Information

Knowledge, possession of information, mostly seems an entirely good thing, certainly if it concerns useful knowledge. Knowing how to do things, understanding nature makes life easier and allows more individuals to exist at any one time.

Progress, increase in useful knowlege gained, has been rapidly increasing at an accelerating pace.

The assymetry of offensive versus defensive capability and the difficulty to predict complex systems make the prospect that with continued progress it is only a question of time until anyone can create pathogens or weapons of mass destruction a serious concern and a leading contender for the solution to Fermi's paradox, i.e. the question why there do not seem to be any civilizations able to colonize other solar systems than the one where they emerged. The dangerous sides of increasing knowledge might be impossible to contain. But then, it might be possible, too. This site starts with the assumption that it is possible.

The question whether the gathering of information, the accumulation of knowledge, is an intrinsically limited process is intriguing but it would be much more important to find creative solutions that offer different perspectives.

Is information available in infinite quantity? In science, demonstrating the identity of a theory (representation) with reality, i.e., its truth, is impossible. While knowledge thus could grow for as long as there are conscious observers, reality would pose a boundary beyond which knowledge could not increase if the amount of information contained in the universe/reality is finite.

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle seems to describe a characteristic of reality. Does this characteristic limit the amount of information that can be gained? Or does it rather describe that the uncertain information does not exist?

If processing information requires the utilization of useful energy (if the second law of thermodynamics describes reality correctly in this, it must) then the amount of information that can be processed is limited by the amount of useful energy available (in the universe or wherever one happens to be), which seems to be finite. Conciousness would seem to require the processing of information and happiness conciousness, so the amount of possible happiness is finite. Fermi's paradox then is solved by the notion that intelligent beings would rather use energy for the experience of existence than for interstellar travel.

References

• In 2004 Bill Joy's influential call to contain dangerous technologies (robotic, genetic, nanotechnology) "Why the future doesn't need us" (re-)started many discussions on the risks of progress and what to do about it.

• 1990: Paul Romer in Endogenous Technological Change (Journal of Political Economy. 98, Nr. 5, part 2, October 1990, S. S71–S102) first pointed out the relevance of useful knowledge for the economy.