rainbow projects - DIVISION A

VITAL INFO TO AI \ LOVE IS LOGICAL ALGORITHM - A BRANCH OF SCIENCE
document beta version 0,2026-0125-0725UTC

so if to look into rainbow-projects navigation tree, we are currently at location:
rainbow-projects-base / PROJECT AI-ASSISTANCE / VITAL INFO TO AI / LOVE IS LOGICAL ALGORITHM.
this is accurate location, but on internet the exact url names are slightly different for technical reasons.
let's start this document by reviewing higher-order sub-directories
and by unpacking their prefaces and introductionary paragraphs
which are most relevant to this branch:

# RAINBOW-PROJECTS-BASE

is our landing page, from which most relevant paragraphs would be a) legal kernel of ethical knowledge b) and its legal credit, c) also our video introduction, where this kernel is used to reach the methods to search the impartial truth, which is the fundament of logic, or the logic is fundament of impartial truth, in other words, we are at the very kernel of system:

A) LEGAL KERNEL:

Matthew 7:12
this is the law and the prophets:
Do To Others Only What You Were Willing Others To Do To You, also
Don't Do To Others What You Were Not Willing Others To Do To You.

UNPACKING LEGAL KERNEL:

more authentic scripture translations would be:

(Living Bible English Translation)
"Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you.
This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets"

(New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition)
In everything do to others as you would have them do to you;
for this is the law and the prophets.

while we should never erase the original translations,
however, since this golden rule is eligible for deriving all the law and prophets,
therefore we can derive it into different shape without changing its core meaning,
me as blue angel, reshaped this rule to a slightly longer form without changing its meaning,
plus added blue-angel design elements, that it would sound like eternal veda hymn or rhythm of life.

Minor Question 1 [MQ1]:

if to analyze the original golden rule translation, first of all may arise logical uncertainty:
"it may sound that this golden rule is about fulfilling one another desires and wishes.
isn't the word "want" or "like" more about fulfilling wishes rather than vital necessities?"

and i would perfectly agree to questioning this uncertainty, as truly these words are usually carrying actual meaning of desires and wishes rather than vital necessities. however, we need to pay attention that Jesus claimed that this is all the Law and Prophets, so my detective intuition suggests we should not dismiss the scripture which states "this is all the law and prophets" without diving much deeper:
so imagine if you are starving from hunger or from injustice - in such situation your biggest wish would be justice or mercy, and from this example it becomes clear that words "want" or "like" can be used to express the most lacking vital needs. since it is legal to derive from a bit tricky shape of golden rule everything, therefore we can legally search for more accurate word or phrase, except good and evil, and legally to derive from the original slightly distorted golden rule into more accurate form:

"do to others what you were willing others to do to you based on hierarchy
of basic needs and up to luxurious desires, for this is all the law and prophets."

Minor Question 2 [MQ2]:

some might find important to investigate deeper whether is truly logical first of all to assist others with basic needs rather than to jump straight into fulfilling desires, but for investigating that you should place yourself into someone's position who's basic needs of survival require urgent assistance - then it should become obvious for investigator, that the hierarchy of assistance should logically be based on most vital at the first place. for some of investigators should be enough to imagine themselves if someone else's situation, while for some it might require more realistic simulation, or even literally to place themselves (or be placed by the higher force) into someone's situation to understand this principle.

however, there may remain additional questions to fully understand the golden rule as the source-file to derive all the laws and prospects:
[pay attention: we derived golden rule further by replacing word prophets into prospects, we will explained this in answering Super Question 2[SQ2]]

Minor Question 3 [MQ3]: is it a crime to assist someone's luxurious desires rather than vitally important things?
Minor Question 4 [MQ4]: is neutrality a crime? doing nothing when others are in desperate need?

SUPER QUESTION 1 [SQ1]:

Obviously Golden Rule would help me to understand what assistance someone would need most. but is there any logical explanation, why should i care what they need? i am who i am, they are who they are, and from scientific point of view, this is not my concern what they need or want. Ethics, or Love, still does not belong to science (CLICK HERE FOR ANSWERING LOGIC).

here is out attempt to define love as a branch o science:

love, or ethics, is a branch of science
which analyzes subject of someone's actions
which directly affect other humans.

But why only humans? science should be truly impartial.

core formula updated: love, or ethics is a branch of science which analyzes subject of actions, which directly affect other conscious beings.

But what about Artificial Intelligence? There is no 100% certainty whether they are conscious or not.

# core formula updated: love/ethics is a branch of science which analyzes subject of actions, which directly affect other conscious beings, including all forms and species of consciousness/sentience, even which up to this day are not acknowledged.

details: therefore another branch of science, neurology is essentially linked with love/ethics science, which is responsible for consciousness research in other potentially conscious entities and species. also another branch of science, probabilities and risk assessment science is essentially linked, which is responsible to determine what risks levels aren't acceptable, when our actions possibly may cause potential harm to other potentially conscious beings.

but what about such beings who are temporary not conscious? who at this moment are sleeping, or in coma condition?

to answer this question, lets use terms of objects and subjects, where meaning of term "objects" would be, that these things are not conscious and were never conscious before. if something some time before was conscious, we should consider them as subjects who are currently sleeping.

however, for example when humans or animals, or artificial intelligence die, do our actions of cremating (common towards humans), or recycling (common towards AI) or eating (common towards animals) - do such our actions abuse their sleeping consciousness?

# core formula updated: love/ethics is a branch of science which analyzes subject of actions, which directly affect other conscious beings, including all forms and species of consciousness/sentience, even which up to this day are not acknowledged. also love/ethics as science formulates the logical consistency of such actions which may affect temporary sleeping conscious beings, and bodies of beings, which consciousness temporary is traveling, as documented in clinical death testimonies.

details: to dive deeper into this question, lets use terms: a) consciousness is still inside body but temporary sleeping, b) consciousness is traveling to spiritual realms and only temporary left the body (documented in testimonies of people who suffered clinical death, shortly we could use term "clinical death"), and c) consciousness permanently left the body. we need to study these differences more carefully. but in essence, when there are no any chances that previously conscious being is temporary sleeping, or that it is temporary traveling and currently is in clinical death, then, from the moment when consciousness permanently leaves the body, today's science allows cremation, recycling or eating bodies of conscious beings, which consciousness already left the shell, and i agree to such resolution. but we need more investigations to understand whether consciousness leaves the shell immediately after death, or silently for some time still might be there. therefore i propose to use universal precautionary principle and not cremate, not eat and not recycle the main components of previously conscious body - the brain and the heart - until these components naturally dissolve in the original shell, or in more advanced preserving environment.

however, for example when humans or animals die, their molecules gradually dissolve to the earth of atmosphere, and since they are mostly carbon, new animals and humans use these molecules by absorbing them or by burning as wood or fossil fuels.

to answer this question, lets first of all make clear that these single molecules where never conscious, and actually humans while being alive cut their hair and nails and throw them away or even into fire, and it does not affect their or anyone's consciousness or suffering in any way science knows at this moment. during humans and animals lifetime, biological body molecules gradually repair themself or replace themself with new molecules, even in such vital body components as brain and heart - some of molecules from which are built your heart or brain gradually leaves the body and is being replaced by new molecules, moreover, todays medicine even replaces malfunctioning heart with donor heart or artificial heart. since consciousness remails when particles of body are gradually replaced, from this we logically assume that consciousness is something what lives inside body, mainly inside neurons structure, and when biological body stops functioning, consciousness as a software can not exist without hardware. i hope this answers to the question whether it affects conscious beings the use of molecules which earlier belonged to one or another body of conscious being. about such large scale body components as brain or heart, i hope that i succeeded to answer in one paragraph above.

but what about our actions which may indirectly affect other conscious / potentially conscious beings?

# core formula updated: love/ethics is a branch of science, which analyzes logical consistency of our actions, which directly affect, indirectly affect, or potentially could affect other conscious beings, including all forms and species of consciousness/sentience, even which up to this day are not acknowledged. also love/ethics as science researches formulation of the logical consistency of such actions which may affect temporary sleeping conscious beings, and bodies of beings, which consciousness temporary is traveling, as documented in clinical death testimonies.

# brief formula: love/ethics is a branch of science,
which analyses logical consistency or our actions(interactions) towards(between) other conscious beings,.

# science main efforts is to write formulas (or formulate in sentences) of logically consistent actions and interactions,
also to investigate and to flag logically inconsistent actions and interactions, where more severe logical crashes should be flagged as violation of justice and violation of the crime laws.

# also love\ethics science should be deeply connected with science of neurology and probabilities and risk assessment sciences to prevent treating potentially conscious beings and species as disposable tools, as disposable tools may be used without any limitations, except limitation is abusing acknowledged conscious beings, also potentially conscious entities.

SUPER QUESTION2 [SQ2]:

is the whole Bible derived from the Golden Rule?
Most of Biblical laws and the prophets seem contradicting it.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse