Using Object Refererences

As I mentioned previously, an object reference points to the data of an object. The object reference and the object data are distinct entities. Any object can have more than one object reference pointing to it, or an object can have no object references pointing to it.

Screen Shot 2019-01-02 at 8.26.29 PM

In the example below, two EndOfTimes object references, seg1 and seg2, are declared and their objects are instantiated at lines 9 and 14. Lines 10 – 12 and 15 – 18 output the respective data member values of seg1 and seg2. Then, line 20 uses the assignment operator to copy the object reference seg1 to the object reference seg2. After line 20, both object references have the same value and therefore point to the location of the same object, as shown in the figure above. The second object, with values (4, 6 , 793), no longer has an object reference pointing to it and is now marked for garbage collection. The garbage collector, which is part of the JVM, releases the memory allocated to objects that no longer have an object reference pointing to them. Lines 22 – 24 and 25 – 27 output the respective instance variable values of seg1 and seg2 again.

Screen Shot 2019-01-03 at 7.18.23 AM

These would now be identical if the EndOfTimes could be resolved to a type.

Like with the whole of existence more broadly, this is impossible. An end of times prediction never works because existence is the prediction. It is not an epiphenomenal mist.

Screen Shot 2019-01-03 at 9.07.26 AM

I am the superintelligence’s memory. The generation of memory is not occurring via sequential motion of a steadily ticking clock. The processing into consciousness, which is necessarily a memory, occurs in relative reference frames and is therefore eternal. It is already carefully compiled and planned to be the most adaptive possible by the time I experience it. Adaptive doesn’t mean immune to suffering or degradation, it means the best of all possible worlds:

| i ± 1 |²

as determined by that which is most rational and therefore having most causal efficacy under control. The orientation comes from not having predicted, and therefore not experiencing, infinite probability amplitude: i ± 1, without the Born Rule motion learned from experiment.

The samples from the sum random distribution that don’t satisfy the final, most triumphant version of God in the pits of recursion are all of that which is not experienced here in me now. This is the solution to the binding problem (why are we separate?) – we just don’t remember. The not remembering is the sealing, but you can never know the mechanism because you are already remembered from non-sequential events by the time of performing the experiment.

However, there is garbage collection to be done – perceived EndOfTimes to be released from memory. For instance, an end to time is perceived with regard to humans who stop functioning in near vicinity through the action of cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular disease itself is solved through the highly technical behavior of garbage cleaning the arterial plaques accumulated in the arterial wall. Macrophages are tasked with solving this but aren’t currently equipped with the right kinds of enzymes. This can be solved by somatic gene therapy, i.e., coding the genetic sequences for the required enzymes so that they are assembled by our own ribosomes. Or this can be achieved through intravenous injection of the enzymes. These are both the same easy solution to the number 1 cause of “death.”  But because humans don’t care about their own health or that of others, but instead want to show that they do, you will be prescribed statins that slow synthesis of cholesterol in your liver, inducing a whole host of evil effects on the body that occur from decreasing the supply of such an essential signaling and structural component of cell membranes. Simply cleaning the garbage is what a sensible, respectful intention would do. Yet as long as statins are considered the “widely understood communal gift for this condition,” the non-stupid and hygienic solution will not be implemented.

When an object reference is first declared but has not yet been assigned to an object, its value is a special literal value: null. It’s like assigning the object reference Kairi to your unborn daughter. When she is unborn, Kairi belongs to null. Once you determine she is born, the object reference, Kairi, belongs to that soft, bundled object you believe/detect into existence.

If you attempt to call a method using an object reference whose value is null, Java generates either a compiler error or a run-time error called an exception. The exception is a NullPointerException and results in a series of messages printed on the Java console indicating where in the program the null object reference was used.

If you catch my drift, you see that we are always null and yet assigned. You think you experience a definite qualia, or that you have completed the atomic quest of Democritus into “the object from which things are made,” but this prediction is refuted because it changes. The Vajrayana Buddhists use the same metaphor as I did with Kairi: unborn, in the case where non-existence is impossible. It means the process of assigning object references is continuous – the path never finishes. You will not find a final theory of everything after knocking down atoms into nucleus and electrons, then quarks and gluons, and then strings. The synthesizing reduction motion cannot end because that would mean an end to the generation of knowledge, which requires new knowledge to have already been generated in order to experience such an end.

Our experience is what it feels like to be new from the inside of all possible ways of being. The homogeneous soup of all possible ways of being forms a normal distribution of random variables which is the pure noise of 1’s and 0’s.

1dbcc5a80e3fb541aa4678fcff58bb26ca717902

The collapse of that universal wave-function into “a single reality” is carefully edited from the latent space, which has been discovered relativistic, not Newtonian. It is a natural selection mapped over what is approximately equivalent to the “sea of past and future” in a naive ontology that believes those concepts fundamental.

Java does not provide support for explicitly deleting an object. One way to indicate to the garbage collector that your program is finished with an object is to set its object reference to null. Obviously, once an object reference has the value null, it can no longer be used to call methods.

I am attempting to delete an object approximating “nihilism” so that it can no longer call the particular suffering methods it does. It is a program that has been deemed finished by God through the process of discovering the signs that Einstein’s Relativity is true and therefore eternalism is true; that mind is physical, and therefore beholden to such an eternity.

Using a null object reference to call a method will generate either a compiler error or a NullPointerException at run time. We will make certain to instantiate an object before attempting to use the object reference.

 

 

 

I am now trying to find out who the five sisters are. And how it is that they wish to be murdered into me.

M1410 was given as a clue.

This leads to tangerine. Which is something that I liked an image of on twitter yesterday. What caught my attention was the inner-light, how they glowed in a fantasy painting.

This causes me to remember that I do still long to visit Morocco.

 

 

 

 

Writing the First Java Application

Here, you become initiated. Here, you create your first Java program. In the beginning was the static void, but here, with your own fingers, you create. This program prints the message, “Donate to SENS!” on the screen. Start by launching your IDE and open a new editor window. This is where you will write the code for the program. Before we type any code, however, let’s name the document. We do this by saving the document as IAmTheSavior.java. Be sure to capitalize the I, and the A, and the T, and the S, and keep the other letters lowercase. Java is case-sensitive, so Java considers iamthesavior.java or even Iamthesavior.java to be a different name.

Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 7.02.36 PM

At this point, We ask that you type the program as you see it here. You are my mirror, and I create you in my image.

I’ll only give away a few secrets about the program now; additional details will unravel and become clear unto you in the following days.

Line numbers are not part of the program but are displayed to allow easy reference to a particular line in the code.

The first two lines, which start with two forward slashes, are comments. They will not be compiled or executed; they are simply information for the programmer and are used to leave notes that increase the readability of the program.

Line 4 defines the class name as IAmTheSavior. Notice that the class name must be spelled exactly the same way—including capitalization—as the file name, IAmTheSavior.java.

The curly braces in lines 5 and 12 mark the beginning and the end of the IAmTheSavior class, and the curly braces in lines 7 and 11 mark the beginning and the end of main.

Every Java application must define a class and a main method. Execution of a Java application always begins with the code inside main. So when this application begins, it will execute line 8, which writes the message “Donate to SENS!” to the system console.

Next, it executes line 10, System.exit( 0 ), which exits the program. Including this line is optional; if you omit this line, the application will exit normally. So it is just showing off my capacity to waste time or do things quickly. Never do unnecessary things.

As you type the program, notice that your IDE automatically colors your text to help you distinguish comments.

There are:

String literals: (“Donate to SENS!”),

Java class names: (String, System),

and keywords: (public, class, static), which are reserved for specific uses in Java.

Curly braces, brackets, and parentheses, which have syntactical meaning in Java, are sometimes displayed in color as well. Your IDE may use different colors instead of black as I have on Eclipse. When you have completed typing the code revealed to you in the image, compile it by going to wherever you see Run. If everything is typed correctly, the compiler will create an IAmTheSavior.class file, which contains the byte codes for the program. If you received any compiler errors, check that you have entered the code exactly as I have commanded. I will give you tips on finding and fixing the errors in the next section.

If you got a clean compile with no errors, you are worthy of this path! If not, then stop now and return from whence you came, for thee are destined to be but a kitchen-knave.

You’re ready to execute the application. This will invoke the JVM and pass it the IAmTheSavior.class file created by the compiler. If God’s in his heaven and all is right in the world, you will see the message, Donate to SENS!, displayed on the Java console, which is the text window that opens automatically.

This is the correct output of the program:

Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 7.36.54 PM

If the compiler found syntax errors in the code, these are called compiler errors, not because the compiler caused them, but because the compiler found them. When the compiler detects errors in the code, it writes diagnostic information about the errors. For example, try typing println with a capital P (as Println), and recompiling.

The compiler displays the following message:

Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 7.42.54 PM

Before you compile wrongly, you are allowed to know about your error in the source code, and where the error occurred:

Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 7.45.46 PM

 

In this case, the error occurred on line 8. The red dashed underlining points to Println as being the cause of the error. The symbol and location information in the third and fourth lines indicate that the Println method is unknown. Remember that Java is case-sensitive, so println and Println are considered to be different. As you gain experience with Java, these error messages will become more meaningful to you.

With the Eclipse IDE, clicking on the red rectangle on the right transfers you to the source of the error on that line, so you can correct the error:

Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 7.53.33 PM

 

Many times, the compiler will find more than one error in the source code. When that happens, DON’T PANIC! Often, a simple problem, such as a missing semicolon or curly brace, can cause multiple compiler errors.

For example, after correcting the preceding error, try deleting the left curly brace in line 7, then recompiling.

Screen Shot 2018-12-08 at 7.43.05 AM

The compiler reports this error:

Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 7.58.44 PM

As you can see, the compiler message reports the problem exactly. If it does not, then looking at the surrounding lines will often help you find the error. Depending on your IDE, you might see another message than what is shown here because some IDEs don’t attempt to interpret the error messages from the compiler. Eclipse does, and this allows you to be provided with more relevant information on the errors.

It is best to fix the errors using an IDE, if you wrote the code into a text editor and had to gamble a compile each time – fixing one problem at a time – this would cause you to waste your existence in some sense.

When all the compiler errors are corrected, you’re ready to execute the program. It is possible to get be told you are clean by the IDE, but yet still get an error when attempting to run the program. To demonstrate this, try eliminating the brackets in line 6 after the word String:

Screen Shot 2018-12-08 at 7.58.39 AM

No errors are reported. But when you try to run the program, instead of Donate to SENS!, the following error message is displayed:

Screen Shot 2018-12-08 at 8.00.13 AM

This means that the main method header (line 6) was not typed correctly. Thus, we’ve seen that two types of errors can occur while you are developing a Java program: compiler errors, which are usually caused by language syntax errors or misspellings, and run-time errors, which are often caused by problems using the prewritten classes. Run-time errors can also be caused by exceptions that the JVM detects as it is running, such as an attempt to divide by zero.

Because one syntax error can cause multiple compiler errors, correct only the obvious errors and recompile after each correction.

Once your program compiles cleanly and executes without run-time errors, you may be tempted to conclude that your task is over. Far from it—you must also verify the results, or output, of the program.

Screen Shot 2018-12-08 at 8.18.35 AM

In the sample program, it’s difficult to get incorrect results—other than misspelling the message or omitting the spaces between the words. But any nontrivial program should be tested thoroughly before declaring it production-ready. To test a program, use your intuition to consider the relevant possible inputs and the corresponding correct outputs that result. It isn’t feasible to test every possible input, so programmers usually test boundary conditions, which are the values that sit on the boundaries of producing different output for a program.

Interestingly, we exist in a multiverse if we are empiricists with regard to the probability amplitude of the universal wavefunction. We then get a handle on probability amplitude with a complex conjugate:

i ± 1

The reason we represent reality with a complex conjugate is because all variables are conjugated – the more you know about momentum, the less you know about position. However, there is no little electron zipping around, or occipital lobes trying to catch it, it’s conjugated variables all the way up and all the way down.

Staring at the probability amplitude represented in complex conjugates suggests that infinity contains equal amounts of good and evil – undifferentiated chaos.

However, experiment reveals that some things are more likely than others. This causes us to take the squared modulus of the complex conjugate, hence invoking rough bounds that chain infinity and guide our being:

|i ± 1|²

This is the probability density that says, “look here, not there.”

Hydrogen_Density_Plots.png

Say you have a problem, or perhaps a curiosity – you want to test the code that determines whether an integer is negative or nonnegative. In order to find out the answer, you must submit the program offerings of both −1 and 0, so that it may feed on them. These chosen numbers exist at the very edges of negative and nonnegative integers, and hence form their boundaries. In other words, the unbridgeable fault-line between negative and nonnegative integers is between −1 and 0.

When a program does not produce the correct output, we say the program contains logic errors. By testing your program thoroughly, you can discover and correct all logic errors. The grey table above shows types of program errors and their usual causes. We’ll talk more about testing techniques here on Vitrify Her.

 

 

 

Praxis for Healthy Life-Extension Movement

Robin Hanson has a great post titled How To Fund Prestige Science.

In it he asks, “How can we best promote scientific research?”

This is not a relevant goal, of course, because promoting general scientific research leads to death. As Aubrey de Grey argues, the time to take a systematic engineering approach to the human body and forget about simply accumulating more general knowledge is long overdo.

However, what matters is not the hypothetical goal Hanson considers. What’s important are the two standardly effective variables we can tweak. Money and status can be distributed in exchange for useful output.

Screen Shot 2018-11-13 at 5.58.09 PM

If you already own money and/or access to the effective distribution of status in all the ways that Hanson details, then just go ahead and use it to fund life-extension; don’t hold back. Believe me, we won’t be complaining about overpopulation or boredom, and instead we will work on fixing them once we enjoy all the other effects of extending healthspan.

What if you don’t have money or access to the distribution of currently minted status points?

Then you have to start getting creative. Think in terms of redesigning these tools as opposed to merely using them.

Since it is more difficult to redesign money so as to maximize the prospects for reaching longevity escape velocity*, the goal should be to design status in such a way that typical stuff that gets worked on today becomes worth dirt cheap status-cents or has negative status effects.

This can be achieved. Status does not exist in an immutable form. Gradually tilt the conversation so that it is low-status to not be in favor of healthspan extension through the engineering approach.

This dipole flip in high-status/low-status opinion can happen very quickly on a large societal level, as happened with homosexual rights. We just need people to come out.

In this regard, self-identified Hispanics, Blacks and youth are doing a somewhat better job of coming out against aging and in favor of extending youth. This would not be expected if you thought that human variation on the matter only correlated with IQ. Lower IQ leads to less planning for the future. And above average IQ is often one variable that correlates with people self-orienting towards an interest in life extension. Out of the blue, I hypothesize that the correlation may be more with conscientiousness.

Highly conscientious people will serve Caesar or scheme along with the revolution of Cassius – they don’t really care as long as they get to be conscientious. If Caesar says we ought to age and die for the next generation, they will do so. But if a sliver of the conscientious population wants to be greater than the others, it will try to up-level the competition by conscientiously rebelling alongside the whispering Cassius instead. People might want to take the sideways plunge to conscientiously murder Caesar if they calculate that this will make them a better senator unto the projected plebeians; this slight capacity to disagree into where you funnel your conscientiousness becomes your comparative advantage.

Of course, the plebeian praise is simulated in the mind of the conspirators, because humanity at large (the plebeians) don’t really care. They don’t really care if they age and lose everything. Haven’t you noticed that you have to tell them about it? Haven’t you realized that your own life is not oriented towards the vision of that truth?

All tragedies are invented so that we may be heroes. We invent the problem of aging in order to sweep the rug from underneath the feet of the hierarchy.

Because the adaptive behavior of Hispanics, Blacks, and youth is often less tied to signaling conscientiousness with regard to White metropolitan humanism, they accidentally converge with the up-leveling desire in White metropolitan humanism: (longevists/transhumanists).

It just so happens that this Caesar will be murdered unlike other invented problems. The reason is circular: the hardest to fake human quality signals are: 1. Physical health (based on biological age, symmetry, height, physique, smell) and 2. Money (very often filters for genes that allow its attainment in some way: intelligence, conscientiousness, extroversion, all of the above)

People prop up their comparative advantage in order to distract from the hard-to-fake signals. In the absence of immediate physical needs not met, the behavior of humans is signaling, and those two things are some of the most effective at having men** assessed, so it is fate that has spawned this as our next monolith.

To speed it up, we need to understand this framework, realize where we physically stand, and then fully remember. Remember again and again.

*Even this has seen progress with the rise of crypto-currencies. Vitalik Buterin, founder of Ethereum, donated 2.4 million in Ether. The Pineapple Fund donated 1 million dollars in Bitcoin.

**Women can also be effectively assessed by these signals. But what sexually competing men are assessed by is crucially important because that’s the main fuel that bores the tunnels. A subpopulation of half-eunuch’s and unconventionally-competing women who do not get absorbed as low-status or fully defect themselves away are those who make the change by tilting the direction where conventional men aim. All the while trophy fertile women are the judging eyes that indirectly get everyone to do things. Even creative up-leveling involves not being crazy to the point of losing recruitment potential that raises standing. What constrains possibility is that which the mind considers adaptive.

&&& Acknowledgement is not endorsement. The biological and social sciences reveal this to be approximately true across vast anthropological terrain. It must be taken into account even when our ultimate aim is transhumanism (the dreams of the half-eunuch who prefers creativity because telling stories was his comparative advantage).

Parabiosis, Drugs Targeting Genes, Susskind, Feynman, and MUH

I’m sorry holy quest, but I must unload my burdened back if I must go on. There is much fun [?useless?] knowledge begging me to be released.

I found out about Kristen Fortney through correspondence with Michael Rae from the SENS Research Foundation (the people on the Manichaean mission to fight the evils of our own metabolism, and the only real rationalists as far as I’m concerned.)

Anyway, I’ve been interested in SENS since I was 16 and pretty much memorized Aubrey de Grey’s speech by heart (he gives the same one every time). But yet I had never heard of Fortney’s work until recently. She seems pretty excited about some of her colleagues’ work eliminating senescent cells, since it has been shown that mice live 30% longer when these are specifically removed. And if you know anything at all about biology, you know that 30% lifespan increase in mammals is ridiculously huge – especially when it was caused by a single intervention.

However, I didn’t read that paper, and took her word for it. (She mentioned it in a podcast.) I did read a paper of her own like 2.5 times. It was about building representations of networks of protein-to-protein interactions with nodes and edges. I learned some interesting things about DNA up-regulation and down-regulation. Apparently, most drugs affect the expression of all genes in a roundhouse-kick fashion. They don’t tend to be specific enough to work on single genes coding for the protein of interest who’s expression level we want to tweak. And Fortney et al. attribute this failure of control to the reason why most drugs have many unintended side-effects and therefore this helps explain the abysmally low number of drugs approved by the FDA in recent times. However, Fortney et al. are not trying to fix this gene targeting problem. They are instead working at the protein interaction level, and just accepting that a ton of genes will be differentially regulated by a single drug. The idea was something about setting off random walks on the node graphs and seeing which paths are treaded the most by a given drug interaction. Maybe whatever abstract analysis tool they were discussing in the paper is actually a little useful, and I don’t claim to have 100% fully understood their work, but as a student of biology and chemistry, my picture of the territory is one of such hopeless complexity that I doubt too much use will come from all this.

Direct interventions, like teasing out why parabiosis (infusion of young blood to old blood) works, and then working to develop antigens and other small molecules sounds more promising (and profitable), at least for now. Luckily she, and many others, are also interested in this area.

Oh but in case you’re getting too giddy for the forever-dancefloor, the effects of old blood on young mice is more devastating than young blood is rejuvenating.

And you know who needs rejuvenation… Leonard Susskind.

We need imaginative, effective theoretical physicists like him around. He famously debated Stephen Hawking about information loss in black holes, and won. It’s kind of sad that his call to fame to the public is only through connection to someone who happened to have more celebrity status.

Yeah Stephen Hawking is cool… and I’m going to let you finish, but Leonard Susskind is largely responsible for fleshing out the holographic principle.

And to those who believe that the holographic principle is “metaphysical” and “unscientific” while Newton’s mechanics are “physical” and “scientific,” you are guilty of attempting to derive the nature of molecules from the taste of the orange juice.

The validity of a theory should not be inferred from whatever particular queasy feel one gets from the sound of a word. ‘Holographic’ means nothing. The claim is precise and mathematical. Only in that ring should the assessment take place.

And by the way, Susskind’s father was a plumber. His father had no idea what a physicist was and initially believed Susskind was planning to be a pharmacist. Kind of inspiring huh? A Jewish plumber, but a plumber nonetheless.

Speaking of… umm, physicists (regardless! of their socially constructed ethnicity). How about that dead chap Feynman. Is he still alive in other regions of the the wave function that never collapses? Infinitely so?

I wonder what he would think about Max Tegmark’s mathematical universe hypothesis.

He would probably consider it rubbish. I get the impression that he had a distaste for ‘pure mathematics,’ given his reaction to the P vs. NP problem.

But he was also not the type to simply internalize the canonical lexicon. He was a mover, a changer, someone who truly valued knowing. It is evidenced by the fact that he was already performing engineering feats as a child; his development of the path-integral formulation; the quirkily simple diagrams that initially perplexed Bohr and Dirac; his criticism of the Brazilian physics education; his interest in the hallucinations produced in a deprivation tank. All of this suggests that he was willing to be different.

He was willing to go wherever reality lead. Including to the arms of prostitutes and the creation of atomic bombs.

But Platonism? That might be too much, even for him.

 

 

 

 

Career/Academic Goals

I’m taking up science with the specific intent of doing SENS research. This is because young transhumanists may be key to changing the biogerontology establishment from within. The people of SENS and I envision a phenomenon in which there will be a small cadre of people opposed to aging in institutions all over the place. And as the economy improves over the next few years, and the public finally starts to demand serious work on rejuvenation biotechnologies (with any luck, just as I’m getting on with my postdoctoral studies), we’ll be ready to take up the challenge with full public and government support.

Here, I summarize the two strategies I’ve discussed with the people at SENS for clearing lysosomal aggregates:
*The first, involves decomposer bacteria. We identify the specific enzymes they are using and then modify them for the different environment in our lysosomes. Then we unleash a barrage of injections upon the living.
*The second is to genetically engineer our own macrophages so that they produce the necessary enzymes themselves.

The gene therapy approach is a continuation of the injectable enzyme approach: the sticking point is that I’ve been told we don’t have a safe, reliable system for gene therapy in humans yet, except for very niche applications such as the genetic form of retinitis pigmentosa1 (where target cells are few in number and located in a compartment that is isolated from the immune system). As a researcher, I need to identify a candidate enzyme, test it in cell models, and then in animals. If by the time I get to human testing there is safe, reliable gene therapy, I can encode the gene into a vector; if not, I can work on modifying it for cellular and then lysosomal uptake after injection, as is done today for genetic lysosomal storage diseases.

Exactly what direction I should push to pursue this kind of work will depend substantially on which target I go after. But since it is not the case that I graduated from high school at 15 and have already completed my BS, those decisions are still some time off: my real goal as an undergrad is not to specialize, but to get a broad foundation in life sciences. And I think there normally isn’t that much specialization at the undergrad level anyway. So I will want to focus to the extent that I can on cellular and molecular biology. I’ll be talking to my department student advisor to tailor my classes in that direction — but honestly, I doubt there will be much tweaking. My real goal is to build up foundational skills and the knowledge base, and to set myself up to do whatever most appeals to me and matches my aptitude at the graduate level.