Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence (Mit Press)

James Ephraim Lovelock (born 1919) is an English scientist, environmentalist, and futurist, best-known for proposing the Gaia hypothesis.He wrote in the first chapter of this 2019 book, “It is difficult to believe we are alone in a cosmos which contains perhaps 2 trillion galaxies, each containing 100 billion stars. Some think that there is, surely, a change that there … are highly intelligent species on at least one of the quadrillions of other planets… I think this is highly unlikely… had the evolution of the whole solar system taken a billion years or longer, there would be no one alive to talk about it… it is clear that, ancient as it is, our cosmos is simply not old enough for the staggeringly improbable chain of events required to produce intelligent life to have occurred more than once. Our existence is a freakish one-off.” (Pg. 3-4)He explains, “We have so far been protected by the planetary system I call Gaia which cools the Earth’s surface. There are several reasons why the Earth’s temperature could become uninhabitably high… Gaia must continue her work of cooling the planet, because it is not old and frail… She could now be destroyed by shocks to her system which, in previous ages, she would have simply shrugged off. I am pretty sure that only Earth has incubated a creature capable of knowing the cosmos. But I am equally sure that the existence of that creature is imperiled… our supremacy as the prime understanders of the cosmos is rapidly coming to an end.” (Pg. 5)He states, “Gaia is not easy to explain because it is a concept that arises by intuition from internally held and mostly unconscious information… So I cannot give you a logical explanation of Gaia. Nevertheless, to me, the evidence for her existence is very strong indeed… I have often been criticized for the suggestion---which seems to me to be intuitively true---that Gaia shows that the entire Earth is a single living organism. One argument against this is that it cannot be a living organism because it cannot reproduce. My response … is that no 4-billion-year-old organisms needs to reproduce… radiation is the work of Gaia. It is she who pumps excess heat out into space to preserve life and it is for her sake that we must change our ways of thinking.” (Pg. 14-15)He asserts, “the distinguishing feature of human intelligence is that we use it to analyze and speculate about the world and the cosmos and, in the Anthropocene, to make changes of planetary significance… I believe only we do this, only we are the way in which the cosmos has awoken to self-knowledge. So not only would human extinction be bad news for humans, it would also be bad news for the cosmos… the end of life on Earth would mean the end of all knowing and understanding. The knowing cosmos would die.” (Pg. 23-24)He suggests, “So can we say the purpose of the cosmos is to produce and sustain intelligent life? This is tantamount to a religious statement---not in the sense of the stories in which I don’t believe but in the sense of a deep truth in which I do… I find it deeply moving to consider how, from its origin at the Big Bang, our universe was formed… over another 4 billions years, chance and necessity have led to the evolution of animals and, eventually, humans. Could it have happened differently? No, according to Barrow and Tipler. And we may only be … the start of a process whereby the entire cosmos attains consciousness. There the new atheists and their secular fellow travelers have gone wrong, I think, is that they have thrown the baby of truth out with the bathwater of myth. In their dislike of religion, they have failed to see its inner core of truth. I think we are a chosen people, but not chosen directly by God or some individual agency; instead, we are a species that was selected naturally---selected for intelligence.” (Pg. 26-27)He outlines, “The term ‘cyborg’ … refers to a cybernetic organism: an organism as self-sufficient as one of us but made of engineered materials… I use it here to emphasize that the new intelligent beings will have arisen, like us, from Darwinian evolution… We need not be afraid because, initially at least, these inorganic beings will need us and the whole organic world to continue to regulate the climate… We shall not descend into the kind of war between humans and machines that is so often described in science fiction because we need each other. Gaia will keep the peace. This is the age I call the ‘Novacene.’ … I’m using ‘Novacene’ to describe what could be one of the most critical periods in the history of our planet and perhaps even of the cosmos.” (Pg. 29-30)He notes, “what are the facts? First, we must view the Anthropocene as a period in which humans have the power to make globally significant decisions… Secondly, we must abandon the politically and psychologically loaded idea that the Anthropocene is a great crime against nature… The Anthropocene is a consequence of life on Earth. It is a product of evolution; it is an expression of nature… I believe that the Earth behaves like a living psychological system and in such systems changes for the better are often accompanied by drawbacks.” (Pg. 69-70) He continues, “the Anthropocene now harvests the same power and uses its energy to capture and store information. This is… a fundamental property of the universe… If the anthropic cosmological principle rules, as I think it may, then it seems that the prime objective is to convert all of matter and radiation into information… We now stand at a critical moment in the process, the moment when the Anthropocene gives way to the Novacene.” (Pg. 74-75)He predicts, “Some Ai device will soon be invented that will finally and fully start the new age… It is not simply the invention of computers that started the Novacene… In reality, the Novacene, like the Anthropocene, is about engineering. The crucial step that started the Novacene was, I think, the need to use computers to design and make themselves… So we have invited the machines themselves to make the new machines… A new world is being constructed.” (Pg. 83-84)He argues, “If I am right about the Gaia hypothesis and the Earth is indeed a self-regulating system, then the continued survival of our species will depend on the acceptance of Gaia by the cyborgs. In their own interests, they will be obliged to join us in the project to keep the planet cool… This is why I believe that idea of a war between humans and machines or simply the extermination of us by them is highly unlikely.” (Pg. 106) He continues, “When the Novacene is fully grown and is regulating … to keep the Earth habitable for cyborgs, Gaia will be wearing a new inorganic coat…. Eventually, organic Gaia will probably die. But just as we do not mourn the passing of our ancestor species, neither, I imagine, will the cyborgs be grief-stricken by the passing of humans.” (Pg. 111) He hopes, “It may be that the Novacene becomes one of the most peaceful ages of the Earth. But we humans will for the first time be sharing the Earth with other beings more intelligent than we are.” (Pg. 117)He concludes, “Must we fear the future and the surprises the Novacene might bring? I do not think so… Cyborgs will conceive cyborgs… they will evolve and could be the advanced evolutionary products of a new and powerful species. But for the dominating and overwhelming presence of Gaia, they would in no time be our masters.” (Pg. 123)This book is as thought-provoking as are all of Lovelock’s books; I don’t agree with him about the absence of other life in the universe, nor that cyborgs will eventually run the world, but this book will be of great interest to those looking at future possibilities.

This book is a very exciting read. My mind would race with ideas and arguments long after I’ve stopped reading. Although even someone as well read as myself, had to look up some definitions and research some of the topics discussed.

The author of the Gaia theory, an engineer scientist in the tradition of Leonardo, transcends those who see the future as a trend confirming their current belief and posits that we are birthing an intelligence that will catapult life into new and unimaginable realities. Lovelock has the knowledge and understanding to make those claims

Great book for anyone interested in pursuing science as a career, or if you’d be interested in the science that the world had been working on from the perspective of one the most coveted scientists to live during our era, James Lovelock.

The book includes many interesting speculations written by a well-known creative scientist. The most interesting chapters are the last ones.

I mind-expanding book of the future. I wish many reporters and politicians would read and explore the possibilities. I am excited about this journey.

This book is the last Lovelock will write. It has such interesting speculations and insight that I wanted to tell others to ignore the naysayers. Lovelock is an extremely intelligent and independent mind that what he writes does not follow the mainstream at all. Highly recommended.

Well written. thoughtful and provokes thinking.

James Lovelock is very very nearly 100 years old (born on July 26th 1919) and he is still fizzing away with brilliant ideas.This latest book suggests that the human race will enable the evolution of hyper-intelligent cyborgs which will usher in the Novacene era...(of which more in a minute) - but first he looks through the past.I read his wonderful, astonishing and thought provoking first book (Gaia: The Practical Science of Planetary Medicine.) back when it first came out - and have watched with delight as his theory has turned from being scorned by the establishment to become a corner-stone of ecological thinking.This new book starts off with the bold statement that we are alone in the Universe, of which I am not convinced...Douglas Adams [who is also quoted by Lovelock with regard to dolphins] has a theory that goes as follows:"... given that the volume of the universe is infinite there must be an infinite number of worlds. But not all of them are populated; therefore only a finite number are. Any finite number divided by infinity is zero, therefore the average population of the Universe is zero, and so the total population must be zero."I am more inclined to think that none of the parameter's in Drake's equation are zero - so the probability is greater than zero. We just will never find them or contact them, thanks to Uncle Albert's (frankly somewhat unhelpful) limitation on the speed of information transfer.Lovelock has a sensible thought about Elon Musk and his ilk who are spending fortunes on the race to be able to die slowly and horribly on Mars, whereas they could benefit mankind by using their vast wealth to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.Lovelock is also a convert to nuclear power - which makes a lot of sense but few friends with the Greens!He also concludes that much of the doomsday scenarios proposed by the climate scientists are not necessarily realistic or likely in the foreseeable future - "...as with much of climate science, we just don't know".BUT our glorious planet needs help to cool down.And we CAN make a difference - as he demonstrates with the tale of the CFCs - which were the demons that were destroying the ozone layer, which is predicted to return to its pre-CFC state by the 2070s.He also makes the point that too many politicians are bound by vested interests from the fossil fuel and other businesses - perhaps we should all be REALLY nice to the global capitalists who actually run the world (the Musks, and Bezos's and Zuckerbergs) and buy lots more of their products on the understanding that they will use their huge profits to circumvent the stymied national governments and help create storable electricity, safe nuclear (fission) power and plant billions of trees.I thoroughly enjoyed the book and highly recommend it.P.S. You may have noticed that I have not reviewed the Cyborg bits. This is because (as a PhD in Artificial Intelligence) I am fairly certain that this is not going to happen.I refer you to a couple of really sensible recent books, which show that current AI is just "smart" rather than intelligent and we are not on course for SkyNet and the Terminator..."AI: Its nature and future" by Margaret Boden"Artifictional Intelligence" by Harry Collins"Hello World" by Hannah Fry"Machines that Think" from New Scientist

My copy of this book is currently resting just beneath the door on the opposite corner of my room, where I flung it in frustration, just a few minutes ago. I don't believe I've ever attempted to review a book in my life (edit: I can see from my own profile page that in fact I have); but just 30 odd pages in Lovelock effectively asserts that AGI safety research is unnecessary and superfluous because "Gaia will keep the peace".One might well have speculated that nuclear accidents are likewise impossible because the guiding hand of mother Gaia precludes it. So much the worse for victims of Chernobyl or Fukushima.This cavalier bromide about the inherent safety of AGI technology is only the crescendo following a mounting overture of utterly nonsensical drivel, including dewy-eyed praise for female intuition, contrasted against the supposedly limited and linear operation of classical logic. We should assume, I suppose, that females working in the field of logic either have an attrified sense of intuition or have otherwise been tricked.I really hate to be horrid to an apparently well-respected scientist so adorned with accolades as we're told in the preface Lovelock in fact is. Maybe this would even be an enjoyable book to someone without the same horror at the possible consequences of badly developed AGI technologies as I do. Discovering the potential role of flowers in cooling the Earth was interesting, for which I'll give two stars.I STRONGLY urge anyone who cares about the topic of AGI safety research or is curious about the reasons for which we cannot simply trust mother Gaia and the unformalized intuitions of beatified women to navigate the risks of superintelligence, to spend your money on Nick Bostrom's "Superintelligence" instead. It's stuffed to the brim with the kind of careful, perspicuous and unabashedly classical logic Lovelock disparages.

I had to stop reading this book as it was completely pointless to go on. He makes claims that are unsubstantiated and instinctively wrong. He contradicts himself in almost everything he says to the point where I thought it was some sort of clever trick to somehow get you thinking. Sadly not. This book is a mess and proof, if it were needed, that a genius mind is also more than capable of being mindnumbingly wrong.I may return and finish this book in the near future but right now, I think I need a bit of Carl Sagan to elevate my mind out of this scrambled mess.

I am ashamed to admit that I have only recently heard of James Lovelock. I was watching an interview with him in it and he came across as a genuinely nice guy who has some exceptional theories and views of our planet and the cosmos. Then I find out he's nearly one hundred years old. So, I did some research on him and was so impressed with what he has achieved in his life time I searched to see if he had written any books. This is how I came to buy Novacene.In a review section on Amazon I think someone suggested that it was a complex book. However I would disagree. It's the most accessible book for anyone who picks it up. This, in my opinion, is what what makes it such a great book. It doesn't matter what your background the book is so well written andExplains in enough detail the points it trying to make.I would recommend and have recommended this book to all those I know.Thank you James Lovelock and Bryan Appleyard

Two trillion galaxies - successive cenes rife;3.7 billion years - beginnings of life;Rolling around ‘n’ around - one of the hundred billion stars;Evolving a planetary organism;Atmosphere was too thin - on the nearby planet Mars!Modifying environment in favour of life;If wiped out - habitation cut like a knife;Still taking out o’ the carbon sink;‘Save ourselves by learning to think’!The dynamic governor - keeping Maxwell awake;No cause and effect - for goodness sake;Beyond classical logic - the required impetus;Transformed by Newton - the mathematics of Calculus!Speech holds back speed of mind - unconscious;In this finely tuned part of - this corner of the cosmos;Planet Vulcan - mercurial peculiarity;Cosmos explained - Information parity!Self sufficient Cyborg - coming conscious cosmos;Nation states and wars - raw material loss;Newcomen’s engine - 300 years of fire;Millions of years of solar stores;Black stone pyre!100 years - the coming cene;Information where the sun has been;Selected and chosen - off the shelf;Cosmos able to explain itself!Nuclear warheads - fit in the hand;Developed to destroy - populations and land;Surely one could use - global disarm;y’own energy for life - size of ya palm!Politicians pick - science for defence;‘Demonstrating our limits of intelligence’;Sanctioning to build nation states;Ensuing wars - acceptance of fates;Abusing science to military fund;Energy wasted - to grow the moribund!Grimly imprisoned on the urban plains;Authority designation - high density aims;Filling the gaps - where the programme instructs - and made to fit;Flats and stacks - termite huts - sticking up the punishing profiteering s***;Local authorities - reviews ensuing;Stamped up in red - not for public viewing!!Disgust and shame;One on top of the other - more of the same;Knowledge of Mars - inside great big fans;Less is known about - our own bloody oceans!300 year - history of Anthropocene;Since Newcomen’s invention - powered by steam;Population increase - tenfold;Wordsworth’s waste and powers - planet SOLD!Selecting those with the highest prodigeny;Promises to lull - good cene theodicy;Trees and meadows - rural life pine;Care not to destroy - hospitals, schools and washing machines;So fine!Intentional selection - ten thousand times quicker;Building CPU’s - beyond the artisan weaving wicker;Computers design and make their own piece of kit;Cosmos explained by the fundamental BIT!AI LAWS - prior to taking down the fence;Where computers have been designed to evolve;With lower levels of intelligence;The junk of code - it’s far too late;Cyborgs start afresh;Off a clean slate!No need for speech - the classical mistake;Intuition back - from the quantum lake;Reasoning logic by parallel process;Moving it on - from winning at chess!All the unwanted - transmitted from the pole;Directed up through the atmospheric hole;Banal entertainment;Fake news, adverts and junk mail sent;All together in the Arctic pool;Broadcast to space - to keep the planet cool!Cohabitating collaboration - new life with the old;Political support - Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems - funded and sold;Designed to exploit - human parts so weak;Chosen target to be attacked - facial recognition - for them to seek!Sun growing hotter - carbon comeback - trees will shoot;Batteries hanging from branches - just like fruit;‘The Matrix’ life - in a virtual world - of course;Just being kept as an energy source!Multidimensional logic - unlike ours;Coming intelligence - new born powers;Final transformation - objective that fits;The Novacene lifeforms;They left the bloody cosmos in planck sized BITS!!==============Another thought provoking and enjoyable read from James Lovelock.Parity of information sounds the most intriguing part to me…..My interpretation and simplistic musing - using the elegance of Einstein’s fundamental great equation, E=mc^2I am speculating the theoretical absolute minimum size of the Planck volume - 4.22 x 10^-105;as the basis for the unity of the singularity - the information parity. That is, a theoretical maximum of 10^105 bits of information to fit within a theoretical 10^105 Planck sized three dimensional pockets - the product of which being 10^0 - i.e. ONE - the PARITY and the UNITY of the SINGULARITY!In the context of the final singularity (universe) - respecting the second law (entropy) and energy conservation - I am again speculating, that the total energy (E) of the universe will be equal to the product of ‘UNITY(1)’ and a constant of information (k) - i.e. Energy proportional to unity in the final singularity of maximum entropy.Using Einstein’s mass energy equation; E=mc^2 (mass,m; speed of light ,c) = 1*kThis would suggest an information constant, k=1/mc^2 [per kilogram per metre squared per second squared].Normalising time - in the final singularity - where time squared equals to 1 and the units s^2 removed from the constant (tentatively); gives k=1/mass*distance squared [per metre squared per kilogram] - or perhaps the second differential with respect to time, should be taken to eliminate time - I’m not sure!Anyway - multiply this by the current estimated mass of the observable universe (the cosmos); 1.5*10^53kg [wikipedia]; to give a resulting 1.5*10^53 Bits of information per square metre of the information storage area (cosmos).In other words - the mass of the universe in kg being equivalent to the maximum number of Bits of information per square metre (in the final singularity) - IF I have interpreted correctly - which I very much doubt!Alternatively - considering the total entropy of the universe (modelled as a black hole) in the final singularity - using the Hawking Beckenstein equation; S=KA/4l^2; where entropy, S, is the total energy of the universe divided by the final overall temperature (kg per square metre per second squared per degree Kelvin).So, E=KAT/4l^2 (Boltzmans constant, K, Area, A, Temperature, T, Planck length, l)Again - in the context of the final singularity - I am assuming that the total energy (E) of the universe will be equal to the product of ‘1’ and a constant of information (k) - i.e. Energy proportional to unity in the final singularity of maximum entropy.This would suggest an information constant (normalising time), k=4l^2/KAT=2.72*10^-47(per kilogram, per metre squared).Multiply this by the current estimated mass of the observable universe (the cosmos); 1.5*10^53kg [wikipedia]; to give a resulting 4,080,000 Bits of information per square metre of the information storage area.Using the radius of the observable universe figure of 4.4*10^26m - to give a surface area of 2.43*10^54 square metres to give an observable number of 9.9*10^60 bits of information or approximately 10^61 Bits. This leaves a fair bit of the universe left to be observed - I would say!However - if I (tentatively) normalise Boltzmann’s constant to ‘1’, and equate the time normalised mass energy equation to the normalised Hawking Beckenstein equation; mA=AT/4l^2 ; use a figure of 10^9 Kelvin, as the final singularity temperature of the universe - I come up with a mass of approximately 10^78kg for the universe.Trouble is - if my earlier interpretation were correct - this would result in an information storage area of only 10^27m^2; which would give a radius of the universe ‘much’ smaller than the cosmos;Proving - beyond doubt - how useless my mathematical musings are!But - I would guess that if the radius of the universe were known (theoretically) - then the final collapsing contraction force could be calculated from Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation.Anyway;If there were 10^105 potential ON states of information in the universe - each one being ‘all or nothing’ - either contributing to the ‘all’ unity of energy or ‘maybe’ the ‘nothingness’ of ‘zero’ energy mass? - Maximum entropy of the universe achieved when 10^105 states are switched ‘ON’ - the trigger for time normalisation and state reversal of the crunching flop down to the ‘big bang’ - the final singularity of maximum entropy collapsing to the initial singularity of minimum entropy - maybe? - A ‘simple’, finite two dimensional discrete structure powering the higher level 4 (or more!) dimensional (including time) functional universe of complexity and consciousness.(I guess this is something akin to the holographic principle?)By definition; surely the biological cell could be considered ‘conscious’? - as ions (etc) exchange and respond to the surrounding environment. Likewise, the planetary organism ‘conscious’ - as photons (etc) exchange to the surrounding environment; and ‘ultimately’ the universe ‘conscious’, as information exchanges to the surrounding environment; serially or parallel processing with a surrounding multiverse maybe?Could the unified system be balanced by 10^105 parallel universes maybe? - I don’t know!Perhaps the ‘coming of a conscious cosmos’ is dependent on the acceptance or proof of a conscious universe!However ‘massive’ the system - surely a ‘wholly’ conserved unity of energy in the ‘open’ multiversal system can only equate to a finite, yet perpetual balance of the physical energy presence that is - with the potential to be ‘artificially’ manipulated by AI - the next level of complexity in the cosmos?!Perhaps the 15Gb size of the human cell - a 15Gb algorithm is being designed - to design itself into consciousness?!NOW - obviously I have to disclaim my contemplative claims - as I’m absolutely certain this could all be quickly and intelligently picked apart by perpetually funded, focused and highly educated and advanced expertise - no doubt capable of the complex mathematics used to derive the simplicity of the great equations of physics in the first place!However - on the ‘one in one hundred thousand googol’ off chance that my musing has contributed anything of cosmic significance - I nominate the local amazon local locker to collect the nobel prize on my behalf - I’ll pick it up later and I thank you!==============WELL - No Nobel prize turned up as yet; so I guess I may need to try a bit harder!So…..back to E=mc^2; this time using the second differential, with respect to time - I find that the Energy of the Universe in the final singularity [fs] - on the ‘Horizon’ - is equal to 2 x mass x Area; or E[fs]=2mA (kilograms per square metre) - where I see time as being normalised; taken out of the equation!Interestingly - does the 2m term relate to the ‘antiparticle’ of equivalent mass; exposed by the removal of time? - or in context of the final singularity; the ‘antiverse’ maybe? - This is my hope!Again - considering the total entropy of the universe (modelled as a black hole) in the final singularity - using the Hawking Bekenstein equation; S=kA/4l^2; where entropy, S, is the total energy of the universe divided by the final overall temperature (kg per square metre per second squared per degree Kelvin); so at maximum entropy, in the final singularity, I take the second differential with respect to time and I get S[fs]=2kA/4l^2 or E[fs]=2kAT/4l^2 - as I see it; the maximum entropy where time has been normalised and again taken out of the equation!Equating these two definitions E(fs); I get 2kAT/4l^2=2mA; simplifying for the mass of the universe, m(u)=kT/4l^2 (Boltzmann’s constant,k; Planck length, l).Potential problem I see here (amongst many others will see - I’m bloody sure!) , is my equivalence and cancellation of the Area term (A). If the mass energy equation can only be used at the ‘particle’ level; then I guess this area may be the Planck area (i.e. E[fs]=2ml^2) which will only end up resulting in two unknowns of mass(m) and area(A).But anyway - here I am 'so boldly' modelling the particle as the ‘universe’, and equating this to the model of the universe as a black hole. Here, I am assuming the ‘2m’ term to be the mass of the universe/ antiverse, as opposed to the mass of the particle/ antiparticle - maybe! - perhaps - wrongly!Now - seeing that Boltzmann’s Constant appears to be derived as a scaling factor between temperature and energy; would seem sensible - to me - to set kT=1, in this context of the final singularity (the ‘Horizon’). Effectively saying, that the temperature of the universe in the final singularity - will be the inverse of Boltzmann’s constant; i.e. T[fs]=1.38x10^23K - the ‘crunch’ temperature; maybe?This would give the mass of the universe to be, m[u]=3.83x10^69 kg.Now ‘back into time’ with E=mc^2; would give the total conserved energy of the universe, E[tot]=3.45x10^86 Joules.Back to the statics - and predicting the motion - Gravitational potential Energy, E[pot]=-Gm[1]m[2]/r; andconservation of Energy then gives E[pot]=E[tot]=E[fs]=3.45x10^86 Joules and taking m[1]m[2]=mass of the universe, m[u]^2, in this context; to give the radius of the universe, r[univ]=-Gm[u]^2/E[fs],where G is the Gravitational Constant.Resulting in radius, r[univ]= -2.84x10^42 m; the negative sign - the way I see it - being the direction measured inwards, away from the final singularity on the horizon.The FORCE VECTOR of the LAW, F=-Gm[1]m[2]/r^2; the ‘FINAL CRUNCH’ F[fc]=-Gm[u]^2/r^2 ; F[fc]=1.21x10^44 NUsing my radius of the universe - the Area, A[fs]=4[pi]r^2 ; resulting in A[fs]=1.01x10^86 m^2In terms of planck areas - 2.64x10^156 potential BITS or QUBITS of information - maybe?Now I got all these - no doubt incorrect - results; I’m going for the big one! - when will the end of time be?First time derivative of the mass energy equation; I get E=-2mA/t, or t=-2mA/E=-2.24x10^69s;Or -7.1 x 10^61 years - the negative sign, I see as being the ‘countdown to extinction’ - the megadeath of the universe! - just a mere one hundred quintillion quintillion years or so away - until it all starts up again a Planck second or so later! - MORE OF THE BLOODY SAME EH!First time derivative of the Hawking Bekenstein however; and I get -5.6 x 10^68 years - so maybe I’m a bit light on the old big bang temperature - by about ten million degrees or so - I don’t know!So what’s the point in trying to get my head around information parity?Well, say I take a figure of 10^28 fundamental particles per human and allocate a Planck area of space to each on the horizon - in a similar fashion to the punishment of THE CONCENTRATED BLOCKS OF BLOODY URBAN PLANNING AND THEIR COLLECTIVE MATES OF ATTRITION - THEN THAT’S BLOODY TEN TO THE BLOODY 43 HUMANS PER SQUARE METRE ON THE BLOODY HORIZON INIT - CONCENTRATING IT ALL INTO THIS BLOODY URBAN SINGULARITY!!!Furthermore, once again applying E=mc^2 against the life of the universe:undifferentiated and ‘squarely within time’ - again using dimensional analysis leads me to Time, t=(mA/E)^½=1.06x10^27 years; a billion billion billion year universe lifecycle; although I would guess that should there be any such ‘inflaton’ episodes to be taken into account, and assuming that these would occur at - or close to - the speed of light, then a billion billion billion year duration may not appear to be as long as all that - relativistically speaking anyway - when ‘specially’ observed from this niche of the universe anyway.As the current age of the Universe is estimated to be around 13.8 billion years, and rearranging the above equation for Area, A=Et^2/m=1.7x10^52m^2 equates to a spherical radius of 3.6x10^25m; only approximately 12 times the estimated figure for the radius of the observable universe of 4.4x10^26 metres - when using my calculated figures for the universal constants of mass and energy.Correct or not, this reassures me that - in my current ‘high functioning occupational fantasy’ of the theoretical physicist - that these figures for the mass energy constants may not be too far off, and perhaps - just perhaps - my simplistic mathematical musings may not be quite so damn useless after all!If it is at all possible to consider or even imagine an initial point of singularity at Universal Time (t) of 1 planck second (10^-43s) - this equates to an horizon area (A) of close to 1 Planck length squared in area - almost exactly an initial singularity diameter of 1 Planck length; the seemingly ridiculous quantum universe seed of astronomical density?Then, after say 1 second - expanded to a radius of 8.5 x 10^7; or 85 million metres; from the initial singularity surface of 1 planck area - equating to 9x10^16m^2 area - the massive ‘inflation’ of the universe during the first second after the initial singularity or the ‘big bang’. This massive inflation occurring during that first second would appear to be purely put down to the mathematics as a function of time, rather than any specific inflationary field - the single planck area multiplied by 3.45x10^86 (Fixed Energy value) during the first second. Beyond the first second though, the rate of expansion seriously slows down; After 2 seconds, an area of 1.8x10^17m^2; After 3 seconds, an area of 2.7x10^17m^2; After 4 seconds, an area of 3.6x10^17m^2; and so on. Couldn't this alone be explanation for the ever accelerating expansion of the universe - as the surface area expands as a function of time - squared (A=Et^2/m)?Considering that the Universe - if in its final state - were to be a massive ball of gas; and as such using the Ideal Gas Equation, PV=NkT; where Pressure is Force by Area, so Force x Distance, Fd=Number of gas molecules, where kT again I have set to unity.Using my previous Crunch Force and Radius calculations, Fd=(1.21x10^44)x(2.84x10^42)=3.44x10^86 Joules: close enough - for me - to my earlier calculation for the total constant energy of the universe. Implying to me that the Number of molecules floating about in the final ball of gas, is equivalent to the total energy - in the Final Singularity of the universe.Turning to Gravity, and the ‘indisputable’ gravitational constant, G=6.673x10^-11 Newton Metre squared per kilogram squared (Nm^2kg^-2); where squarely inside the mass - lies the force spread over the area of the constant of Gravity:That is if I have interpreted the units correctly?Using my results for the radius and the mass of the universe to reconcile Gravity: gives G=(F[fc] x r[univ]^2)/ m[u]^2 =( (1.21x10^44) x (2.84x10^42)^2) / (3.83x10^69)^2 = 6.653x10^-11; so probably close enough to the known value of G, allowing for any ‘likely’ rounding errors along the way. If the Gravitational constant can be considered in the context of the whole universe - why wouldn’t it be such a weak force at the local level?Having said all that - I guess I must be wrong, as the current ‘cosmological crisis’ authorial and authoritative viewpoint (taken from my slow and limited readings) seems to be stacked against any notion that there can be any solutions to the universe to be explained using the Newtonian paradigm.So…….Looks like I ain’t gonna receive no prize;For my deduction of the Universe size;Three of ‘em together - explanation of time;Einstein, Hawking ‘n’ Bekenstein;Antiparticle Universe - may be paired;Combined mass - I reckon is;ONE OVER - FOUR TIMES THE PLANCK LENGTH SQUARED!No doubt just another waste of time;Leave it there with another rhyme;Over simplistic - amateurish - undereducated post;Time is fundamental - it cannot be lost!Experts observe the bottom up complexity;Einstein was sure - on human stupidity;Not so sure - as he was on the speed of light;'bout universal postulations of the Infinite!