Ethics of the #FractalUniverse - Resurrecting people

(Disclaimer: I did not write this; I am not involved in this project; while not an enthusiast - like my brother - I still enjoy a good thought-provoking argument. I consider this as my 'introduce myself' post, and using at the same time my right to promote instead something that I hold the unshaken belief that is of real value. You don't have to enjoy, but if you do: bonus!)

'Building A Universe Competition' #BAUniC

Let's say we find the addressable form of the fractal version of the formula of the universe, single or multiple histories.

Let's say we can pinpoint Earth of various stages of development in there.

Let's say we can address clusters of molecules (for example an individual human) in there.

Let's say brain scanning techniques used in the the brain upload of organics have a counterpart in reading slices of fractal physics with enough resolution to read the brain cells (maybe easier since the fractal would be frozen in time, maybe harder since there is no action/reaction to the forces of the scanner with brain chemicals or injected upload serums).

Let's say we find a version of Einstein in the fractal.

How ethical would it be to scan and extract that Einstein at some stage of his existence and make a copy that can be injected into a simulator of organics (or extract a bubble around his organic body and execute it in a modified fractal), while the original Einstein continues his history as if nothing happened... ?

What about Hitler?

What about reacting to those entities extracted from the physics fractal?

Would we be sending Einstein in a museum? Zoo? University?

If in a museum, idol worship for example... that is freaking Einstein, reduced to an icon... but we cannot stop fans from extracting one or more versions from the fractal, even if they know it is wrong.

If in a zoo, retaining most human characteristics that made Einstein Einstein, which would be why we picked up him, how would we prevent him from changing and becoming one of us, swarm or individuals in a digital environment orders of magnitude more powerful than our old organic brains, and more orders of magnitude if we shed emulation of organic processes in neurons for efficient code carrying on memory/sensory/decision information.

If in an university, likely a birthright to all sentient entities at such stage of development, and he proceeds to be quite unlike the historical Einstein, becoming more like us than his past self, would we extract another for historical accuracy? An actor (in the fractal, coexistent of the original, or in the real world learning to imitate the original by historical data), by pretending and wishing to be like the inspirational source, would do a better job for museum and zoo scenarios.

Einstein's teachings are among the tiles that make the castle of our civilization. We do not need the original Einstein to put him in a university at an age where willpower/intelligence/memories can be adjusted at will. We cannot stop others from extracting versions of him for other purposes, so, maybe the ethical issue is skewing the odds in such a way that likely continuation of existence of the Einstein consciousness proceeds to a world where he is welcomed as an equal.

What about Hitler?

What about Joe Nobody? Afterlife for the organics of our past, single history or multiverse?

Should we construct a hell for Hitler?

Should we construct a hell at all?

Should we put evildoers in hell, on top of having injected them with memories from a fractal world that denote their sin?

In my view, injecting memories of a sin, and the punishment (or memories of the punishment), is wrong, whether they are extracted from a table of values, from a manufactured fractal (videogame or partial Earth) or from a stable fractal (a cosmos with all forces working fine, that spans from BigBang to DeepFreeze). When we reach that level of development, we should not play G0D with the fates of lesser beings. It is the duty of the inhabitants of present Earth to deal with monsters of our time, individuals or organizations. After we reach the level of reading and addressing fractals of our universe, at maximum we should try offering an afterlife for all lower forms of consciousness, as extracted from actual fractal histories or from a table of all values, and converge them into a heavenly afterlife, from which they can join our ranks or stop computing after going through the necessary stages.

What about resurrecting somebody who wishes not to be resurrected?

For example, I would like to get my grandfather to join me in post-organic society. I grab his consciousness, put it in a virtual world, and offer him a choice: continue as you are now, afterlife and all, or cease to be computed.

And he chooses: No, leave me dead... this is just a dream...

Who is to say I will comply with my grandfather's desire to stop being computed, and not try again?

Where does my grandfather stop being him, and becomes somebody else, if I try a few times (as I learn what areas of his decision-making-tree influence the choice of stop existence), and then change his decision in a way that makes him think it was his choice...?

Maybe I resurrect him first at year 2040, and comply with his wishes and not try again... for how long? Maybe in 2240 I try again. Maybe instead of using the original extract, I use the extract after first being presented to him in 2040 and informing him of a much farther future world with much more interesting things to see 200 years later.

Maybe in 2440 we realize it is impossible to stop people mixing up fractals and creating emulated or self-sustaining mathematical worlds to acts as zoo and museum, or heaven and hell, and we decide the ethical thing to do is try to convince all sentient entities to join us in the post-organic life else they could end up in the hell of somebody else, while, at least, with our presence, chances are that we caught most of the potential extractions into a path that connects them to non-zoo, non-museum, non-hell.

(We could extract entities 10 seconds apart, and offer them a convergence path to the most meaningful divergent points in personality or components of it, between their own versions and the versions of similar consciousnesses).

Maybe in 2640 we realize hell is impossible to avoid, so, we construct it, fractal and perpetual, absorbing souls. We use it to prove to the resurrected/extracted consciousnesses that hell is real and that joining post-organic society is the logical step to do. No need to force them. The versions that don't, they end up in hell automatically by virtue of the algorithms used as fractal base (algorithms that exist in the shared mathematical universe already, but we provided with maybe yet another historical path connecting the the 'it Does exist' with the 'why').

Maybe we should put all extracted consciousnesses in hell first, until they converge to pure suffering, and then extract that version to merge with its source and the rest of the alive entities.

Maybe, if we have to put someone in hell, let them be a good soul, who, at least, will have a belief that deities will not have abandoned them, because we would not have. The opposite of punishing the sinner.

By ethics cold logic, and the possibilities of the mathematical universe, we should construct hell, put good people in, torture them for eternity (or as much as their limited consciousness can take before going in a loop), and then extract the post-hell version to join the pre-hell version and come into our world. It would be the fair thing to do. Fair, not good.

Their consciousness would be to future us as ants and bees are to present us. It would not change much to us if we injected into our awareness a few consciousnesses of ants that have gone through millions of years in ant hell and ant heaven. It would impact us less than a dream of our normal/higher complexity.

Maybe when we reach that stage we will be thinking differently. Maybe we should not put ourselves in the shoes of powerful civilizations until we reach that stage.

But I think we should be prepared, because, the times provided as example here, 2240, 2440, 2640, are a bit exaggerated compared to how I predict the future will look like. Exploring the cosmic backyard is limited by lightspeed, therefore 50'000 years in the future is maybe normal... but exploring the timeless fractals,,, that could happen sooner than the technological singularity.

Believe it or not, this is the conservative approach to the #FractalUniverseRevolution our civilization will find ourselves in soon enough.

The real prediction is that it is presumptuous to think we are the only intelligent species in the fractals. And once we learn to address physics, we will find aliens there, and even 2 way communication with several of their historical branches.

It is a great great mathematical universe out there, and our physics multiverse, even with the wave function that never collapses and the dreading 'all-that-can-happen-has-already-happened' scenario, is a blip of probably insignificance in the grand scheme of things. And we are hopelessly, hilariously, ill-prepared for it.