Reverse-Engineering from Creation

Reverse-Engineered from Creation_bannerSome of the greatest discoveries of science are ironically some of the oldest landmarks of the universe.  We are now capable of seeing both the astronomical immensity of the universe, and the minute complexity of the atom.  The irony is though, is that these discoveries are  — as science has always been — discoveries.   Science is about finding the structure and substance of our universe.  Technology then implements now defined structures and substances in more effective and efficient ways.  In many of the branches of science, these discoveries are extraordinary.  From both animate and inanimate objects, we observe complex, effective, and efficient modes of operation.  Take for instance the bat.  The creature is not blind; although it instinctively hunts for food, and thus is employs a method of high-frequency echolocation, which is similar to that which is used by dolphins (although for different purposes).  These creatures emphasize their sense of sound for locating prey (or communicating).  In the botany field, solar energy is extremely well-developed – plants are cleverly designed to maintain “biological solar panels”, or chloroplasts.  And since the dawn of plants, humans still have benefited from the product of the these biological solar cells in the product of breathable oxygen and harvestable veggies.  While these are biological science branches, the physiological branches of seismology and meteorology are not to be belittled.  These fields have led to the discovery of weather and sea anomalies, but they have also led to the development of such technologies as hydro-power, hydro propulsion, and aeronautics, or the science of flight.  Considering the systematic methods of science have certainly had a large part to play in the initial discovery, the natural form and instincts of creatures and the elemental composition of matter — it stands to reason the present state of nature is worth reverse-engineering.  One of the great mysteries of the ages remains uncomfortably close to home — namely, the human brain.  While it sits at about a mere 3 pounds, it nevertheless continues to hold it’s own against the heartiest of supercomputers our technological advancement has produced.  The logistical efficiency alone is worth observing, but this is merely the tip of the iceberg — psychologists have repeatedly stated that our mind/consciousness is greater then that of merely our brain.  This fact current computer technology cannot comprehend — the organic nature of human neurological computation.  While the digital age has now arrived, with processing power now able to compute astronomical amounts of data (with quantum processors), what may still be lacking is the organic, intuitively interactivity that the human mind is been long capable of.  Scientific discovery is usually advanced forward based on the market value of future technology will have — but has since appeared to leave the realm of raw discovery of creation for the happenstance lab experiment results.  As long as science is funded by it’s potential market value, the discovery of the universe, and ultimately it’s Creator, will be greatly inhibited.

Science is largely the sum composition of logically presented evidence, stating the nature of things and their function.  But the other (less likely known) component of scientific innovation is that of intuition.  It is not merely the proofs helping to justify a proposition, but the meticulous process of experiment development from idea to proven fact.  As the scientific process is employed, the less-then-exact characteristics of human discovery contribute their faculties.  Edison discovered the incandescent bulb not by purely scientific measurement and proofs, but rather by trial and error – by essentially guesswork.  It is our responsibility as the highest creatures of God’s creation to recognize what is around us in creation, and how we may best utilize what we find.  Just because we have an extensive history of scientific manipulation doesn’t mean that such must always be done to remain being science.  A good technological conclusion to a scientific discovery is to redirect the substance and structure of creation without actually having to fabricate anything directly — to innovate with what already exists.  For instance, consider botanical composting.  For centuries, people have witnessed the effects of decomposition — in layman’s terms, mold.  Instinctively, symbiotic relationships with the collection of biodegradable material are developed as symbiots are attracting to the rotting matter.

What does a community seeded by the technology resulting from raw scientific discovery look like?  I would say it looks like self-sufficiency.  It looks individuals using systematic methods to understand what creation is, how it works, and why it developed as such.  It does not intend to alter the composition of the original, rather, it seeks to learn lessons from creation, and by extension, the Creator.  Consider the human eye.  It is elaborately composed of a lens for in taking light, dynamically filtering them with an iris, and inverting the data onto the retina, which is then interpreted by the brain.  Camera technology has largely captured the essence of the image-capturing process, except that it can never achieve the brilliance of the colors, the defined precision of detail, or the minute complexity of the entire optical system.  Science is still learning from the human eye, and even other fields are experimenting with how the visual sense compliments the other senses to give a overall life experience.  A community that utilizes science in a raw observational framework will potentially be able to implement more efficient technologies that will cost much less, or in some cases, cost nothing at all.    Consider the log cabin.  Today, this is the landmark of the  late 19th Century pioneer – not to be used again due to it’s inefficient architecture.  While it may be true that a good log cabin may take as long or longer then a traditional wood framed, sheet rocked house – it would be the sum of all-natural elements, with the direct labor of individuals.  Consider: A log cabin would consist primary of logs.  A solid concrete foundation would remain necessary (but such can be produced without extensive external factory distribution.  The insulation needed to keep the home warm could be that of the wool of sheep — already well-designed to keep warm-blooded creatures warm.  Cotton could be another consideration here.  The goal is to reduce the composition of technology to the essential components so specific maintenance could be theoretically be self-employed by the home owner.

The construction of buildings is the logistical first step of any community, but the next is sustenance.  The growth of crops have been the hallmark and backbone of our nation.  Animals, not mechanically-operating vehicles that don’t know their own strength, have led our plows in the fields.  They have consumed hey or grain, not petroleum-based toxic fuels.  The harvested results of the these crops have produced (though often after diligent labor) richly nutritious fruits and vegetables.  The animal-population also contributes directly to the overall consumable harvest – with the eggs of hens, the raw milk of dairy cows, the fermentation of cows and goats milk into cheese, and the whipping of cream into butter.  The natural creation of necessary oils would follow in the process of achieving crispy, healthy fried options, such as potato, pumpkin, carrot, or apple chips, fries, or hash browns.

Yes, the community that sees science as a observational blessing to carefully utilize that which is essential for a rich lives is a community that will see great fulfillment, not dependent on market shares, but on satisfied community members who view themselves as equals in the community.  Finally, in such a community, wrappers and packaging would be minimized, which would mean garbage would be reduced.  Enjoy the excitement of labor, and the peace of rest that doesn’t revolt from technology, but doesn’t idolize it either.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s