Singularity

{{pseudoscience}}
A '''singularity''', as most commonly used, is a point at which expected rules break down. The term comes from [[mathematics]], where a point on an otherwise continuous slope is of undefined or infinite value; such a point is known as a singularity.

The term has extended into other fields; the most notable use is in [[astrophysics]], where a singularity is a point (usually, but perhaps not exclusively, at the center a of [[black hole]]) where curvature of spacetime approaches infinity.

This article, however, is not about the mathematical or physics uses of the term, but rather the borrowing of it by various [[futurism|futurists]]. They define a technological singularity as the point beyond which we can know nothing about the world. So, of course, they then write at length on the world after that time. Conveniently, this premise not only allows but justifies anything, including large inconsistencies with known principles of [[science]]. 

==Technological singularity==
{{cquote|It's [[intelligent design]] for the [[IQ]] 140 people. This proposition that we're heading to this point at which everything is going to be just unimaginably different &mdash; it's fundamentally, in my view, driven by a [[religious]] impulse. And all of the frantic arm-waving can't obscure that fact for me, no matter what numbers he marshals in favor of it. He's very good at having a lot of curves that point up to the right.|||Mitch Kapor on Ray Kurzweil<ref>[https://archive.is/ec5sE#selection-1147.572-1147.990 The smartest (or the nuttiest) futurist on earth] by Brian O'Keefe (May 14, 2007, 2:00 PM UTC) ''Fortune'' (archived from 11 Dec 2024 07:12:11 UTC).</ref>}}
{{cquote|You know this guy, Kurzweil? I started it [his book, ''The Singularity Is Nearer'']. But he’s so&nbsp;— I really hate this stuff. I really, really&nbsp;— I think it’s a [[Dystopia|nightmare]], you know? And he presents it with such excitement. I just couldn’t take it. I think it’s so dreadful. But I will read it, because I have to, because of what I’m writing.|||Karl Ove Knausgaard<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/interactive/2024/karl-ove-knausgaard-library/ Karl Ove Knausgaard shows us the books he loves (and hates)] by Sophia Nguyen (December 6, 2024 at 8:00 a.m. EST) ''The Washington Post''.</ref>}}

[[File:PPTExponentialGrowthof Computing.jpg|thumb|A graph used by Singularity advocates ]]

In [[transhumanism|transhumanist]] and singularitarian belief, the "technological singularity" refers to a hypothetical point beyond which human [[technology]] and civilization is no longer comprehensible to the current human mind. The theory of technological singularity states that at some point in time, humans will invent a machine that through the use of [[artificial intelligence]] (AI) will be smarter than any human could ever be. This machine in turn will be capable of inventing new technologies that are even smarter. This event will trigger an [[Moore's Law|exponential explosion]] of technological advances of which the outcome and effect on humankind is heavily debated by transhumanists and singularists.

Some proponents of the theory believe that the machines eventually [[Cybernetic revolt|will see no use for humans on Earth]] and simply wipe us ([[useless eaters]]) out — their intelligence being far superior to humans, there would be probably nothing we could do about it. They also fear that the use of extremely intelligent machines to solve complex mathematical problems may lead to our extinction. The machine may theoretically respond to our question by turning all matter in our [[Solar System]] or [[Milky Way|our galaxy]] into a giant calculator, thus destroying all of humankind. 

Critics, however, believe that humans will never be able to invent a machine that matches human intelligence, let alone exceed it. They also attack the methodology that is used to "prove" the theory by suggesting that [[Moore's Law]] may be subject to the law of diminishing returns, or that other metrics used by proponents to measure [[progress]] are totally subjective and meaningless. Theorists like Theodore Modis argue that progress measured in metrics such as CPU clock speeds of conventional [[computer]]s is decreasing, refuting Moore's Law.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20060520051910/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tmodis/Kurzweil.htm The Singularity Myth] - THEODORE MODIS</ref> 

Adherents see a chance of the technological singularity arriving on [[Earth]] within the 21<sup>st</sup> century. Some of the [[wishful thinking]] may simply be the expression of a desire to avoid [[death]], since the singularity is supposed to bring the technology to reverse human aging, or to [[Mind uploading|upload human minds into computers]]. However, recent research, supported by singularitarian organizations including MIRI and the Future of Humanity Institute, does not support the [[hypothesis]] that near-term predictions of the singularity are motivated by a desire to avoid death, but instead provides some evidence that many optimistic predictions about the timing of a singularity are motivated by a desire to "gain credit for working on something that will be of relevance, but without any possibility that their prediction could be shown to be false within their current career".<ref>[http://intelligence.org/files/PredictingAI.pdf How We’re Predicting AI—or Failing To] - Stuart Armstrong & Kaj Sotala</ref><ref>[http://fora.tv/2012/10/14/Stuart_Armstrong_How_Were_Predicting_AI Stuart Armstrong- How We're Predicting AI] - The Singularity Summit 2012</ref>

Don't bother quoting [[Ray Kurzweil]] to anyone who knows a damn thing about human cognition or, indeed, [[biology]]. He's a computer science genius who has difficulty in perceiving when he's [[engineers and woo|well out of his area of expertise]].<ref>[https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/17/ray-kurzweil-does-not-understa/ [[Paul Zachary Myers|PZ Myers]]' rant] on the subject</ref>

=== Biological Superintelligence ===
Godlike AI's aren't the only proposed method of kick-starting a Technological Singularity.

Another method is using advanced biology to create extra-smart humans and/or super-intelligent living creature (e.g. "[[brain]] the size of a building, with per-pound intellect of a human"; or human with brain multiple/many times bigger than normal, with enlarged hulking body required to supply brain with oxygen and carry it around; or human brain with 100 times more neuron connectivity and 100 times more wrinkles). Yet another method is to unite humans (optionally&nbsp;— also animals and computers) into super-intelligent [[Groupthink|hive mind]] smarter than sum of it's parts (via biology, and/or cybernetic brain-machine-brain interfaces).

In both cases, it allows to make super-intellect smarter via enlargement (make super-brain bigger; assimilate more people into hive mind). Once such super-intellect becomes smart enough, he could start inventing more smart versions/modifications of himself, therefore kick-starting the feedback loop what leads to Technological Singularity.

More over, uniting everyone into hive mind [[handwave]]s the "humans become useless" problem&nbsp;— as human brains are excellent at computers, and are unlikely to become outdated enough to become useless.<ref>Tia Ghose, [https://www.livescience.com/53751-brain-could-store-internet.html The Human Brain's Memory Could Store the Entire Internet]. ''LiveScience'', 18 February 2016.</ref> The problem is&nbsp;— "bigger brain" method is slow, albeit still faster than normal scientific progress (humans take a long time to grow; modified-to-be-smarter human, due to having big brain and even bigger body to support it, would take even longer to grow; as such, the "Current Super-Brain inventing smarter Super-Brain" and "new Super Brain being ready to research" would have intervals of about 20-40 years per generation)&nbsp;— and "hive mind" method rises obvious ethical and moral concerns (though, ones smaller than the "Godlike AI" method).

Yet another method, is surgically implanting neurons into brain. It's possible to implant additional neurons into brain, therefore making it larger - which would likely make it smarter<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_size#Intelligence</ref><ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_brain</ref>; extra neurons work correctly even if they come from another biological species<ref>{{citation|title=Rat neurons repair mouse brains — and restore sense of smell|url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01222-1|year=2024}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=Human neurons implanted in a rodent’s brain lead a rat to water — and make it drink|url=https://www.statnews.com/2022/10/12/human-neurons-implanted-in-rodent-brain-lead-rat-to-water-and-make-it-drink/|year=2022}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=Human brain cells transplanted into rat brains hold promise for neuropsychiatric research|url=https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2022/10/human-rat-brain-neuron.html|year=2022}}</ref>. Cranioplasty technology can be re-purposed to increase skull volume, by assembling larger skull and/or making extensions to existing skull, to make space for now-enlarged brain. Medical Exoskeleton and/or rigid collar-like device transferring head's weight onto shoulders can be used to support now-enlarged head weight. Life support systems can be used in case brain becomes too large for organs to supply normally. This could eventually result in human having multiple times larger brain volume, which could result in corresponding increase of intelligence. Additionally, some amount of useful knowledge and memories of neuron donor may survive transition to recipient's brain. On top of all that, such "big brain" strategy is ''only'' superintelligence plan which, with current technology level, could be enacted ''right there and right now''<ref>In fact, since [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cranioplasty Cranioplasty was used since late Stone Age], with metal collars for transferring head's weight also being doable at that time - most key technologies required for that Singularity plan were already invented thousands of years ago. The only thing which was missing at that time was the idea of "humans think with their brains, so what if we make them bigger?", and ability to transplant tissues (like neurons) from one body to another without big chance of contracting infections (good disinfectants). Ability to scan brain for activity ("Yes! There's some activity in the grafts!") is invented, but not strictly required; advanced knowledge of how brain works is not required, and isn't invented even today; external life support and bionics are not required if you don't overdo the grafting; ability to store neurons in incubator comes in handy today, but isn't required if taking neurons directly from living creatures. If such plan was enacted earlier, we would definitely live in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrofuturism retrofuturistic] future - but while it wasn't enacted ''yet'', we '''''definitely''''' have everything needed for plan.</ref> - since it's unusual combination of already invented key technologies, not wholly new thing entirely and not extrapolation of currently existing technologies<ref>Artificial superintelligence/AGI requires more advanced AIs then those which are currently invented. "True" Hivemind and man-machine-interfaces require either very advanced genetics or very advanced cybernetics, neither is currently invented. Genetically-engineered super-smart humans require advanced genetics, those aren't invented yet. "Graft neurons onto brain" plan requires OK surgery, cranioplasty and primitive exoskeletons - all currently invented separately, but not combined in such peculiar way. Just like tractors, armor and cannons were invented separately in 19th century, but was combined into "tank" only in World War 1.</ref>. And on top of all that, extra neurons can be taken from nearly any source without going out of your way<ref>E.G. volunteer humans who are about to die, humans who are about to be executed, caught live vermins like rats and cockroaches, caught live hunted animals like hogs or wild rabbits, farm animals about to be killed, etc. If it has neural system, it will be extracted and used to create bio-computers or superintelligent humans. Neurons can be grown separately in special incubators, but it's easier to just grow farm animals instead.</ref>.

==Three major singularity schools==
[[Eliezer Yudkowsky]] identifies three major schools of thinking when it comes to the singularity.<ref>[http://yudkowsky.net/singularity/schools Yudkowsky.net - Three Major Singularity Schools]</ref> While all share common ground in advancing intelligence and rapidly developing technology, they differ in how the singularity will occur and the evidence to support the position (although they aren't mutually exclusive).

===Accelerating change===
Under this school of thought, it is assumed that change and development of technology and human (or AI assisted) intelligence will accelerate at an exponential rate. So change a decade ago was much faster than change a century ago, which was faster than a millennium ago. While thinking in exponential terms can lead to predictions about the future and the developments that will occur, it does mean that past events are an unreliable source of evidence for making these predictions.

===Event horizon===
The "event horizon" school posits that the post-singularity world would be unpredictable. Here, the creation of a super-human artificial intelligence will change the world so dramatically that it would bear no resemblance to the current world, or even the wildest [[science fiction]]. Indeed, our modern civilization is simply unimaginable for those living, say, in ancient Greece. This school of thought sees the singularity most like a single point event rather than a process&nbsp; indeed, it is this thesis that spawned the term "singularity". However, this view of the singularity does treat transhuman intelligence as some kind of [[magic]].

===Intelligence explosion===
This posits that the singularity is driven by a feedback cycle between intelligence-enhancing technology and intelligence itself. As Yudkowsky (who endorses this view) said, "What would humans with brain-computer interfaces do with their augmented intelligence? One good bet is that they’d design the next generation of brain-computer interfaces." When this feedback loop of technology and intelligence begins to increase rapidly, the singularity is upon us.

==Techno-faith is still faith==
{{cquote|A singularity is a sign that your model doesn't apply past a certain point, not infinity arriving in real life. |||Forum comment<ref>[http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3627012&perpage=40&pagenumber=58#post438614577 From the SomethingAwful thread] on LessWrong.</ref>}}
There is also a fourth singularity school: that it's all a load of bollocks!<ref>[http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2011/03/07/this-weeks-finds-week-311/ This Week’s Finds (Week 311)] - "This week I’ll start an interview with Eliezer Yudkowsky, who works at an institute he helped found: the Singularity Institute of Artificial Intelligence."</ref> This position is not popular with high-tech billionaires.<ref>[http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2010/06/23/singularity-schtick-hi-tech-moguls-and-the-new-york-times-may-buy-it-but-you-shouldnt/ Singularity Schtick: Hi-tech moguls and The New York Times may buy it, but you shouldn't] By John Horgan on June 23, 2010</ref>

A similar precursory concept was developed by a [[Jesuit]] priest by the name of {{wpl|Pierre Teilhard de Chardin||,}} a [[Paleontology|paleontologist]] who, like [[Russian]] [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] ascetic {{wpl|Nikolai Fedorov}} before him, was inspired by [[Darwinism]] and believed that humans could [[genetic engineering|direct their own evolution]] to bring about the resurrection and the kingdom of [[God]]. In 1949, Teilhard proposed that in the future all machines would be linked in a vast [[internet|global network]] that would [[telepathy|merge the consciousnesses of all humans]]. Eventually, this would prime an exponentially incomprehensible intelligence explosion which he termed the {{wpl|Omega Point|"Omega Point"}} which would allow humanity to [[time travel|break through the material framework of Time and Space]] and become one with God without having to die, despite God already being [[The Force|omnipresent and inside everyone]].<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/18/god-in-the-machine-my-strange-journey-into-transhumanism "God in the machine: my strange journey into transhumanism"] ''The Guardian''</ref>

To sum up, singularity might be a religion for nerds who are too smart to follow a conventional religion.

===Is the Singularity going to happen?===
{{cquote|The Singularity is a new religion – and a particularly kooky one at that. The Singularity is the coming of the [[Messiah]], [[heaven]] on [[Earth]], the [[Armageddon]], the [[End times|end of times]]. And [[fanatic]]s always think that the end of time comes in their own lifetime.|||Jaron Lanier<ref>[https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ray-kurzweil-ai-david-kushner-1234779424/ When Humans and Machines Merge: Meet Ray Kurzweil, prophet of the techno rapture. By 2045, he says, computers will surpass us in intelligence, the universe itself will become conscious, and humans will live forever] by David Kushner (February 19, 2009) ''Rolling Stone''.</ref>}}
A major issue arises from the nature of intellectual development; if an artificial intelligence needs to be raised and trained, it may take a long time between generations of artificial intelligences to get further improvements. More intelligent animals seem to generally require longer to mature, which may put another limitation on any such "explosion". Singularitarians usually respond to this problem by pointing to the trend of accelerating change. However, as noted above, Moore's Law is nearing its end, and outside of the realm of computers, the rate of increase in other things has not been exponential — airplanes and cars continue to improve, but they do not improve at the ridiculous rate of computers. It is likely that once computers hit physical limits of transistor density, their rate of improvement will fall off dramatically, and already even today, computers which are "good enough" continue to operate for many years, something which was unheard of in the 1990s, where old computers were rapidly and obviously obsoleted by new ones. Someone like Kurzweil may say that all of this is indicative of an ongoing paradigm shift whereby the rate of development of old technology (such as cars and planes) stalls while the rate of newer, more influential technology (such as AI or quantum computing) begins to increase, but claims like that can be seen as a classic example of the [[No True Scotsman]] fallacy. Additional claims which attempt to disprove the No-True-Scotsman interpretation, such as that the trend of exponential growth has existed for millions of years and that it is therefore logical to conclude that slowing growth rates of some existing technology are more likely to indicate paradigm shifts than a global change in the trend, have not been verified in a systematic, unbiased manner.

François Chollet points out that, despite ever-increasing amounts of money and time spent on scientific research, scientific progress is still roughly linear.<ref>[https://medium.com/@francois.chollet/the-impossibility-of-intelligence-explosion-5be4a9eda6ec The impossibility of intelligence explosion] François Chollet, Nov 27 2017</ref><ref>[https://wayback.archive.org/web/20160708082616/http://www.sphere-engineering.com/blog/the-singularity-is-not-coming.html The Singularity is not coming] - François Chollet, 2012/08/10</ref> Despite exponentially increasing numbers of software programmers writing code for exponentially more powerful computers, software still sucks.<ref group=note>See also {{wpl|Wirth's law|Wirth's law|,}} which states that software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware is becoming faster.</ref> The easy problems have already been solved, and continuing progress requires solving harder and harder problems, which require larger and larger teams of people. "Exponential progress meets exponential friction."

Anyway, in the [[real world]], exponential growth never continues forever, since it will always eventually encounter some type of resource depletion that slows it down, turning it into sigmoidal (or "logistic") growth;<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20190905183806/http://www.zo.utexas.edu/faculty/sjasper/images/52.11.gif Exponential growth vs. logistic growth]. Archived from zo.utexas.edu, 5 September 2019.</ref> claims that this resource depletion will occur only after AI reaches superhuman intelligence have already been addressed. Besides, even when exponential growth does continue forever, it can by definition never reach infinity.

Moreover, the choice of events that mark a major progression of computer technology, humanity or biological evolution in general by proponents of technological singularity is often arbitrary and there's a lack of solid and widely accepted criteria to justify the choice, which makes arguments about the upcoming technological singularity highly vulnerable to problems like cherry-picking and cognitive biases like wishful thinking, thus invalidating the whole argument, making the arguments for an upcoming technological singularity a mere statement about personal religious belief with a facade of science and technology, instead of a serious and sound prediction about the future.

Even worse, the notion of accelerated change directly contradicts with the observed fact that the speed of technological growth has been decelerating in most fields of science and technology for decades,<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Russell J. Funk |last1=Park |first1=Michael |last2=Leahey |first2=Erin |last3=Funk |first3=Russell J. |coauthors=Michael Park, Erin Leahey |title=Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time |journal=Nature |date=2023-01 |volume=613 |issue=7942 |pages=138–144 |doi=10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x |language=en |issn=1476-4687}}</ref> and a simple fact is, the exponential growth of computer technology does not always translate to other areas of science and technology, for example, in medicine, there's [[Eroom's law]], which states that drug development has consistently gotten slower and more difficult in the last few decades,<ref name="MyUser_Pipeline.corante.com_October_3_2015c">[https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/eroom-s-law Eroom's Law] by Derek Lowe (8 Mar 20127:24 AM ET) ''Science''.</ref> and computer-based ways for drug development like high-throughput sreening and computer-assisted drug design have failed to reverse this trend so far, which is a clear indicator that the impressive growth in computer technology does not translate to medicine, and it is not unlikely that the recent growth of artificial intelligence will fail to translate to medicine as well.

Even by the most conservative estimates, if global high-tech civilization is maintained to ≈2100 without civilization being ruined<ref group=note>e.g. nuclear war, running out of resources, or turning into stagnant dystopia.</ref>, the Singularity will happen. The question is whether or not the Singularity could happen earlier, how it would happen, exactly when it would happen, are we ready for it, is it a good thing, and so on and so forth.

It is also worth noting, that if Singularity happens, it won't look like ''any'' proposed prognosis of Singularity. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrofuturism People of past couldn't accurately predict what would happen in 20 years] - and Singularity situation is even more complicated, due to wildly superintelligent supergeniuses incomprehensible to normal humans becoming increasingly more wildly superintelligent.

===Problems with intelligence explosion===
Intelligence explosion is usually thought of as an intelligent program/person, that modifies its/their own code and body to become more intelligent, and further accelerate the process of modification.<ref>[https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Recursive_self-improvement Recursive self-improvement], ''LessWrong''.</ref> However:

#For a program of certain size <math>n</math> bits, there can only be <math>2^n</math> possible bit strings. So, recursive self-improvement cannot continue indefinitely.
#This requires massive computing power: Even if RSI is possible, it would need extreme quantities of computing power. At every stage, the program would write down multiple programs, execute them to check whether they are more intelligent than itself. So, either the starting AI is a very highly competent programmer, or an extremely massive number of programs would be checked. Executing every program would take some time and/or power, thus making the process extremely long and/or power-intensive. Moreover, the AI would have to learn extensively to become competent as an agent in the wider world. It would require computing power to process the information.
#The assumption that intelligence is one-dimensional. It is likely that there would be a tradeoff between capabilities in different fields. So, program 1 would have to decide between various candidates for program 1.1, some of whom are more intelligent than it. How will it do so?
#Researcher Yamploskiy has raised the concern that errors could accumulate during self-improvement, stopping the program from functioning at some stage.<ref>Roman V. Yampolskiy, [https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1502/1502.06512.pdf ''From Seed AI to Technological Singularity via Recursively Self-Improving Software'']. Computer Engineering and Computer Science Speed School of Engineering, University of Louisville.</ref>
#Like stated above, intelligence explosion does not always translate to the explosion of progress in science and technology, and there have been real-world examples where the exponential growth of computer power does not accelerate discoveries in other disciplines of science and technology. In short, we can’t simply equate the growth of computer power to the growth of intelligence.
#All this is before factoring in the {{wpl|code bloat||,}} {{wpl|software rot||,}} {{wpl|software bloat||,}} {{wpl|Cruft#Software cruft|software cruft|,}} and {{wpl|feature creep||.}} Basically, new programs tend to be less efficient and more clunky than old programs, requiring even more computing power to function, which partially compensates the increase of computing power. In simpler words: programmers become more clumsy ham-handed klutzes faster, than computers become stronger.
#Even for wild superintelligence, ability to build things is limited by local materials and tools. In order to build something mind-boggling, a supergenius must build first build better tools to build better tools and mine better materials, while also researching any prerequisite technologies of wanted technology. While superintelligence's tech would be multiple epochs ahead of out tech, it would still be only a crude cobbled-up imitation of what said superintelligence has planned "on paper".<ref group=note>To visualise, what kind of problems must be overcome to build futuristic things with modern materials and tools: ye can't build a working machinegun with Late Medieval era materials and tools, even if ye have blueprints, knowledge of how machinegun works and lots of money - since machining is too crude, and black powder would instantly clog the automatic mechanism. So ye make crude smoothbore manual-action multi-shot repeater (pump-action, lever-action, bolt-action, etc), chambered in musket rounds and loaded with paper bullets (more quick reload then powder-and-shot) - which is still better than ye normal arquebus, shooting stronger bullets at faster rate. But yer King wants dakka, so yer next task is invent lathes/machining tools for fine parts and standartization, and upgrade alchemistry to chemistry for smokeless powder. But yer serfs didn't even invent printing press and looms yet, so ye must make them first. Smokeless powder is stronger than blackpowder, using same mass of smokeless powder in arquebus results in violent explosion; ye need wholly new calibers and re-armament of army. Heck, even paper bullets are still rare outside of ye lab, gotta fix this. And so on and so forth.</ref> .
#AI-poisoners are engaging in sabotage. They [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7P9mGa5Hgk poison the data and turn code into mess dangerous to AIs, but undetectable and safe for humans]. This is disruptive already, but AGIs would be better at sabotage than humans, and superintelligences would be better still. As such, this could result in Singularity being used against Singularity itself, halting itself.
#Communication between creatures of wholly different intelligence levels can be tricky. While it's likely that superintelligence would easily understand normal humans, it's also possible that superintelligence would often fail understand humans (like humans fail to understand animals).

==Extraterrestrial singularity==
Extraterrestrial technological singularities might become evident from acts of stellar/cosmic engineering. One such possibility for example would be the construction of {{wpl|Dyson Sphere||s}} that would result in the altering of a star's electromagnetic spectrum in a way detectable from Earth. Both [[SETI]] and Fermilab have incorporated that possibility into their searches for alien life.<ref>[http://home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Fermilab_search.htm Fermilab Dyson sphere searches] updated February 26, 2016  D. Carrigan</ref><ref>[https://wayback.archive.org/web/20170623053724/http://archive.seti.org/pdfs/Shostak-spring2009-EnS.pdf When Will We Find the Extraterrestrials?] Seth Shostak 2009</ref>

A different view of the concept of singularity is explored in the science fiction book ''Dragon's Egg'' by Robert Lull Forward, in which an [[Extraterrestrial|alien civilization]] on the surface of a [[neutron star]],<ref group=note>No ordinary matter&nbsp;— let alone living things&nbsp;— can exist given the gravitational field strength on the surface of a neutron star. And that's before we talk about highly magnetized neutron stars (magnetars), whose magnetic fields are the strongest in the known Universe&nbsp;— so strong, in fact, they can wipe clean your credit card from 10,000 light years away. Keep out!</ref> being observed by human space explorers, goes from Stone Age to technological singularity in the space of about an hour in human time, leaving behind a large quantity of [[Cryptography|encrypted data]] for the human explorers that are expected to take over a million years (for humanity) to even develop the technology to decrypt.<ref>Robert L. Forward, ''{{wpl|Dragon's Egg||.}}'' Del Ray, 1980. {{isbn|0345286464}}.</ref>

Definitive evidence of extraterrestrial civilizations has not been found.<ref>[http://www.astronomy.com/news/2017/05/tabby-star-weird-behavior The weird star that totally isn’t aliens is dimming again: The mystery of Tabby’s Star kicks in again.] by John Wenz (May 19, 2017) ''Astronomy Magazine''.</ref>

==See also==
*[[Dystopia]]
*[[Futurism]]
*[[3D printing]]

==External links==
*[http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/28165 Science Saturday: The Great Singularity Debate], [[Eliezer Yudkowsky]] vs. [[Massimo Pigliucci]], Blogging Heads
*[http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier/lanier_p1.html One-Half of a Manifesto], Jaron Lanier, edge.org
*Michael E. Zimmerman. [http://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/view/107/214 The Singularity: A Crucial Phase in Divine Self Actualization?] ''Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy'', Vol 4, No 1-2 (2008)
*[https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/?s=Kurzweil Biologist PZ Myers criticizes Kurzweil]
*[https://www.wired.com/2017/04/the-myth-of-a-superhuman-ai/ The Myth of a Superhuman AI]
*Charles Stross, who recognizes the Singularity is science ''fiction'', wrote [http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2011/06/reality-check-1.html Three Arguments Against the Singularity].
*Ramez Naam, another science fiction writer, argues against the Singularity in [http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2014/02/the-singularity-is-further-tha.html The Singularity Is Further Than It Appears] and [http://hplusmagazine.com/2010/11/11/top-five-reasons-singularity-misnomer/ Top Five Reasons 'The Singularity' Is A Misnomer]
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hKG5l_TDU8 I Am the Very Model of a Singularitarian]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

[[Category:Futurism]]
[[Category:Mathematics]]
[[Category:Oligarchic escapes]]
[[Category:Science woo]]
[[Category:Transhumanism]]
[[Category:Technology]]

Categories: Futurism, Mathematics, Oligarchic escapes, Science woo, Transhumanism, Technology