Noetic Sciences and other Wissenschaften
Instead of jumping into early conclusions what we need is a framework that enables the analysis and comparison of collective conscious entities.
The Web Bot project, according to Wikipedia missed on a significant percentage on its predictions, and based on its veiled, blurry nature we won’t even know if these hits/misses are justified by its mechanism.
Even though we don’t have a deeper understanding of the GCP in terms of how the noosphere reaches down to the quantum level, we do know how its measurements are made.
GCP and other, similarly open entities (Gaia hypothesis, evolved Twitter, etc.) may be fitted in a common framework. The more we know about these entities, the better we can compare them to each other and weigh their behavior, uses and threats.
I’m working on such a framework which I publish here: http://collectiveweb.wordpress.com/category/global-consciousness/
I welcome comments, suggestions and collaboration.
Just read your article and while it sounds very interesting I would like to know how “the global conscious” (based on aggregated search data) can predict the future in any long term form. While it is very plausible that the aggregated data would be really useful for human influenced trends (playing the stocks and economic events) I doubt the future of non human events can be predicted by what people are taking about and searching for. What people search for is generally in the now or near future or what they hear about and want to look up themselves. No wonder the searches about 2012 went up after a Hollywood film comes out about 2010! Can you explain how what people are talking and thinking about could for example predict movements in the moon?
thanks for your comments. I don’t have the answers, I don’t think anyone has. Everything changes and often we don’t know why things change and its not always as obvious as you describe. We’re only certain of that things do change. Whether all this is wishful thinking or reality is up to every individual. It’s real to me.
I think Hari Seldon would say his psychohistorical equation are a part of Noetic Science.
Why am I saying this. Both theories are saying that they can predict a GLOBAL gradient of happenings. Imagine our world with a veeeeery big Heisenberg constant, and than try to see what will happen with a thought from the brain, then 1.000.000 brains etc.
The results from this (again veeeeery crude estimation is that the whole world would have to thing the same thought in order that the exponential probability function has some influence at the object 100m away. And they should be together at one big square.
And I assume, if we ever decide to gather in order to “change something with a thought” that would not be a stock report, but rather the answer to the important questions like Is there a god (in quantum mechanic, not theological sense), or more obvious, change the orbit of that bloody asteroid that is going to collide with the Earth.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>