and space and they could show biological activity with conditions that allow such transformation. The heuristics used by the agency to find life, such as the presence of water, are archaic and it is time to step out of the rooms without windows, surrounded by steel and electronics, and think clearly. It is likely that the most dominant life form in the universe is something that can easily transcend the life/non-life threshold at will and that provides infinite possibilities for spreading themselves. The ability of an organism to freeze-dry itself should be considered dominant for transference and the environment in the blue planet is not conducive to enhancing robustness.

A sitting duck in the meteor shooting gallery, the Earth should be counting down to the unavoidable catastrophic event. If that happens, it does not look like there is anything that could hitch a long ride to the next spot.


(1) http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/cometlike-objects-could-be-spreading-life-star-star-throughout-milky-way

The value of breadth

As the present regime shifts to one controlled by uncertainty and accelerating technology, the premium on breadth of knowledge compared to depth, continues to increase. Innovation appears to happen at the intersection of fields and not in secluded domains and that is an important issue that educational institutions need to consider as they design futuristic curriculums.

It is also highly problematic. As an example, business graduates tend to be broad and shallow and if the stated hypothesis holds true, they should do well in the future. However, it is more complex than that. As the value of the individual is intricately correlated with how she can improve the economics of societies, it is not just the breadth of knowledge that gets into the objective function but also applications of it. Here, shallow and broad knowledge suffers from interactions with institutional constraints. The politicians in Washington are certainly shallow and not necessarily broad. Without deep knowledge of technology, policy-makers are ill-equipped to do anything good for future generations, let alone for themselves. They could be well advised to go deeper, perhaps a few inches below the ground they walk.

A bifurcation is in the cards. There is an optimum shape - breadth over depth - that optimizes societal progress. The pride of the country, the graduate schools, are without a clue, chasing after the latest "trends," to optimize localized economics. They need and want to make money by selling the latest wares and they are beginning to resemble a used car sales tent. It is unfortunate. Those who want to advance knowledge and improve societies, need to get out of the artificial and rigid constraints placed on them - academic, political and economic - and attempt to shape thinking beyond their career horizons. That is a tough ask even for those who already secured tenure, but still counting the number of incremental papers they published in marginal journals.

The value of breadth is increasing but not for those who do not have any depth.