3 ms·
Each neuron contains within itself a nanostructure whose resonance acts as an antenna both for receiving quark vibration frequencies and transmitting back to th
by slver 6y ago
Each neuron contains within itself a nanostructure whose resonance acts as an antenna both for receiving quark vibration frequencies and transmitting back to them for synchronization, effectively forming a communication protocol with higher dimensional string structures.
In higher dimensions our common thoughts are aggregated into massive socially-shared hyperbrains, each of which is segregated from the other based on both cultural and genetic similarity between specimens (mostly of the same species). Hyperbrains form a trie predicated on the commonality of our toughts and the closer you move to its roots, the closer you get to our biological origins, until eventually all species merge at the root.
Our individual biological brains then acts only as secondary devices similar to how L1/2/3 CPU cache is to the main memory of a computer. We use our brains to think only when the communication bridge is unstable, or when our experiences cannot be matched into compatibly vibrating wavelets in the hyperbrain. Our brains are also an anchoring devices of the self. While the hyperbrain encodes the shared memories and experiences of entire groups of specimens, our brain is a "diff" between the personal and the communal.
OK, anyway, I had fun making some stuff up, it's not like I understand anything this article says.
- fnord77 6y agoI was hoping you'd tie this in with some occult/pseudoscience stuff. Some people would gobble that up.
- slver 6y agoFrankly I'm almost gobbling it up myself as I type it. I guess I'm gullible.
- chmod775 6y agoI expected to find a reference to some sci-fi book at the end of this.
- slver 6y agoWell, no book, but I might as well write one, why not :P
- why_Mr_Anderson 6y agoBeautifully written. Now all you need is to open store on Etsy with some crystals and similar junk :) On serious note: I wonder if there is a generator somewhere for this kind of BS. I have bookmarks for several (corpo lingo, resume, progressive newspeak, etc.), but not for this new age style.
- samstave 6y agoWell crap - I thought this was amazing. :-( Are you sure (y)our hyperbrain didnt make you write this?
- teclordphrack2 6y agoThanks, now someone is going to take this and start scientology 2.0.
- brahyam 6y agoWow! I was really into it right until the end. What an amazing imagination. Thanks for putting that together and sharing your creativity.
- mmazing 6y agoYou channeled Deepak Chopra for a minute there, glad you recovered though!
- oldstrangers 6y agoSo this is what HN is doing now? I thought this shit was left for reddit.
- meowface 6y agoI think it's not too implausible that something like this could be real in the distant future. Most would rely on the collective biological-abiological-hybrid hyperbrain(s) for most things most of the time, but (biological or otherwise) individuals or sub-collectives/colonies would also narrowly specialize and rely on local processing when they believe their specialized cognition/ideation is more effective/efficient than deferring to the collective. Or when they just want some privacy. Entities would be able to seamlessly "context switch" between the different scales of shared memories/knowledge/mental models, from universal to individual. Hopefully with some rigorous isolation so that only you can ever access your individual mind. Maybe also some vandalism mitigations for those who might want to mess with the universal Neurapedia. Plus some kind of hardware switch that can fully cut the connection at a moment's notice, in the event of some neural 0-day or DoS. In practice it might be infeasible to make it both seamless and safe from adversarial risks, but people said the same of Wikipedia. Though, the consequences of a manipulated Wikipedia article are probably a little different from the consequences of a manipulated neural interface/network.
- slowmovintarget 6y agoThat's not that far off from the actual notions of panpsychism (a philosophical rabbit-hole if ever there was one). Tack on a smattering of Orch-OR (Penrose and Hammeroff) and you have something like this, only there are actual papers about it. I do have to wonder if Hammeroff isn't coming at the encoding part from the other direction. His work showed quantum-encoding structures in the microtubules inside neurons which could encode quite a bit of information, even to the point of functioning like little Turing machines. (Hammeroff encoded cellular automata on a simulacrum of these structures.) Maybe that "string" the article keeps talking about leads there. At any rate, when an article uses slashes so frequently like that, you can tell it is more of a rant.