It is not a material substance, but the matter-energy equivalence has been demonstrated in Einstein’s famous equation e=mc2. Ghosts are in no way measurable or observable whatever. So the comparison is fatuous. — Wayfarer

:up:

All due respect, I don’t think you
[@Gnomon] demonstrate understanding of the sources you’re quoting.

:up:

The point remains that energy is an abstract but universal, constant, and predictable property of matter - precisely measurable to minute degrees of accuracy. It is not a material substance, but the matter-energy equivalence has been demonstrated in Einstein’s famous equation e=mc2. Ghosts are in no way measurable or observable whatever. So the comparison is fatuous. — Wayfarer

My point is not that potential EnFormAction (EFA) is thermodynamic Energy, but that Energy is merely one form of Universal Causation*1. which is an abstract concept : an idea. You seem to be taking my analogies literally. But the Map is not the Terrain. So, pardon the riposte, but your physicalist interpretation of EFA is "fatuous". I would expect that from 180poopoo, but not from you.

As I said, even though Energy is invisible & intangible & immaterial, it is considered to be physical precisely because it has measurable effects in the natural world*2. I compared Energy to ghosts, because some people have claimed, throughout centuries of civilization, to find measurable effects of spirits (e.g. ectoplasm) despite their being invisible & intangible & immaterial. The point being that Energy is an Idea (mental inference), not a real thing (physical observation)*3. One of my footnotes above said that Energy is a philosophical "postulation" (from reasoning) not a sensory object. Hence, Energy is Ideal, not Real : like a ghost. For the record, I don't believe in Ghosts, but I do believe that the mental concept of Souls, having demonstrable effects on bodies, has been a fertile notion in the history of philosophy and religion. What did Plato mean by "Soul"?*4

Take biological Evolution for example. Darwin did not observe the process of evolution. He only observed instances of form change in living creatures, and inferred the causal (transforming) procedure by reasoning. He explained his imaginary process (series of actions) in terms of form variation (mutation) and natural selection (conscious Choice?). But what is Nature in this context, but a generalization or reification or representation of a mental concept, not a material object. Science deals with observed particulars, but Philosophy deals with inferred universals.

The evolutionary process could be described physically as the momentum of matter following the Big Bang impetus of cosmic scale Energy. But momentum alone, sans Laws, would result in a brief flash of light, and quick disappearance, like New Year fireworks. However, a more philosophical way to look at Evolution is as a living organism, born in a state of low Entropy and high Energy. How it got in that state, contrary to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, is another question for conjecture. In addition to the propulsion of the boundless "Bang", evolution has been guided by limiting "Natural Laws". Which are not observed material objects but inferred forms of Information*5.

If you think my philosophical "comparison" of local Energy with universal EnFormAction is "fatuous", what do you thing about Federico Faggin's similar concept of Live Information : "makes no sharp distinction between energy, matter, and information"? Similarly, I use EFA to include all kinds of causes in the universe : from Big Bang singularity, to the transformation of Plasma into Matter, to the Momentum of cosmic expansion, to expansion-slowing Gravity, to atomic Power, to un-actualized Potential, to E = MC^2, to the eventual emergence of Life and Mind. All are the result of causal en-formation (form change). But only Energy is associated with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Do you understand the philosophical implications of the scientific sources I'm quoting? :nerd:



*1. For Plato, Forms are the ultimate causes, acting as eternal blueprints or essences that explain why physical things are the way they are.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=plato+form+as+causation

*2. Likewise, EFA has measurable effects in the world : Matter as a form of physical Energy, Living creatures as a form of biological Vitality, Thinking beings as a form of Information Processing activity.

*3. "Inference not observation" highlights the crucial difference between observing (using senses to gather direct facts) and inferring (using logic and prior knowledge to interpret those facts and draw conclusions). An observation is what you see, hear, smell, taste, or touch, while an inference is the guess or explanation you form because of those observations.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=inference+not+observation

*4. Soul : Plato didn't have a concept of modern physical "energy" (\(E=mc^{2}\)), but his philosophy touched on related ideas through concepts like the soul's parts (rational, spirited, appetitive) as driving forces, the "Forms" as perfect essences, and his emphasis on ethereal, unchanging ideals versus the changing physical world (like fire/spirit pointing up vs. earth/body pointing down). He viewed true reality as immaterial Forms, suggesting a different kind of "power" or "being" (essence) than the physical world's constant flux, linking to spiritual or intellectual dynamism rather than kinetic/potential energy.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=plato+notion+of+energy

*5. Yes, natural laws can be viewed as fundamental information about how the universe or human morality works, describing inherent patterns (physics) or universal ethical principles (philosophy) that are discovered through reason, not invented by humans, providing foundational data for both scientific understanding and moral governance. These laws act as inherent instructions or rules for behavior, whether physical (gravity) or ethical (inherent rights)
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=natural+laws+are+information
Note --- For extra credit : Who or What was the Enformer, the Instructor, the Rule-maker? Are those powers inherent in Matter? The Ontological status of the Singularity was originally viewed by Cosmologists as a mathematical limit where the matter & laws of physics disappear into immeasurable infinity. Quick quiz : Was Mother Nature originally a ghost, or an infinity of material worlds?

180poopoo — Gnomon

:lol:

Ghosts are in no way measurable or observable whatever. So the comparison is fatuous.
— Wayfarer

I compared Energy to ghosts ... measurable effects of spirits (e.g. ectoplasm) despite their being invisible & intangible & immaterial ... I do believe that the mental concept of Souls, having demonstrable [subjective, hallucinatory] effects on bodies ...

:sparkle: woo-of-the-gaps supernaturalia :sweat:

The point being that Energy is an Idea (mental inference), not a real thing (physical observation) — Gnomon

This is simply mistaken. Drop that phrase into Google Gemini and see what comes back. No amount of verbalisation is going to alter the facts.

:up:

The point being that Energy is an Idea (mental inference), not a real thing (physical observation) — Gnomon
This is simply mistaken. Drop that phrase into Google Gemini and see what comes back. No amount of verbalisation is going to alter the facts. — Wayfarer

"Scientific facts change because science is a dynamic process of discovery, not a static collection of absolute truths"
180woowoo is getting an ego-boost from your materialist comments, and hard facts. :up:

I don't have Gemini. But here's what Google AI Outlook says :
Yes, energy is fundamentally an idea, a powerful mathematical concept and property in physics that quantifies the capacity for work or change in a system, rather than a tangible "thing" or substance itself, though it describes real physical processes like motion (kinetic) or stored capacity (potential). It's an abstract, conserved quantity, a numerical tool allowing us to predict how the universe behaves and transforms, like a car slowing down (losing kinetic energy, gaining heat).
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=is+energy+an+idea

I'm aware that most Physical scientists like to imagine that Energy is a real substance. And it works, on a superficial level. When you touch a hot stove, you sense the changes in your finger as-if it is caused by flowing Energy. But the molecular form changes are actually caused by transfer of Quantum Information. That statement won't make sense to you, if you are not familiar with the latest, post-Shannon, science of Information*1*2. But most scientists will be reluctant to draw philosophical inferences about a "deeper level"*3. Yet again, EnFormAction is a philosophical metaphysical concept, not a scientific physical fact. :smile:


*1. The relationship between energy and information is profound, suggesting they are deeply linked, with energy required to process information, and information defining how energy is used, often connected through concepts like entropy and thermodynamics (Landauer's Principle linking information erasure to heat), while also showing potential for energy savings via information technologies and a fundamental cycle where structure, energy, and information interact in physical systems, including life.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=energy+information+relation

*2. "Energy is information" is a profound concept in physics and philosophy suggesting a deep link, not identity, where information needs energy to exist physically, but energy needs information to do useful work, with some theories proposing information as fundamental to the universe's structure, linking matter, energy, and organization through concepts like entropy and quantum mechanics. It highlights that organized matter (information) extracts energy, while energy itself is just potential until described or ordered.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=energy+is+information

*3. Scientific American article :
The flow of energy in human societies is regulated by the tiny fraction of energy that is used for the flow of information. Energy and Information are also related at a much deeper level.
https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/Energy-and-Information.pdf#:~:text=Today%20we%20know%20that%20it%20takes%20energy,of%20information%20began%20only%20with%20Claude%20E.

PS___ I seem to remember that you have quoted astrophysicist Paul Davies before. This is what he says about a concept of Information*4 that is similar to my notion of EnFormAction.
*4. Information and the Nature of Reality: From Physics to Metaphysics is a book edited by Paul Davies and Niels Henrik Gregersen that explores the concept of information as a fundamental aspect of reality, bridging physics, biology, philosophy, and theology.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=paul+davies+information+and+the+nature+of+reality

*4. Information and the Nature of Reality: From Physics to Metaphysics is a book edited by Paul Davies and Niels Henrik Gregersen that explores the concept of information as a fundamental aspect of reality, bridging physics, biology, philosophy, and theology. — Gnomon

Look beneath the Planck size, but you may get eyestrain.

*4. Information and the Nature of Reality: From Physics to Metaphysics is a book edited by Paul Davies and Niels Henrik Gregersen that explores the concept of information as a fundamental aspect of reality, bridging physics, biology, philosophy, and theology. — Gnomon
Look beneath the Planck size, but you may get eyestrain. — PoeticUniverse

The Planck scale was computed to establish the universe's minimum physical limit, beyond which material things can no longer be measured (i.e. information extracted). For the purposes of Philosophy though, Information is not a physical object, it's an abstract metaphysical (cognizable) pattern. Yet in Science, those meaningful patterns can be associated with physical things. But, while your eyes cannot see information, your mind can infer meaning. And, as a fundamental element of reality, mental Information applies at all conceivable scales down to Infinity*1.

However, John Wheeler, in his attempt to reconcile Quantum Physics with theories of Gravity, postulated*2 that Quantum Foam might exist at or below the Planck scale, making it difficult or impossible to measure. Hence, you can only imagine the foam, not see it. Therefore, materialists might get Mind-strain from the attempt to percieve what can only be conceived. In the century since, Quantum Foam has not been detected, only conceptualized*3.

I suspect that some commentors in this thread have the mistaken idea that, by "EnFormAction", I'm talking about some eternal spiritual power. Yet, my philosophical thesis does not speculate beyond the available evidence for the Big Bang. So, to keep it real, I try to avoid peering beyond Nature, into SuperNature. Here's an excerpt from a recent blog post. :smile:

Panpsychism vs Enformationism

In Post 130, I discussed the philosophical distinction between the ancient & modern notions of Consciousness as a fundamental force in the world, and my own hypothesis of Causation as more elementary than Mind. Hence, what we know as Mental phenomena — thoughts, percepts, concepts, feelings, etc — did not exist in the physical world until a few million years ago. What necessarily did exist, in order to power the creation of a cosmos from a void or chaos or nothingness, was Causation : the power to create from scratch, and/or to transform from one Form to another. I’m not talking about raw random power, like dynamite, but about Creative Power guided by an “organizational factor”.

That organizing force in Nature is not some supernatural agency, but merely the combination of causal energy and directional information that went Bang about 14B years ago. It is about creativity inherent in nature. The eventual emergence of natural hierarchies & categories is of significance in the evolution of both sentience and knowledge, with the animal and human kingdoms both having sentience, and the human having self-consciousness and knowledge propagation, especially through language for the social development of philosophical notions, such as Panpsychism.

In my own personal philosophical worldview, that "organization factor" is called EnFormAction¹, and the "creative" trend of evolution is Enformy². Both terms are derived from an Information-Centric philosophy³, in which Generic Information works like a computer program in the physical world. It's a combination of Causal Energy and Logical Information. And it assumes that En-formation (power to transform) is more essential than Matter. Hence, Consciousness is an emergent⁴ quality, and not fundamental as Panpsychism postulates.
https://bothandblog9.enformationism.info/page48.html


*1. "Fundamental information" refers to the essential, basic facts forming a foundation for understanding, but in physics, it also describes the radical idea that information (bits), not matter or energy, might be the most basic constituent of reality, with the universe acting like a giant quantum computer processing these bits, potentially explaining dark matter and dark energy through quantum memory
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=information+fundamental

*2. Postulate : suggest or assume the existence, fact, or truth of (something) as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or belief.
___ Oxford Dictionary

*3. Quantum Foam is Stephen Hegarty's first collection of poetry. It takes as an impetus the baffling realm of quantum theory, which tells us a strange, unknowable fuzziness governs the fundamental nature of reality. The elementary particles are not real, after all; they form a world of potentialities and possibilities rather than one of things or facts.
https://www.amazon.com/quantum-foam-Stephen-Hegarty/dp/9369542930

↪Gnomon
I won't reply to all your points because I believe that there is a deeper difference between our positions and I think it is possible we will simply "agree to disagree". — boundless

Ironically, I originally got the idea, from your screenname Boundless, that our philosophical positions might be somewhat compatible, but then we seemed to diverge on the mundane topic of Energy. Yet today, I happened to notice the uncommon term "Panentheist"*2 in the thread About Time. So, maybe we have something else to dialogue (both agree and disagree) about.

In recent years, I found A.N. Whitehead's Process Theology *2 compatible with my own secular metaphysical (philosophical) worldview, which, when pushed, I sometimes identify as PanEnDeism, to distinguish it from traditional doctrinal theological religions. For me though, the hypothetical First Cause of the natural world is not experienced as a "feeling, responsive entity". Instead, the "evolving, relational whole" of the Cosmos is an intellectual concept, not a mystical being that I can communicate with & relate to emotionally.

Actually, I emphasize the Causal function (Energy ; EnFormAction) of the supposed Programmer of Big Bang Evolution over the Feeling function of love for humanity. To wit : It only took the God of Genesis seven days to produce living & thinking beings, but the Programmer of Panendeism took over 13 billion years to evolve shrew-like mammals that eventually transformed into animals capable of thinking philosophically.

The concept of computer-like Causation (1s & 0s, positive & negative) gives me more philosophical meat to chew-on than of a Human-like creator, who made us featherless bipeds in his image, then left us alone to deal with the physical & philosophical Problem of Evil. I view Panentheism and PanEnDeism as philosophical cousins, not siblings. So, we should have some relevant notions to both Agree and Disagree on. :halo:


*1. :
Oddly, enough, as a (panen)theist, I actually agree that 'things' arise thanks to a rational mind that is able to distinguish, classify 'things' etc.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/16337/about-time/p1

*2. Whitehead's panentheism (Process Theology) posits that God is both immanent within the world (in it) and transcendent beyond it (more than it), with the universe existing within God's being, making God and the cosmos an evolving, relational whole, unlike traditional views where God is static; God has a primordial (unchanging) nature and a consequent (changing, experiencing) nature, growing and feeling with the world, offering persuasive, not coercive, power, and being a feeling, responsive entity rather than a distant, impassive one
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=whitehead+panentheism

*3. Panendeism is a philosophical concept blending pantheism (God is everything) and deism (God created but doesn't interfere), proposing a God who pervades the universe (like pantheism) but also transcends it (like deism), existing beyond it while remaining the all-encompassing divine mind, often with a non-interventionist, "hands-off" approach. It suggests God is both in the universe and greater than the universe, a cosmic intellect or force that is the source of reality but doesn't actively manage day-to-day affairs, unlike traditional theism
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=panendeism