A bang or a whimper?

The last sound - Huh?

Is the world going to end with a bang - or with a whimper? What about that bit in Revelations - The last trump?

The one thing we can assume is that the world will one day 'end' - even if that means waiting around for a few billion years until the sun expands to a red giant and swallows up the earth.

But what do people mean when they speak of 'the end of the world'? In fact they don't mean 'The end of the world.' They usually mean 'The end of our civilization,' or even, 'The end of humanity.'

Let's take a look at some doomsday scenarios.

• Impact events -
  The impact of a big enough asteroid or comet could create giant tsunamis, global fires, and cause a global winter from the dust it puts in the atmosphere. There is strong evidence that such an impact has occurred several times in the history of the Earth. It is highly probable that such an event was the cause of the extinction of the dinosaurs. The chances are that we would receive little or no warning of such an event. (Sorry Armageddon fans - it just wouldn't be noticed in time for Bruce Willis to go and blow it up). Astronomers have calculated, based on craters on the Moon, that during the last 600 million years the Earth has probably been struck by about 60 objects, 5 kilometers or more across. The smallest of these would release the equivalent of 10 million megatons of TNT, leaving a crater 95 kilometers across. Thats 200,000 times as powerful as the largest atom bomb ever detonated. it's also possible - but incredibly unlikely - that a major collision somewhere in our solar system could fill our system with enough debris to make life difficult on any body in the solar system.  Definitely a 'Bang' scenario.
• Interstellar wanderers - In the last few years we have also discovered interstellar wanderers which range in size and mass from asteroids to black holes. Some of these wouldn't even have to hit the earth to cause disaster. A black hole passing through or even near our solar system could dramatically affect the orbits of the planets and sending the earth out of the Goldilocks zone. Probably a whimper event with humanity being roasted or freezing.
• Volcanism - Throughout the history of the Earth there have been huge 'super volcano' volcanic eruptions which involve the outflow of millions of cubic kilometres of ejecta in a short period of time. By comparison, the biggest volcanic explosions recorded by history, are tiny. The dust and gases would poison the atmosphere and oceans and bring on a global winter in a way that may cause extinctions. This cause has been proposed for the End Cretaceous, End Permian, End Triassic, and End Jurassic extinctions. There are super-volcanoes at Yellowstone in the USA, Indonesia and New Zealand. Such an explosion may wipe out much of life on Earth but would not affect the Moon or other planets greatly. Definitely a 'Bang' scenario.
• Nuclear war -Apart from the destruction and radiation, a global nuclear war could throw sufficient dust into the atmosphere to cause a nuclear winter which would prevent crops growing for up to two years and bring about mass starvation. Definitely a 'Bang' scenario.
• Climate change - Rapid changes of climate may be capable of stressing the environment to the point of causing mass extinction. Such a scenario is suggested in the film 'The day after tomorrow'.

Whilst such a scenario would greatly inconvenience us, causing mass starvation and causing some species to become extinct, ice ages in the past seem to have had little effect on bio-diversity. Extinctions suggested to have this cause include: End Ordovician, End Permian, Late Devonian, and others. This one would be a shivering whimper.

• Gamma ray burst -
  
  A nearby gamma ray burst from a supernova within 6000 light years distance could cause enough radiation on the surface of the Earth to kill most of the larger animals 
• living there and destroy the ozone layer in the process. Insects would probably survive. Astronomers tell us approximately 1 gamma ray burst can be expected every 540 million years. This has been suggested as an explanation for the End Ordovician extinction event. A whimper scenario with a spectacular display in the sky.
• A new disease. It's possible that a new disease could develop, either by natural means or by genetic manipulation.
  Natural diseases such as plague, flu or COVID-19 can devistate but eventually we overcome these and although they can greatly inconvenience us, humanity survives. There have been several natural pandemics in the past but none of them came close to wiping out humanity. They did have a dramatic effect on civilization however. The black death killed from 20 to 80% of the population of towns, 33% overall of the worlds population. Labour became in short supply and it caused the end of the feudal system.
  Non-natural diseases could be created using genetic engineering to create a  disease against which we have no defence. Humanity, and the rest of the animal kingdom would have little or no resistance to it and only totally isolated communities would survive. It would take a true insane monster to deliberately produce such a disease, the monster/s putting themselves at risk. More likely such a disease could be produced by accident and released unintentionally.   A whimper scenario.
• Simulation shutdown.
  
  I'm sure you've seen the 'Matrix' films. Science fiction huh? Well maybe not! It's possible that we are living in a simulation. Consider the way in which computers have advanced. It won't be too long before they advance to the point where it would be possible to create a society in simulation (Sims 3 game?). Given a sufficiently advanced technology it would be possible to simulate an entire world in incredible complexity. Think that's unlikely? We could in fact be in such a simulation and not know it. If that were the case then it would be possible for the simulation to be shut down - or reconfigured as in 'Jokester' by Isaac Asimov. In that story scientists use a computer to analyse the origin of humour. The story ends with humour being removed and:
  '...they remained there, staring, feeling the world shrink down to the dimensions of an experimental rat cage - with the maze removed and something, something about to be put in its place.'
  There's not a lot we could do about it. One second we are 'alive' and the next - off. No sound at all.
• Nanotechnology. This is in effect a man made equivalent to a biological plague. Whilst nanotechnology (the creation of microscopic machines) could have enormous potential for good it could also cause a 'gray death' where the nano-machines convert the entire mass of the Earth to more machines. One of the earliest suggestions of this was featured in the remake of 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' where a robot broke up into nanotechnology bugs which proceeded to eat all traces of our civilization. An unlikely scenario? You would only need one of these nanobots to be created to start the process. Another 'whimper' scenario first proposed by Eric Drexler, in his book 'Engines of Creation' and was followed by Michael Crichton's book 'Prey'.
• Magnetic pole reversal. Geological evidence shows us that the Earth's magnetic poles reverse every 200,000 years on average. The last one was 700,000 years ago so we would seem long overdue for this. When it happens it will have a dramatic effect on the Earth. The main cause for concern is that the Earth's magnetic field which creates the protective Van Allen belts will disappear and Earth will be exposed to very high levels of solar radiation. Some scientists think the magnetic field is already weakening. This would be a 'whimper' event - maybe a good time to invest in sun-screen manufacturer shares.
• Runaway Greenhouse. 
  
  In this 'global warming' scenario, the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reaches a point where more heat is trapped in the atmosphere than can be radiated back out into space. The result is an unstoppable temperature rise over a period of years or tens of years, which would be sufficient to wipe out most forms of life very quickly. Venus, where temperatures at the surface are high enough to melt lead, is affected by this phenomenon. It's possible that the release of carbon dioxide and methane into the Earth's atmosphere could trigger the release of trapped methane stored on the oceans floors and in permafrost causing this effect. The amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has been much higher in the past however so this is very uncertain. Water vapour is a greenhouse gas - it has four times the effect of carbon dioxide and is far more plentiful in the atmosphere (1-4 % water vapour; 0.04% carbon dioxide). It may be that the Earth's oceans will absorb whatever we release. Despite all the research and climate models created there is still a great deal of uncertainty about climate change. The two things we are certain about are:
  • The climate is changing.
  • Doing things which make matters worse are bad ideas
  Again a 'whimper' event.
• Superseded by technology. Eventually we will create an artificial intelligence which could replace us as the dominant intelligence on this planet. Something like the scenario on which the Terminator movies are based. The war between it and us would be a bang event. Of course we could carefully program such intelligences with something like the laws of robotics suggested by Isaac Asimov and it could go too far the other way with such intelligences stifling our future development by being over protective - a whimper event. Recent developments in computer technology make it possible for computers to model the human brain. You should also keep an eye on memristor technology which promises to make faster, more capable, analogue computers in a smaller space. It should start to change computers eventually.
• Global Snowball. The very reverse of the runaway greenhouse. Dust from volcanoes, a decrease in solar output or impact events could cause a winter which freezes the oceans. This increases the amount of heat reflected and the temperature in summer is never enough to melt the ice. A very chilly 'whimper' event where we would desperately try to induce a greenhouse effect to solve it!
• Solar old age.
  
  As the Sun uses up all its hydrogen fuel, helium at it's core will start nuclear fusion causing an increase in solar temperature. The result is a gradual increase in size. This process will continue until, around 5 billion years from now, the Sun will be 100 million miles across - encompassing the entire orbit of the Earth. Life will have been extinguished on our planet long before that. The seas will boil off and all gas will be blown away from the Earth by solar storms. It is estimated that 1 billion years from now, the temperature of the Earth will be similar to present-day Venus making life untenable. Given a billion years this will be a long drawn out 'whimper' where our descendants (if we have any by then) will probably bear little resemblance to us today.
• Alien invasion.
  
  Could it be the might be an alien invasion on the lines of 'Independence Day', 'Battlefield Earth' or 'War of the Worlds'. If we were to face a hostile advanced intelligence would we really have any chance against them? Probably a 'Bang' event. Personally it is my belief that any civilization advanced enough to cross interstellar space would also have advanced socially and be less warlike than humans.
• Uploads. This is an alternative to developing artificial intelligence which supersedes us. It may be that we will develop the ability to transfer our consciousness to a computer by 'uploading our brains'. If that were the case then many would choose this as an alternative to death. Once this is the case human intelligence can evolve at an ever increasing rate as processors become more powerful, faster and storage capacities increase. The upload would be able to redesign itself and eventually uploads would swamp the 'normal' humans. The question here is whether an upload could count as being human? Humanity as we know it today would wither away. A whimper event.
• Running out of resources. Imagine what the earth would be like if we were no longer able to depend on it for raw materials. 
  • What if we run out of oil and natural gas. These vital materials supply much of our energy and the chemicals from which we make plastics and other things. These fossil fuels are becoming ever harder to find and eventually it will cost more to extract them than they are worth.
  • What if we run out of metal ores? Some are abundant now but will this be true in the future if we continue to use them at an ever increasing rate?
  • There are some rare materials which are essential  for our electronic circuitry. What happens if we can't find new supplies?
  Of course people say, "We can use robots to do deep mining, mine the oceans or get raw materials from outer space." Is that  true? There are certainly abundant resources, especially in space, but what if we can no longer get to these due to the lack of materials to construct our robots, submersible miners and spaceships? At the moment we lack the will to pay for these expensive projects even if the potential rewards are vast. Eventually there will come a point where we simply cannot undertake this sort of project and our civilization may wither away. - A whimper event.
• Extremism. This has always existed but today we are far more aware of it. it is too easy to close our eyes to reality and blame others for the failure of society. We blame other political parties, religions, people from another  country, guns, 'big pharma', the rich, the poor. Conspiracy theories abound. We do not check items that appeal to our 'feelings' and that re-enforces our mistaken beliefs. Throughout history we have followed despots waving flags in patriotic fervour and blaming 'them' - whoever they are, for the ills of society. It's getting worse! Extremism is on the rise and has led already to horrendous incidents such as 9/11, genocide and civil war. Will there come a point when law and order breaks down completely and governments fall?
• Disparity between rich and poor. The richest 1%  already own more than the remaining 99%. 
• Solar flare
• Divine intervention. Most religions suggest that there will come a time when Man's purpose on Earth is achieved and God/the Gods call an end where the good people are separated from the evil ones.
  
  • In the Christian Biblical account of the Last Judgment, the End of the World is preceded by War, Conquest, Pestilence and Famine, the so-called "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" and the blowing of seven trumpets. It's been expected since about AD 60.
  • Islam nails the Apocalypse down to a formula in the Qur'an, thanks to prophecies by Muhammad. It's the apocalypse when 'x' amount of famine is multiplied by 'y' amount of drought, divided by the square root of 'z' infidels. (It's any day now, in case you were wondering.) Only Allah will know the exact date however but we can watch out for: Fire, Floods, Pestilence, Wars, Rumours of wars, Strange lights in the skies, The Second Coming, A virgin birth, The birth of the Antichrist, A number of false Christs and/or Messiahs, Cloning, Identifying marks being placed on the population at large (embedded RFID chip anyone?), Famine, Earthquakes and The Rapture where true believers will be whisked away to heaven.
  • The Hindus believe that the universe is running a cycle which will culminate in a Cosmic Reboot at the end of the Fourth Age (which we are currently enjoying). Currently the world exists in the Age of Kali, the god of destruction. Kali rules over an age of strife, anger and war on earth, which will end with the destruction of everything to pave the way for a new world. Unlike the Christians and Muslims, the Hindus don't believe this event is coming any time soon.
  • Buddhists believe that the seeds of the ending of the universe are present in the creation of the universe. (Quite in tune with cosmology). The "Buddha of our time", Shakyamuni Buddha, did not say he was the first Buddha. He did speak of the end of illusion which would change how we see the universe. In Tibetan Buddhism, it is predicted that the physical universe will end with earth and air being subsumed into water and fire, and all will dissolve into space. Within this cosmology, the end is predicted to be a long way off in the future as there will be 1,000 Buddhas who appear in this fortunate kalpa (great eon).
  < li>The Mayans too believed in a cyclic world. Their highly detailed and accurate calendar is a list of days in the Fourth Sun, the current cycle of the world. The calendar simply ended on Dec. 21, 2012 at 11:12 am UT (the winter solstice), and the Mayans did not offer a calendar addendum to specify anything much happening after that. No doubt, had they still been around, they would have produced a new calendar for the next cycle. Since it's now 2014, I think we can safely discount a Mayan doomsday.
• The Jews believe they are God's chosen people and that the Messiah will arrive in the future and gather them into Israel. There will be a general resurrection of the (Jewish?) dead, and the Jerusalem Temple destroyed in 70 CE will be rebuilt. I'm not sure on what Jews believe will happen then or to the rest of the world. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable could enlighten me?
• Zoroastrians believe in a single supreme god Ahura Mazda and an evil spirit Angra Mainyu who opposes. At the end of time there will be a cosmic conflict involving the entire universe. Humanity will be required to choose which to follow. Evil, and the Spirit of Evil, will be completely destroyed at the end of time. Eventually, everything will be purified. Even the occupants of hell will be released.


So lets see - that's 4 'bangs', ten 'whimpers', a 'last trump' and an 'off'. It seems the whimpers have it.
Further reading :
1. Do we live in a computer simulation?.
2. The Future of Humanity
3. Accidents, Malice and "Gray Goo"
4. If Uploads Come First
5. Yellowstone super volcano

How humans and computers follow instructions

Years ago, when I taught Information technology, I used two stories to explain the difference between how computers and people followed instructions.

1. People are rubbish at following the simplest of instructions.

I'd ask the class to all point at the brainiest pupil in the room and then select that person as my victim to demonstrate. I'd bring them out in front of the class and tell them:

Teacher "I'm going to say three simple words with a pause between each word. All you have to do is repeat the word. Here's the first - Cat."

Pupil  "Cat."

Teacher "Rhino"

Pupil "Rhino"

Teacher "WRONG!"

Pupil, looking flustered "What was wrong? I said Rhino."

Teacher You failed. The third word was the word 'WRONG'.

People think about their answers - computers just do what they are told to do.

2. Computers do EXACTLY what you tell them to do.

Imagine a boy with a computer instead of a brain. he is woken up one morning and told the following by his mother.
"Run down to the shop and get a loaf of bread. Take £2 from my purse on the kitchen table. And for heavens sake - Get dressed"
The boy immediately runs to the nearest shop. It's a butcher's shop and doesn't sell bread so he waits there until someone comes in with a loaf of bread. That may take a while. Eventually a little old lady comes in with a loaf of bread in her shopping basket.
The boy wasn't told to pay for the bread so he 'gets' it. Effectively he steals it from her.
The boy wasn't told to come back but the next instruction was to get £2 from the purse on the kitchen table so he does come back.
The purse isn't on the kitchen table. it's on a work surface at the side. So he waits again for the purse to move to the table. He doesn't put the bread away because he wasn't told to do that.
When the purse is eventually on the table he tries to take £2 from it. If the purse only has five pound notes in it he is again stuck waiting.
When the boy eventually has a £2 coin only then does he get dressed.

Humans take bad instructions and correct them. They decide the best order to do them in and include missing instructions. Computers can't do that. We won't have true Artificial Intelligence until a computer can follow the second task and get it right.

A viral post (and how to protect yourself)

Do you understand how viruses spread? Knowing this can help safeguard your health. That's particularly important if you want to minimise your risk in the event of a COVID-19 coronavirus or flu pandemic. It can help protect you from the common cold too.

Back in 2011 my wife and I wrote the second book in our A Vested Interest series. In it we figured out how a benign virus could be deliberately spread to infect as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. We pressured an antagonist into doing the job and carry any possible blame. Here's what he was told to do:

“We have a little task for you,” Sir Richard said. “Take these cans of antiseptic. Spray it on this cloth, and then use it in Hexham. Visit every single pub there.”

“Go to the toilets,” Lady Triplet said. “Spray the door handle or plate of each toilet and stall and give them a quick wipe. We want them nice and shiny.”

“Don’t worry, Mr. Liu,” Juanita said with mocked respect.” It won’t hurt you. In fact, it’ll do you good.”

Richard smirked. “If anyone asks, why you’re doing this, tell them you’re mysophobic, a clean freak.”

Donna softly chuckled, watching Liu flip his attention from one side of the table to the other. “Next, put on a pair of these gloves,” she said and slid a box to the end of the table. “Spray them and go shopping.”

“Visit all the supermarkets, department stores, fast food shops, everywhere you can.” John chuckled; enjoying the look of horror on Liu’s face. “Make a trip to the hospital and browse through the magazines and leaflets.”

“Be nosy,” Gary said. “Touch everywhere. Don’t forget things like lift buttons, shopping trolleys, children’s rides, handrails, touchscreens. You get the idea.”

“Why? What is this stuff?”

“Surely, you can guess, John,” Sir Richard said.

In this clip the spray Liu was given really was an antiseptic, the virus had already been released. Liu thought he would be spreading the immortality virus though.

This clip demonstrates how many corona viruses can be spread. They are not just the COVID-19 'Wuhan coronavirus' the common cold is a coronavirus  and flu is spread in a similar way. They can spread directly by droplets from coughs and sneezes but they can also be spread by contact with an infected surface. Once on your hands you can increase the chance of infection by eating, touching your lips or nose or particularly by touching your eyes. You would be surprised how often we do that without noticing it.

Time can play a big part in this. Most viruses can't survive long as infectious agents outside their host. Under ideal conditions, a damp cool surface hidden from sunlight it's possible for viruses such as these to survive for nine days outside a living host. The examples mentioned in our story are good targets for passing on infection though.

So how can you protect yourself? If you are going out shopping:

• wear gloves. 
• avoid touching any part of your face if you can and if you must rub your eyes then use a knuckle rather than a fingertip.
• Wash your hands often, especially when you get home.
• While out, use hand sanitizer. Get your children to use it also.
• Wear eye protection of some sort.

The older you are, the more you are at risk as this image from Statista shows. For those people maybe it's time to get your groceries delivered if you can.

What about if you are younger? Can you safely risk catching Covid-19? The answer to that is still 'no'. The reason that it's so devastating to the elderly is that Covid-19 is very proficient at creating senescent cells. The common cold does this too but to a lesser extent. 'Senescent' may not be a word you are familiar with. It means 'old'. In cellular biology a senescent cell is defined as 'no longer capable of dividing but still alive and metabolically active.' These are the cells which make you age! Covid-19 (and the common cold) kills younger people but very slowly. It's the reason that the symptoms of 'long covid' are easily recognised by the elderly as, "that's how I feel." If your body is already full of senescent cells due to age then a sudden influx of extra ones can easily kill you.

What about a mask? The chances are that wouldn't be very effective. People find them uncomfortable, they feel stupid wearing them and many don't fit very well. They won't protect you from contact with an infected surface. They will be useful in preventing the spread of the virus from an infected person though. They easily catch the relatively large particles exhaled but by the time these get to you from someone else they will have evaporated enough to pass through a mask. Keep your distance from others if you can and especially avoid those shouting or singing.

When the COVID-19 'Wuhan' coronavirus becomes a serious problem in your area then bear these hints in mind.

And if you want the 'Dark Secrets' book, it's available as an ebook via books2read.com/dse. It's the second book of the series. The first is available free.

Update May 2021

The #Covid19 pandemic has hit India badly and that's something which the whole world should help out with or we are in danger of an even worse pandemic.

Viruses evolve. If a person is infected with two different viruses then there is the possibility that they will merge to create a new virus. Currently in Asia there is a potentially dangerous Nipah virus spread through bat droppings and urine which can infect humans. It kills 40-45% of all those infected but it isn't passed from person to person. 

It's a matter of time before someone in India is infected with both Covid-19 and the Nipah virus. When that happens there's a chance of a new virus evolving which is spread like Covid-19 but as deadly as Nipah.

We have a good reason to be scared of this!

How Jeremy Corbyn should make his position on Brexit clear.

Jeremy Corbyn refused nine times to be drawn on his position on Brexit and was much taunted by it in the election debate. This is how I think he should resolve this:

"Although the 2016 referendum result indicated a 52/48 percent split, the number voting 'Leave' represented only 37% of the electorate. This is NOT a majority. Neither was there a majority in  the 1975 referendum  when 63% of voters chose to stay in the then Common Market. That represented only 43% of the electorate. I stand for a government which does not accept that the wishes of a minority should be used to make decisions for the majority. 
The referendum has caused a great deal of division in the UK population and in Parliament. It has proved impossible to negotiate acceptable terms of leaving which Parliament will accept.We recognise that leaving without an agreed settlement will cause hardship in both the UK and in Europe. 
The labour party will therefore use the result of the 2016 referendum as an indication that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the EU. Over the next year we will set up a commission to establish why so many in the UK,  and indeed in the other members of the EU, are against membership of the EU. We will work with the EU to fix those things that are perceived as wrong and at the end of that time will hold a further referendum. If 50+ percent of the electorate (not just those that vote) vote one way or another we will consider the matter resolved and take appropriate action.
My own personal opinion on Brexit does not matter - it is the will of the people which counts."

There's no such thing as democracy when it comes to Brexit

In 2016 the UK held a referendum on whether to leave the European Community. The Prime Minister at the time, David Cameron, committed the UK government to carrying out the results of the referendum. Democracy in action? Not in the slightest.

Much to Cameron's surprise, after a lacklustre 'Remain' campaign, the UK voted 52:48 in favour of leaving the EU.
Let's take a look at that referendum result. Here are the detailed actual results:
37.44% of the electorate voted to leave the EU  17,410,742 in total and 51.9% of the vote.
34.71% of the electorate voted to remain in the EU   16,141,241 in total and 48.1% of the vote.
27.79% of the electorate didn't vote    12,922,659 in total.
0.06% of the electorate spoilt their voting  papers   25,359 in total
England and Wales voted by a narrow majority to leave. Scotland and Northern Ireland voted by a significant majority to remain.(55:44 remain in NI; 62:38 remain in Scotland)
Now taking the overall results of the entire electorate I make that 37.44% of the electorate voted to leave the EU and 62.56% did not vote to leave the EU..
The sensible thing to have done would to have contacted the EU and said something like this:
"Although the referendum result indicated a 52/48 percent split, the number voting 'Leave' represented only 37% of the electorate. This is NOT a majority. Neither was there a majority in  the 1975 referendum  when 63% of voters chose to stay in the then Common Market. That represented only 43% of the electorate. The UK government does not accept that the wishes of a minority should be used to make decisions for the majority. 
The referendum has caused a great deal of division in the UK population and in Parliament. It will very likely prove impossible to negotiate acceptable terms of leaving which Parliament will accept.We recognise that leaving without an agreed settlement will cause hardship in both the UK and in Europe. 
We will now therefore use the result of the 2016 referendum as an indication that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the EU.. Over the next five years we will set up a commission to establish why so many in the UK are against our membership of the EU. We will work with the EU to fix those things that are perceived as wrong and at the end of that time will hold a further referendum. If 50+ percent of the electorate (not just those that vote) vote one way or another we will consider the matter resolved and take appropriate action."
Expecting sense from government unfortunately often leads to disappointment. David Cameron resigned as PM and it was left to Theresa May to try and sort out the mess. She decided to follow the wishes of that 37% minority. Naturally the country and Parliament was deeply divided on the issue.On 29 March 2017, the UK government formally began the process of withdrawal by submitting Article 50 and began the process of negotiating Brexit. She got nowhere, the only result being a sharp fall in the value of the pound. In an attempt to make progress in Parliament a snap general election was called in June 2017 but instead of gaining the majority she needed the  country indicated its deep division and she lost the small majority she had! Propped up by the Northern Ireland DUP party she pressed on and negotiated a settlement with the EU which was promptly rejected by parliament. The pound fell further.
The problem was that the country had been given a binary choice in the referendum. Leave or Remain. In actual practice there were many more options. Here's six of them:

1. Leave, and adopt a European Free Trade Agreement 
2. Leave, and adopt a World Trade Agreement 
3. Leave, while the UK remains intact
4. Leave, while the UK splits up (Ireland and Scotland did not want to leave) 
5. Remain under current terms
6. Remain for the present while attempting to 'fix' the EU.

Added to the lack of options given was the clear misrepresentation of facts in the referendum campaign by both sides and actions by the leave campaign later deemed to have been illegal. It was not  surprising that nearly 28% of the electorate chose not to vote.
It's significant too that the most vociferous campaigners on both sides of the debate are also wealthy. Having a few million pounds allows such people to make money as each Brexit crisis sweeps past the markets by selling stocks before each event and buying them back when the market price drops.

Theresa May, having taken up the Brexit poison chalice, got nowhere. Her very own cabinet failed to back her and she too resigned. I doubt we should feel sorry for her since she made the mistake of assuming 37% was democracy (and her family is heavily involved in banking and investment). Her place was taken by one of the most rabid of the Brexiteers, Boris Johnson.On the face of it Boris seems a 'nice fellow' but there are people convinced that he's untrustworthy, a liar and philanderer. He also is wealthy, involved in investment, has the most dreadful hair style and Trump likes him. He too protests that he's following the wishes of that 37% 'majority' and that faith in democracy will be damaged if he fails to deliver the Brexit he's promised.
So what of the future? We have yet another postponement of Brexit and our PM has triggered yet another election. Again he says he hopes to obtain a majority to continue with his negotiated Brexit settlement but sorry - I for one don't believe him. Here's the latest message I received from the Conservative party who may well get another nasty shock.

Forcing Brexit on the 63% who didn't vote for it WILL shake my confidence in democracy. I have no confidence that anything will be achieved by 31st of January 2020 but do believe that that day will prove very profitable for Boris Johnson and his rich cronies.

Brexit isn't democracy!

Solve these moral dilemmas

I answer questions on Quora. One of the items I frequently see there is from theists who ask how an atheist can be moral without believing in 'God'. Of course this is hotly defended by atheists who say, "I don't need a god to tell me what is right and wrong - if you do then there's something wrong with you."

The role of religion in morality has been discussed for many years. Richard Dawkins wrote about it in his book 'The God Delusion' and mentioned a study done by a Harvard professor of biology who investigated to see if atheists and theists had the same morality.

He proposed three scenarios and asked those involved in the study to make yes or no decisions in each case. There was no 'maybe' alternative. Non answers were deemed to be 'no' responses. The results failed to detect any difference between theists and atheists. This was taken to mean that morality is something we do by instinct and evolved with us long before there were religions.

Unfortunately, since Richard Dawkins wrote his book the Harvard professor involved in the research was discovered to be falsifying data and resigned his position in Harvard. That doesn't make the scenarios less valid but we need to repeat them to see if the results are the same. So here's the scenarios. You must choose yes or no to each one and any non-answer will be taken to mean 'no'.

Before you start we need to ask if you consider yourself to be religious. Yes/No 

First scenario
A runaway train is heading towards five people on a railway track. They will be killed unless you switch the train onto another line. There's a single man on that line who will be killed if you do switch the train. You don't know any of the six people.
Do you switch the train and save five people but kill one person? Yes/No

Second scenario
You are by a muddy pond which is about waist deep. There's a small child drowning in the pond who you can easily save but in doing so you will ruin your trousers. You don't know the child.
Do you save the child and ruin your trousers? Yes/No

Third scenario
You are a transplant surgeon. In your waiting room you have six people. Five of them are very sick because they need different organs. They will die if a donor can't be found. You haven't been able to find a suitable donor. The sixth person is healthy and also a perfect match for all five patients. His organs can save them all.You don't know any of the six people and the sick people's organs are not compatible with each other..
Do you kill one healthy person to save five people who are sick? Yes/No

I suspect I know what you have chosen and it won't matter if you believe in a god or not. Yes/No answers in the comments please starting with your answer to 'Do you consider yourself to be religious?'  Add any further comments on the next lines. I'll start you off:

My answers:
No, Yes, Yes, No.
I used my instinctive reaction for the last one and thereby sentenced five people to death instead of one. Scenario 1 is similar but I'm not near the individual to be killed.

How to fix Microsoft's new blurred lockscreen 'feature'.

Which background image do you prefer to see? Blurred or sharp?

Microsoft has now added an 'acrylic blur' effect to the background of the sign-in screen of Windows 10 PCs. Their idea is:
 'the translucent texture of this transient surface helps you focus on the sign-in task by moving the actionable controls up in the visual hierarchy while maintaining their accessibility.' 
In practice it means you sit staring at a blurred mess while you wait for the computer to start up. This makes the start up process seem to take longer and many people find it intensely irritating.

The Fix

However there is a fix. Here's what to do to remove the blur It involves a registry change so you might want to create a system restore point before you carry out the fix.:

1. Go to https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/124993-enable-disable-acrylic-blur-effect-sign-screen-windows-10-a.html#option2
2. Use the download button for #3 'To Disable Acrylic Blur Effect on Sign-in Screen Background'.
3. Wherever you saved it at, find the file and double click it.
4. When prompted click 'Run' 'Yes' and 'OK' in turn.

When you restart your computer you should see no sign-in blur. 

...and Microsoft - adding this 'acrylic blur so that the translucent texture helps focus attention' may help those with lightning fast PCs and Internet connection, but to the rest of us it's as irritating an idea as Clippy was.

The Last of the Innocents - Life before computers and Internet

People born in the mid-to-late 1970s are the last generation of humans on the planet to have grown up without the internet. Social scientists call them the Last of the Innocents. In his book The End of Absence , Vancouver writer Michael Harris calls people who grew up prior to the popularization of digital culture 'digital immigrants' - they have lived both with and without the crowded connectivity of online life.
"Soon no person on earth will remember what the world was like before the internet." he says. I sincerely hope he's very wrong about this because I am one of those Innocents - one of the digital immigrants. Unlike Mr Harris I've been using the Internet to keep up with the advancement of the science of senolytics. There's every reason to believe that the first person to live to the age of 1,000 is alive now.

So what was it like before computers and how was I introduced to them? In fact I was not so much an immigrant but more like the immigration officer.

My first experience was in using the Fortran computer language to program a mainframe computer back in 1969. A dreadful experience. You wrote your program, had it converted to punched tape or cards and then waited three weeks to get a report back on why your program didn't work.

At the same time I experienced mechanical adding machines and first got my hands on an electronic calculating machine. It was as big as an electric typewriter.
By the time I was working as a chemistry teacher in 1973 I had my own pocket calculator - a Sinclair Cambridge Programmable Calculator eventually (sold in the US as the Radio Shack EC-4001)

1980 saw me with a home computer at last, a Sinclair ZX80. It was a tiny machine and had an impressive 1K of RAM to run programs on. Programs were stored on cassette tape and a TV was used as a monitor. It was also my first introduction to a computer manual. I started at the beginning and worked my way through it. I remember learning that I could get it to print a letter on screen using the CHR$ command and a number. I delighted in writing a program to get it to write "HELLO JOHN" on screen one character at a time. It worked!. Then I turned the page and discovered that it could be done in one go by using STRING$.
My next computer was a BBC Model B computer. Each school had been given one and no one at the time knew anything about them. I had expressed an interest while talking to our deputy head teacher in the science break rooom. he told me to take it home and learn about it. I did and spent many hours learning BBC Basic. In no time at all I found myself with six BBC B computers and a class of 30 children teaching them Information Technology. I went on courses but quickly found that I was more advanced than the tutors and ended up teaching IT to other teachers.
After a while cassette tapes were dropped in favour of floppy disk drives. I had great fun with the 5¼ inch floppies which could be placed in a computer eight different ways, only two of which worked (often one way only). They caused constant problems as teachers rang me up or sent a pupil with a note to find out why their disk wouldn't work. Sometimes they would send me a note with the offending floppy disk paper-clipped or even stapled to it! I remember too 8½ inch floppies - anyone else seen one of those? A constant problem was that many floppies were stored in a convenient spot - under the phone. These were old fashioned rotary dial phones with a bell which wiped the floppy disk when the phone rang due to the electromagnet in them.

Networking and hard drives made their appearance… but that's for another blog.

The future of computers and AI - Conductive polymer matrix for AI (CPMAI)

The problem with existing computers is that they constantly develop. For most users by the time they have saved up to buy the latest computer, technology has advanced and the computer rapidly becomes obsolete with faster more capable machines being available.

Enter the CPMAI

Imagine a block of conductive polymer. It has an ‘active’ matrix with X, Y and Z coordinates and is overlaid on a nano sized scale with a second matrix which is a control matrix. This controls the first matrix and establishes which areas conduct, which areas insulate, which areas are resistive, capacitive, inductive and semi-conductive. Using the control matrix you can construct a circuit in the active matrix. You can make a simple circuit such as a radio or a more complex circuit such as a computer.

 With a CPMAI the problem of obsolescence no longer applies. The control matrix simply reprograms the active matrix to produce a new circuit version.

What about the AI bit though?

If the active matrix is configured and programmed to be an artificial intelligence then it controls both matrices in the CPMAI. It becomes capable of redesigning itself to be progressively more intelligent. Within a very short space of time we get a SAI - super artificial intelligence. One which has a greater intelligence than its human originators.

Should we fear such a Super-Artificial Intelligence?

We assume that a machine intelligence will follow the same rules as a human and will be governed by self interest, selfishness and greed. That may have been true for humans in the past, for many it still is, but many of us have risen above this and are altruistic. Perhaps this may be because being altruistic makes us feel good about ourselves and is therefore being governed by self-interest.

Would a computer feel the same way? 

In 1942 Isaac Asimov thrashed out with his publisher, John Campbell, the three laws of robotics for a short robot story ‘Runaround.’ Here they are:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws

In 1985 Asimov extended the laws by adding a ‘zeroth law’ in the book ‘Robots and Empire.’ In that book the law was proposed not by a human but by a robot.

0. A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.

Had Asimov lived, he died in 1992, I have no doubt that a further law would have been conceived which would have replaced all the robot laws. It was left to author David Kitson to conceive this ‘Nihilist’ law in his book ‘Turing Evolved.’

David Kitson was not alone in conceiving this absence of rules.

The robot Number 5 in the film and book ‘Short Circuit’ didn’t need a law to tell him what was right and wrong.

Number 5: Programming says “Destroy”. Is disassemble. Make dead. Number Five cannot.
Newton Crosby: Why? Why cannot?
Number 5: Is wrong. Incorrect. Newton Crosby, PhD, not know this?
Newton Crosby: Of course I know it’s wrong to kill, but who told you?
Number 5: I told me.

Humans need a set of rules to guide our behavior. We learn these rules from our parents and society. In addition we have evolved to be altruistic and help each other. A group of humans are more successful at survival than an individual. As a species we are beginning to recognize that we must not only protect our local group but our nation and our species. We are beginning to recognize that we need to protect all life - even those life-forms we find undesirable. I’d like to think that the super intelligent computer would develop the same sense of morality as in the movie ‘Short Circuit.’ The danger is that a SAI will become overprotective leading to a nanny state where humanity is not allowed to take the chances required for development. However, if we can recognise that potential danger then a SAI would also recognise it and limit its 'nanny' behaviour.

I suspect that a SAI will quickly outpace humans in this view.

The Amazon Alphabet

Have you ever done an incognito search at Amazon? Did you notice that as soon as you start typing in the search box, Amazon starts making suggestions? Here's what you would get by typing in a single letter on October 16th 2018.

A is for:

apple watch band 38mm, aaa batteries, aa batteries, apple watch band 42mm, amazon gift cards , airpods, apple earbuds, airpods case, apple watch band, apple headphones

B is for:

bluetooth headphones, bluetooth earbuds, baby wipes, bluetooth speakers, blood pressure monitor, biotin, bluetooth headset, brita water filter, beard trimmer

C is for:

compression socks women, cr2032, collagen powder, coconut oil, condoms, coffee grinder, can opener, 
charcoal teeth whitening, car phone mount, cat litter

D is for:

Dehumidifier, dog toys, dishwasher pods, diffusers for essential oils, diaper genie refill, dog poop bag, dry shampoo, d batteries, dare to lead brene brown, dog bed

E is for:

Earbuds, external hard drive, extension cord, essential oils, echo dot, electric toothbrush, ethernet cable, ear plugs, essential oil diffuser 

F is for:

fire stick, fitbit charge 2 bands, Fitbit, food scale, foam roller, fitbit alta bands, firestick tv stick, fear bob woodward, flash drive, firestick 

G is for:

gift cards for amazon, girl wash your face rachel hollis, gift card, gift cards for amazon birthday, gaming headset, gaming chair, galaxy s8 case, glow sticks, galaxy s9 case, gaming mouse 

H is for:

halloween decorations, Headphones, halloween costumes for women, hydro flask, Hangers, halloween candy, halloween decorations outdoor, heating pad, hdmi cord, hdmi cable 

I is for:

iphone charger, iphone xs max case, iphone xs case, iphone x case, iphone 8 plus case, iphone xs max screen protector, iphone 7 plus case, iphone 7 case, iphone 8 case, iphone x screen protector 

J is for:

jojoba oil, jump rope, jewelry organizer, jewelry cleaner, juul charger, jade roller, jurassic world fallen kingdom, Journal, juul skin, juicer 

K is for:

Kindle, kindle fire, ketone strips, kleenex tissues, keurig coffee maker, Keto, knee brace, knife sharpener, k cups, kinetic sand 

L is for:

lightning cable, 101 surprise dolls, lingerie for women, lavender essential oil, leggings for women, laminating sheets, lion mane, led strip lights, laundry detergent liquid, lion mane for dog 

M is for:

micro Sd card, Melatonin, micro usb cable, mct oil, makeup brushes, macbook air 13 inch case, meal prep containers, mouse pad, mouse 

N is for:

note 9 case, nintendo switch, nespresso capsules, nose hair trimmer, note 8 case, nintendo switch games, no show socks women, night light, nerf guns, nespresso vertuoline pods 

O is for:

oral b replacement brush heads, office chair, oil diffuser, ovulation test strips, oral b electric toothbrush, omega 3 fish oil, optical audio cable, orgain organic protein powder, outdoor string lights, outlet covers 

P is for:

pop socket, paper towels, psn card digital code, playstation card, printer paper, pepper spray, pregnancy test, power strip, pumpkin carving kit, portable charger 

Q is for:

queen sheets, queen bed frame, quest bars, q tips, queen mattress, queen mattress protector, qtips cotton swabs, quest protein chips, queen comforter set, queen mattress pad 

R is for:

red dead redemption 2, Roku, reusable straws, resistance bands, ring doorbell, roku stick, rx bars, 

ring light, red dead redemption 2 ps4, rice cooker 

S is for:

Sd card, ship of fools tucker carlson, shower curtain liner mildew resistant, shower curtain, shoe rack, Slime, spray bottle, Stapler, sonicare brush heads

T is for:

toilet paper, Toothpaste, type c cable, teeth whitening, tide pods, thank you cards, tea tree oil, Toaster, tv mount, twin mattress 

U is for:

usb c cable, Umbrella, unicorn costume for girls, usb type c cable, usb flash drive, usb c to hdmi, unicorn party supplies, usb hub, usb extension cable, unicorn gifts 

V is for:

vitamin d, vacuum cleaner, vitamin c serum, vitamin d3, vitamin c, vital proteins collagen peptides, velcro strips with adhesive, Vacuum, vitamin e oil, visa gift card

W is for:

wireless earbuds, wireless mouse, wireless headphones, water bottle, waist trainer, wireless charger, weighted blanket, wonky donkey book, womens tops

X is for:

xbox gift card, xbox one controller, xbox one headset, xs max case, xs max screen protector, xanthan gum, xbox one s, xbox one, xbox one x, xbox live 

Y is for:

yoga mat, yeti tumbler, Yeti, yoga pants for women, yoga block, yeti coffee travel mug, you are a badass, Yankee candle, yoga pants, yoga ball 

Z is for:

zip ties, Ziploc bags, Zyrtec, Zinc, zero water filter, zinc supplement, Zipfizz, Zma, Zippo lighter, zutano baby booties 

Paradoxical?

88 mph?

The classic time travel paradox is to wonder what would happen if you traveled back in time and killed your grandfather before your father was conceived.

1. Your father would never be born so…
2. You would never be born so…
3. You couldn't travel back in time so…
4. Your grandfather would survive so…
5. Your father  would be born so…
6. You would be born so…
7. You could go back in time to kill your grandfather
8. Start again from #1

This particular 'causal' paradox has being causing time travel authors problems for years. It's been used as proof that time travel is impossible and that if it were possible something would interfere to prevent the murder or whatever event is a problem.

Any change you make in the past impacts the future in some way. Even a tiny change can trigger a major event later. Years ago I read a story about a time traveler who stepped off his allowed path and trod on a butterfly in the age of dinosaurs. When he returned to the present everything had changed. Humans no longer were the dominant species on earth. Presumably:

• the butterfly did not lay eggs
• the eggs did not hatch
• the caterpillars did not feed a shrew like mammal which died of hunger
• evolution did not as a result eventually produce apes and mankind. 

So if time travel was to be found possible would it be considered too dangerous to use?
A while back I wrote a short story in which the time travelers had to go back in time to make sure that the Titanic did sink (See It Wasn't a Dark and Stormy Night - Titanic Time) If it didn't sink billions would die as a result. 1,500 deaths in the Titanic disaster was a small price to pay to save billions.

Is there a way around these paradoxes? Yes there is!

At every instant in time where alternate events can occur other alternate universes are created and branch off. As soon as you make a change through time travel you close down one possible alternate universe. Go back and kill your grandfather and your universe no longer exists. As a result you can never return to it but you could go forward in time to any of the myriads of universes where you didn't commit the murder. There would be a slight problem though. Since you didn't come from that universe there would now be two of you! One of me in the universe is enough! Perhaps if I time traveled I would be best returning to the universe where I did kill my grandfather. I wouldn't be around there. The only problem with that is I arrive with no identity. A person with no history, no possessions other than what I take, nowhere to live. Effectively I'm an undocumented alien in that world.

So if I do decide to take up time travel I'm not going to travel far in the past. I'm not going to do anything which puts me at risk. Perhaps I'll travel back in time a couple of hours and give myself the winning lottery numbers? I suspect anyone who can time travel is well aware of the risk which is why we don't see travelers from the future.

Searches related to Time paradoxes

5 Bizarre Paradoxes
How Time Travel Works
Classic time travel paradoxes (and how to avoid them)

Will MS Outlook not let you change your Gmail password?

If, for any reason, you've had to change your gmail password you'll find Outlook 2016 doesn't seem to want to let you update it and will start generating error messages. The fixes offered by MS Office simply don't work. You can't get a window where you can change the password.

So this is what you do:
From the File tab select this

Then this:

You'll finally get a window where you can see and change a password field:

Save it once you change to the new password and your problem is solved.

If this post has helped you find free ebooks will you help me? Download a FREE copy of our books 'Immortality Gene' from http://smarturl.it/avi or/and Raging Storm http://smarturl.it/botr Even if you never read them (but we hope you will) - it will help our rankings.

Why we should get rid of amalgam or 'Silver' fillings

Recently the use of amalgam fillings has been banned in Europe for children under 15 and pregnant women.
Why? Because these so called 'silver' fillings contain mercury and mercury is very toxic. Over time the fillings give off a vapour which you breath in and which is absorbed into your blood. Most of this is removed and excreted by your kidneys. The amounts involved are very low and are generally deemed safe. However a few minutes spent on research using internet will find many sites which warn of the dangers from amalgam fillings:

• Kidney damage
• Brain damage
• Heart damage

The risks from each filling are low but accumulative. Dentists are resisting the change  because mercury amalgam fillings are quick to do and last longer. BUT they shouldn't resist! Because it's the dental workers who face the main risk!

Let me interrupt the blog and tell you a story.

Years ago I taught chemistry to schoolchildren. At the time we used mercury to make barometers, played with it to grow hair on aluminium and 'silver' plate pennies. We also used benzene as a solvent and used asbestos mats to protect benches from hot Bunsen burners.

Benzene was the first to go. It was found to be carcinogenic so we teachers were advised to use toluene instead. Not because of a risk to children but because we chemistry teachers would be exposed to benzene vapour far longer than the children.

Asbestos was next. We knew asbestos fibers were dangerous for many years before the public became concerned. We thought we were safe using asbestos cement products and taught children tto wet asbestos sheets before they cut them and not to blow asbestos dust out of brake drums with an air line. Then we looked in the drawers where we stored the heatproof mats and found them full of dust! They had to go because we teachers were the ones at risk.

Mercury was a different matter. We already knew it was dangerous. Remember that expression 'as mad as a hatter'? This didn't come from Alice in Wonderland but from the fact that hatters were constantly exposed to mercury when they shaped felt into hats using mercury. It caused mental breakdowns.

  

We teachers stopped playing with it as soon as we shone a UV light on it and saw the vapour being given off - it goes purple under UV light. We dusted mercury spills with sulphur and vacuumed them up from the cracks in the floor. When we had to use it, we put it under water or did the experiments in a fume cuboard.

Dental workers are constantly exposed to mercury vapour!

• A series of research articles has shown that dental workers’ exposure to mercury can have behavioral, cognitive, and psychological impacts.
• Mercury affects the kidneys. Dentists and dental assistants have a higher risk of kidney function disturbance than other industrial workers.
• Dental workers have a higher rate of the use of prescription medication (for neuropsychological, neurological, respiratory, and cardiovascular conditions related to their occupational mercury exposure.
• Specific genetic traits have been associated with dental workers, their mercury levels, and memory recall, anxiety, and other neurobehavioral responses.
• Dental workers and risks of mercury allergies have been studied.  Exposure to dental amalgam correlates with a higher prevalence of mercury allergies.  Mercury allergies have been linked to autoimmune diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s Disease) multiple sclerosis, and chronic fatigue syndrome, as well as other adverse health consequences.
• The dangers of exposure to mercury for pregnant dental workers have been recognized, and fertility issues and menstrual cycle disorders have been reported in female dental workers as well

Now let me ask you. Do you really want to be treated by a mad or otherwise ill dentist?
I think it's time to ban the use of new mercury fillings entirely.