Categories - Download Now DOC by pansey


Ideas and other similar stuff, separated by categories.

Ontology/Universe/Odd Physics Ideas/Existence (& Like Philosophy) Points:
Thoughts/Observations: You can only view the universe through a limited context. “I may as well have never existed as I know it.” I was thinking about individuals and the way the universe as it is, including individuals within it, exist. Change anything and you essentially stop existing? Again, I come to a point where I am concerned that I may only think everything is happening. I don‟t expect there is a situation where my real self is a body somewhere with its mind being illusioned. I just feel like it may turn out to entirely be a matter of perceptions. Perhaps the “original” type of human, the one we are now, is more primitive than we think. Evolution takes millions of years for even small changes, so maybe this species is still very premature. Maybe we can be viewed as advancing way too fast in technology in proportion to intellectual and societal advancement. It speculate that either there is a very far, probably infinite course of advancement (starting with Fire and later involving surpassing the universe), or we are already in a narrow stretch that goes from animal to end being. “I may as well have never existed as I know it.” I was thinking about individuals and the way the universe as it is, including individuals within it, exist. Change anything and you essentially stop existing? Sometimes, one might say “It wouldn‟t have been the same were it not for___” How truthful is this? There are probably many times where somebody else could have been put in the place of another and the result would have been the same or similar. There are s urely an uncountable number of combinations that could have formed events differently (which were events themselves), but the world is at it is. There aren‟t even necessarily true. “I always felt I was one of these people. If it were for some other people, it would have been different.” The universe is a dream, and we are as much a part of that dream as anything else in it. Realizing we‟re in a dream doesn‟t help, because we can‟t understand what else there is outside that dream. It‟s not a dream in the literal or Hindu sense, but it‟s something much less solid than we perceive. However, looking at it at deeper levels shows that it‟s something else. At the obvious level, I‟m a solid thins and these objects around me are things. Simple. Deeper, things

are seen to be composites of smaller bits, molecules. Deeper, these are made of atoms, which are actually really different from how we think, such as how electrons can be in multiple places at once and atoms may Perhaps the spectrum of everything cannot even entirely be called existence, because there could be so many things that don‟t exist in the way we know. Existence somewhere might be seen by us as a temporary, incohesive thing. “You people are still so biased from how you were. You still consider life as such a limited thing.” Capitalism

Specific Ideas:

“The best choice is the female equivalent of myself from some alternate universe. It‟s exactly what I‟ve been looking for!” “Among the many things wrong with that, what about incest? You would share the same families and genes.” They both have the same idea, but since she is a girl she didn‟t assert her desire to stay in her own universe as much. Not everybody who does this is successful, usually because of personality traits. “I think it says something when you can‟t get along with yourself.” “The interactions of physics, even on an apparently simple level such as when one object moves though space, are complex. Our technology focuses on simplifying, doing the intended action (such as teleportation), and then restoring.” Maybe in the entire span of existence, they would find the interactions in universes running parallel to others. “We are fortunate that the right circumstances are present to produce us.” “Why? If we didn‟t exist, we wouldn‟t care. It‟s moot.” “If your own existence is moot, and it seems you don‟t care. If you don‟t care, would you compromise own existence to produce other things?” “That‟s beside the point. I mean to point out causality and existence. It‟s not luck or something special, it just happened and so here we are now.” Looking into this, religion or at least religious though has to do with it. A totally empty, completely void universe. “When you travel forward, you are moving slightly slower through time. Someone had the question of what would happen if you moved cosmically backward. We know forward as a concept, but cosmically forward is movement in any direction. This person decided to find the physical opposite of motion, which was sort of un-motion. What happened after they managed to

do it was bazaar.” Would it matter if I knew that someone would kill me by making it so I fail to exist? Yes, although the real question is if I really believe my existence is something that should be rather than I simply want to exist. “I visualize things this way. The universe is a ___, which is what we call a sort of cohesive picture made up of layers. What we do to the universe translates into these layers. When a person dies, it‟s particular layer fades away and is also covered up by others. The one who has the strongest affect has the strongest layer, although this one also fades. You know, the first human 0robably has a strong undercoat that affects every other layer. This undercoat is going to disappear eventually, I think.” “I am now passing through a day, but I don‟t realize this until the day is long past. I wonder if we would fail to realize time the same way if we didn‟t sleep.” Could not just as easily be me. If it was me, I would in fact be someone else. Little side rule to sympathy. “Whatever happens, happened.” Some physicist puts together a picture of what the more complex, para-universe stuff could look like, assembling it into some tangible other reality that could be lived in, from the ground up. Maybe it turns out that it‟s ours/the protagonist‟s. Perhaps at really complex levels, discoveries turn out to actually be contradictory. It can coincide with my expectations of there being no objective truth as to how we should be, and how there will therefore be multiple ways of thinking that will be accurate as to facts, contradictory, and still can‟t be called wrong. “I‟m comforted knowing that there is some number of people who are essentially me who are doing better right now. In this way, it‟s me who‟s doing better.” Talking about parallel universes. Perhaps the spectrum of everything cannot even entirely be called existence, because there could be so many things that don‟t exist in the way we know. Existence somewhere might be seen by us as a temporary, incohesive thing. Ontology “You people are still so biased from how you were. You still consider life as such a limited thing.” Perhaps at really complex levels, discoveries turn out to actually be contradictory. It can coincide with my expectations of there being no objective truth as to how we should be, and how there will therefore be multiple ways of thinking that will be accurate as to facts, contradictory, and still can‟t be called wrong.

Time and Space Ideas:
Thoughts/Observations/possible rules: “Well, we can send you forward in time, but backwards is a little more complicated.” “Essentially, time is a resource. There is a way to use time itself as an component of something, especially when it comes to projects in physics.” “For time travel, you have to first displace yourself from this universe. From this point, you become a separate entity in existence. Also, you cannot change the universe by traveling to a different point in time and changing it. You must integrate yourself into whatever universe at whatever point you wish. This is the most complex part of it, which must be automated or else it won‟t work.” “Whatever happens, happened anyway.” “Time is no one solid existence. It‟s not a straight line or one continuous stream. It exists in layers, often identical. Identical things happen at the same time and also at the another time. Everything exists at once physically and at different times temporally.” Changing time is changing physics. All of time exists simultaneously, so maybe not so hard to move through.

Specific Ideas: If a person could change time so that the holocaust didn‟t happen, they would have to ask themselves if they would give their life to save those people. Would they sacrifice the present and everything they knew of growing up? Most people shouldn‟t be so ready to change something that was horrible, because it‟s effects could turn out to be good over time. Story told by a person living in an alternate timeline who knows a time traveler from the future trying to fix an event set by another time traveler. In a premise, suppose a person or some people have gone back in time, and find that they were a result of a previously committed problem that changed the relative present for somebody from the future, meaning the characters future is "wrong". Would they change it back? That would mean they would probably cease to exist, but the people who were supposed to will exist. If time has no meaning, if it is simply a matter of perception, then everybody is always alive. The most offensive things of any era become the novelties of the future.

“We cannot take you with us. It would upset time and do unpredictable things.” “Consider this: I‟ve wanted to leave everything for many years. I‟ve been unhappy, wanting something better, or even just different. Maybe you would upset time by not taking me with.” Something frightening would be finding your own dead body. Unparallel universes. Physically identical parts might merge at some moment and then the stuff that merged instantly splits into the other or stays in it‟s own. It sorts itself out. After that, matter diverges back into the course it would take in that universe. Rarely does anything actually match in position (it doesn‟t have to match in time) Universe shifted to the left by an inch “Will only affect the most advanced things” “But don‟t you see how significant this all is?” “What if the universe can‟t lead to anything breaking out? The actions happening within it don‟t allow anything to escape. Not that it‟s impossible for it to happen, but circumstances won‟t let us find a way to do it.” I speculate that wherever there is an extreme, there will be effects beyond simple physics. A large enough thing produces its own pull. The Earth feels so mighty, just feeling its force. If gravity is a weak force, there are sure to be some amazing things in the future. Since the energy for gravity is possibly something that doesn‟t weaken over time, maybe there could be a simple way to produce something with gravity that you can turn off and on, and then use that to generate power. Space vessels with gravity, unless that have some brilliantly complex things at work in them, would probably need a good deal of energy to produce gravity. Imagine if the universe was structured in a way so that it resembled a flat planet. If 99% of the matter in the universe wasn‟t destroyed at the big bang, if it took up about as much space I imagine it as something similar to a huge network of caves, with relatively empty space and relatively full space. I imagine people of my time exploring it all in a way similar to how the explorers of the pre- industrial age explored. They might simply explore as far as their means would support their interests. The atmosphere might also be more liberals since resources would be practically unlimited, since they can be walked to. I‟m think ing of things in this way because I‟m imagining further ways to explain the way things work in advanced civilizations. Part of a created universe, with the actual humans long gone Entirely artificial universes

Religion/Atheism Ideas:

Thoughts/Observations: It‟s a common mistake and a vain idea to think you are clever because you‟ve uncovered an arrangement by god. Considering that they had so little knowledge to measure things against, maybe it was actually smart to believe in god and the explanations. However, maybe even with only very basic knowledge, logic might still prove the nonexistence of god and spirits. In the future, people‟s more intrinsic philosophical classifications will not be separated into religious groups with Atheists as a sub- group. They will be classified among the types of atheists and then theists as a sub- group. There are rarely people who say that religion advocates against them and that they will therefore not believe it.

Specific Ideas: The concept of god simply being a very powerful being, and how that means that ultimately the high concepts would remain ambiguous. Little God A society worships a “god”, who in this case in a real person. It is found that the one they were worshipping is more of a cruel and powerful person. A lone, minor powerful super person is wandering a world where they are worshipped. A lone quester. Some inexperienced person, who has immense power but has no conceptions aobut it or much of anything. A place where they are worshipped as gods as people worship on Earth would involve super-people of unadvanced minds, being as simple as the gods made up now. Imagine a religion in which a person who communicates with god is told that people can only go to heaven in they kill themselves before they reach puberty, or dome other thing like that. Reasonably, this religion has as much reason to be true as the others, except it naturally won‟t survive, not because it‟s wrong but because it doesn‟t work. It‟s not fit. Sacrifice ritual to excuse punishment or selective breeding. Maybe some jerk from a more advanced society comes along somewhere and just wants to have control over some people. In one religion, the point could be the ultimate sum, a final accomplishment that takes place during and possibly causes their end. “I want to join the fold!”

“You don‟t get a number unless you agree.” Person with highly deviant psychology wants to benefit his father as he has recently become wealthy. However, he tells his father that he is Atheist (since now he feels like he has the fewest reasons ever to deceive his dad.) Now his dad refuses to accept it as a matter o f pride and a desire to distance himself from his son as a consequence of his atheism. The son argues that he just wants to help, while his father is going by conservative morality. However, both are just going by their own codes after all. It‟s still a co nflict of morality. Science is much more complex than any religion. This fact can be interpreted as people want to interpret it. I think it reflects how people prefer simple explanations, and it fits with how people learn the reality is hard and intangible. A person could become an atheist not by learning science, but by realizing how complex the real world is and realizing how religion's explanations are simplified. "If science were made up, why would they make it so hard to figure out?" “You keep searching for god. Perhaps you cannot find him because he is not there.” “Born from nothing, returning to nothing. Relevance: Nothing.” Actually make the capitalism system as a religion. Systems of beliefs all have similar potentials. Someone looks at coins. “This is metal. Melted, formed, stamped pieces of metal. We made it. How does it decide who‟s better than others?” A religion is against killing all of God‟s enemies, and instead prefers ruining them economically. Someone realizes how similar all religions are, and assumes the first one is correct. I think it's foolish, really. The prevalence of new cults are exactly the same as the older religions, but they are better updated to be consistent with how we think and act and what we know now. Make a cult for them. Mysterious powerful enigmas > turns out it‟s humans. There are rarely people who say that religion advocates against them and that they will therefore not believe it.

Justice & Fairness & Ethics Ideas:

It‟s no more than just so many rules. Completely artificial. People have to label everything with human qualities. They have to anthromorphosize. They have to imagine a god as creating the universe, and an evil person as causing all badness. Maybe that is why it‟s so hard for people not to blame for bad acts. They can‟t imagine that things just happen, that there isn‟t a conscious force. Human forces are entirely created by other forces. It might seem wiser to judge people before they do things, such as dismissing a person who seems likely to do something bad. Although this can stop a person from doing things, the benefit of a doubt is fairer. Today I read about a place in South America that is a gold mining town where the workers prefer a current sort of lottery system of pay instead of regular wages because this gives them hope of striking it rich. They receive something like four hours each at the end of the year when they can take away whatever they can carry, and these rocks may contain a good amount of gold but more likely practically nothing of value. Overall, they receive less. I think this is an example of positive thinking and such other faulty human things as hope working against them. Besides this, the workers like it when other ones occasionally die in the mines because they believe it benefits the rest of them in the tradition of Mayan beliefs that still strongly influence the region. Humans consider the rights of life being whatever they want. “No matter what, in the end you‟re just doing what you want.”

Specific Ideas: “You‟ll forgive a cat, but not a human?” In justice, it really does matter who you are. As an example, a housecat is forgiven sooner than a human for the same thing. Punishment and significance changes with the subject. Human justice developed in a more complex way, so that it fits into society. “Well, a cat has no moral code. It is too stupid to really know what it is doing.” “But the human moral code is based on emotion, and all the behaviors of a cat are based on emotion.” Promises, loyalty, and agreements making people stuck. “By making it so that chance kills someone and not any particular person, nobody can be blamed.” “But you set it up. It‟s you who‟s to blame.” “By that line of logic, you have to blame everyone who ever made any misfortune possible.” “Well, I do.” This inadvertent thing can kind of extend to other things, such as social irresponsibility. “There is so much emphasis on being dedicated to learning and doing as you‟re mea nt. I

think it developed because they want me to be able to better serve. There is all this bull about how it determines the value of a person, but I don‟t accept that.” On one world, 1 murder = 4 deaths. First, whenever somebody is killed, there is a person nicknamed a "murder mate" assigned to that person who is as opposite them as possible and who is executed by the state when somebody is murdered. Every person has someone who dies if they are murdered and somebody who's death will kill them. It was later put in place that when a murderer is caught, their murder mate is also executed. A character comes up who decides the only way to stop the oppressive killing is to murder so much people stop it. The state that initiates this is very oppressive by nature. It's basically one of those space empires you hear so much about. For one of these to exist, there might have to be a conservative lapse simultaneous with a major threat to civilization to allow such a state to arise. They took the murder rule away from people above a certain age. People close enough to death sometimes decided to stage their own murder because they might not like the person they were assigned to. “Killing someone in self-defense is just a case of keeping yourself alive at another person‟s expense.” “But they want to kill you.” “So you are okay with killing people for thinking or feeling a certain way?” “Absolutely.” “I argue to the court that they should let me go, because lawbreakers are essential to revolution, which is essential to changing things which are horribly wrong. You believe in your government today, but hasn‟t every improved version of the government come along because of those who went against the previous one? I argue that defiance is essential to human development.” It‟s a valid point, but of course they want to preserve their own revolution, seeing theirs as the right one. “I realize now, there are so many ways to kill. There are more ways than facing somebody and shooting them. Creating the right circumstances does it too. You can deprive them of the means to live, or ignore them when they depend on you. It confuses everything. Who do I blame?” “Would you use the lives of people who have done no wrong to affect another? Would you kill a child to punish a parent?” Simulation vs duplication “both are real and living!” “We‟ve given our media displays every sense except feel.” “But should we?”


Thoughts/ Observations: Specific Ideas: “Consider the implications if all meaning is produced.” It is, of course. Almost everyone goes the entirety of their lives needing to believe they are something greater than everything else; divine. It‟s something vicious, how they set themselves up so the y must believe it so. Many stories can be told involving this. “It‟s all about context.”

Species Ideas/Alternate Life Ideas:
Thoughts /observations Something that could happen often but is often unused in science fiction (partially because it depends on what you can film) is relative size of peoples. They usually are made to be about the same height, but this could probably vary a lot. People might possibly end up being doll-size or regular giants. It's kind of hard to imagine anybody living forever. Something would happen. Maybe the ultimate future of the characters is to become universes themselves. An example of how genetically distinct humans would work with each other exists in Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals. Sometime, I should just learn about it and analyze it and practice with it. In HHGTTG, Dent says that it‟s disgusting to eat n animal that willingly wants to be eaten. Thinking about it, I agree. It‟s also disgusting to take advantage of people who are willing to be taken advantage of, even if it‟s for certain people and because they believe in these people. Without any “I”s, how can there be a “we”? A “we” implies multiple “Is”. Maybe it‟s a paradox for collective races. Machine noises are like animal noises. They are both things with their functions. They are the same. Alien music may evolve based on sounds resembling their own voice, since our music has so much to do with ours. Possible questions over life: 1. Does it demonstrate deliberate action? 2. Can/could/will it be able to propagate? 3. Does it involve nucleic acid? Probably not comprehensive, but there it is.

Music might be very different. Rhythm might be based on some unit of time other than a second, and pitch different from the 7 do-re- me system. “Other races are often completely missed. They all tend to go on to the much greater infinity. Humans have been muddying about a lot.” What is a monster? Is it any inhuman being that‟s threatening to us? On some planets, such as Barren, accelerated evolution may be put in place by placing some genetic thing that help control the aspects of mutation (Such as by allowing people to only develop non-cancerous mutations, and other living things to produce all sorts of mutations. People would evolve slower, but they would live better.) Putting people onto new worlds and allowing them to develop is like an act of reproduction for an entire group of people (rather than individual). This might also be a reason for advanced civilizations leaving more minor civilizations alone. Human Species: Blocks in mind making people completely ignore or fail to notice serious contradictions. Voluntary Evolution Reflex Some people have a dynamically changing body, like something between solid and shape-changing people. They can quickly reform by some pre-coded thing in their mind; certain basic changes are already in their mind, and from these they can create more complex morphs. It gives many evolutionary benefits instantly. It started when somebody wanted to do it to himself and when times forced survival of the fittest, this artificial adaptation survived. A variety of human that is extremely sensitive to pain and let-downs. Some species of human has particular markings on their bodies indicating details about their body as well as being sexual indicators, like flowers. It‟s a product of body chemistry. They had a lot of time to evolve. Every creature already has things about their body that communicate to others of their and other kind, such as particular shapes on the body. These people evolved these colorful markings that act as modern tattoos do. They reveal a lot to others, but in their modern times they usually wear clothes, but dress code has a different dynamic of it‟s own. They often show their emotions with their body, making it hard to lie. Another thing they do is artificial tattoos, which have advanced to the point that they can deceive their own people. Among the people born with body markings, there is serious contention over modifying them. A lot can be told about people from them, so changing them at all upsets a lot of things. Males have some makings on their face that are reminiscent of blood stains. The climate is sort of subtropical, with jungles and islands. Skin and hair color are unusually various. Story could just come from my protagonists just being there and events playing out. There doesn‟t have to be a major world event. Story could just be these different people meeting. Some drama could come from the drastic things the people of wither groups would do. They interfere with each other.

Some species of human can re- make itself. Their own body rewrites its cells. In the process, the old skeleton is discarded and a new one regrows. The other cells are reorganized into a new body. The brain stays intact and practically undisturbed. Any living matter added can be combined if its own cells don‟t defend against it and the stuff corresponds with the person‟s genes enough. What if people evolved in such a way (in a way that may be dependent on technology) as they reproduce multiple children at once or very quickly, and only one or a few are expected to survive. Such evolution seems unlikely. Might happen from very odd circumstances, such as with cyborgs. A species produces a small creature for reproduction, which lays the eggs in an ideal place and then parents them for a short time after they hatch. Some peoples move through time as we move through distance. Time is perceived to them as distance, and distance as time. They are not perceivable to us. Create some people who are super empathetic. They actually feel what others do, or they at least feel what they think others do. Plus, they can recall actual feelings and senses from their memory. “Do you know that recurring thing sometimes, where it‟s like your mind is in a loop? Like a computer?” “No.” This could be one of those differences that is a sign of a human whose mind evolved differently. On much more developed worlds, there could be nationalities very quick to compromise and unite to avoid war. This way they would do much more since they would work together instead of fighting. Compromise might exist as an inborn preference. Create humans that are not social creatures. Things would be very different if my race was solo. There may be no society at all. People would behave very differently. Perhaps the characters visit a world of them early on. Would they look at these people as worse? Races/subspecies who‟s sense of the present in their mind is longer (ours/the base human‟s sense of the present being 3 seconds, their being more like 6) would have slower music, and those little changes that make music would be more complex and harder for us to notice. A race of people want to be used and exploited. Among the issues, who doesn‟t want to be used? How different are they from Homeworld? “I had odd senses that I had no idea about. Nobody else had any idea about them. I ignored it for a while, but eventually Il earned to use it. It was much like learning to walk. I got a sense of what I was doing and could feel when I was doing it right. That‟s how I learned to read

minds.” “It‟s something that slowly got better over time. It was like learning t walk, but this time I had no others to reference. I honed it eventually.” It‟s a sophisticated skill, so it‟s not intuitive like a newborn and it‟s not something learned as quickly as walking. It works in particular ways for different people, such as how everyone walks in a particular way. People are not naturally an automaton species. With the unique mental traits of humans, making them automatons, like ants, seems unlikely or at least like it would require huge changes. In some race, they are usually automaton until there is a need for individuality. It activates itself when necessary. A character is essentially one person for half a day, and another for the other half. One half of him is murderous, and the other is kind. Both are smart. The issue is over what to do with him. How is this situation similar to and different from others? Is he the same being both times? Should one be killed to destroy the other? A person who can‟t control themselves, like a vampire or some other mythological nearhuman thing, shown in comparison to how ordinary people have things controlling them as well. If something was applied to humans that made them more aggressive but also more intelligent, would they cancel each other out? “With difficult living comes conservatism. However, it also promotes the growth of further intelligence.” Some race could be very skittish as their quality. Some sort of new people are created for some purposes and then they are mostly cast away. “For every one of me, there are many others that were either failures or bad attempts.” Explore the idea of when every aspect of identity changeable An advanced group of people they meet while in the early stage (as well as many others should) change themselves to suit demands of the environment and situations as evolution would. That is just the sort of thing that should be done with technology, directing advancements intentionally and at an individual level instead of letting the slow process of evolution control it. “If I will be in the mountains, I can give myself wings and fly. If I will spend a long time in a place with few resources, I can change my metabolism.” “This is so difficult. Are you male?” “I‟m whatever I want to be. Gender often doesn‟t suit any needs.” “But how do you find your life working out when you hack into your humanity? I mean, what happens to your objectives? Every one of you must change to a different species whenever you do this. It‟s just so extreme.” The entire life of this person, if it can be defined as one life, started normally and ended enigmatically.

“The only thing that really separates us is our inability to mate with each other.” Maybe some personality differences too. Anyway. Two species are essentially the same, but people have to think they are different. There should be an actual race of liars. It‟s a specific social evolution that they are made for. In society, they have developed a sort of controlled skepticism for whether or not people are telling the truth. After all, people don‟t naturally choose to lie when the truth won‟t be better. They tell the truth when it isn‟t better to lie. Part of the skepticisim sense is that people may be scheming, so telling the truth when there is a chance they will lie is subject to suspicion. This planet doesn‟t have people all over the place, they are actually somewhat limited. They developed in a small pocket. Some race complains a lot because of something about their brains. “You complain too much.” “You complain too little.” Make race that always had immortal life. A clone is created and the original is unhappy with him. He changes his mind when he is asked if god is happy with the creatures crafted in his image. Beings made to sustain other beings. Not as food, but their processes make human processes possible. “Fulfilling a re- invented balance of nature.” Some character practically can only be happy when pleasing others. Not necessarily happy when others are pleased. Meaning, not happy for others. The sub-species was created partially by artificial means. This character is strongly and primarily motivated by this drive. The Igdgi grew out of some murky past on what was known as the Blue Continent, so named for an odd prevalence of the color in its many life forms. Whatever odd circumstances made this was rumored to have made them. The other people of the world knew them for their unbelievably generous nature. They received great pleasure from causing pleasure to others. Causing sadness to others made as much difference to them as it did to most people in general, which is not much. Oddly, their empathy was nearly absent besides when they were the cause of happiness. They often had blue eyes and [looked Greek]. Besides this, they were not unique. Their dispositions and appearance were just the same as everyone else‟s. Their known history ran thus: Before the Cold Era ended, they existed. Since the farthest records of history, they stayed years ahead of everyone else. Peace prevailed for their entire race, for obvious reasons. They generally were the envy o f the world, made others suspicious with their kindness, and did everything different, and the rest of the world hated them for it. Luckily, they lived largely isolated from the rest of the world as they existed on a continent that only touched the other landmasses at a few narrow points. Then the rest of the world reached the renaissance and the ice receded enough to open new passages to their continent. They finally had the means to fully exploit the Igdgi. Attacking them came easily to the world and defe nding came hard to the Igdgi. They had lived in peace for years, and the best advantage against them

was that their trait made them easily manipulatable. They practically ceded land and freedom and everything else they had to others. They lived well together, but not with others. They became an acceptable sub-class in societies all over the world. They kept a small place in the Blue Continent for themselves because the others wanted a reliable supply of them. By the time the mechanical age arrived, the Igdgi possessed a reformed culture. They knew themselves as people without a true home, and as an inferior race that was meant to exist for others. Many felt ashamed of their past for not sharing themselves with others. Generally, they were at once proud of themselves for being better than the rest in their way but also humble for their station in society (which seems like a contradiction to me). However, their fragmented culture fell apart when the Regit Nation disassembled the last piece of their homeland after claiming it as a spoil of war (the nation passed into many hands before this, being treated as an asset to be won). This created a lot of ill feelings among them, which, as I‟ve said, they weren‟t indisposed to. A now famous Igdgi created a philosophy for his people at this time: they would make each other happy instead of the other races, and do it by using force to overcome them. They largely succeeded in this for four reasons. One: they made the largest ethnic group in the world. Two: Because of their new philosophy, they exploited themselves into doing this. Three: Their near-apathy for anything besides causing pleasure and their new nationalism. Four: The rest of the world didn‟t see it coming and hardly realized it happened until it was too late. Now the Igdgi are still the dominant nation of the world. They rule with a social sort of government that is common in many parts of humanity [Communism]. Their governments is largely unchanged after hundreds of years since it seems to work for their personalities. Stability is just happening now. We are entering a new age with our technology and a more tolerant world. I am a mostly full-blood Igdgi and personally I am very unhappy with the world around me.” If a person was changed into something else and had to feed off it‟s own, like a vampire, would that person be likely to kill itself or learn to hate people, or could it go a different way? It might even be a natural thing that evolved into a species. “My people have been oppressed for a long time. It‟s only fair to get revenge on their people.” “There is so much wrong with that.” In one occurrence, there is a sentient sort of queen to a bunch of other creatures. She‟s another deviation of the base human species, and her methods are killing humans of other species. “These creatures can become adult humans? Doesn‟t this mean we‟re killing babies?” “Only if you look at it that way. They are mean, vicious babies that will kill you.” “I wonder what my elders would have thought?” “I think we‟re beyond any situation their religion anticipated.” “If I do this, it will haunt me for the rest of my life.” “Alternatively, you can choose to not do it and have no remainder to your life.” Some person lives entire lifetimes, being born and dyeing without actually ceasing to exist as a being, in a wide variety of cultures. This is what they do, to experience firsthand as much as possible.

A life form is genetically made to grow over its resources and utilize them in an animal structure. It‟s a self- forming synthesis of meat and machine. It‟s an intelligent life form too. It‟s form and appearance depends on a lot, but it can rarely take inorganic materials and replicate them within itself (meaning making itself look like something inorganic). It‟s similar to the people who do atomic energy conversion on their own, but this one works at a more limited, molecular level. Some people are able to live multiple lives for experience. Their memories stay, but it‟s as if the body and mind reset. In wrong place and feels excluded. One species is apparently identical to another, and they just start blending. Then dormant changes come up years later. Blocks in mind making people completely ignore or fail to notice serious contradictions. "A formerly fierce and proud race is now common among us. Fear of them is common, even though they are integrated and totally different in reality." As very different native and invasive species of similar ecological niche ma y, aliens come and they and humans simply work in entirely different ways, even largely taking different resources. They basically ignore each other for a long time because they are just so different they hardly consider the other a life form, and more as some other part of the environment. These should probably be aliens from alternate sort of existence, perhaps converted form their physics to ours in order to spread out more.

Other Species: A species is actually robots that have evolved in a way to be machine equivalents of humans. Questions are brought up. Creature capable of gradual voluntary biological restructuring. The genes do exist, but they are inactive. Some alien or non-human creatures could have a relatively higher amount of exploitable weaknesses but also broader abilities. "You don't need to worry about how humans feel, they have no souls." Souls have been used to justify human treatment of other creatures. The arts of other intelligent lifeforms would be really interesting. They would develop from a totally different basis. A possible history for a pair of creatures that gained sentience: the two either mate with each other or mate with many non-sentient creatures of the same species, and the smart offspring

survive. “They are very simple life forms. Collectively, they are something like a conscious, but I still don‟t care about them.” Said when on a planet that has such a species. Wants to be treated the same, but such a thing worldwide cannot happen until some point of human mental evolution. Something that is possibly alive or in some ways alive is detrimental to people. However, it can potentially become something highly desirable (and also more alive) and useful. Is it worth keeping? It‟s comparable to the issues with human embryos. The thing could be a mindless creature that carelessly and effectively destroys a lot of things. In it‟s second stage, it can become a more intelligent and benign creature (maybe a human-level intelligence?). Perhaps they always turn into attractive women who, unknown to everyone else, are of a different sub-species. They can‟t reproduce with them. How useful, or how benign, does something have to be to be considered good or worth sparing by humans? Have it apply to other things as well. I saw a show and I see that a mechanical species has a lot that can be looked into. First, what do they think? They could be a total collective, an interconnected group of individuals, or total individuals. Then, where do they come from/what was their evolutionary process? They almost certainly have to come from biological designers first, since mechanical functioning is almost an impossibility in nature. How smart are they? Are they evolved? Energy form to our universe. The conversion from it‟s universe to ours is odd. To it, we are energy forms, and vice versa. It‟s a matter of perception. We are the same, but a difference in perception “just as the colors of light, which is everything we see, is relevant and cannot be perceived elsewhere.” Artificial and smart creatures are not considered right enough. They are perfect within tolerable measures, but they are thought to lack some idealized things. “Anything complex enough has personality.” It can be said of dead and living things. It‟s another thing blurring the boundary between living and dead. It can be an observation of one of the characters. Life popped up, looked around, and went back into nothing There is an artificial intelligence, but it‟s not a mechanical or electronic or organic one. There are plenty of species with two hearts. Some aspects of this are where they are (if they are like one working with secondary), if they can start the other back up, if this expands the being‟s capability (such as broadening their abilities when they are straining themselves), if the blood system is arranged so that it is constantly flowing (such as with out-veins and in- veins), etc. Someplace, creatures are made artificially to fill all needs. Every need. Perfectly intelligent ones are made, and their right to live isn‟t disputed very much because they themselves argue against it (as they were made to do). An adult human is hybridized with some other species as a sort of lesson. Person

hybridized with some animal has equal mental capacity as human, but the animal emotions and thought processes somehow are stronger. How much is intelligence affected by emotion? If the person was smart and properly moderate, this person could control itself to turn out the better. “Cleaning” animals Really well-bred steeds that can do self-sacrificing exertion when commanded so. “Where is the solid line of identity? A bird is distant from us. A mouse is closer. A monkey is even closer. We know each other as humans. We have all seen people who can‟t be called human. If there were new animals that had traits that made them both one species and another, and these existed for every pair of species, what would we do then? How would we consider each other? Could we even continue to accept different species as distinct from us in our definitions?” I saw a show and I see that a mechanical species has a lot that can be looked into. First, what do they think? They could be a total collective, an interconnected group of individuals, or total individuals. Then, where do they come from/what was their evolutionary process? They almost certainly have to come from biological designers first, since mechanical functioning is almost an impossibility in nature. How smart are they? Are they evolved? Rolling land crustacean. It has a sort of snail shell as its major body, and it can pull into it for protection. It‟s a weak fighter against similarly sized creatures, at least on its own. They work via mobs. It usually flees by rolling down hill or, more often, it pulls it‟s parts in and makes a very hard, mostly complete armor. When closed, it has an almost perfectly circular shape with open parts along the edge or varying width. It is a land and sea animal. It‟s about human size. Because of its variety of environments and its potentially very helpful but difficult to control movement, it developed good intelligence. Instead of hands, it has many smaller pincers with various ends for their needs. As most intelligent animals are likely to have some history of tool use, these do too. Their capabilities worked them into an evolutionary corner. The biggest impudent was their slowness and lack of maneuverability. They had to be clever to get more than easy food. Most races of it can survive indefinitely on land as long as they have water on their outside occasionally. Some even live in the desert, with some natural adaptations for keeping in moisture longer. They can‟t sweat, however, so they usually open their shells as wide as they can. In ways, they do more things they were not evolved for than humans do, and they have many innovations for survival in extreme areas. They practically explored all the sea before probing the less adaptive parts of land. The evolution of this sea being brought them to land because in a way they were as lucky as many of our notorious invasive species are, because so few land animals could kill them and all sort of other creatures just were of too-different types to do anything but ignore them. They have social, congregating structure. (society developed form the need to defend each other. One cannot defend itself, so more come to help when one contracts itself and releases a high-pitched noise). They walk on about eight longish crab legs that extend parallel to the circular shell. For reproduction, a male releases genetic material into the water during the appropriate time, it enters the female‟s system, and a few eggs mature in her and she gives birth only a few months later. They don‟t drink milk like mammals, but instead they are fed mouth to mouth like birds. Underneath their shells they are highly pressurized. This and their armor lets them go very deep. They had submarines (ones filled with water that were just meant to let them

go deeper) before airships or any kind of motorized land vehicle. To our wood they have coral, and otherwise use whatever is available. As we did, their early history made good use of products from other animals. They can‟t swim very well at all, only able to somewhat pathetically move their longer legs around, which can only move so much water with their vaguely paddle- like shape. Instead, they are like underwater mountain goats. They easily can hang from most surfaces completely upside down, although they need a very good surface to do it out of water (but they habe developed the technology to expand far beyond their natural abilities). They developed artificial gravity relatively late after creating spacecraft, because they don‟t have much natural need to be upright. A detriment in space travel was their higher-pressure natural environment, though this was a minor one. Any penetrating injury is particularly bad for them, since the high pressure has their internals closer together and they tend to hemorrhage from the pressure difference. Their medical science is trickier than ours too, because of the difficulty in opening up a live one. However, their limbs mostly grow back, so there is a plus. Before fire, they had the luminescence of the deep-sea creatures. Their spacesuits could be somewhat simpler than ours because of their protective shell. They have the retractable, moveable eyes. Their reaction to danger is as sophisticated as that for any other developed species, but in the natural state was not to fight or flee but yell and wait for reinforcements. Their natural color is steely grey and blueish. Their recent evolutionary ancestors survived a global mass extinction, since it mostly affected the land. The first source of heat they used for anything was underwater vents. Later, they mastered fire and their own version of alchemists developed oxygen chemical compounds to use this source of heat and energy underwater. That was about when they had their industrial age. However, their technology developed in a way that certainly didn‟t parallel human development. They think of humans as the long- lived, ancient, respectable ancient aliens of the universe. Their species only recently achieved an advanced level of space travel. Their first contact wasn‟t even face-to-face, it was by sending communication to planets they could only suppose had some intelligent life on them by their observations of cosmic movement. For a while, they were very certain other life was out there, but they could only make poor attempts to contact it since it (inexplicably) wasn‟t coming for them (many assumed they were only ghosts that they could observe, from long- lost light. Others thought none of them were interested. This was closer to the truth, since humans civilizations learn to ignore the busyness going on around them.) They eventually got lucky enough to contact someone who was interested. In popular science fiction, they used to think an intelligent land species would fly, since they themselves move through most of the depths of the sea. Somewhere they make animals happy to die. One original species they contact with might be a tree lizard. It can slink around like some sort of shadowy monster. It can dart around very quickly, and it is flexible like a cat. Inventing new species that supposedly don‟t come from terrestrial interference is hard. Somewhere they make animals happy to die. “They must be made for the purposes of humans, because they are happy to die for us.” Humans made happy to die.

“Do you think I‟m ugly?” “Well, you‟ve gone past ugly. If somebody of my species looks bad enough, the n I would call that person ugly. I have no standards by which to judge other species. If you had a slight resemblance to us, then you‟d seem more human to me, and then you would seem ugly.” What is the likely ultimate course for a collective species?

AI/computer Ideas:
Thoughts/Observations: I would define the AI as what computers are now but with the addition of non- linear thinking. It can do these things independently. But maybe whatever makes living things do that is the same thing that makes them fallible. Otherwise, it‟s clearly an improvement. AI actually have personality depending on how they were made, meaning the wiring of the artificial brain is like the wiring of an organic brain. Their personalities vary more, eventually being similar to different species of different kingdoms of creatures. AI may have to be taught proper logic. If it has freedom of thought, isn‟t it possible it could develop, on its own, the same thought problems as people? I don‟t think it would automatically be a formal thinker. Will vast intelligence and a free will for thought always produce the same thing? Such a claim that there are natural conclusions that an intelligent ad perfectly rational being would reach suggests it so. The issues of robots could probably be relatable in just similar ways as for humans. A robot trying to go against its programming is like a person trying to go against its mind. For computers, what about “ascending”? Instead of search-engine searching, which can be unreliable and difficult at times even if you know just the keywords to use, it would be nice if someone worked out some sort of selfupdating super directory with some sort of comprehensive thing for every page describing what it is and such. As it is, they just look for matching words, making it harder when you want to search for more specific things. I‟m sure it can be done with the proper computing power and people who can figure it out. It may take the best experts from multiple fields of science, but I think it could be done, and that it would further streamline this huge stock of information. The first AI might do this. Specific Ideas: It is decided that the best way to make an AI work properly is to make it have love. An AI is told to gain love; but since it doesn‟t understand it yet it does contradictory things to it in

the process of learning it. A computer could take the odds for all past known things and factor in known odds for past occurrences. It could compute the odds for future events, and then consider how the past has factored in and use that to predict the future better. Somebody makes a biological computer, basically an artificial brain. To make it smarter without actually growing they connect digital computers to it. Now it is a thinking computer, but it can fix itself and adapt like an animal can. “The first smart computers were very faulty. They had the flexibility to actually think, but very little. Many common computer problems existed, such as being stuck on doing one thing. They are regarded as not having personalities.” Some people have developed a way to cope with AI. They are distinct and separate, and find both equal. “What are regarded as limits make us human and not AI.” Someone determines that the only way to make AI is to remove limits. Removing limits brings a lot of risk. Lives in restrictive state. Wants to have it born to total freedom. A robot being defined as human when it learns to lie to itself and twist the truth for its own preferences. Creators decided not to give AI an instinct of self-preservation to avoid catastrophe, but this actually counts against them later because an AI that does do esn‟t like them for that. Computer has been dumbed down and cannot figure out something that people normally can, such as a guess at how someone will behave after learning about something, or the distance toward a distant object. It would use an algorithm, but it doesn‟t have one and it cannot produce its own unless it has enough time. Humans could use approximate guessing, something that might be called intuition, to know these things. It‟s better for inferior intelligence. If a computer were really smart and could create anything within it, even thinking entities, then that brings up if they are really alive and if they care and think about things the same way real organisms do. Weather they did or didn‟t, if they acted like people they would want to leave it and actually live. Imagine if they lived in the simulated universe, and the person helped them get out and into full physical existence. On the other side, what if there were people that, in order to preserve themselves, put their whole selves into programs? Somebody makes a biological computer, basically an artificial brain. To make it smarter without actually growing they connect digital computers to it. Now it is a thinking computer, but it can fix itself and adapt like an animal can. For computers, what about “ascending”?

War Ideas:
Thoughts/Observations: Something that can fit in many stories in which people are kept ignorant: “I know nothing about my enemies but what my people have told me.” “Warfare became insanely dangerous when they invented super-efficient batteries that had practically no potential to harm on their own, such as if the exploded. It was like a nuclear core powered every handgun.” Specific Ideas: A long-warring world finally loses its enthusiasm. The fighting has gone on long enough for technology to actually advance one or two stages in the meanwhile. “I hate the soldiers we get today. They don‟t follow orders, and they don‟t even like the country.” “If war grinds on long enough, enemies might start to like each other.” War got old. People gave up believing as they originally had and were both ready to finish. Put in situation to go somewhere and save somebody who would die without help, but it was actually a trap set by own leaders. A destructive weapon, like a disease or tiny bomb, is sneakily included on savior. It‟s a method of delivering weapon to enemy. By tricking deliverer, they don‟t need to bother to find/waste someone loyal enough to die for country. “You idiots! How could you attack me? You don‟t even know who I am!” This is a simple and strong point. People in militaries have to make generalizations and assumptions. “Have you ever killed a person for somebody else, and then found out that the one you killed for was completely undeserving?” Someone makes non- lethal weapons that prey on irrational fears. One might be a gaybomb (with some sort of pheromones), that is meant to draw people away from the army because the soldiers would be so afraid of being turned gay. Another might simply be a horribly foul smelling bomb. Other things might be made to offend the sees too, such as something that leaves a long-lasting bad aftertaste or a constant annoying noise. The premise they are in might be one in which an advanced society has problems with killing so they only use a variety of non- lethal weapons. Large military protection mega-mob that makes huge money by providing for war and providing other military services. Weapons that teleport stuff to some unknown place “This weapon we have made will usher in a new era of peace.”

Soldiers are kept in stasis-sleep for long periods of time, years even. Then, when they are needed, they are used very briefly and put back. Consequently, much of their life involves fighting. It turns out to be psychologically damaging. A war where no side is justified vs. a war in which both sides are justified. Morally debatable. There is a fight purely over ideals when there are plenty of resources and otherwise needs are satisfied. “Humans fight when needs aren‟t satisfied, and then when it becomes so that they can easily afford to fight they don‟t. It‟s counter intuitive.” “It is easy to attack others when you feel they are somehow inferior to you, but how can you fight them when you know their wants are just as important as yours?” In some navy/air force, most people think of their vehicles like women, except the big scary guy who it seems never thinks of anything but sadistic things. And they are in the good guy army. Remember that Christmas in WWI when two sides near each other made a truce and even played football in no- man‟s land. There were surely some unusual interactions there. A pair of soldiers from different sides might meet and make a pact, or even make a pla n to help each other go AWOL. "They are cruel. They threaten to kill the soldiers they took prisoner whenever we are in battle. We're soldiers, so we have to fight. Then they die. See, they do it to make us wait or run away."

Government/Economic Ideas:
Thoughts/Observation Extreme liberalism, that is, practically without government, may need complex system developed by people who know how things work in order for it to exist and function. However, using systems ironically would potentially make it all less free. It‟s probably an indicator of the honesty of a nation if they have very cushy names for their departments and actions (patriot act, dept. of defense) Allowing people considerations to live themselves as much as possible as part of government or philosophy I think it might be good if employers had to be trusted with employee transportation. It

would be more efficient, for one. Don‟t use lazy titles like “Galactic Alliance”. Instead, use something like “Union of Nationalized Planets”, meaning on planets that are one nation can join. There are beliefs of letting people work themselves out or imposing controls. Isn‟t there an alternative? Perhaps in the future, the people regarded as anarchists now will be regarded as mild. At the moment, it‟s mostly kids and young people who aren‟t very well- informed. If a government started with the people I consider right, maybe it could sustain its ways for a long time afterward if the only people that could take office after current officials were carefully chosen by the previous ones. Leaving to an unguided, natural system will create the same things as in nature, the worst of which are the dominance of aggression and the unfairness. Systems, such as economic and governmental, should be artificial. They should not be left alone. Law is not perfect, but instead of tight law, there could be a sort of guidance. Birds flock without a leader. They have an odd system. They can appear to have one, but they don‟t. I wonder if the same principles behind that can be applied to human government. It‟s probably a dated perception that there has to be a supreme person, which has come about through the thought-diluting concepts that developed during cultural natural-selection. Perhaps a successful kind of communism can only come up through non-violent means. Because any need or reason for government or any similar form of management and control will eventually cease to exist, I think we will ultimately ascend into anarchy. Specific Ideas A government develops that is authoritarian yet not conservative. It may seem like the speed at which people change, thinking more and more for themselves without outside influence, will make society less stable. This government develops in response to this attitude. People think freely and they don't try to change that. Instead, the government has fairly simple laws in place to keep society running smoothly. However, they enforce these laws very strongly and in a rightwing fashion. One example is that absolutely any murder comes with the death penalty, whether it is first-degree or just manslaughter. Attempted murder often ends with punishment of death as well. Less serious but very significant crimes, such as stealing something very valuable, results in something like years of hard labor. People are allowed to say whatever they want, but the rules are unbreakable. Although people often wonder about what is called for in difficult situations, such as when something is in a gray area that isn't often thought about, the government gives no alternative explanation for what they do. They admit that what they do isn't strictly good in all interpretations, but that what they do has the most important objective.

Make a government that goes by certain rules along the lines of this: when nobody would be able to determine who would pay for or take the burden of certain things, the selection is randomized. “The tyranny of a nation correlates with its use of fear.” An oppressive nation could promote random accidents to incite overall fear. Some powerful nations have annual contest to see who takes over countries better. They are allies, who resolved not to go to war with each other but to bully those that are weaker. Perhaps they are held together to prevent a stronger enemy from overtaking them./ Perhaps they formed a sort of confederation, because each nation handles it‟s particular location and such beteer on its own than if they were merged. All the participant might be traditional war nations. “Politicians should have to always suffer the same problems of the people they represent. If most of the people in a small area are poor, it‟s governor should be poor. If a king leads a poor nation, he should also be poor.” “We can profile people exactly. If they refuse to let us change them, we take charge of their lives by force.” They had few rules. The principal rule: „Do as you want, but your technology may not progress past this level.‟ This way, they insured their dominance. Weak centralized governments, when they fail, are disastrous. A system that could move to more localized governments when necessary or called for could maintain peace better. Instead of holding on to its power tighter, it allows more autonomy and thereby compromises instead of putting itself in a situation of either having the rebelling area or nothing. “Eventually things will be structured just so that people don‟t need to deviate from law at all. It will guide their lives perfectly.”An observation and hope if a conservative. A leader that appeals to a character in a story says “Democracy exists to please the people. It‟s ridiculous. The people are a stupid mass. The government works to keep them happy, to appeal to them, instead of doing what‟s right.” The narrator goes to him to meet him in person, thinking him a genius who‟s on to something revolutionary. Instead, this guy is just a conservative. He has a little college education, and although he‟s a great orator the narrator finds him wrong. He tries talking about it. “I‟ve thought it could succeed as long as officials are openminded.” The government tries to prosecute somebody for using seeds from a plant that was bought. The person argues that, although a free market system is acceptable, an economy controlling the government is wrong. The current economic and status system in America still supports the way of thinking that the wealthy are better and the ones who should be ruling the rest. The current, mostly unregulated economic system will follow the dominant (and has kept with changing traditions)

ways of people. Maybe in more enlightened times, it would work out alright. Someone joins a democratic election. There was another person running unchallenged, and this guy tries it anyway since it‟s free. In the small, publicly funded campaign, his platform is “At least I‟m not conservative.” Government with business mentality and point is supporting country. It‟s run and thought of as a business. Aliens are benevolent to a world they took over, but oddly they are not so to many other people. “We‟ll do things to keep you happy. You just let us take care of the more saddening, boring, things. Best not know what you don‟t need to, since you won‟t like it.”

Thoughts/Observations (Keep) Consider the conflict of Fulfillment vs. Survival/Stability. It‟s something a revolutionary comes to understand in the midst of the pursuit of radical change. In a place where everybody is very different, such as the advanced society, they may still use the term "common", even though such people became rare. Or, maybe they are too knowledgeable and broad- minded to make generalizations. A total leftist civilization would probably be some sort of anarchy, but something keeps it functional. Many worlds could be limited in technology by their natural resources. The ways of society, civilization, and laws depend on instinct of the time. Philosophy is made on human thought. Society, civilization, and laws use the philosophies they like. Something I don‟t make happen much is that there is a well-evolved fairly advanced race and a lesser one on the same world. Sociologists might think it better to grow new civilizations by terraforming it in such a way and placing creatures and plants in such a way as to make it very prosperous for people on the planet, which would not only speed their growth but allow the to grow in more directions since the good conditions would allow more liberal thought. So many problems in modern times, especially those attributable to technology, are from lag. Cultural lag, intellectual lag, etc.

People were sadder then. They wanted those things to satisfy them more. Now they are happier and they don‟t. It should make them freer. It would be much better for people in “backwards” places to be taught our sound methods of thinking and reasoning than our way of life. The absence of natural petroleum on most worlds (since most are terraformed, meaning there isn't a few million years of biological presence) might change the course of their history, particularly in technological aspects. Perhaps they wouldn't suffer the same problems as we did during the industrial age. Things that rely on combustion, including guns and explosives, could be somewhat altered. Gunpowder can be made from renewable chemicals, but it was preceded by experiments with alternative stuff.

Specific Ideas In some place, slavery by loss of a bet is allowed In an individualist society, one sort of game might be one in which multiple sides play multiple roles involving differently assigned skills. Players don‟t face of with the same restrictions and demands. An example might be like cops and robbers, where one player/group pursues and the other runs. Maybe on Barren, Ludin learns the game from some kids. A society simply reversing women and men. For some cultures, they could grow slower than anticipated because of a nuclear war in their history. What if there was a planet that, once it had nuclear war, was not afraid to continue it? Imagine two battling traditions. There are many stories where it‟s a sad thing that people lose their traditions and it‟s a bad thing. In this, the point is to make two traditions fighting each other and watch them interact and see the results. It‟s something that‟s happened a lot throughout history, really. The story takes place in an area where people have blended a lot recently, perhaps through war or some other means. There are two cultures, having different religion and tradition and such. One is of the conquered and the other of the conqueror. In the middle of this, the world is changing. Somebody hears a prediction from sages, like when the Aztecs heard the prediction of their doom. The prophecy predicts good things, but then a catastrophe happens, and the person defends their belief arguing that something good surely came of this and that the prediction still stands. In some society: I imagine that if the things people restrain are always brought out into the open it may push people away from each other or allow/force them towards each other.

Imagine the premise of technology increasing too quickly. Constant kind of war I played a video game where both players are criminals and kill cops and generally anybody to rob banks and things. I was thinking about how the game story might be made moral. What if society was more chaotic than thought? What if every level was outwardly cooperating, but actually at war? What if there were actually tons of revolutionaries, but the society functioned in a way to allow all this, such as by something besides a high- ranking group of men running the country. This society might be ultra- liberal, basically allowing anybody to do anything. It would not be conformist, but neither would it have much respect for individuals. It would be like a bunch of confederate systems operating together. The family system could be the most basic unit (the group people revert to), and larger groups of all k inds would develop. They would be like warlord holdings. This sort of society might develop after some catastrophe or something breaks up a highly advanced and peaceful civilization. It might be prosperous overall, but unstable. It could make an interesting setting. The government would be anarchist, but somehow the society continues to work. Perhaps different groups could be characterized by the phrases “No news is good news” and “Any news is good news.” Some leader blames a minority. After having wiped them out, they go on to blame other groups. After wiping these out, they still can‟t blame themselves. Every favor for an individual and every act against is considered made toward and form the entire families of the people involved. Someone is a family outcast. This thing forces him into individuality. “With difficult living comes conservatism. However, it also promotes the growth of further intelligence.” “Here, they value animals more. It‟s nonsense.” “Maybe it‟s just kindness. There are humans who are so to other humans.” Infighting is allowed in some society. The government fights itself often, and it‟s not only tolerated but worked into the system. In this example it works out well enough. In a changing world society, a "Society for Religious Respect" is formed, with the intention of stemming what is perceived as an encroachment against all religious beliefs. The broad-mindedness of such an idea is something that would be necessary for continued success, and as time goes on its own leaders become agnostic and atheist, and it's purpose shifts to protecting vanishing cultures. Imagine a military state that didn‟t have an inferior class, but was entirely a military. The culture would be different. The attitudes too.

“You can choose between science and religion” Science presented as having has the benefit choice and eventual empowerment, but the religion is presented as being a definite promise of being saved and granted some empowerment inferior to god. Of course, the religion part turns out to be wrong. Reason vs. Faith They were afraid of fear itself. They were aware of the power of fear, and they decided to only fear the fearful. Even this fear was exploitable, as they became so fearful. Some deviant colonists form an advanced civilization. They all think most liberally, and their starting of new efforts fails to work because other ways beat theirs out, such as survival. The thing here is what happens at the starting of a raw world. Maybe it‟s Homeworld. It‟s the story of how I project these things will happen. Some peoples are friends with everyone in personal and broad relations. “The things society has people do are not just some evil dynamic. Much of this is meant to be by nature.” “And you think we should abide by nature? I‟m ready to rebel against it completely.” Perhaps second is proved wrong by some different reason. Society existing with deliberate and clear contradictions. It‟s an old system, but make a way that it works out. “We terraformed this moon years ago. Now, it‟s losing its atmosphere and becoming desert.” If they want the opposite, for people to grow more slowly and to hammer themselves out to something very specialized, they would make conditions worse. When we made our own codes of living, it is a little like we took what we do naturally, and modified it ourselves to work better. Lawyers. What if there was a society in which Lawyers didn‟t work for cash? What if the Lawyers argued for somebody because they had a profound belief in that person being right? In this way, Lawyers would be more like ethicists or philosophers that politicians or businessmen. The needed expertise in the law and the management of the case could be managed by somebody without an opinion either way who works behind the lawyer and who‟s pay comes from a different party, such as the government. People on a world live with much more powerful people over them, but they are aware of there being greater gods beyond. In the thing in which there is a future person in a more backwards place, there are others in little alcoves, and they are often rumored to exist. One is a “psychic”. A world has global catastrophe due to human failure at a point similar to today, then

some people re-analyze years later and find all the mistakes are repeating. There is a sort of portal. It‟s the source of a lot of interest, and people don‟t know where it goes. It turns out to be a thing that converts mass to power. Anyway, it turns out that it disintegrates. Somewhere, being different is recognized as a disease. Right now, if somebody is different enough they are recognized as having a physical or mental problem. “I‟m not sure if we should really be calling this an epidemic. What if this is something other than a disease?” Some culture has disrespect for people who put themselves at relaxed or submissive places as courtesy. Not because they dislike weak people, but they say that it shows they think they can get past them. Reading about what DUNE was on Wikipedia, I think it's mostly pop fiction writing. Apparently it was special because it was so different at the time. One interesting thing was the Bene Gesserit. A cult of people in a society who are bred and raised to be very capable is an interesting idea. I think secret societies could exist easily. I think there are many possibilities in this. Imagined a complex system of measurement in which every measurement is relative to the observer rather than based on constant. Math is done to compare relative measurements. Someplace, there is sudden catastrophe and competition during a stage in history equivalent to here and now. The catastrophe changes the rout of the world in many ways, and it is most significant culturally because it creates so much competitio n. Some philosophy or viewpoint of an advanced people. They are not merely against being committed, but being firm at all in any aspect. They see everyone as fanatic to some degree, even if it‟s about enforcing freedom. Probably very difficult to arise in a less advanced one; probably would most likely be one that retained aspects since cutting off from advanced society that made them. Similarly, there are philosophies in which they are merely uncommitted and merely limit how much they do. In my sociology book, I read about a list made that gives the prioritization and description of American values. One of them is that they value technology as something that brings them toward the vague notion of progress. It‟s nicely ironic that progress will shift their values. A society functions with a loose free dynamic that allows people to be who they want and do what they want, but the dynamic still keeps things running well. Literal sea world. No land. Entire civilization started as a floating space vessel that made its own resources, and from there made new ships, and since then the processes are sustainable

things adapted form original process, extracting all resources from the sea. For example, mining dregs up stuff from the water and processes rocks, then dumps them again. So often in my stuff, humans seem to prosper as much on their world as they do on ours. That can‟t always be the case. So often in my stuff, humans seem to prosper as much on their world as they do on ours. That can‟t always be the case. In something, make the magical life as ordinary, with mundane systems being mystical. Many stories with any abnormal abilities present still use medieval concepts. In response, this one is a sort of reverse. "I like the idea that power isn't passed on. Then, everybody's fate depends more on their character than their lineage."

Advanced People and Advanced Civilization Ideas:
Thoughts/Observation/Expected COmmonalitiess: Conservative values moot the gain of new technology for many civilizations. Basically, immortality gives more feelings of worth. “I‟ve changed my mind! I don‟t want to die.” Advanced people may more easily make the decision of whether or not to sacrifice one for the sake or others because they are more solidly decided on things due to having the means and being allowed to develop their minds and philosophy better. In a really far-future society, definitions would really be very blurry. I thought that maybe they would have mostly women, but now I think it‟s likely that definitions of gender would be very blurred as time goes on. A mark of human progress would be the elimination of natural selection. It is something that scholars could use to check the advancement of others. Of the advanced civilization, “We still have norms here. There are commonalities.” In advanced times, we make our own version of nature, which almost always depends on human influence. The younger future people are more childish and seemingly oblivious to nuances of situations they are not used to. Emotions in advanced people. Are they stronger or weaker? Are they mostly separate

from the base ones people get at birth (meaning they are sort of custom)? In the system of some advanced civilization, everything is free except for things above a certain complexity and difficulty to make. These can only be had with some prerequisites. For some advanced people, sending others to start civilization on their own is like sending them to their deaths. They will be eventual, but still would happen. “You created them. Don‟t you have the right to do what you want?” Letting people create civilizations in which people die even though they are made by the civilization‟s creator to expect death and not want to live forever is very similar to letting people create other people just so they can suffer. Societies (that I make up) that do one should logically do the other. With their broader mindset, I should bring it out by making them say things like “I am happy about this” instead of “this is good.” “Do you think people will just stand around and live as they always ha ve until nature the universe claims them back? Even most philosophers from unadvanced times imagine their futures so.” In the future, all the people of a society can come alive totally separate from natural birth. Drugs for everything Instant movement Advanced people don‟t think much of oddness of nonsense, such as a person talking really loud for no reason. There will probably always be those afraid of new discovery. It‟s not a baseless fear. Humans are more volatile than ever before. The people in the advanced civilization share an almost universal feeling that with their indefinite lifespan, they are going to end up doing everything. Advanced people regard what they know simply as that; not as definite facts, just the facts as they know them. Given unlimited time, people will probably be much less ambitious. “We are highly divided, but there is not much worth fighting for and there is little in our minds to make us want to fight. Conflicts in less advanced places often occur for simpler reasons than the people involved suggest, such as over stubborn preservation of one‟s own ways or over resources. These problems don‟t exist for us, basically leaving deeper causes, such as philosophical difference or otherwise. Besides, all conflict only happens over some fault in people.”

In the advanced places, death and taxes are long eliminated. There is no perfection, no matter how advanced people get, but there are still regarded to be several variations of the best possible ways to be. In a conflict among very advanced people, nobody says it‟s good or bad, it‟s just a profound disagreement over deep matters. Nobody can be seen as the villain or a hero, even by the reader. Primary values of typical advanced worlds may often include individualism, material comfort, humanitarianism, and Science and Technology. Maybe it would take some long period of time; maybe 100 years or so, for a usual world to culturally catch up to advanced technology. This could be the uncertain, exiting part of its history. Some likely advancement is objects made to find you and get to you, so you can‟t lose them or anything now. With the resources available, they would be feasible even if very complex. I wouldn‟t be surprised if a great many worlds fell apart because of the lag in society when they get new technology. Even now, I feel like there is a significant likelihood of something catastrophic happening because there is powerful technology in the ha nds of undeveloped people. I suppose I can incorporate this into many plots, such as the one in which the protagonists are on a world going through a significant technological transition. “Many of us are less than excellent, and there are those who are downright simple.” People of the future may become extremely arrogant, or at least develop some unique kind of arrogance. There may be more trouble among civilizations of similar advancement than from more advanced civilizations unto less advanced ones. A society is considered mature when it no longer finds any need to fight others. There could be explanations for that point in development that goes between the modern level and the really advanced level. Remember that knowledge and technology would j ust shoot straight up at some point, but a world itself wouldn‟t necessarily keep up at the same rate. It can only spread as fast as it can be facilitated. Meanwhile is the interesting times. The idea that future civilization will be around the lowest common denominator seems believable. It seems there isn‟t much to cause them to all be intellectuals and interested in that sort of stuff. Maybe that would come after life is indefinite and they have less to do.

(I think I‟ve said something like this before) Maybe far advanced societies will evolve into two types: the kind that goes into advanced anarchy/primitive communism, or a kind more along the lines of the standardized and streamlined bureaucracy that has been given many forms by authors. Given time, the latter may end up being less durable and forced into change eventually. I also think this one is similar to people adapting to greatly changed conditions with the simple, safe, dependable solutions before they advance with it. If it is a case of humans adapting to the new stage of conditions, how will it be in the future? Every day, things change exponentially faster. It can bring very serious implications. Maybe peoples don‟t “ascend”, or Finish (as I call it), until something sociological just brings it about. It‟s very unlikely most of them will just happen to come to a broad consensus on what to do with themselves. Society of people simply all using their abilities to go their separate ways. No mass movement or conversion.

Specific Ideas Like conservatism, people regarding their level of technology as the right one. “Why is everything so extra-safe?” “Nobody here accepts death at all. The fact that somebody dies every week is too much.” After long- life solutions are created, the things created that make people accept death will eventually disappear. They will have a stronger desire to live, as sensible people would. If there was a place that was happy enough with technology, would they stop having respect for scientists and other similar sorts? The power of technology might create a world of extreme caution and fear. Destruction in the hands of many forces all to change lifestyles. “This entire place is converted for instant travel. Travel of anything is naturally limited to the speed of light, but here all things travel instantly. It is the principal thing to consider as you examine our world.” Instant travel would make a place very different.” They meet some people who might seem to underutilize new technology. “This tree is our buildings infrastructure. It grows as we make it. It‟s not our most quality way to make buildings, but it‟s the most affordable way.” “That‟s so bazaar. Why would you do that?” “I don‟t understand the question. We do it because it works.” “What are we doing? Making it so children are out of civilization means there is no love!”

“Opening relations with less developed worlds makes it possible for some of our people to exploit them. Also, the dramatic changes may be too much for the stability of it. It or we could destroy it.” “How can we trust ourselves to be parents to a younger civilization?” (Another reason why high civs might keep a low-interference policy on less developed civilizations.) It would be funny if some civilization made it so it actually did rain food (something like popcorn though) like in the children's book. Advanced people might see that giving technology to less advanced people because they are acknowledged as less wise and potentially dangerous to them (such as when a country in an undeveloped stage gets nuclear weapons.) People with technology development criticizes those who resign to ignorant, quaint happiness. Future people might remind a lot of hippies in many ways, including benevolence. Maybe they have to live a regular lifetime and regress for a time. On a ship of just or mostly advanced people, even if it‟s huge they would probably all be easy friends. An advanced person changed the body in a unique way. “I see smaller constructs making bigger things to do things for them. Why don‟t they just become bigger themselves?” Some form of food could be a plant that crystallizes itself to become a solid deposit of nutrients. It crystallizes as it grows. After this, the crystals can be boiled down or other things can be done with them. They can be eaten as they are, since they are not as dense as mineral crystals. They might be a reliable, simple food source for all sorts of people, including those going on expeditions. A civilization winds back and forth, being conservative and liberal continuously. It slows down in its strength either way over time. I can imagine people making all the animals possible smart. If they can, why not share it? An entire civilization freezes itself and its people to give the world time to naturally repair itself a little. On one planet, they keep the respect for life away from the artificial. Generally, the people actually aren't as cold as the knowledge of this would make them seem, as they do to Ludin. The real reason they do this is actually complicated politics. At the start of the story, they seem like bad guys for it, but as complications arise convictions become muddied. The plot part comes from the character's behavior.

Adv. Civ lets people just evolve as they will as an experiment. No genetic or physical manipulation. Everyone put in constant pleasure Humans can create intelligent life to the degree that they want, and people can enhance themselves. A civilization may choose to create planets for specific purposes if that becomes convenient for them. There could be completely residential planets, office planets, construction planets, and maybe a refuge planet for safety. These people might have the ability to travel instantly. Somewhere, they limit their ability to feel emotions to only pleasure. It would seem like the perfect thing to many people, since they would achieve happiness. I think it would be a huge mistake. When it finally stopped, he felt a savory sadness. A tired society has forgotten and now is just cold. It was a bright intellectual place, but it was forced to become cold. It‟s very advanced and intelligent, but now it‟s faltering. It is like the crazy “worship science” place of older science fiction. Now someone starts a movement saying that it needs love. The thing is that even there they find these ideals. “This is something that only exists for the purposes of sex. How likely is it that it is the vitally important thing we need?” “We don‟t need these emotions.” “Even if that‟s true, what about our wants?” World of will. Everything is made to happen as a consequence of will. “If you see somebody dyeing and it is easily in your means to help, why not? If someone is being assaulted an you can easily overcome the assaulter, would you not? In the same way, we should intervene and help the less advanced worlds.” “Why do we help if not for gain that ultimately helps us? It‟s a selective trait, not some beautiful human spark.” “We cannot say what is wrong and right and should not act in any way. A principal reason for this is that we would be effectively forcing conformity.” “This need to do such things is what starts wars.” (Interference philosophy could found republic.) Future societies: Not apathetic, just inactive. “What a sickness. They do as they please. Because it‟s all down to pleasure for them. It‟s emotion. „Nothing else ultimately matters, and it‟s always been emotion anyway so why stop it, right? Let‟s not try to develop any farther or anything. Let‟s not evolve ourselves, explore.‟ No, they won‟t deprive themselves or anything. Come on. Be something else.” An observation in future societies: “How do you punish someone when nothing is bad anymore?” It‟s common belief that bad and good are relative measures.

There is a feeling of all effort, all things done, of it preparing for one thing. Afraid of further advancement because of extreme likely results. Instead, developed with what they had for sophistication into technological niche. Imagine people making perfect mates artificially. The major thing is how it would be looked at. “Remember that time we used stars as [hypothetical] currency?” A high civ has a stage when stars were being explored and used. People would claim stars, even if they hadn‟t seen them. It got to the point where it was seriously regarded as property if you c laimed one. It started to work its way in to law. There was a brief fad where people traded their claimed stars like currency shortly before it became more organized and the practice stopped. “How do we balance freedom while taking care of everybody‟s needs and wants? It can only happen with progress, either technologically or mentally, and the two follow each other.” The attitude of the generations that come along a significant amount of time after life spans became indefinite have nonconstructive attitudes. To teach them more appreciation for the proper things, they are sent on expeditions such as the one the characters are on. A few characters will be like this; in their late tens, perhaps a little arrogant, a generally different outlook on things... "All retirements are now temporary." You get to choose one ability at a young age. One of those expansive, bazaar, long-advanced worlds should have been left to less advanced people. That would be an interesting place. Planet that recently tapped space “We do not punish, we neutralize.” “It wasn‟t until we overcame the artificial, human constraints that we could challenge the more powerful, unintentional regulations and laws of the universe.” There are settings in which everything has descended into amoral, desperate anarchy. I‟ve only seen this in post-apocalypse or similar places. Make it happen in someplace more advanced and prosperous. Someplace, creatures are made artificially to fill all needs. It‟s the relationship people have with creatures since primitive times. “They haven‟t even died once?” Some people have gone though life multiple times. One person is in many generations. From what they know, you‟ll have to have lived several times to

be experienced. “And how long would you two like to be married?” Marriage, depending on if it exists at all, will be different in the advanced future. There are multiple ways it will disappear, but maybe it will turn into a sort of legal thing. What if the really high point in human development is reaching a point where everybody is happy (If that is the key thing supporting the growth of liberalism). Advanced things as ancient. In an advanced society that is in the middle of transition, there were still many causes that would make people kill each other, along with an (possibly) inappropriately liberal government. For a few decades of lag, people did. At one point, everyone alive at some point could be assumed to have killed at least once. Concurrently, the population had dwindled in those years. The wrong person in the right time. There are stories written about cold, impersonal future, where lives are meaningless. I think that just happens when morality is lagging. Some viewpoint is that once you have learned everything, you will find that there really is nothing and no reason, and that you should just go back to the universe much the same as you came from it. They basically learn everything and then go on to die, or at least fade completely. A deviant sect is one that feels all this is a bit pointless, and just wants to die outright. Another says there should be something else past this. When people are really smart, they might over think things very quickly, as I sometimes do. They might make connections very quickly, so to another observer they may be doing something nonsensical because it‟s not the expected next step. There could be explanations for that point in development that goes between the modern level and the really advanced level. Remember that knowledge and technology would just shoot straight up at some point, but a world itself wouldn‟t necessarily keep up a t the same rate. It can only spread as fast as it can be facilitated. Meanwhile is the interesting times. The idea that future civilization will be around the lowest common denominator seems believable. It seems there isn‟t much to cause them to all be intellectuals and interested in that sort of stuff. Maybe that would come after life is indefinite and they have less to do. A translation of a type of ultimate state of being is of achieving infallibility. It would be funny to see really advanced people, who have surpassed the universe, still anguish over whether they are some sort of simulation. Some viewpoint is that once you have learned everything, you will find that there really is nothing and no reason, and that you should just go back to the universe much the same as you

came from it. They basically learn everything and then go on to die, or at least fade completely. A deviant sect is one that feels all this is a bit pointless, and just wants to die outright. Another says there should be something else past this. “The people you kill don‟t always stay dead.” Could be clones, or recreation, or some sort of system of keeping them as they are. System keeping people alive after apparently dead: There are things going on at unperceived levels, and they are just part of a larger construct. Aliens are benevolent to a world they took over, but oddly they are not so to many other people. What happens when a highly advanced society is still using the rules and structure of severely less advanced times? Technology can change fast, but not people and society. Early time, when they can‟t be as influential. One thing that directs some very advanced people is to master this level of existence. “Giving technology would mean ruining the years of work by settling it now.” This view on smaller societies would mean deciding that it‟s ultimately about their efforts. Life being worse now because even though we are freer, etc. we are more aware of these things and are too aware and knowledgeable to be happy.

Superadvanced People Ideas/Post-Society Ideas:
Thoughts/Observations: “Changing yourself to exist on a more complex level isn‟t necessarily higher. It‟s like north and south; arbitrary measures.” God-people can still be stupid. Don‟t show the super-beings as being in any way less wise than the mortals, unless it‟s some sort of specifically character things. Specific Ideas:

God people might stop their memories and become a sort of regular person for a time because of the boredom, for some change, or some other reason.

Remember that Gilthoniel doesn‟t give them anything at all. Also make sure that the god-people aren‟t indicated to be running the universe. The universes they make are often incomplete. Only ones who have been around a long time can make convincingly natural ones. Some post-civilization people simply blend with and fade into the rest of existence. They go back to nature, not so different as when people die. “We never found a perfectly functional system, you know. Society evolved so that it eventually became pointless to find it. I mean to set out and find that system. No matter how long it takes, I‟ll find it eventually.” The god-people can be whatever they want; male, female, neither, something else. Bringing up the issue that if there was a god, might still doesn‟t make right: They go to a place where the super-advanced, being the god-people, have either created or are controlling it. A character living on it says “God is a tyrant!” “Every species has been a transitional species. Look at me. I am not a transitional species. I am the ultimate result.” Gilthoniel or other god-person. Jeffrey McKee said that every species has been a transitional species. Some people hide in/are based in a late-stage, dead sort of universe in it‟s black hole era. If a person was granted one wish (perhaps can happen from god-person), a real good choice would be total control of self. It definitely gives you many things at once, and the definition is debatable, meaning the wisher might be able to argue the points to get even more for it. Perhaps the particles a person has any interaction with are a pert of that individual because he/she affects them, practically meaning a person is the universe. One creation of far- future humans could be a universe no more than a light- year or so large. It is mostly made up of matter, and at it‟s edge ends abruptly. “Those god-people man, I mean they are there. They have learned everything and gone past all this, so now they just have no direction, you know?” When making something inside of a different realm of existence, one detail to make it different could be the way visual perspective works. For example, when you jump, you can see a little more of what‟s beyond a roof than when you are standing. It might be so that it just doesn‟t work this way. Asks the god person: “could you create an object so heavy, you yourself cannot lift it?” She answers that it would depend on her energy reserves, so she could convert more mass until she can lift it. Then he poses it is so heavy she could absorb all possible energy and not lift it. She admits that then she would have no alternative then but to convert the mass of the object into energy until she could. So that answers that.

“Games serve purposes.” “Next, we intend to go to the place beyond the place outside of existence.” Maybe some god person likes to act totally opposite of how it feels at time, such as doing devil‟s advocate sorts of things or defying own morality to teach others by example. God-person kills planet or something, but duplicates exactly to make up for it. When somebody changes to go into an alternate form of existence, the experience is different than expected. Thoughts might go: “This is wonderful. Even just moving is like nothing I‟ve done before.” The initial thing is very different and it might seem heavenly, but then they find that in this alternate place life is equivalent. It‟s just as complicated and unforgiving as nature in the human universe. What at that time is normal human life turns out to be preferable to this. “Emotions are usually inactive, but there are times when they are constructive.” Some future people use them occasioanlly. Bringing up the issue that if there was a god, might still doesn‟t make right: They go to a place where the super-advanced, being the god-people, have either created or are controlling it. A character living on it says “God is a tyrant!” Kind and compassionate but monstrous god. Like Jesus the fascist. Wants to be and feels should be good (in the usual sense) but also doesn‟t see reasons against the monstrous things done alongside that (and done to the same people). Benevolent but cruel leader. “These people think they are so evolved. They are still just refined anima ls. They let themselves be it, too. They still keep some vestiges of their original species.” “Humans are a conservative species. Even long after they gained the ability to change themselves completely away from their original being, they stayed the same.” I can imagine humans as appearing conservative and stale as a species to other ones.” Perhaps artificial life humans made evolves farther no it‟s own, going past that posthuman thing Maybe the logic of what we do when we know the full universe will be circular. “I like creating new natures, new creatures. It‟s the fundamental of nature.” My present exists as an eternally recurring alternate-universe thing. It is kept for posterity and for various other reasons by super advanced people. It can always be revisited. “We have beaten logic.” May it be that even the greatest beings will retain the rules of behavior demanded by

empathy (such as being fair by giving similar consideration to other lives as to yours)? There are other godly beings, but they get along the same as human godly beings. There is no lack of space or anything else, so there is little cause for conflict. Few god people can be said to be able to do anything particularly impossible. Travel beyond the universe is one thing that gods of only a certain caliber of mastery over their way of functioning and very comprehensive knowledge and practice can do. Basically, Gilthoniel‟s abilities extend to being able to do conversions of matter to energy and then of energy to matter, and then she can reform the matter how she wants. She‟s good at this, being able to make al lsorts of things. Besides that, she can‟t do anything more complex. She spends time messing with people. She is no more mature than most well- advanced people. In advanced societies, they often have means to do very advanced things. Godly people may even occasionally come to these places as them for their own purposes. A person‟s lifetime of accomplishments compared to what one adv person does. “They won‟t help you. They are already serene.” Said of some people who have made it so they cannot be disturbed or bothered by anything. “Would you rather know? Is it better to know?” “You‟ve tried everything, but you can‟t find the perfect thing. I‟ll give you something new I know you‟ve never tried before…death.” “The people you kill don‟t always stay dead.” Could be clones, or recreation, or some sort of system of keeping them as they are. System keeping people alive after apparently dead: There are things going on at unperceived levels, and they are just part of a larger construct. “Existence is a property, and I am as much a part of existence as anything else, and so it is fair for me to claim all existence as property, and I have the power to enforce it.” A translation of a type of ultimate state of being is of achieving infallibility.

Approaches to Life:
“Don‟t you think love would work out better and everybody would be happier if we didn‟t have to say our feelings were absolute? Few people have ever been so that they either simply love somebody or don‟t.” A philosophy on life and how it‟s filled with contradictions and nobody is able to live

perfectly: “One person can‟t fix it, can‟t be totally pure of injustice. Just follow along as best you can.” There is no way to avoid evil, and so acting as best we can is said to be all we can do. Negative thinking makes people less likely to think they as creatures are special. It has less delusion. “The best thing for us is to think against ourselves.” “People take the path of least resistance. It‟s how animals survive. The most convenient way is usually the one.” “Love is not restrained. It‟s just a pleasant thing. You people make too much of it, probably because you let nature interfere.” “What about sex?” “Just the same.” It‟s sort of human nature to resist reality for reasons of happiness or convenience. “In reality, love is very simple. People have urges to do these things. Society has made all these specific rules and created specific concepts for it. There are ways that you are supposed to go about it or contexts in which it may exist, and we forget that it‟s just a feeling.”

Their Universe/Galaxy:
The place: Many space-nations have existed, and most have quickly faded. “We may all be descendants of a few people that stayed behind after the first time the human race decided to move on to something else.” There are not many advanced civilizations around, because so many people just leave. Has been known as the “Broken Silver” and the “Silk” galaxy, among many other names. Things within/Specific Ideas: End of all things. “Well, it doesn‟t all end at once. It‟s sort of a dynamic exchange overall.” THE REPUBLIC The republic is a large force in their Galaxy. It‟s the largest known cohesive government. It‟s early days were nice, not it‟s in the late- middle era deteriorating despite that it‟s still growing. It‟s members are becoming increasingly dissatisfied. There is a powerful sort of Republic that is recruiting other civilizations to become a part of it. They actually are quite fair to their members and nice overall. It seems like everybody who

hears about them wants to join. However, there is at least one that does not want to join. They aren‟t particularly special, but their leaders just don‟t want to. When asked why, they reply that they have accepted the role of nonconformity. The way their story plays out is that after at least a few hundred years, the republic starts to turn bad. Even though in the beginning they brought many advantages to their members, the years of conformity have basically turned all of the members the same, and now they are trapped. The benefits have stopped, including the benefit of all the different technologies and resources brought together, since they are all now the same. The civilization that denied themselves entry into the republic now has the advantage, because they are now a centre of new and different things and ideas, because they were able to develop with relative independence. A sort of wide-reaching galactic republic would probably have tight control/influence in it‟s center, with more autonomy and less influence on planets as you go farther out, until a point where it simply disappears. For hundreds of years, it was a smallish collection of systems and such, but it had a pretty strong integrity. It was a collection of systems with the same general ideas and attitudes. Locations within: Some solar system could be slightly above a galaxy. The star and the debris that formed the planets were thrown upwards when the other things orbiting a black hole along with it moved in just such a way to throw it out the the spiraling orbit and away from most of the galaxy (which is a spiral one). Intelligent life in such a place would develop in a vary unique way. The stars would not surround the planet. Instead, depending how close it was, the bright center would appear as the middle of a sort of plane of light. (If it is above a gala xy, perhaps that means it‟s either constantly moving away or in a huge orbit.)

Spaceship Stuff:
Thoughts/Observations Because there are such high speeds in space, to allow for acceleration there is a thing that evens out inertia all over the vessel. It has a little lag at very fast acceleration, such as zero to several times the speed of sound. The lag gives the feeling that one is being taken by some huge power. A vessel with function so perfect, no form could improve its design. Often, in science fiction, a spaceship is treated so much like a boat. A boat can have equipment put on it to be used as a researcher, fisher, or warship. I really think spaceships would be much more specialized than that. (Also, this is a good place to put in that I think most ships would be much more vulnerable than they are made to be in fiction. Shields actually seem like a plot device to allow action without making combat a disaster. Ships in combat would probably fall apart quickly due to the strong physical forces.) Escape pods are put on spaceships lie longboats. Space stuff is like likely to be much

more expensive and carefully made than that. Survival vessels might more likely be integrated into vital parts of the ship (every part is probably vital) that are detachable. Some form of propulsion might warp space immediately around the vessel, similar to how pressure differences underneath and above an airplane keep it in the air. Ship simplification. The interface can simplify to accommodate anyone with basic training in controlling the thing. Doing more complex things will bring up more associated controls for it. It shouldn‟t be hard to be stealthy in space, at least with a few modifications to how a spaceship might normally work. The structure of ships can have many orientations. Underwater vehicles use dome windows because they hold up equally well on their surface against water pressure. Since space is the opposite, are their windows concave? In the really advanced and complex ships, every system seems to mess up the other. In large spaceships, it would seem like many differences on pressure would make winds pass through the corridors. The space vessels and other big things that are complex enough would probably resemble an ecosystem more than a machine. When they can materialize from one place to another instantly, there would be the potential risk of getting particles and atoms within their own. That might be potentially very dangerous, especially as systems get more developed. Maybe it‟s within their power to instantly move whatever is in the way. When people invade spaceships, it seems kind of dumb that they could have any influence from within their enemy‟s vessel at all. I‟m sure that the people operating it could do all sorts of things, such as cutting the air or opening the doors or sealing them off and cutting the power to their part or creating a fog or forcing an explosion. Even if they don‟t have very much control, they can surely control plenty of the circumstances when they fight. Tying to invade an active ship is probably like trying to rob modern fort Knox. Specific Ideas Tan ship with red thrusters one might have one major thruster on the back and two others on the sides/top and bottom near the front. Turning one way other than up/down involves rotating, changing the orientation of it. This can be a more efficient use of thrusters at some maneuverabilit y costs.

Earlier intersystem ships with oversized attachments to make travel possible. They would open up their own hole or special route, and they could be ultra compact and light for their size because it takes massive energy to move mass. It could also be so that the people in control have developed better means, but allow the public to use these to control better. A warship is made. It‟s practically better than cutting edge, but only useable for six months, because by then it‟s too obsolete. They give it away.

Space Combat:
Thoughts/Observations: Space combat isn‟t like anything else. It may seem like in an empty area there are no factors besides which ship is better armed and armored, but the truth is that with all this technology and a clear field a million different things can happen in an instant. A small exploration vessel might defeat the space force of an entire planet if the crew of it is smart enough. There would be many types of energy shields. One might be for object-heavy areas, which pushes things in the vicinity toward the back. They don‟t lose momentum, the momentum is just changed. Imagine a weapons shield that grabs a fast missile, orbits it once around the ship, and throws it back. "It's much simpler to curve or divert an attack than to block it completely. That is why those types of shields are so common." An impact shield that works like an actual bubble. Anything as dense as gas pushes in the shield, and the bubble shapes itself back into a sphere, bouncing it off. The shield is vulnerable to sub-atomic stuff, like radiation. The physics isolation thing could also be sort of projected like a shield to cutoff sections of ships. Even if done for an instant, it would be disastrous. Temperature varies wildly in space. Locations with even minute debris would pose a risk for fast moving particles Releasing an EMP in the middle of a fight, and using special fast-recovering boarding ships or powerful and simple weapons overtake the other ships. Nuclear weapons seem relatively cheap compared to spaceships. It might be a feasible idea to send a suicide ship or drone into the middle of a formation or at a station and detonate it. On Star Trek, most ships have teleporters. Why can‟t they just teleport enemies out of their ships? A ship with teleporters would probably have a big advantage over ones without. To counter, there would need to be some sort of distortion or something.

Any sort of bullet-type weapons might likely be used like shotguns, which would probably be most effective against unarmored non- military types of ships, which would have many unprotected parts. They might make good area-of-effect weapons too, like flak cannons. If a ship has a device that propels it at the speed of light, it wouldn‟t seem like much of a stretch for the device to be applied to project small particles at the speed of light. A dust particle at light speed has the potency of a nuclear bomb. Beam-type weapons always shoot like bullet-type weapons. Couldn‟t they be adjusted to shoot a single, powerful beam for a brief amount of time or to shoot at lower power constantly (such as if they were trying to bring down shields or sweep the beam across an area). Another thing they would have to consider while doing anything in space is energy and fuel consumption, particularly in movement. Supposedly, movie-type shields turn off before they overload. It might be an option to allow the shields to overload. This way, although the shields may have to be replaced later, the ship receives some extra protection. Another possible weapon is a projectile that penetrates armor and is connected directly and physically to the attacking ship. The ship provides more energy than whatever charge would be in the weapon, which can be turned into destructive force. I can imagine something like this being a cheaper alternative to heavier weapons. It isn't a very feasible idea to make powder-style guns to work on spaceships, so instead they could make a gun that works by having a very strong hammer po und heated rounds. The energy that doesn't go into kinetics is turned into heat energy. Supposedly a ship could generate a lot of power, so the ship could make the force needed to drive these rounds instead of the power coming from a self contained bullet. Alternatively to typical shields, maybe they make a field that gives more integrity/hardness to everything within it. Every space door should have physical ways to close and open it as well as a switch to force it closed or open. A space vessel steering interface might have several buttons doing the same things, but perhaps in different degrees. One set might be for precision control, but the other set may be situated close to each other and meant for fast control. “I‟ve thought of something. It wouldn‟t be impossible to make a device that takes the force of something projected at you and, rather than pushes it back, changes it‟s direction and lets it circulate around you. Then, since it still ahs it‟s force, you can let it do a full circle and let it turn back towards the place it was projected.”

In ships that lack a wealth of components, many are used with multiple purposes, meaning that functions depend on the same components as other functions. Since vessels would be so vulnerable, it would seem like a good idea to automate most vessels. Training people is expensive, so they shouldn‟t be sent on such dangerous tasks. Each vessel might have it‟s own AI, or it might connect to a main computer somewhere, which could make a number of vulnerabilities but might give advantages such as to coordination and preserving the AI programs. Something on spaceships: If the capability existed (such as with sentient AI) to identify targets as hostile or friendly and the destructive abilities of a vessel could be made nearly equal to its power generation, then it would seem like a good idea to just make one big one instead of a number of smaller ones. A small space fighter could have machine guns that fire shells which explode at a distance. If there were the small vehicles, they should probably be more useful for placing or utilizable as proxy equipment.

Specific Ideas: A warship is made. It‟s practically better than cutting edge, but only useable for six months, because by then it‟s too obsolete. They give it away. Maybe I could explore this in one story. Maybe it could star the one guy who left his life to military service. Spaceships with oversized, intimidating, but actually fake, guns. Similar to animals with spots n their heads that look like eyes. A private space vessel just has one big beam for its armament. It‟s good against raiders and less formal attackers, because they know at least one of them is sure to be destroyed from it. If there were dropships, they should either be big, very well-equipped transports, or Spartan, fast, stealthy things. Can control all of a massive undertaking one controls the mind. Decides what happens, practically. EMP could also work at times. I read that it is generated by a pulse that travels through a medium. If a ship had insufficient radiation protection, maybe an emp-releasing weapon could simply disable it. Maybe EMP could be made to travel through a very fast medium, such as something like a lazer. After disabling, this is probably one of the few times you could try to take

it over. Optimally, the invaders and defenders would want relatively simple weapons and equipment specifically for such a thing, such as gunpowder weapons (probably with bullets that wont damage internal structure as much.) and otherwise non-electric based tools and equipment. For some sort of space war, the conditions would have to be very unusual. Maybe there are two sorts of planets at equal technology with many systems between them. They have enough space between them to buffer from the highly dynamic outcomes of space battles. How they travel is very important, of course. If they have some sort of instant travel, the whole thigns would probably be over soon enough, or else have some really fast dynamic. Maybe there is a one-way instant travel thing, where extremely expensive and complex points are constructed that give one-way trips. Maybe the only way back is to construct a new gate. The best reason not to send all the forces at once is because of the unpredictability of battles. Maybe a good strategic place for a central gate is situated in a moon. All the rock surrounding ought to make it safer. Perhaps it can open and close too, in order to protect itself from surprise attacks. Maybe ships can be sent through to attack, and then to bring back the pilot they send an instant mini- gat thing that transports the pilot alone. Afterward, they can self-destruct so as not to give their enemies anything. THe only alternative is to leave the pilot behind, which would not be popular.

Technology Ideas:
Perhaps in future technology, there may be so many technological functions that they are classified as simple, base-physics things and more complex physical operations. A teleporter would probably be very complex, but they could make it in a way so that it functions on a base physical level. Maybe quantities of mass, from people to perhaps worlds, could be frozen and compressed somehow and then stored. Perhaps the space between atoms is eliminated. Spaceships capable of extreme physical manipulation could tow a black hole and direct it‟s gravity. Future weapons could probably serve a multitude of uses. There are few things to do with guns besides killing, but basically things with fire. Cool zeppelin thing Afraid of further advancement because of extreme likely results. Instead, developed with what they had for sophistication into technological niche. “We‟ve already made machines stronger than us. Now we‟ll have ones that are more intelligent?” Instead of freezing people until a cure is found, they might turn them into computer code and reprogram the cancer out of them.

Despot of the Internet Despot of the internet. Takes control in the same way the first human government did. The internet is not a solid place you can conquer. You cannot sent troops into it, plant a flag at it's center (for it has none), and build walls around it. If somebody actually could control the internet by controlling hackers and programmers, and then controlling sites and servers through sanctions and threats, that person could control the world. Robots are likely to be developed to have full simulation of humans. A man is sitting in a bar. Many occupations have been replaced with robots, who simulate people very well. The bartender seems to do his job too well (including the 'human' aspect of the job, such as conversation) He looks around the place and thinks to himself "I might be the last human", because the robots could have replaced everybody and it would be hard to tell. A controversial magazine article appears: "Science now finds no distinction to sugges t biological humans are more alive than robotic ones. Unless the definition of 'alive' is being able to independently evolve, or that it lies somewhere in mental mechanics, we are as alive (or no more alive) than the robots we create today. Although their minds are made around following commands, the human mind works much the same. We are usually unaware of it, but most of our actions are pre-created responses to stimuli. It used to be that electronic minds were incapable of intelligently willing themselves to do things such as changing their minds, but the present robot technology is now so sophisticated and complex that it can." The arrival of the next generation of computers makes change inevitable. It is met with dread and anticipation and excitement. "You can do what you want to me, I can't fight back. It's against my programming." "Animals can be bred to be docile, but they can change their minds." The use of robots creates wider societal problems. They are considered property. At the same time, they replace humans at jobs. The owners of the robots don't have to pay them regularly, and upkeep is very cheap. Perhaps there develops a distinction between robots developed for business and profitable use and robots developed for personal use. Maybe the ones for business end up having to be developed with a broader range of emotions and behaviors than what they would need to do their jobs right. "It would be convenient for me if people acted more like robots. Now I'm fortunate, since robots are so much more common. The problem is that they increasingly act like people." “We have made a new life form and must take responsibility. It might be compared to parenting or being gods, but this is really like nothing before.” Possible to see everything in the past by comparing relative things to similar universes. “Cloning will liquidize the right to live. What considerations will there be when everyone lives indefinitely?” I think that as people would see it when they look back afterwards, being without it would seem like one of those simpler ways of working things out, ones that conservatives like. Stasis thieves. Stasis is the last bit of hope for those hoping that lost loved one are alive.

Within a stasis field, an object loses the quality of time. Without the dimension of time, nothing happens to the object. It‟s an exploitable resource. What if there was music you could listen to that changed every time? “How do we manipulate energy without using energy?” On a commercial for vodka they covered the moon in disco mirrors. A lot of people wouldn‟t be happy about this, but it would be something if a satellite was made that was a half sphere and was covered on the half with those tiny mirrors. It could be directed to shine on a certain country or part of the world on days of celebration. It would probably be very useful for a number of more useful purposes, such as keeping a place lighted for a very long time. If information is beamed directly into mind and memory, then can‟t it easily be biased information? Aren‟t there plenty of ways to influence somebody‟s mind even if you‟re simply doing something as innocent as entering new information into it? Destroying/ruining a planet doesn‟t seem as hard as they make it look. For example, Ecosystems are very sensitive, and the planets and stellar objects of our system are in a delicate balance that can apparently be thrown easily. The technology to build spaceships seems like it would be about a close enough level to affect complete worlds. One way might be to make an explosion the surface equivalent to the force of a miles-large asteroid. It would be enough for sure. People who wanted to simply destroy everyone else might be very successful. One piece of technology might be a Superdense Cube (not necessarily a cube, but a cube is a convenient shape) that transforms and expands into devices. It's something only kids might think of because there are the rules about mass and such, but if things could be designed carefully enough and in the right way they could save tons of space this way. "Medication is simply the re-wiring of our bodies. Full-on genetic modifications are just the advanced way of doing these things. It started with tribal herbs, and now we have the ultimate level."

Setting Ideas:
Sometime, they could come across a planet with a crashed moon lodged into it. It would be like two near-spheres (one smaller than the other) that have been lodged into each other. In the middle part, the gravity of both spheres might interfere with each other and make odd physical conditions. Some people live on a planet that people are able to get onto, but not leave. Settlers come if they want to run from somebody, because it‟s unlikely for others to follow them in. Some future people were isolated, like a ship they can never leave being stuck alone on a world, and then they formed their own little dynamic.

One difference in the worlds I failed to consider yet is brightness on those worlds. On Earth and Mars, the brightness is tolerably the same since they are close to each other, similar, and have the same sun. However, different conditions may make things much brighter or darker. The principal thing is probably the dimness or brilliance of suns, and other things suc h as atmosphere are less important. The eyes of different species would be the same anyway since they would have almost all have a nighttime of relatively the same darkness. So people from a bright world would be able to cope on all darker worlds, but otherwise on brighter ones they may need help (sunglasses). One planet can be one where it‟s very cold, but life is dormant for the hours of night (similar rotation to ours) and it opens up and flourishes for the hours when there is daylight, which is very strong from a clear atmosphere and close(er) proximity to the sun. I‟ve heard someone on a comedy say that hell exists for people who like that sort of thing, and heaven is for people who like their sort of thing. This is another version that can be explored.

Story Perspective Ideas:
Sometimes there are stories in which people are changed by others in some bazaar way to something inhuman, like people being made crazy or their mind being otherwise controlled. In something I do, a character could be made better (instead of into a monster) for intervals of time. Could be made to act what I see as opposite of what I call monster. The perception of others and of this character on the event, however, is different. “Our outward appearances are just facades. We look so neat and beautiful on the outside, but just underneath it‟s hideous. It‟s like we have a tarp covering our ugly selves.” A short story idea is a brief adventure with “nonsensical” people. The narrator is an unadvanced person They are a pair of travelers, and the things they talk about things that the narrator is totally unfamiliar with and they also say things that seem ridiculous to the narrators sensibilities. Show businesses as individuals The “Not my concern” that is in duty and requirements of jobs is just the same as when a person says “not my concern” in life. The law currently considers businesses as individuals. If everybody did this, they would be very inconsiderate people. By the same, businesses are assholes. A person who can‟t control themselves, like a vampire or some other mythological nearhuman thing, shown in comparison to how ordinary people have things controlling them as well. There are stories where monsters, such as vampires or aliens, are unable to overcome instincts and do terrible things. Make something where humans are the monster, and the species of the main characters are either very different humans or some other species that are much

gentler than humans. The narrator creatures should be things that would look quite hideous to us, and maybe be a little offensive too. Try phrasing and posing everything in a story as a narrative of separate animals, observing from a scientific perspective. “The successful are not inherently better, but they have fit into their niche in an advantageous way. When one is removed, it is less able to adapt.” A maverick businessman has studied hard and taken full advantage of things. He is very smart, and unlike others, adapts when taken out of his environment. Could say sympathy and such things are the product of more advanced thought. There are base things already around in basically all animals, and these are generally about supporting self. Everything Ayn Rand is known for arguing against.

Interesting Concept Ideas:
Just as part of a concept, “My worst enemy turned out to be my best teacher.” Staying in the same place for years, only glimpsing changes in the world. Perspective bit: going through the hugest structure they‟ve ever seen, knowing it is still as small as anything else. All the major characters inevitably die. In their situation, the survivors become increasingly aware of mortality and their imminent death. As a side concept, a character changes mind over who it loves frequently. It's something that can bring up more things. Someone with the ability to travel from any spot to any other spot in space. Running around, going to everyone desperately for something important. "When everyone is against you." There is a murder of a good guy, and a person who is part of the same group as the good guy seems evil and is very suspicious, but then for complex reasons a differently and totally sane good guy actually did it. (This happens in Watchmen) Notice the things behind a person caring about small concerns and then later being (or being involved with) a massively powerful being. Some little concept in something may be that a title or name has traced back though many generations but with a complex history. Examples of how the phrase works are that the words might be the name of a mythological creature, a group of people, an object, the names of a person‟s children, etc. The idea seen behind it may be that they are just words, and they mean what you want them to.

Somebody determines that there is some limit to when philosophical things can be considered an issue, such as eating meat not being one and eating the meat of an intelligent creature being one. Later, this character is faced with far-advanced people who consider something as minor as his and many other‟s lives not to be an issue. Family often exists as important value. Someone is betrayed by family Don‟t trust the good ones. “We‟re the good guys, so it‟s okay to do these things.” Consider that a structured, purely rational person who always does what is completely the best means to an end is not so different from naturally evolved thinking, because deciding others are good or bad was rooted in the advantages it gave. For all beings, all the emotio ns and the affiliations they want served as a means to an end in natural selection. “People who want to be natural are just the same as me, but just less efficient.” Antagonist/not protagonist has been trouble, but gives word on something. Things get worse, and much depends on his keeping to word, and it looks like he won‟t and things will be worse, but he does keep, even though the protagonists are doping so bad and it could be advantageous to him. An idea may be that they were the worse ones. They have been told “You always have choice,” and after leaving has to do things really doesn‟t want to to survive. In this case, the words resound while killing a loved dog to survive.

Story Premise/Significant Parts Ideas:
Protagonist-Inclusive Plot-Significant: Gidge Quixol A creative person imagines or otherwise immaterially creates a very idealized person. Creation morality and the nature of imaginary things come up. The character could go on a journey to get this person created, but it would change as the character questions if he/she should. (The right to do it, even without the existence of god, is still arguable.) The imaginary person could be an AI. The creator can be a man and the imagined one a woman. While questing, he might continue to change her program. (One point learned might be that people essentially go by the programming of their mind. He might even improve her over humans by improving her mind to work past programming.) He would see creations of all kinds during the quest. If the creation is a program, how can she be said to definitely exist? All possible or likely forms of creation can be seen and explored. Spending time with an immaterial being can be compared to living in fantasy, even though this person can actually do things in reality. Her being imaginary can be enforced by the fact that she can go in and out of existence when she is turned off and on, creating contention on if she was ever alive to begin with or if she has always been something dead.

He finds he could create a real version. He also learns that the virtual version will also still exist. He decides not to do it, because that would be creating a new one and not solidifying the original. Characters in something: “Take life by the horns” guy, calm observant one, psycho, one who does as he is intended to…These characters are unconnected until some extraordinary things happen. The responses of these types come through. Said to a person from the ship: "Would you know what's going on?" "Why do you ask?" "because you're an unusual person in an unusual part of the world and something unusual just happened." "Well, that's reasonable enough. In the places I've been, unusual things are frequent and we learn not to think that way." Tentative Infrastructure: These characters are shown doing typical things one day. On this day, some extraordinary events happen (probably significant human-started events). By chance, they end up together. Here, the characters are explored. Pawns to Nature (preceded by Another Death in the Lake/Within Doubt/Unbearable Revelation) A bunch of people are in a life and death situation, where there has been an emergency and they can only choose a limited number of people to survive. A person writes down their favorite ranking from the most desired to least desired, and they can‟t vote for themselves. Ludin and Ulyphya are there. “I‟ll vote for you if you vote for me.” They have a few hours to choose who lives, during which they argue their own value. Among them is a mother and her baby, an old man, and a major person such as a C.E.O. There are about 20 people. Everybody but the two protagonists is from the same society. This is during their early times, about a few years after they left their home worlds and before they meet Gilthoniel. {some parts: The value of their accumulated experience and knowledge; value dependant on age; value vs. sympathy; being ready to die vs. value of life; Historian explores the past and the roots. “I‟m going to look back and reconsider how much of what we think is rooted in biases.” “How far?” “All the way.” It seemed like he meant for the statement to carry a lot of weight, as if it was a near-impossible ambition. Instead, they assumed he was drunk. “First of all, you obviously can‟t do that without biological expertise, as opposed to your historian profession.” “But this is why I became a historian in the first place!” Aliens aspect on human visitors. The aliens are original ones inexperienced with humans. We can be a strange form of life in the right circumstances. Someone is stuck in one of those repeating day loops and takes full advantage of it. For one thing, notices it‟s a huge advantage to be only one with unlimited time. Does lots of practice. At one point sees how phenomenally he can change the world in one day. When bored, can just relax all day for as many days as want until feeling like doing something again. If he dies, he just perceives himself as advancing instantly to the next day. Writes stories entirely in head.

Perfects many mental techniques. Enjoys changing all the factors. Of the several people who want him to do things in the repeating day, he eventually learns exactly all the things to say to them to make them do whatever. After its left, even finds that it‟s nicer than having everything available, since has no control over the reset. Has concern for what‟s going on outside, and over the ontological aspects. Also wonders if he will continue to do this until time ends, and he will have done nothing. The process of going over one person: Tests things over and over. If one person is deterred, he does things with that person that he could only try if that person is deterred. By trial and error and endless experiementing and questioning, eventually knows that person exactly. He decides to end it himself because he does not know what else is going on and this may not last forever. He also does it because he is just starting to get bored. This is why he eventually chooses to stop it himself. After basically mastering physics mentally, he breaks the cycle. He was very careful to take all the time he needed, so that he didn‟t get a detail wrong and end up destroying everything. Upon breaking the thing, manages to change his world completely in that one day as it actually plays out. He knows exactly what every person is doing that day. I got this idea while watching a Star Trek episode called “Worst Case Scenario” Two people are talking about an allegedly hypothetical scenario. In the course of conversation, they bring up what- ifs and such, both contributing to the new things thrown in and the consequences of them. Since the beginning of it, they are getting ideas about what the other is intending. As it goes on over a very long period of time, start to apply these things. It‟s premise for sub-premises, like 1001 nights. The over-story of these hypothesizing people is a source of drama for a long arc. If something conflicts irreparably with cannon, then it‟s one of these.

Other Plot-Significant: As a short or side story, I could write about celebrity. Include their role, how people feel about them, and how they can fall apart after their fame has passed. No Cause No reason to live, no reason to die. I have seen much. I know much. I have learned we are not as special as we often think, and we are not as sub-worthless as others think. No cosmic decision makes us anything different than the rest of the cosmos. We are the same as the rest of matter itself. So here I am, in the grey. There is no reason to live beyond the circular, subjective reasoning. At the same time, the ultimate analysis gives me no reason to die. Deciding to do nothing at all from now on is wrong, because living completely passively will bring death. Existing is a paradox. I was born wealthy. When I was younger, I could have become like everyone else. They meant for me to be. I didn‟t grow exactly as intended, but my parents still cared enough to support me after society meant for me to mostly sever myself from them. I spent years trying to

learn wisdom. I realize how far away it was. Distractions sidetracked me often, and I paid them my attention willingly. Besides this, I still had much to learn. My parents and I became very frustrated. After years of wandering the shore, I plunged into the ocean. Practically severing all ties, I left home and wandered. I knew this would mean a commitment to finding whatever it was I had been searching for. I knew this and continued anyway, taking it more lightly than I should have. More years passed, and I floundered. I broadened myself and nearly died a few times, but I felt less than complete. My life actually was uninteresting until I had the chance to wander farther than I ever expected. I completely left the world. I‟ve recently seen more than I could ever make up. Now I‟ve learned practically everything I could ever need to know and that I wanted to know about the universe itself and more. I don‟t know what to do now. I have no wants, but somehow I want to do everything. It‟s so confusing. I have the knowledge, but wisdom could not be given. I was warned many people lose themselves when this happens. Was I too hasty? A character testing another without that characters knowledge is trying to find out how compassionate the character is. For purposes, a lot of compassion is very important. They want to use this person for something. However, in the process of the test others are hurt and killed intentionally. The point is that there is use for this quality, and those who appreciate it might not necessarily choose to exercise it. He develops a strong relationship with someone, and then they have someone else he has a strong relationship with kill that person. “It feels like something is messing with me. All these things keep happening. I am paranoid. Why do they do these things? Are they trying to ruin me, change me? Is this a test by god, or the work of the devil? Maybe these things are just happening, but they are happening in such an odd way. I try to be compassionate, and everybody wants me to be, but it gets difficult. I‟m told there are good reasons to be, ones that I don‟t understand.” A planet has been purged of people and most life forms by a small group of people. They have advanced technology, and they plot to remove human life from it so they have resources to use to achieve the abilities of god-people. These people continue to live there and that‟s when plots form. Some character: “I think I‟ve had enough of this. I‟ve decided to change.” This one guy changes his mind and goes against his former compatriots. Weather it is for revenge, gain, or a newly changed structure of beliefs is ambiguous. Afterwards the character stays alone to think. Says to the narrator before killing him: “Was I insane then for being a part of this, or am I insane now for throwing all of it away?” Rationality is examined. It is shown from the first that they are responsible. It‟s thought of as an achievement. The characters fill a number of profiles that might fit. One is nihilist. One feels like he is simply a superior being. Very sane one Very insane one One is nihilistic in a universally indifferent way “What we did doesn‟t really matter. Maybe this way I will find some idiom of purpose.” “You are making it all for nothing!” Decided he doesn‟t care in the opposite. Something like being indifferent either way.

It‟s partially about what the character could be thinking. “What makes a good man suddenly decide to become bad one day? That‟s a question many have asked. But I rarely hear people ask about what causes the opposite.” It opens after the fact. It‟s a tragedy, yet they are generally unmoved. A couple of them could be called optimistic. The treachery is suspected from the beginning, and they all treat each other cautiously. This guy starts killing off the others, but they don‟t know it yet. Eventually, the narrator and the guy are the last ones alive. The story ends when the narrator kills him. Make a vivid dream and play with that. In one story, there are three atheists. They are in a society with in a mid 1900s level o f development. Two are men, one is a woman. They hang around cafes and talk. They eventually make a major change in things, much like Darwin or Marx did. They should have qualities very different from others, such as the girl being promiscuous or they all do drugs casually. These are not the sort of pathetic sorts of slightly different people who really aren‟t all that different and are actually kind of childish. These sorts are later writers, discoverers, and revolutionaries. “You‟ve changed a lot since this transformation. Would you say you are more confident and convicted now?” “Yes.” “Then I doubt this version of you is your sincere personality. When people are confident in themselves, it often means they are ignoring something.” In some story, make characters who all want to die. They are perfectly normal and mentally healthy people, but they have reached philosophical conclusions that bring them to this. The plot would have to be written around this, though. One person has aged tremendously, and another is wealthy and controls or can afford the means to make this person younger, and to keep him alive through regular submission of the treatment. This person gives this to him because he likes him. Over time, the other person becomes a slave since his friend controls the means of keeping him alive. This provides. The Old one has to keep in good favor with the Rich one. Perhaps over time the rich sees the power he has by being the one to keep this person alive, and this forms a slave and master relatio nship. Perhaps the rich one gets old himself and administers this treatment to himself, and he also becomes more conservative and brutal. Perhaps it ends with the older one orchestrating a way to inherit the rich one‟s wealth and means and then he kills him. Today I thought of something that might happen if aliens came to Earth. One thing that came to me is that they might want to test us or to find people with qualities they consider special. What if they took a person and gave that person the chance to go into a machine in which they would live through all of time in a simulation of the universe in the span of one actual hour. They might even forget after a while that they were in a simulation. They would leave it when the sim came to the end of the artificial universe or if the person somehow managed to die or leave the universe. However it ends, the person would have had unequaled experiences, and there would be many possible events after they returned to their body and the

real world. Additionally, once the person went through it, it may go a second time without their knowing. The premise given during this second turn is that the person is told that the aliens have put all their efforts to make it so one person cannot die. Their feelings as a species about doing this to themselves made them decide to do it for someone who was willing. This person would go through it all again, but now is certain that it is not a sim. Some experiences the person may have during the time in the sim are sex and species change, going past human inhibitions, great learning and enlightenment, conflict concerning it being a sim (is this NPC alive?). In the last instant at the end of the universe this person would know that the truth about it and would return to reality. In the first simulation, there are obvious things to stop him from dieing. If he stays underwater in a sunken ship, he can stay there after his breath runs out and then simply nothing happens to him. In the second simulation, it‟s like he has some sort of power that lets him live on forever in a totally inconspicuous way. Person doesn‟t know who to blame after a terrible thing was done, probably some military conflict or other cruelty. Wants to exact revenge by killing a former grunt, but the grunt explains that he can‟t be held responsible. The person then decides to kill a higher person instead. This higher person is just a selective target and not the one to blame either. He wanted to kill this person because he‟s a fairly well-known target, not because he‟s particularly responsible. He also is determined not to be very responsible for his actions, as the grunt was. The would-be assassin moves on to a general. Here he finds that his revenge is very vague to begin with, as he isn‟t sure if he is revenging for the death of relatives, for hurting his people and things he values, or against the vague notion of evil itself. Also, he again finds sympathy for this target, but not as much as for the grunt and even less than for the lieutenant. He then decides to pursue the leader himself. Looking for a man, who they aren‟t even sure who is. Go to great lengths, crossing great distance. They find him dead. Start story with Ludin as evil bad- guy, perpetrator of destruction. Then show why he‟s the good guy. Then further go on to show there are no good guys. They are the same. Adv people are like monsters but actually there for benefit, because the truth is scary. Explanation of why people think justice is right and fair and why it exists vs. why it actually exits. For example, there are many premises that are accepted very early, such as eye for an eye. Also, punishment serves the purpose of gesture better than of creating fairness. Some physicist puts together a picture of what the more complex, para-universe stuff could look like, assembling it into some tangible other reality that could be lived in, from the ground up. Maybe it turns out that it‟s ours/the protagonist‟s. Someone had a lot of very well- made, clever ideas about how to organize things. They worked so well that they became standard ways of living. They worked too well, because years later the world was different and they became dated, but people still liked them enough to use them.

General/Broad Concept Ideas: Life being worse now because even though we are freer, etc. we are more aware of these things and are too aware and knowledgeable to be happy. Faith and fear They go together. Have neither. Story with “uplifting, inspirational” meaning at basic emotional analysis and reading, but with darker tones underneath. A story showing that old knowledge isn't simply nonsense. Can show emotions being good when they are the right ones (basically, the more feminine ones). When ignorance factors in, it‟s useless.

Sub-Premise Ideas The ideas of “It‟s unfortunate that anyone has to work” vs. “Contributing is essential to human health” “It‟s healthy for the mind. It gives a sense of belonging, and more so a sense of contributing and being good for society.”, “I doubt that‟s true for everyone. Do you think that‟s how people are naturally? Isn‟t it possible or even likely that they want you to be like that?” Lament the huge loss of memories and experience that goes with death. There's a lot more to miss with age. It could be an easy plot thing to make it so they go to a place where everything seems totally fine, but a problem could be found with anything. Maybe the first advanced civilization they meet is like this, and they find more problems as they stay. Some fables have a person do something important, and receive little reward, but then the point is that there is something else more important. Make something in which the world is still just as bad, and the good guys go unrewarded. I thought for a moment of how one person from another culture, whose life brought this person completely away from their culture and into mine for what could be the rest of their life, might act if they spent their days with me, and how our interactions might be. I‟ve had this same sort of daydream with historical people and others, but annoyingly I can‟t manage it with my own characters.

Someone comes to a character in dreams and interacts through that, but he rarely remembers them at first. Maybe can be anywhere they interact with others indirectly. The way groups of people deviate from others might provide an explanation for a situation in which a crew of a ship is the last surviving vestige of a destroyed civilization.

Little Scenarios/Other Occurrences:
There is a situation where there is apparently no right choice. An example would be stealing from someplace you don‟t like. At very first look it would seem perfectly reasonable, but there are plenty of other consequences and significances to it. "I came here to beg you to stop! What you're doing may seem good, but I fear it is going to hurt us." "Yeah, alright." Is could see Ludin acting this way. “We‟re not that different, you know.” “What‟s your point?” Showing intelligence and knowledge as keeping individuals safe. Dedication and willpower have been used in stories where people resist alluring things. An example of this idea is somebody being fed all sorts of things meant to control them, but the character overcomes because knows better. It could be made to sound like the typical "overcame adversity through unconquerable moral fortitude" story. “Your kind will never learn.” Said the judge. “One thing you should know about my „kind‟ is that we don‟t have a kind. We are the absence of a kind and therefore not a kind.” The ship had little buttons and lights…”We want to terraform by crashing a water asteroid into it, but that‟s really low tech. We want to do it better.”…One of several massive machines ran there, a combination of biological parts and crude, large machine parts. They were organisms that were there own tools…They had been going though space on their massive starship for a while now. It‟s courses were practically random, as they went around doing goodwill everywhere… It might be very scary for someone to go from one world to another with similar people and at first think they seem like that person‟s race, but then subtle differences are noticed and emerge (Imagine how humanoid monsters get creepy eyes.) "Nothing is a bed of figdoqules." They say life isn't a bed of roses, meaning it's not perfectly pleasant. In comparison, absolutely nothing at all is a bed of figdoqules, which can only be described as the most pleasant things imagined. Usually, worlds are turned upside down when people have huge revelations and self doubt.

“My world is crashing in. I don‟t know what there is. I don‟t know what‟s right, what‟s real. I‟m lost.” “Nothing is meant to be. Consider yourself free.” Skeptic messes with a psychic. Near the end, excuses it as “natural selection”. “Why did you destroy it?” “It made life too easy. It was wrong.” “You‟re an idiot!” Somebody killed somebody to live; not in self defense, but only because one could live. Afterwards, people know about it and the guy is tried. One position is that he only lived because he was stronger, and this is not something which should be promoted. Uncovering mystery. In something, a smart man from some developed world gets a woman from an advanced one. They are of very similar mind and compatibility, but the things is that she came there from her world and is the one who has to make a major transition. He manages to put things together so that for one day for her it‟s like she has similar things, but the principal problem still lasts that she can‟t have all things available to her as she did, and at best she can just pretend and suppress. Rapped the pen across his knuckles I thought of a dirty joke that could go in. The women on X say the males on the cat planet have 6 limbs. Optimistic, simplistic person: “How can you be so certain that he will survive?” (Cheerily) “Why, I just know!” “(Moans) How inspirational…” A child argues it's own worth as being better than that of it's parent because the parent's life would be considered more expendable if the question came up and that it is therefore more valuable. It does this with a plain, factual attitude. “Sometimes good people do bad things for good reasons. It‟s easier to see bad people do good things for bad reasons.” “I see you are attempting various methods of persuasion and manipulation. Only a logical argument can free you.” Maybe in this situation it is tough tutoring.

Weird Mask Turning 18 Wouldn‟t trust their thinking. What we do with our time Individual has to be discerning Sees through the other ones “Too happy with himself.” Removing restrain ts prototype

To top