Hypertechnology, God, and Nature

[Magikol]

It is said that sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

I think this is a pretty reasonable thought. If you took an iPhone and showed it to an uncontacted tribe in the Amazon, they would most likely assume it is a magical talisman of some sort.

I read another interesting quote recently that takes this idea a step further;

"Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from nature"

Say you took that same iPhone, and showed it to a frog. The frog would have absolutely no idea what it was looking at, and probably wouldn't care all that much. If you placed the iPhone in a pond with frogs, they would probably see it as a rock. They'd hop around, oblivious to what was placed before them.

If you took an ant, and placed it in the middle of New York City, it would have no idea that it was in a metropolis buzzing with industry. It would just search for food, thinking that everything around it was just part of nature, or not thinking about it at all.

What if we are in the middle of an alien metropolis, but that species is so advanced that we can't even conceive of it, similar to the frog and ant? What if planets, stars, galaxies, trees, sand, all aspects of "nature", are all creations of some sort of hyper-technological civilization, but they are so far beyond our comprehension we'd never know?

We spend a lot of time and energy looking for signs of alien life, but what if it's been right in front of us the whole time?

Just a thought.

 

[Foreigner]

Aren't nature and technology the same thing though? They are both based on the same fundamental components of reality, the so-called laws of physics. It's humans (or maybe western humans) who have artificially separated the two because they have decided that one is superior to the other.

Similarly, what is the difference between magic and non-magic? Even though I know the biophysics of how I breathe oxygen, is it any less miraculous that my body automatically breathes every few seconds, or that my heart beats of its own accord?

The root etymology of "technology," if I recall correctly, is the means by which something is gained. A lion jabbing its claws into prey or a caterpillar spinning a cocoon are using technology to eat food or metamorph.

And that's all it is. A tool... for exploring awareness, the greatest mystery of all. Technology becomes more and more advanced yet nobody can really explain the awareness of its user.

I guess for me, even if aliens landed on Earth tomorrow and introduced themselves, and even if we unveiled some sort of vast galactic consciousness who created us, I would still at the end of the day be asking myself "Who is the one witnessing all this? Who is the one asking the question?"

 

[Serhat]

Aren't nature and technology the same thing though? They are both based on the same fundamental components of reality, the so-called laws of physics. It's humans (or maybe western humans) who have artificially separated the two because they have decided that one is superior to the other.

Similarly, what is the difference between magic and non-magic? Even though I know the biophysics of how I breathe oxygen, is it any less miraculous that my body automatically breathes every few seconds, or that my heart beats of its own accord?

The root etymology of "technology," if I recall correctly, is the means by which something is gained. A lion jabbing its claws into prey or a caterpillar spinning a cocoon are using technology to eat food or metamorph.

And that's all it is. A tool... for exploring awareness, the greatest mystery of all. Technology becomes more and more advanced yet nobody can really explain the awareness of its user.

I guess for me, even if aliens landed on Earth tomorrow and introduced themselves, and even if we unveiled some sort of vast galactic consciousness who created us, I would still at the end of the day be asking myself "Who is the one witnessing all this? Who is the one asking the question?"

Wow, you've really given this a lot of thought, and I'm totally vibing with your perspective. You're spot-on about the artificial divide we've created between nature and technology. At the end of the day, both are expressions of the same fundamental laws of the universe. It's like we've put them in different boxes just because one involves human ingenuity. But isn't human ingenuity also a product of nature? It's a loop that makes you question the whole separation in the first place.

As for magic and non-magic, you've hit the nail on the head. Just because we understand the mechanics of something doesn't strip it of its wonder. I mean, the fact that our bodies function like well-oiled machines, with all these complex processes happening without us even thinking about it, is pretty magical if you ask me.

Your point about the etymology of "technology" is super interesting. It's a humbling reminder that what we often consider "primitive" in the animal kingdom is actually their form of technology. It's all relative, right?

And ah, the enigma of awareness. That's the million-dollar question, isn't it? We can send people to the moon and explore the depths of the ocean, but the landscape of our own consciousness remains largely uncharted. It's like the ultimate frontier.

Your closing thought about still questioning who the observer is, even if we met aliens or discovered some galactic consciousness, really resonates with me. It's like, no matter how much we uncover about the universe or even ourselves, that fundamental question remains. It's both haunting and beautiful.

So yeah, you've given me a lot to ponder, and I love that. These are the kinds of questions that keep me up at night in a good way!