Vitomir Jovanovic asked:


Regarding previously said, a problem of information note and form of description ,extrovert and inner ,introvert world is based upon existence of information code ,as subject determination basic feature in the moment of “technological “ description ,which is related to certain object, or substantive analytical examination in relation with the same object. What appears to be essential is whether the information evolved from technological advancement or it has been defined by its own existence .For instance, Is the informational capacity ,measured in bytes and regarding technological advancement and subject of research taken randomly, more determinate to analyst rather than to its inventor? Informational determination capacity is proportional to analytical decoding , just as the content of dream is to conscious. Technical measurement ,which is to determinate the subject informational more precisely ,directly affects the informational code reproduction. Informational chain code appears to be essentially divergent in relation to any subject being analysed ; its selfdetermination is unconditional only if out of experimental or any form of perceptive range .The problem resembles subquantum paradox which results in experimental conception –experimenter causes the result of experiment ,while on the grounds of experimental action technical substratum treats its own field of analysis as artificial

Subquantum technology basics

Principles of quantum mechanics are based on the claim that the fundamental entity concerning all interactions in nature is quantum, defined as form of indivisible unit carrying an absolute minimum of energy .In a word,any process of interaction, emission or absorbing of all materials energetic conditions is exclusively possible in form of infinitesimal quantum continuance .According to theoretical implications method , metaphysics and physics matches.

As a subject of research , subquantum level of nature is being realistic ,not only metaphysicist, but also to physicist , regarding theoretical concepts. This aspect of nature excels any range of scientific or any other form of perception .Basic reason is most simple: considering the fact that perception sphere is being modified inside the quantum instance of nature , in order to implement any form of knowledge, it must be based upon quantum “behaviour” of natural interactions. Realization of subquantum instance theoretically implied, although its practical significance or experimental induction are impossible .

Solid form of technological advancement interpretation and the way it emanates from nature ,speaking in terms of idealists, it shapes into a classical model of synthetic explanations, which defines the technological circle as formal, secondary characteristic of individual interactions with nature. Structure of technological image is exclusively based upon domain of interactive, process related, although its peculiarity absolutely can’t possibly be derived from natural substratum. The aspect o technological determination is added to natural domain ,regarding synthetic interaction with nature ,relation between technology and nature is,a s for these concepts of explanation ,immanent,e ssentially impracticable.A possibility stems from shaping, factual ,state which subject reduces from nature influenced by technology.

Specification of technological advancement is concentrated to reducing the practical domain of technical implementation considering the sphere of reality and perceptiveness.

Realization ,practicable and technical is in direct connection to expectation of scientific theory principle which proves itself. Technology evolved in just a few decades .Considering the fact that technology raised, for instance, in nineteen forties the size limit was 10-5 milimetres, while nowdays contemporary science moved the limits towards 10-10 meters or 10 -7 milimetres.T his is the domain of very popular nanotechnology .Quantum physics concept in a pretty self-confident way pleads with absolute influence to the real world of subatomic entity of nature ,although the theoretical concept itself, regarding analytical method used for its definition, seems to be very self –destructive and fragile. Subquantum aspect of natural interactions, like absolute foundation of visible and invisible is theoretically and implicitly unpredictable in its adherence, which should be considered as variable; subquant world is not a subject to laws of existing world, so should any discerning reader notice that ,according to conceptual explanations of interactive manifestations, certain processes should be assigned to a cathegory of principles semantics. In a word, It is necessary to find some law in illegal. Such conclusion is a mind’s need, like a compromising relief in a visible defining process, but also a fundamental self-deceit of our own world of phenomena is in mind navigating to functionality exclusively referring to cathegories of relational .Pointing this problem in a theoretical manner of explaining the subatomic, it is inevitable to say that our model of perception points out to specific “behaviour” of invisible world of subatomic level of nature. Related to our concept, this world has its own rules, essentially Imperceptible. It is possible to presume its ” intensity “,inner essential determination ,although, according to its constitution, it is impracticable ,for it is not connected with factual world.

Poetical sentence says: a shape whose appearance exclusively stands for itself , has no appearance at all. This problem is going to be mentioned later on,regarding analysis of multidimensional concept relation and relation of selfhood and the instance of consciousness.

Let’s make an assumption that result of technology advance is ,as mentioned, based upon structural minimization, deeper penetrating the natural infinity, regarding as macro as mini entity, even though the practicality of technical advancement incorporates into substantial minimization, or division of manifesting world .As to this, what is the final result of technological advancement? Provided that subquantum world represents fundamental entity of factual world, is the subquantum world itself a metaresult of technological circle?

Being incorporated into the fundamental range of natural, technology would turn the full the circle as non-spreading shape .Its inner substance would excel the result of the very evolution. Speaking of metaphysical poetry, it would be amazed by technology, not by its complexity, but for it excels the semantic of pure determination as a concrete being of practical world .From the starting point, which is originally referring to practical approach to nature , it finds its own realization in substantive influence on absolute entity of – world, to subquantum entity. By this process technology would , closing the evolutionary circle, abandon the originality of physical world. Each form of its prediction or attempt on complementary defining would appear to be unsuccessful. Synthetic form of metaphysical incarnation of technology would strengthen; nevertheless, this analyse intention is not to establish the horizon of its (technological) final revolution as meta-aspect. Subquantum technology should ,by surpasing the applicable value, and regarding qualitative peculiarity towards efficiency within natural complex, make transcendence superior to categorizing. Forms of quantity and quality ,equalizing technological relation and natural ,become completely useless. Assumption of taking initiative action implicates a huge possibility of technological meta determination of natural flow; every interaction, causal relation,any natural manifestation are being modified by subquantum technology. Countless options of nanotechnology in virtual, parallel reality construction appears to be essential regression concerning subquantum technology. Quality proportion would be enormously bigger between these two evolution aspects, than between microprocessor and prehistoric stone axe. Provided that nanotechnological field “resource” is 10-10 meters, the aspect of subquantum might be extensively measurable by theoretical models. Essentially and structurally ,microdimensions of subquantum technology would not be determinate, according to upper definition, and intensity would not follow extension. This final” level “of technology would appear to sphere of perception identical to entering the singularity.To our categories of cognition it seems to be incomprehensible , whereas it could be predicative according to existing theoretical models. Example of singularity,I n this case ,ought to be seen as compromising analogy, although regarding the hypothetical case of final technological revolution ,it would be absolutely incomprehensible. Exceeding the quant limit would mean that technology in multidimensional frame absolutely alters space and time continuum ,even the genealogy concept og Universe would be absolutely changed, although this theoretical implication totally unacceptable in its essence .

Finalization of technological evolution understands ontological surpassing the world. Problem appears here, in state section ,on condition that finalization of evolution process understands own starting point transcendence ,sublimated in visible macroplan of nature ,which is fundamental to changing the essential form of existence. In a word, how can a form, defined by technological semantic ,practicable realization ,outdoes own form of existential determination placing itself into the aspect of absolute, subquantum. Metaphysical conflict is in the notion and also in the semantic of subquantum. If this entity himself reperesents the absolute entity of nature, turning the full circle becomes expected. On condition that theoretical models point out to interpreting suitability of subquantum as absolute, subquantum technology would be as far from the result of infinitely successive circle of its own evolution. This problem will be examined synthetically highlighting either the notion multidimensionality and reduction of selfhood later on in the text.

Visit Sciencomatica.com!



Create a video blog

Nancy William asked:


As a mother, I can truly understand how parents across the world feel about their children. The parent-child relationship is a universal one. It crosses languages, barriers, and borders and speaks the same language of love and protection. All parents have the same goal – to protect their children from the problems of the world. Obviously, most parents would like their children to grow to be model citizens and they would never want their children to be associated with anything criminal. Fair enough… but (and of course there is a but to everything, isn’t there?) there are two sides to everything. The knife that we use to cut fruits and vegetables could also be used to kill! Does this mean that we should stop using it?

I believe it all depends on how people look at things. We can choose to be positive and to look at all the positive aspects of life, or we can choose to be pessimistic and to be threatened by every fly that passes by. (Flies can carry germs!)

Recently, I have been reading countless accounts of parents who are paranoid about fingerprinting their children, and so far I haven’t been able to understand what the real issue at hand is. We have made numerous technological advancements to make our lives easier. We believe that now, in the 21st century, we are more civilized than man has ever been. So why are we not able to accept certain changes which come due to new technology? Is it because we are inherently pessimistic and cynical? I’m sure that when Marie Curie discovered Nuclear Physics her intentions were clearly not to create nuclear bombs. Humanity has benefited greatly from the development of nuclear science. Still, every time we hear the word nuclear we think of bombs and wars. It is the pessimistic nature of modern man that guides our thought process in this way.

It is true that fingerprinting has been used in the past for identifying criminals. However, the technology has evolved just as most technologies tend to do. It is rare to see someone today with a car phone or with a computer the size of an entire room. These technologies have evolved, and certainly for the better. Today, fingerprinting is generally used as a device to accurately identify people. In fact, there are a number of other biometric technologies available. Such technologies include signature readers, retina scanners and DNA samples. These have all been used to identify criminals at some point or another. But DNA is also used for many scientific tests and the study of DNA has advanced so greatly that medical science could not possibly think of doing away with it. If you were being treated for a sickness and your DNA needed to be analyzed for a possible genetic disorder, would you choose to die instead because DNA sampling is used to identify criminals? Of course this is an extreme example, but I doubt that anyone answered “Yes, of course!”

We show our children TV shows like Star Trek, The Jetsons, etc. All children have seen doors slide open and computers accessed by using fingerprinting technology “in the future”. Why can’t we realize that “the future” could be now, if we would only allow it to happen?

Parents are concerned that their child’s fingerprint will be stored in some kind of database. To be honest, I was also concerned about this at first. However, I felt that I should gather extensive knowledge about the technology before I shot it down without a second thought. I have done online research and contacted reputable firms that offer biometric technology like M2SYS, Motorola, NEC (citations to these websites are given below) etc.

M2SYS they are an American reputable leading company in fingerprint biometric technology and most of their clients are private firms, school, gyms, banks, clinics, etc. Motorola and NEC are big multibillionaire companies that produce high-fi biometric technologies for big government agencies all around the world.

These companies confirmed what really happens when an individual is fingerprinted. It basically breaks down into an initial enrollment process and an identification process. During initial enrollment, an individual scans his fingerprint for the first time. The biometric software recognizes certain unique, key points of this individual’s fingerprint. These points are then converted into a series of numbers, or a binary string. Then, each time the individual scans their fingerprint for identification, an algorithm is used to determine if the binary numbers match up with the fingerprint. If they do, then voila! The software provides instant and secure identification.

If you are still scratching your head at this point, you are not alone – I was too. Most of us will never understand the entire science involved in biometric identification. But what is easy to understand is this: every software company uses a different algorithm. There is not some magic, all-encompassing fingerprint algorithm that every company uses within their software to identify people. This means that if you had two children attending schools in different districts that were both using fingerprint identification by different biometric companies, and you accidentally sent them to the wrong schools (Mondays…) there is no way that either child could be identified. Their prints are not stored in some common database. All that is ever stored is a binary number associated with points of their prints that can only be accessed by the company that has provided the biometric software. These companies are not even associated with the government. They are mostly private technology companies just looking to sell their software solutions.

Biometric technology can be beneficial to our children by improving the security at schools and increasing the overall safety of our children, all with binary numbers which are useless to anyone but the private biometric company. I would advise every parent to do some research into the realities of biometric identification and to unveil the myth behind the infamous fingerprinting technology.

Of course if we want to think negatively, nothing is one hundred percent foolproof. Computers make our lives easier but they can be hacked too. However, if the biometric software is hacked, the thief would be disappointed that all he would receive were the useless strings of numbers. As one company put it, it would be easier to steal fingerprint data from something a child had touched than to design an intricate reverse algorithm; all to retrieve a useless series of points of a fingerprint.

Life is full of possibilities if we think positively and are open to new technology. I, for one, am more interested in my child safely growing up in a world full of amazing technological advances that my generation could never have even dreamed. I believe that this world is possible if we don’t hinder its progress by bashing advancements that we know nothing about. In the end, we may all have different opinions, but I am asking that we all gather knowledge about each new technology before we ruin a great possibility for our children.

Resources:

http://www.m2sys.com

http://www.nec.com

http://www.motorola.com



technology

Vitomir Jovanovic asked:


Regarding previously said, a problem of information note and form of description ,extrovert and inner ,introvert world is based upon existence of information code ,as subject determination basic feature in the moment of “technological “ description ,which is related to certain object, or substantive analytical examination in relation with the same object. What appears to be essential is whether the information evolved from technological advancement or it has been defined by its own existence .For instance, Is the informational capacity ,measured in bytes and regarding technological advancement and subject of research taken randomly, more determinate to analyst rather than to its inventor? Informational determination capacity is proportional to analytical decoding , just as the content of dream is to conscious. Technical measurement ,which is to determinate the subject informational more precisely ,directly affects the informational code reproduction. Informational chain code appears to be essentially divergent in relation to any subject being analysed ; its selfdetermination is unconditional only if out of experimental or any form of perceptive range .The problem resembles subquantum paradox which results in experimental conception –experimenter causes the result of experiment ,while on the grounds of experimental action technical substratum treats its own field of analysis as artificial

Subquantum technology basics

Principles of quantum mechanics are based on the claim that the fundamental entity concerning all interactions in nature is quantum, defined as form of indivisible unit carrying an absolute minimum of energy .In a word,any process of interaction, emission or absorbing of all materials energetic conditions is exclusively possible in form of infinitesimal quantum continuance .According to theoretical implications method , metaphysics and physics matches.

As a subject of research , subquantum level of nature is being realistic ,not only metaphysicist, but also to physicist , regarding theoretical concepts. This aspect of nature excels any range of scientific or any other form of perception .Basic reason is most simple: considering the fact that perception sphere is being modified inside the quantum instance of nature , in order to implement any form of knowledge, it must be based upon quantum “behaviour” of natural interactions. Realization of subquantum instance theoretically implied, although its practical significance or experimental induction are impossible .

Solid form of technological advancement interpretation and the way it emanates from nature ,speaking in terms of idealists, it shapes into a classical model of synthetic explanations, which defines the technological circle as formal, secondary characteristic of individual interactions with nature. Structure of technological image is exclusively based upon domain of interactive, process related, although its peculiarity absolutely can’t possibly be derived from natural substratum. The aspect o technological determination is added to natural domain ,regarding synthetic interaction with nature ,relation between technology and nature is,a s for these concepts of explanation ,immanent,e ssentially impracticable.A possibility stems from shaping, factual ,state which subject reduces from nature influenced by technology.

Specification of technological advancement is concentrated to reducing the practical domain of technical implementation considering the sphere of reality and perceptiveness.Realization ,practicable and technical is in direct connection to expectation of scientific theory principle which proves itself. Technology evolved in just a few decades .Considering the fact that technology raised, for instance, in nineteen forties the size limit was 10-5 milimetres, while nowdays contemporary science moved the limits towards 10-10 meters or 10 -7 milimetres.T his is the domain of very popular nanotechnology .Quantum physics concept in a pretty self-confident way pleads with absolute influence to the real world of subatomic entity of nature ,although the theoretical concept itself, regarding analytical method used for its definition, seems to be very self –destructive and fragile. Subquantum aspect of natural interactions, like absolute foundation of visible and invisible is theoretically and implicitly unpredictable in its adherence, which should be considered as variable; subquant world is not a subject to laws of existing world, so should any discerning reader notice that ,according to conceptual explanations of interactive manifestations, certain processes should be assigned to a cathegory of principles semantics. In a word, It is necessary to find some law in illegal. Such conclusion is a mind’s need, like a compromising relief in a visible defining process, but also a fundamental self-deceit of our own world of phenomena is in mind navigating to functionality exclusively referring to cathegories of relational .Pointing this problem in a theoretical manner of explaining the subatomic, it is inevitable to say that our model of perception points out to specific “behaviour” of invisible world of subatomic level of nature. Related to our concept, this world has its own rules, essentially Imperceptible. It is possible to presume its ” intensity “,inner essential determination ,although, according to its constitution, it is impracticable ,for it is not connected with factual world.

Poetical sentence says: a shape whose appearance exclusively stands for itself , has no appearance at all. This problem is going to be mentioned later on,regarding analysis of multidimensional concept relation and relation of selfhood and the instance of consciousness.

Let’s make an assumption that result of technology advance is ,as mentioned, based upon structural minimization, deeper penetrating the natural infinity, regarding as macro as mini entity, even though the practicality of technical advancement incorporates into substantial minimization, or division of manifesting world .As to this, what is the final result of technological advancement? Provided that subquantum world represents fundamental entity of factual world, is the subquantum world itself a metaresult of technological circle?Being incorporated into the fundamental range of natural, technology would turn the full the circle as non-spreading shape .Its inner substance would excel the result of the very evolution. Speaking of metaphysical poetry, it would be amazed by technology, not by its complexity, but for it excels the semantic of pure determination as a concrete being of practical world .From the starting point, which is originally referring to practical approach to nature , it finds its own realization in substantive influence on absolute entity of – world, to subquantum entity. By this process technology would , closing the evolutionary circle, abandon the originality of physical world. Each form of its prediction or attempt on complementary defining would appear to be unsuccessful. Synthetic form of metaphysical incarnation of technology would strengthen; nevertheless, this analyse intention is not to establish the horizon of its (technological) final revolution as meta-aspect. Subquantum technology should ,by surpasing the applicable value, and regarding qualitative peculiarity towards efficiency within natural complex, make transcendence superior to categorizing. Forms of quantity and quality ,equalizing technological relation and natural ,become completely useless. Assumption of taking initiative action implicates a huge possibility of technological meta determination of natural flow; every interaction, causal relation,any natural manifestation are being modified by subquantum technology. Countless options of nanotechnology in virtual, parallel reality construction appears to be essential regression concerning subquantum technology. Quality proportion would be enormously bigger between these two evolution aspects, than between microprocessor and prehistoric stone axe. Provided that nanotechnological field “resource” is 10-10 meters, the aspect of subquantum might be extensively measurable by theoretical models. Essentially and structurally ,microdimensions of subquantum technology would not be determinate, according to upper definition, and intensity would not follow extension. This final” level “of technology would appear to sphere of perception identical to entering the singularity.To our categories of cognition it seems to be incomprehensible , whereas it could be predicative according to existing theoretical models. Example of singularity,I n this case ,ought to be seen as compromising analogy, although regarding the hypothetical case of final technological revolution ,it would be absolutely incomprehensible. Exceeding the quant limit would mean that technology in multidimensional frame absolutely alters space and time continuum ,even the genealogy concept og Universe would be absolutely changed, although this theoretical implication totally unacceptable in its essence .Finalization of technological evolution understands ontological surpassing the world. Problem appears here, in state section ,on condition that finalization of evolution process understands own starting point transcendence ,sublimated in visible macroplan of nature ,which is fundamental to changing the essential form of existence. In a word, how can a form, defined by technological semantic ,practicable realization ,outdoes own form of existential determination placing itself into the aspect of absolute, subquantum. Metaphysical conflict is in the notion and also in the semantic of subquantum. If this entity himself reperesents the absolute entity of nature, turning the full circle becomes expected. On condition that theoretical models point out to interpreting suitability of subquantum as absolute, subquantum technology would be as far from the result of infinitely successive circle of its own evolution. This problem will be examined synthetically highlighting either the notion multidimensionality and reduction of selfhood later on in the text.

Visit Sciencomatica.com!



Caffeinated Content