Posts Tagged ‘systems’

Will the secret of success lie in giving up all privacy?

Friday, April 26th, 2019

xxxx

(translated by Google, waiting corrections)

A social system will be all the more defective as more private information citizens denies to Big Brother. For he will be less able to fit all different citizens into a perfect organization.

A social system will be all the more perfect as more information about each individual Big Brother knows.

Big Brother is the abstract entity of systems that emerges as the sum of all the information of all the parts plus the information of the interactions between the parts … and if the system is not isolated, about the interactions of the parts with elements external to the system. This abstract entity in the most complex systems comes from the evolution of the self-control of the non-living systems that maintains the internal thermodynamic equilibrium. It is common among biologists to talk about an “invisible command of instructions in DNA.” This is the Big Brother of genes.

All this is immediately apparent when we have in mind the universal formula that nature has applied to organize matter in all types of existing natural systems:

And the design of the internal information flow circuit of the Matrix / DNA formula in its perfect closed system version, in the form of a software diagram

Matrix / DNA formula in its perfect closed system version, in the form of a software diagram

There is a lot of people’s reluctance to share their privacy. The Petrobras director who was arrested for corruption and was found to have a hollow wall in the house with 20 million, would not want to report it to Big Brother. This would require people to report whether they masturbate or not, how often, and how often they go to the bathroom, whether they have white hair under the paint, etc. But by the definition of perfect system, if a single information, the most seemingly contemptible that can be, internal to the system, which is not summed up in the control entity, the system will not be perfect.

We are led to conclude with certainty that humankind will never have a perfect society.

But we are also sure that either the human being changes physically or humanity will be extinguished. Certainly the changes that will occur on the planet and the solar system will reach a point that will no longer support life on Earth. An alternative that seems to be the only hope is that the human being evolves by changing his physical form, in the sense of less mass and more energy. It would be the only way to make interstellar travel, to find another planet like Earth, and / or to spread through the Universe.

But to change form, there must be transcendence. And transcendence comes from the perfect harmony of all parts with openness to self-evolution itself. This perfect harmony of all parties would imply a perfect social system. And perfect system implies that all citizens totally give up their privacy.

We are apparently faced with a paradoxical problem with no rational solution.

In Aldous Huxley’s book and movie “Brave New World,” we can have a representation of a perfect social system. But the author himself observes that the human being becomes a kind of robot, stupid, where it is forbidden to discover new thing because it would alter the order of the system, it would be forbidden to create, and forbidden or non-existent free will. Obviously many of today’s humans would reject such a system, though it would provide maximum physical happiness.

A possible solution would be for humanity to seek to form an organized society, in the sense of harmonic, without any system. This implies, without having a core, a central government. All decisions related to the social level would be dictated by plebiscites. But for that there would have to be a slow evolution in the sense of cutting cultural, behavioral edges, approaching cultures and unique behaviors. Most would always win a plebiscite. Imagine if the majority were Muslim. Many of his decisions would be unbearable to atheists, materialists, Catholics, etc. Imagine being forced to cover your face with a cloth … never wear jeans … If most were women and with the power to dictate the rules, not even Jesus would have been able to stay in the house of the woman who would not stop moving by cleaning and tidying up the house and complaining that the men did not help in that work to be talking about philosophies, politics …

So maybe the “no system” solution is possible, but it would certainly be very slow. That all the different heads are moving in the direction of one day converge to be one head, it would have to be a process in which each generation would change a minute detail of a less common behavior in the context of the global population. But also the planet would have to change in order to reach a general homogeneity of climate, etc.

Perhaps the supreme and possible solution is concealed in a concept that was said above related to Huxley’s utopia: maximum physical happiness.

I believe there are two different kinds of human need: physical and intellectual needs, or spiritual needs. Then we could think of humanity coming to two types of harmonic organization. One, referring to physical needs, would be the perfect system, total accommodation and satisfaction for the body, and another, referring to intellectual needs, without any system, harmonic but inter-differentiated, with the whole open to its evolution. The intellectual necessity would continue to motivate the spatial evolution, and with this it would withdraw from the social machine bodies to inhabit, as for example, the space stations. For in the brave new world, stupidity would interrupt any search for evolution. The discoveries, the creation, the maintenance of the autonomous consciousness, would be given above the Earth, therefore without affecting the perfect social system. But on the ship there would be no leaders, commanders, for there could be no system there.

Bee and ant societies are the biological incarnation of the universal formula for perfect system. It is understandable that the formula encrypted in genetics has managed to self-design after it has formed the body, to be the social system: ants and bees have no intellect, not even a brain worth noting. There the queen and the incarnation of the abstract identity that emerges as control of the system. but we must note that the queen herself and slave of and in her own system. She has to submit to rigid rules of discipline. It also can not discover, can not create, can not exercise free will in its entirety, as it would alter the system. Big Brother would also be a slave to the system.

The Universe has organized – or assisted the organization – everything in a system. Even the remotest rock on the ocean floor belongs to a system, the galactic. And every system is bad, because it implies death, slavery, etc. But it seems to me that the Universe is sending a message: eternal existence, total freedom, will only be bestowed upon the species in which the parts coexist harmoniously ceasing to be parts of a system.

Anyway, for now the rational suggestion for humanity faith: transform the planet into a landscaped garden and the human inserted into a mechanically automated biosphere, where the body will have the maximum of its satisfaction, but keep the mind out of it, open to evolution.

It is possible. I have not yet solved what we are going to do with our privacy of data relating to our physical body. Which includes up to the last penny, or the bottle of whiskey that I keep hidden under the bed.And as in immigration cases, if you really want to naturalize a citizen because of marriage, you may be required to inform the color of your wife’s panties to prove that the marriage is true …

And maybe that’s where the privacy issue is going to go. You want to be from the system and you understand that for the system to exist and to maintain it has to obtain and verify information, otherwise it becomes a mess, the system can undo itself. Thus you lose all shame, all protection of your physical privacy, and voluntarily surrender your body to the brave new world … But mind, never!

There would be a way for everyone to surrender the body and everyone to maintain sovereignty over their mind. But he could not be an atheist and belong to no organized religion, no church. All would conclude and have the intuition that there is at least a much more evolved intelligence, and therefore with much or total power over the material world. This intuition would be the only common denominator among all minds. Equality of minds would end there. From this intuition each mind would begin to seek and assemble its image and concepts on what would be this “cosmic consciousness.” Since every human is different from anything else, everyone had life experiences with some different detail, there would not be one god equal to the other. It would be forbidden to speak of your God and you would not accept listening to others speak of their gods so as not to disturb your image. Each God indicates a specific path, unique, to follow. Thus all humans would have intimate, unconfessable, different directions, even though they lived together. And ‘possible, for I have been doing times just doing this, my divinity no one else can conceive the same, my temple is my brain, only I can enter into it.

Universal Systems Model : Academic perspective x Matrix/DNA perspective

Thursday, August 24th, 2017

xxxx

At the academic team, there is a field called ” Universal Systems Model” and they has a diagram model:

Input > Process > Output > Feedback > Input > Process > ….

Notice that this is resume of the Matrix/DNA’s formula diagram, where:

Input = F1
Process = F2,F3.F4,F6
Output = F7
Feedback = F7>F1

The meaning difference is that the Matrix/DNA diagram is related to natural systems, which works moved by the life’s cycle force, while the academic diagram is related only to mechanic systems and automatized operations machines.

A second difference is that ( as we can see in the text below), the academics refers to ” open loop” and ” closed loops”, where the system begins with the open loop and the component “feedback” constitute the closed loop, in a clear reference to the states of opened systems and closed systems of Matrix/DNA formula.

A third difference is a curious one. The academic model missing the function 5, which is responsible by the reproduction of natural systems. But, when they inserts the function “feedback” they gets the recycling of the system. This difference is lots of food for thought. First, we need to define the difference between the natural reproduction and the human made machine/recycling. Is there a difference? It seems that, while natural reproduction includes entropy and death, the mechanistic recycling can avoid them. But, it seems that natural reproduction saves more energy than mechanistic recycling, due the natural reproduction using half of its energy at grown state for to feed the production of a new system, while at mechanistic recycling, the component “feedback” always comes with a new charge of outside energy. So, maybe we could change the academic model to:

Input (information + energy) > process (when half of that energy is driven directly to the input) > output > feedback (without new charge of energy) . It would produce a revolution in modern technology! So, let’s go searching a way to do it.

Matriz Universal: Software de Sistema Fechado

The Matrix/DNA Formula as Closed System

The MatrixDNA as Astronomic Closed System

We will need studying the academic texts, as well the technical names, etc., for to search ways of interactions between the two models, with the goal for applying the Matrix/DNA formula to optimizing the technology.

Then, the first step will be ” googling” “Universal systems model”. As beginning, I am posting here the link to a PDF:

https://www.wsfcs.k12.nc.us/cms/lib/NC01001395/Centricity/Domain/1555/3.03_Universal_Systems_Model.pdf
Technology Competencies Problem-Solving
Fundamentals of Technology
Where we can read:
Explain the universal systems model
• Explain the components of the universal systems model
• Explain systems models in the context of the systems of technology such as communication and transportation
• Explain the elements or resources of technology as inputs to systems
The universal systems model is an attempt to graphically depict processes of all sorts. Viewing something through the scheme of the universal systems model is an attempt to simplify something that is relatively complex. The model typically includes a look at system inputs, processes, and outputs for open loop systems and a fourth component, feedback, is included in systems that are perceived to be closed loops.
These are often referred to as the “resources of technology.” System Inputs • People • Information • Tools and Machines • Materials • Energy • Time • Capital
Processes vary depending on the area of endeavor. For example, one of the main processes for a manufacturing company would be secondary material processes: separating, combining, conditioning, forming, and casting. However, a communication company would be encoding, storing, retrieving, transmitting, receiving, and decoding information. Outputs generally include certain eventualities such as expected, unexpected, desirable, and undesirable. For example, a manufacturer expected to make a profit, and this is desirable. However, the company did not expect to pollute the water when it accidentally spilled chemicals onto its loading dock. This output is undesireable.
Systems experience entropy.  Entropy is the degradation of all systems whether man-made or natural.  For example, the fuel system in an automobile malfunctions over time. Systems and sub-systems are interdependent. For example, in order for the automobile’s fuel and electrical systems to work together, the engine must be correctly timed.
Component Systems of Technology
The component systems of technology are:
B. Communication Systems – Systems that change information into messages that can be transmitted.  These systems include a sender, message, receiver, and feedback.
B.  Structural Systems – Systems that use goods and materials to build structures that will resist external force, support a load, and hold each structural element in a relative position to other parts.
C.  Manufacturing Systems – Systems using materials and processes to produce usable products.
D.  Energy, Power and Transportation Systems – Systems that convert energy into mechanical, fluid, electrical, radiant, chemical, and thermal energy.