• Agent Smith
    8.9k
    Well, in that case, let's hope it's a sex goddess with a bawdy sense of humor that will forgive us fools for not believing (i.e. thinking).180 Proof

    :cool: And so we must contend with nature in all her glory - her candour and her cunning both are appealing despite they being frustrating.
  • punos
    321
    It's possible that the spiritual key was made by nature to keep us motivated to play the game (of life). There's no lock for that key, but we keep looking and "while you're at it, why don't you make some babies, eh?" says Momma Nature. What a mind job, oui?Agent Smith

    I have a lot of theories about a lot of things and what you express here sounds much like a theory i formed not too long ago that attempts to explain what religion really is from an evolutionary perspective.

    My theory goes on to state that religion was the first cultural structure to form which had the function of setting up a developmental trajectory in civilization aimed at the eventual production of Artificial Intelligence. It worked like a teleological engine of sorts throwing forward images that compelled people at a subconscious level to begin questioning the natural world and extracting patterns from it which they would later translate into a knew material substrate resulting in the production of novel technologies and even new ways of thinking. Religion has had an influence on scientific breakthroughs throughout history, among other things.
  • punos
    321
    Did you know, heard it from an Iranian, that the Ayatollah of Iran gave each Iranian soldier an actual key, a key to heaven according to him, before they marched to their deaths during the Iran-Iraq war (1980s)?Agent Smith

    I did not know that. That's crazy!
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k


    The carrot is an illusion, the stick is not. The daucus carota subsp. sativus is what keeps us going, willing to play (the game of life). @180 Proof has a term for it. Ask him.
  • punos
    321
    The carrot is an illusion, the stick is not. The daucus carota subsp. sativus is what keeps us going, willing to play (the game of life). 180 Proof has a term for it. Ask him.Agent Smith

    Teleonomy?
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k
    Teleonomy?punos

    What's teleonomy?
  • punos
    321
    What's teleonomy?Agent Smith

    Teleonomy is the quality of apparent purposefulness and goal-directedness of structures and functions in living organisms brought about by natural selection.
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k
    Teleonomy is the quality of apparent purposefulness and goal-directedness of structures and functions in living organisms brought about by natural selectionpunos

    :up: Interesting. So, speaking from experience here, a rare event in me life, the soldier has the brains the general has the courage, the doctor knows way too much math and the engineer is interested in ferns. SLMARCBE.
  • punos
    321
    SLMARCBEAgent Smith

    SCRAMBLE?
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k
    SCRAMBLE?punos

    :up:
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k
    I ask you. :chin:180 Proof

    Religion and spiritualism are simply painkillers some need on a daily basis to live a normal life. Without them, we'd all have lost our minds. Momma Nature's a bitch, oui monsieur?
  • 180 Proof
    10.9k
    Ah yes. 'Placebo-fetish' (i.e. bullet to the brain!) is my preferred term of art.
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k
    Ah yes. 'Placebo-fetish' is my preferred term of art.180 Proof

    :up: It's snake oil, counterfeit currency, a dud - something to ease the pain, not cure the illness. Quackery is what it is mon ami. Instead of curing us of our defects, we're using one defect to cover up another.
  • 180 Proof
    10.9k
    A crutch that only cripples you. :pray: After all, philosophical suicide is painless, no?
  • Benj96
    1.5k
    I agree with pretty much all you're saying. It's an exciting and beautiful thing to consider.

    My only qualm is about heat death. Heat death is only a theory based on observed increasing entropy.

    What's the difference between absolute zero (where energy is not manifested, nothing can act and time doesn't occur) and the state of "potential energy" - a possible precursor to the big bang - where no actualised energy exists, only potential, and time doesnt occur.

    An analogy is like how an elastic band stretches. It stretches ever slower (rate, time dilation) but it's potential Energy increases ever further.

    When it recoils, potential energy becomes actualised energy and time decreases in unit duration ie. Rate increases - the contraction of the second, or a standardised unit of time.

    In this case there's no heat death. Only an Interplay between potential and no time, and actualised energy/existence of time.

    As an inverse relationship.
  • punos
    321
    My only qualm is about heat death. Heat death is only a theory based on observed increasing entropy.Benj96

    You're right, i considered all three possibilities, and there are potential solutions to all three different scenarios (open, closed, and steady). I simply mentioned heat-death because that is the most popular opinion right now.

    What's the difference between absolute zero (where energy is not manifested, nothing can act and time doesn't occur) and the state of "potential energy" - a possible precursor to the big bang - where no actualised energy exists, only potential, and time doesnt occur.Benj96

    Time had to have always been, because if at any moment time were not then the possibility of anything ever happening again would be null. Time can be thought of as a logical NOT operator in an eternal loop, and it is time that is responsible for energy. As long as there is time there is energy. The popular way of thinking about time is backwards to mine, in where time is an effect of energy instead of energy as the effect of time. Because of this i've designated my definition of time as "0th order time", and what is commonly thought of as time as "1st order time". I'm still working out the best way to explain this theory im constructing. I will write a full description of it hopefully soon, in the meantime you can ask me questions about it if you like, or you can challenge it. :smile:

    An analogy is like how an elastic band stretches. It stretches ever slower (rate, time dilation) but it's potential Energy increases ever further.Benj96

    That sounds like part of the Roger Penrose's Conformal cyclic cosmology theory. His theory is somewhat compatible with my model in a way, in the sense that the universe abhors an absolute universal vacuum which causes an inversion (the big bang). The universe seems to have minimum and maximum threshold limits for energy. Exceeding these threshold limits cause phase transitions to occur depending on the specific structure in question all the way down to the Planck volume.

    When it recoils, potential energy becomes actualised energy and time decreases in unit duration ie. Rate increases - the contraction of the second, or a standardised unit of time.Benj96

    That's an interesting idea, but what would make it recoil?

    What if in keeping with the rubber band analogy it stretches so far that it snaps. When it snaps the energy of the break and recoil either can cause another big bang (at the breaking point) or maybe two big bangs (one for each "piece of the rubber band"), and then each piece begins to stretch again. This could be how universes reproduce themselves like in cellular mitosis.

    In this case there's no heat death. Only an Interplay between potential and no time, and actualised energy/existence of time.

    As an inverse relationship.
    Benj96

    I think you might have a workable theory, but for me nothing can ever exist or make sense without time. Do you have a way of explaining or describing how from a timeless state something can happen?
  • 180 Proof
    10.9k
    [F]or me nothing can ever exist or make sense without time. Do you have a way of explaining or describing how from a timeless state something can happen?punos
    I agree, punos, except I subsritute change for "time". And my answer is consistent, I think, with the Nobel physicist Frank Wilczek's quip
    Nothing is unstable
    e.g. Noether's theorem, spontaneous symmetry-breaking, etc .
  • punos
    321
    I agree, punos, except I subsritute change for "time". And my answer is consistent, I think, with the Nobel physicist Frank Wilczek's quip

    Nothing is unstable

    e.g. Noether's theorem, spontaneous symmetry-breaking, etc
    180 Proof

    :up:

    Two very intriguing notions (unstable nothing, and symmetries). I always find myself coming back to these ideas, pondering why and how. I love the universe!

    It appears that matter is unstable as well to varying degrees. It seems a simpler problem to uncover the reason why this is the case with matter than it is with 'nothing'. What is the nature of this instability, and can it be modeled in some way? The notion of self-interaction as a general idea has something to do with it. Does it make sense to have a 'complex system' with only one component able to interact with itself? These are just some of the questions i ask myself.

    I'm reminded of the ancient Egyptian god Atum believed to have created the universe by masturbation (self-interaction?). :snicker:
  • punos
    321


    Hmm, coincidentally this video just came up on my YouTube feed.

    Rebecca Newberger Goldstein - Why Is There Anything At All?
  • 180 Proof
    10.9k
    Thanks. I know Rebecca Goldstein's works on Gödel & Spinoza, respectively, and her speculative novels. I'm in the brute contingency camp, presuming that 'the laws of nature' are emergent, or self-organizing (pace Spinoza & Einstein), through the developmental expansion of the universe.

    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/775689
  • Benj96
    1.5k
    Do you have a way of explaining or describing how from a timeless state something can happen?punos

    Probability. Potential and probability are somewhat analogous/interlinked.

    Rule 1: You can't have Potential if there's zero probability of having such.

    Rule 2: You can't have probability is there is zero potential of having such.

    In this way they're synonymous.
    Potential is the primary existant, a singularity, and the only one that can exist without time, because time is a secondary existant, a tier down on the hierarchy.

    Therefore it's not "Nothingness" before the big bang just because it exists outside of time. It's not nothingness because it has a fundamental or primary property: Decreasing probability of remaining Potential (a singular existant) and simultaneously increasing probability of becoming further existants.

    So that means as existants increase in number, potential drops. And that's entropy. The system getting "less energetic".

    So the secondary existants are 4: Energy (the vector that carries potential), Time (the vector that carries probability), Space and Matter - the vectors that allow for decreasing potential and increasing probability- as matter stores up and confines huge amounts of energy in a stable form (decreased potential) and space allows for that pent up potential to "occupy" increasing numbers of forms "existants" over numerous locations.

    This is neatly expressed by E=mc2. Energy = Mass x the speed (Distance or Space/Time) or light Squared (the inverse relationship between potential and probability)

    That's why we could never reach the speed of light because time would stop (vector of probability) and all the energy (vector of potential) in the universe would be required.

    Hope i explained it a bit better. It's a very difficult subject. Might take a few readings.
  • Benj96
    1.5k
    I love the universe!punos

    Same lol.
  • Benj96
    1.5k
    I'm reminded of the ancient Egyptian god Atum believed to have created the universe by masturbation (self-interaction?).punos

    Oh yes. Refer above to probability and potentials mutual interdependence whilst really just being two sides of literally the same coin. Technically the same thing but interacting with itself.

    I guess that's why sex is connected to division and multiplication. Treated as opposites in maths but in biology one leads to the other. How funny
  • Bylaw
    362
    Meaning our two speciesBenj96

    I think this whole sentient robots we built combining with sentient robots some other species made might be 'our' in some possessive sense, but not in the identity sense.

    That would be two other species 'mating', at best. Not the builders mating. Not our species combining in the identity sense of 'our.'
  • punos
    321
    Hope i explained it a bit better. It's a very difficult subject. Might take a few readings.Benj96

    Thank you i understood, i just had to read it slowly a couple of times. I was trying to understand what you were saying while attempting to compare it to certain parts of my own model. Something about potential is poking my brain.. i need to contemplate on the concept of potential. :up:
  • Agent Smith
    8.9k
    A crutch that only cripples you. :pray: After all, philosophical suicide is painless, no?180 Proof
    Gaslighting. Making someone think s/he's sick when actually not and then prescribing him/her medication to get better? :lol:
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.