Index | Parent Index | Build Freedom: Archive

Ride to Prosperity in Cyberspace

Who Rules Cyberspace?

Happening Now In Cyberspace
on
World Wide Web Site
www.neo-tech.com

Vaporizing Irrationality

Cyberspace Excitement

Throughout conscious existence on planet Earth flows an unbridgeable gulf separating dishonesty from honesty, irrationality from rationality, subjectivism from objectivism. Conscious beings today stand upon the shore awash with dishonesty, irrationality, subjectivism. Most are productive human beings, a few are parasitical humanoids. Some advance liberty, a few advance tyranny. All stand with their backs to the gulf. At first, none are aware of the approaching new paradigm for an eternally prosperous life.

Poised upon the lip of eternity, a few lift their heads to glimpse beyond the gulf. They see that new paradigm. They see a paradigm of integrated honesty that terminates the long train of illusions and investments throughout this moribund anticivilization. At first, rejection abounds. As the paradigm approaches, rejection turns to fear. For, that paradigm means the disappearance of government force that created a galaxy of parasitical livelihoods -- livelihoods supported by dishonesty, irrationality, fraud, murder.

At the height of that fear, those irrational investments become worthless. As those life-long investments in beguilement evaporate, people will sublimate into an exciting, prosperous civilization of integrated honesty. ...That sublimation has already begun in cyberspace.

Vanishing Irrationality

Fully integrated honesty rules cyberspace because no one rules cyberspace. A paradoxical statement? Consider the following: Individual consciousness reigns supreme in cyberspace. Indeed, in cyberspace, harmful politicians, armed bureaucrats, ego judges, religious charlatans, dishonest journalists, and stagnant big-business executives have no control or power over individuals. Consider the harmful politicians who promote gun-backed laws to impose their whims in trying to control others. In cyberspace, destructive politicians are left impotent, thus harmless. They are simply flamed out of existence.

What will happen as individuals by the millions, then by the billons, move into cyberspace? In cyberspace, individuals function freely, voluntarily among themselves. No space, time, or cost boundaries exist in cyberspace. No legal, political, or religious boundaries exist. Thus, a natural dynamic develops in which the honest, the exciting, the valuable drive out the dishonest, the boring, the destructive.

By contrast, in the noncyberspace world ruled by political agendas, the honest and rational are often condemned or suppressed as politically incorrect or subjectively illegal. Also, in the noncyberspace world, the dishonest and irrational are often politically promoted, especially when backed by armed bureaucrats functioning as unpunished criminals. In the noncyberspace world, armed bureaucrats become dehumanized criminals who destroy innocent people's lives, values, and property.

In cyberspace, contextual facts vanish myths. Likewise, rationality vanishes irrationality: value vanishes disvalue, honesty vanishes dishonesty. The good drives out the bad, reality drives out mysticism, excitement drives out stagnation. Why? Because fully integrated honesty rules in the freely competitive atmosphere of cyberspace. Thus, through cyberspace, a powerfully exciting, value-filled civilization will replace the dishonest, nihilistic anticivilization choking planet Earth today.

In cyberspace, each individual can freely communicate with any other individual, free of media dishonesty, free of destructive gun-backed political agendas, free of the irrational noncyberspace world. Today, the noncyberspace anticivilization is ruled by self-serving parasitical humanoids through their armed bureaucrats, sycophantic journalists, and hypocritical entertainers promoting various politically correct agendas. By contrast, the new cyberspace civilization spreading across the globe is free of such corruption. Thus, any cyberspace civilization is ultimately ruled by honest, value-producing individuals -- just as are all advanced civilizations throughout the Universe.

The corrupt establishment media are irrelevant in cyberspace. No matter how articulately mendacious are Washington Post or Newsweek type journalists, their dishonesties have no power in cyberspace. The corrupt, deeply dishonest print-media and network news simply cannot compete in cyberspace. By contrast, any honest, articulate individual has limitless competitive power and relevance in cyberspace. For example, consider the most powerful person in the noncyberspace world: The articulate but pervasively dishonest President Clinton would have no chance hoaxing people in cyberspace, especially the articulate, honest individuals roaming the Internet. His lies and criminalities would be mercilessly exposed. He would then be flamed, skewered, and laughed off Usenet -- the Internet newsgroups. That is why he and other harmful politicians dare not personally enter in the dynamics of cyberspace.

Those proclaiming authority by revelation, deception, or force have no power or influence in cyberspace. By contrast, in cyberspace, any individual can become powerful and influential by applying the dynamics of wide-scope, fully integrated honesty.

Below are examples of the philosophical and physical dynamics that operate together throughout cyberspace.

Philosophical Dynamics

Consider the following example: Two Newsgroups on the Internet embrace the identical philosophy with essentially no intellectual points of disagreement between them. Yet, profound spiritual differences exist: Newsgroup A is oriented around fully integrated honesty and the limitless power of conscious beings. Newsgroup B is oriented around a closed-system authority and the power of dead heroes and fictional characters. As a result, Newsgroup A expresses itself through active, forward-moving, competitive business modes. Newsgroup B expresses itself through passive, philosophizing, uncompetitive academic modes. What are the consequences?

Spiritual passions of Newsgroup A evolve around exciting, competitive value production. Spiritual passions of Newsgroup B evolve around stagnant, collective intellectualizing. Newsgroup A welcomes and profitably utilizes competitive encounters. Newsgroup B fears and dishonestly attacks competitive encounters. ...Newsgroup A represents open-ended growth. Newsgroup B represents close-ended stagnation.

Newsgroups A and B both uncompromisingly hold Objectivism as the proper philosophy for conscious beings. But, most in Group A are exciting and creatively alive, while many in Group B are boring and creatively dead. Newsgroup A holds, for example, dishonestly besmirched, unpopular mega value producers like Jay Gould and Michael Milken as real-life, heroic benefactors to all conscious beings. Newsgroup B holds popular but unreal, fictional characters like Howard Roark and John Galt as heroic idols. Newsgroup A actively sails forth into uncharted territories of future discovery. Newsgroup B passively remains anchored in safe harbors of the previously established.

Both Newsgroups are intellectually in debt to philosopher Ayn Rand. Group A gratefully utilizes her achievements while moving forward. Group B desperately idolizes her importance while clinging to the past. Group A utilizes the outstanding yet grossly under-recognized values constantly being produced by Ayn Rand's intellectual heir, Dr. Leonard Peikoff. Group B chains Dr. Peikoff within the shadow of Ayn Rand by minimizing or ignoring his continuous, commercial value production unmatched by all the other Objectivist "leaders" combined. Group A orients around time-efficient aggressive objectivism that will spread across cyberspace through real-life business dynamics. Group B orients around time-consuming passive intellectualizing that will stagnate into ever shrinking, closed circles. Group A works in the future; Group B dwells in the past.

In response to flame attacks, the following template was posted on both Newsgroups. That template demonstrates how the essence of Newsgroup A is attuned with cyberspace while the essence of Newsgroup B is ultimately incompatible with cyberspace:

Template Post

Objectivist Heroes

Pseudo objectivists frantically trying to flame the fully integrated honesty of Neo-Tech off the Internet anxiously flatter one another as Objectivist Heroes defending the philosophy of Ayn Rand.

Thirty years ago those kinds of heroes were the desperate hangers-on in the Branden/Rand lectures in New York City. Back then, they were characterized by their cigarette holders emblazoned with dollar signs and swirling black capes. They were the sycophantic defenders of their ego facades leached from Ayn Rand's monumental achievement: Objectivism. Throughout the years, such Objectivists have remained the biggest impediment to advancing Objectivist philosophy around the world.

Today, those ersatz Objectivists are panicking. And why not? After 30 years of faking heroic Galtisms and shrugging Atlases, they are being revealed in cyberspace as contradictions to everything Objectivism means in living competitively, honestly, and happily through business-like modes. Similarly, in cyberspace, fully integrated honesty is exposing the fakeries and dishonesties of politicians and many government-dependent academics. ...Eventually, all such fakes will disappear as nothing in cyberspace.

Today, as back then, those pseudo Objectivists appear as sad, boring people. They are basically immature, kind of pitiful. Today, as back then, perhaps not a single, self-made businessperson or really successful entrepreneur exists among them. How many are really excited about what they do for a living? How many are genuinely proud of their competitiveness -- of their value-producing competence? Most have no idea of the incredibly difficult journey required to independently produce long-range, competitive values and jobs for others. Ayn Rand knew. But, most of her dependent followers never knew.

Today, on the Internet, some of the most immature, dependent Randians seem to be on tax-paid academic edu lines, perhaps living off some kind of public funds with abundant idle time on their hands. They can never acknowledge the wide-scope Objectivist nature of fully integrated honesty. For, that wide-scope, active use of Objectivism through the competitive dynamics of Neo-Tech reveals stimulating powers -- exciting powers possible for all conscious beings, Objectivists or not. Such competitive dynamics become illusion-collapsing threats to ego-dependent followers of Objectivism -- especially those living stagnant lives that are going nowhere.

What are those "Objectivist Heroes" harping about? What do they do besides endlessly displaying philosophical "brilliance" while tearing down the practical, objective values of Neo-Tech? What do they do constructively? Have any of them ever made the excruciating effort or borne the racking pain oft required to do anything really important, to take big risks for big payoffs, to alone face down dangerous armed evil in the real world, or even to build and maintain a business that creates competitive values and jobs for others?

Many who attack fully integrated honesty are trying to inflate their shrunken self-perceived images by creating problems where none exist. One should always ask those who tear down values what they have done to make themselves proud of their lives -- what they have done to build values -- long-term competitive values for themselves, others, and society. Today, such people might be called wimps. Ayn Rand had a better word: pip-squeaks.

In reality, Objectivism never needs defending. Moreover, only commercially competitive efforts increase the permanent, long-range value of Objectivism to civilization. And finally, Neo-Tech has never attacked a single tenet of Objectivism. Instead, Neo-Tech vigorously applies and commercially advances every tenet of Objectivism throughout the world.

By contrast, those ego-seeking pontificators of Objectivism unnecessarily waste their lives on nothing much. Most will never discover their exciting, glorious potential in the value-producing business dynamics throughout cyberspace. ...Yet, the helping hand of Neo-Tech is always extended. Still, from Neo-Tech, no leader, guru, or authority is available for anyone to follow or obey. Only fully integrated honesty with its wide-scope integrations is available for all to understand, use, and produce prosperity.

The contributors to Neo-Tech integrations, not the flamers of Neo-Tech, are genuine Objectivists. Only through Neo-Tech business modes is Objectivism pushed forward, into the competitive market place, bringing integrated honesty and exciting Objectivism to the general public worldwide.

Maturing into an Objectivist

Some supporters of Objectivism are like Moliére's Tartuffe with his hypocritical piety. Or, perhaps they are more like Moliére's Alceste in The Misanthrope who rants and rails, neither delivering much of value to anyone nor improving much of anything. Such people ignorantly bluster about things, situations, and people they do not understand. Such people deliver only the narrow-scope nothingness of an ego-tripping Alceste. ...But, many could mature into the everythingness of a Defoe's do-everything Robinson Crusoe, or at least the somethingness of a go-getter Moll Flanders.

Not to be an Alceste takes some brain, mouth, and keyboard responsibility. Discipline is required to deal contextually with reality from the widest perspectives. Indeed, learning to work tolerantly, efficiently, profitably with problems, situations, and people while remaining uncompromising on principles is hard work. To produce competitive values for the world takes constant discipline, thought, and control combined with fully integrated honesty. ...It takes Neo-Tech.

The above template shows why fully integrated honesty rules cyberspace from the philosophical perspective. The following example shows how fully integrated honesty rules cyberspace from the physical perspective.

Physical Dynamics

Two approaches to the physical world embrace the identical laws of physics with no scientific points of disagreement: Approach A is oriented around objective, conscious entities[ 1 ] utilizing fully integrated honesty. Approach B is oriented around objective, nonconscious entities determined by peer approval. As a result, Approach A rapidly advances in a wide-scope integration mode. Approach B, gradually advances in specialized academic modes.

Approaches A and B both utilize the scientific method of validation. But, Approach A relies on fully integrated honesty while Approach B relies on establishment peer review.

Both approaches uncompromisingly correspond to and abide by the laws of physics. Yet, Approach A integrates unrestricted panoramas of knowledge, while Approach B focuses on specialized areas of knowledge. Approach A welcomes competitive encounters that would change the status quo. Approach B resists competitive encounters that would change the status quo.

The essence of Approach A is attuned with existence. Thus, Approach A will create stimulating new knowledge and lead this world into fully integrated honesty -- into the Civilization of the Universe. By contrast, the essence of Approach B is chained to Establishment stagnation, always remaining in the background of history.

Utilized throughout history by only a tiny fraction of scientists, Approach A has yielded essentially every major breakthrough in science and technology since Democritus, 2500 years ago, proffered his theory of atoms as the primary units of existence. In contrast, Approach B has been utilized throughout history by a vast majority of scientists. Approach B solidifies and eventually moves forward those radical breakthroughs that are scientifically valid. ...Both approaches advance science. Yet, almost all individuals among that vast majority following Approach B protect their status-quo positions by initially attacking every valid breakthrough by those rare individuals utilizing Approach A.

Consider the physics and philosophy derived from Approach A and described in Movement 1 of the New-Color Symphony: Both the physics and philosophy of Zonpower are without known contradictions. Still, Zonpower from Cyberspace is not about physics or philosophy. It is about the application of fully integrated honesty to objective reality. The resulting wide-scope integrations will eventually bring eternal life with limitless prosperity to all conscious beings. While perhaps ahead of their time, speculative hypotheses are proffered in Zonpower from Cyberspace as metaphors. Yet, all the hypotheses correspond to the laws of physics as well as to objective reality...and all are open to experimental verification or falsification.

The following example involves the interaction of an industrial research chemist, Dr. Higgs Field, utilizing competitive business-funded Approach A versus an academic astrophysicist, Professor Edu from a Big-Ten University, utilizing noncompetitive tax-funded Approach B. Dr. Edu publishes in prestigious peer-review journals, such as the Astrophysical Journal and Reviews of Modern Physics. He also participates in international peer-review astrophysical symposiums such as the June 1995 symposium in Brussels, Belgium.

After selecting one of the more radical chapters in the on-line version of Zonpower from Cyberspace, Professor Edu published a review of it on the Internet. Had Dr. Edu carefully read Neo-Tech Physics in full context, he could have saved himself the embarrassment of publishing the following seven-point review:

Quote

To learn what a smart astrophysicist I am, or am not, I'd suggest reading the Astrophysical Journal or Reviews of Modern Physics, where I have published papers. I'd be glad to send you reprints. I've been asked to evaluate the physics in Zonpower. I have picked a couple of examples from Chapter 5 of the electronic version that I hope illustrate the problem. In this chapter we read..."Take two cannonballs of identical size, one made of solid iron, the other of solid aluminum. Why does the iron ball weigh about twice that of the aluminum ball of the same size?"
Most physicists would say that iron has more protons and neutrons in its nucleus than aluminum does; thus there are "more particles" in a given volume of iron than aluminum. This has nothing to do with "conscious-controlled geometries" which are listed as the explanation. The author claims that without them we would expect both balls to have the same weight because they have the same volume. Why should different numbers of particles in the same volume have the same weight? This reflects misunderstanding of physics at a basic level.
By the way, the explanation in a footnote of "Gravity Units" is just plain bizarre, and apparently contradicts General Relativity.
In this chapter there is a persistent confusion between mass and weight; we read, for instance, that energy is "weightless". Given the equivalence between mass and energy, this is simply false. I can collide two energetic photons and produce particle-antiparticle pairs; this happens all the time in accelerators. Gravitational redshifts have been measured; photons do respond to gravity. The author's arguments would seem to contradict this, and thus be falsified.
As an experiment, the author (PhD in what? "Science"?) proposes that in a stadium with 100,000 people one should 1) emit a pulse of light; 2) measure radio waves coming from buttons that people push when they see the light. The pattern that emerges is then claimed to be proof that "conscious quanta as an integral part of a fixed existence field". Huh? This sounds like a good way to measure reaction time, and nothing else.
By the way, the speed of the Earth around the Sun is not 0.01 of the speed of light, which is claimed in the text! When I see the orbital speed of the Earth off by a factor of 100, I conclude that the author is sloppy.
This experiment sounds like a muddled attempt at the Michelson-Morely experiment, which did not detect the motion of the Earth through the ether. But wait...the authors claim that the M-M experiment failed because the signals measured in that famous experiment were photons of light, which are not "intrinsic to the existence field". (E=mc², anyone?) Sorry, but the radio waves used in the Neo-Tech experiment are photons too. The author is apparently unaware of this, and it invalidates the entire experiment. This is basic physics, which I teach in my introductory astronomy class. To make new theories in a field, you need some knowledge that goes beyond popular books on the subject.
We then hear of a new particle, called a "thinkon". When particle physicists invent a new particle, they estimate its basic properties: mass, charge, spin, its cross-section for interaction, and so on. How many thinkons are there near the Earth? No answers here, and none will be forthcoming.

End Quote

By reading that chapter on Neo-Tech physics in context with the other chapters and footnotes in Zonpower, one discovers the following answers to each of Professor Edu's seven objections:

Dr. Edu starts by opining his misunderstanding of weight relative to Gravity Units. The entire concept of weight involves the Gravity-Unit geometries mathematically interacting with matter geometries -- independent of conscious actions. Consider the analogy that compares the "volume" of cannonballs to the "volume" of quarks or electrons: Volume, of course, does not explain weight. But neither does mass. In seeking the most-fundamental concept of weight, all volume/mass energy unit quantities such as cannonballs, quarks, electrons, and photons are stripped away. Conceptually replacing volume/mass/energy units with the new concept of interacting geometries lets one reach the most-basic understanding of weight. That understanding corresponds to the laws of physics. Moreover, the resulting hypothesis offers experimental ways to verify or falsify the hypothesized Gravity Units.
By taking one footnote out of context, Dr. Edu uses a single assertion to dismiss the well-defined concept of Gravity Units developed throughout the document. He offers not a single specific fact as to why Gravity Units contradict General Relativity [ 2 ], which they do not. Dr. Edu's approach, of course, would prevent one from examining any radically new but valid concept. Such an approach guarantees continued stagnation for its practitioners.
No disagreement exists with the physics stated by Dr. Edu. What is not understood by Dr. Edu is the subtle difference of nonfundamental created mass vis-a-vis the fundamental noncreated Gravity Unit, which exists as an ether in a weight mode or in a weightless mode. ...Thus, again, Dr. Edu's objections are little more than naive, non-sequitur statements about basic physics. Such statements have nothing to do with the concepts presented.
Perhaps excused by not being an experimental scientist, Dr. Edu reveals his misunderstanding of the Stadium Experiment. How could he or anyone understand that experiment if viewed so out of context. Contrary to Dr. Edu's claims, this experiment has nothing to do with human reaction times or radio waves. By carefully reading the Stadium Experiment, one finds that it is explicitly designed to eliminate -- wash out -- the differences in human reaction times. That wash out is accomplished by the 100,000 people times the 50 flashes of light to give an overwhelming 5,000,000 pieces of data in the few minutes of the experiment. With that huge number of separate measurements, human reaction times become a self-canceling variable arising from the tools used to measure the effects of special relativity on the hypothesized "thinkons".
As Dr. Edu properly indicates in a later review, a straight comparison of the speed of light versus the five-million pieces of data requires more preciseness by several orders of magnitude to detect the sought effect. But, the experiment is enhanced by the sought-after particle not being at rest, but traveling at 67,000 mph relative to the Sun or 0.0001 the speed of light, thus, reducing the preciseness needed to detect the hypothesized particle by several orders of magnitude. The sought effect is further enhanced and then detected through diffraction-pattern, computer/trigonometric analyses that trace secondary changes in statistical data. Even greater accuracies could be achieved if the particles could be measured at much greater speeds as relative, for example, to other entities in our galaxy...or to the entire expanding universe and beyond.[ 3 ]
The Stadium Experiment and the other proposed experiments are sound in principle. They are explicitly designed to support or refute the hypothesis of thinkons. What more could a scientist ask for in examining a speculative hypothesis posited for metaphorical purposes?
Indeed, as Dr. Edu states, the orbital speed of Earth is not 0.01 the speed of light. Dr. Edu was off in his criticism by a hundred fold in wrongly accusing the author of carelessness. Had Dr. Edu been less careless in reading Neo-Tech Physics, he would have seen the figure stated was 0.01% (not 0.01), which is 0.0001 the speed of light -- a figure that both Dr. Field and Dr. Edu agree is correct.
Dr. Edu combines the citations about the Michelson-Morely (M-M) experiment with his own interjections about radio waves being photons. While correct, his interjections have nothing to do with the experiment. Through such non-sequitur interjections, Dr. Edu reveals not even a cursory understanding of the Stadium Experiment. ...Incidentally, the M-M experiment was based on movement relative to the sun.
Dr. Edu dismisses the quantized thinkon particle without identifying a single contradiction to the laws of physics. Instead, he evokes non-sequitur statements about the physical properties of particles and the number of "thinkons" near Earth. His statement has no meaning regarding the hypothesis advanced and the experiments proposed for detecting thinkons.

In cyberspace, fully integrated honesty will vanish bogus biases and arrogant "authorities" used to protect the status quo. The above example is not meant to insult or criticize Dr. Edu, but is meant to help him and others in tenured academic professions by shaking them from their stagnation traps and moving them into competitive, new ways of thinking that will let them deliver much greater values to themselves, others, and society.

Neo-Tech Physics will bring an Objectivist Civilization

By evading the context of Neo-Tech Physics and the purpose of Zonpower, one can isolate almost any sentence or paragraph and attack it. Responding to such out-of-context attacks generally would (1) be futile, (2) encourage ever more such erroneous attacks, and (3) become so time consuming as to retard progress toward curing irrationality.

Consider the following four points:

Zonpower from Cyberspace is not a treatise on philosophy or physics. Zonpower is metaphorically presented for the general public to gain much wider, more valuable perspectives of objective reality.
Neo-Tech Physics comprises a set of speculative hypotheses, none of which contradict the laws of physics or nature. Those hypotheses serve as metaphors needed to introduce a radical paradigm of widest scope thinking about conscious life, civilization, and the universe.
Those metaphorical hypotheses sweep across the entire thirty-six chapters of Zonpower from Cyberspace, uniquely integrating widely diverse areas of cosmology, physics, and conscious minds never before linked together.
The purpose of Zonpower and Neo-Tech Physics is to provide new ways to view conscious life and everyone's relationship to existence -- mind-boggling new perspectives that eventually will eradicate irrationality and dishonesty from cyberspace and then the world.

Next Page | Contents | Previous Page

Footnotes:

[ 1 ] Consciousness itself is not a primary of existence. Both Approach A and Approach B are based on objective reality being the primary of existence. But, most philosophers from Plato to Kant erroneously consider consciousness as a primary of existence. Aristotle and Ayn Rand are the two major exceptions who were free from that profound error. They recognized the primacy of existence and rejected the primacy of consciousness.

[ 2 ] General Relativity: "all laws of physics hold in all frames of references" -- that is the essence of Einstein's Theory of Gravity. ...Special Relativity applies to frames moving at constant speeds in which space and time change to keep the laws of physics constant.

[ 3 ] See pages 42-46 of the New-Color Symphony, especially the footnote on page 44, for further understandings of this experiment.

Index | Parent Index | Build Freedom: Archive

Disclaimer - Copyright - Contact

Online: buildfreedom.org - terrorcrat.com - mind-trek.com