been working with the quantum cryptography folks, so they have more of a theoretical approach.. but you are right that zero energy means no movement - this means atomic movement and forces between atoms so what happens when there’s no energy in the form of forces?
Life goes from disorder (random molecules floating about) to order (DNA and replication etc) and then back to disorder (you turn to dust). But, its like a fish trying to swim upstream. In the end entropy always wins.
En-Tropy = turn towards "low complexity"
Tropy = turn towards "high complexity"
;-?
There is only order. But in different degrees of complexity.
Tropy = turn towards "high complexity"
;-?
There is only order. But in different degrees of complexity.
But it's true for anything surrounding us ( uniqueness)!
Isn't it the whole process of a scientific approach? I mean observe facts, build an abstraction of them which lead to a question/intuition about a phenomena at works, then try to validate/unvalidate the question ( paradigm) in a repeatable maner. All this based on previous works done which makes theories ever changing since they are always challenged.
It seems to me this is the point: scientific theories are kind of snapshots, reflecting the state of understanding at a given point in time and space.
In no way it is ( or seek to be) an universal answer on anything in the field i was involved.
I've got a background on social science study and it is one of the thing i deeply learned from it: what you observe is true here and now, can't be nescessarely transposed elsewhere as it keeps on changing. But it reveals some principle at works which can be transposed to other situation.
The other interesting thing is related to Schroedinger's paradox: by seeking an answer you'll influence the answers given.
At most we known the only meaningful answers that will be gathered are about mechanism at works not absolute answers.
In my view it's not because communication is limited/primitive it doesn't give a way to build an abstraction /complex representation.
My small kids gaves me numerous example of this in the last years.
You started on this social construction about eating animals: you are shocked people eats what you consider pets.
It's all relative: i hope next time you visit France you'll try some 'cuisses de grenouilles', 'escargots au beurre persillé' , 'lapin a la moutarde',...
It's all a social construction including morality : nothing more, nothing less.
I'm not trying to change the subject i told you i'm curious: i challenge you on points i find strange.
Of course it can be painful or hard on you and me.
Really? Isn't a virus a lifeform?
Doesn't it tend to infect its host at most possible up to the point it kills it as well as themself?
I'm sure Chimpanzee have the initial 'spark' which could lead them to nuke if they had/have time to evolve into something else...
I'am as it is a powerful filter on how we see/aprehend our world/reality.
It shape our thoughts. And is a first step on the way of 'meaning of life' in my view.
Assumption to me.
It bring to the question of innate/acquired.
And as animals ( including Humans) are social creatures... it makes difficult to differenciate what come from where...
It seems to me we disagree on one fundamental trait: the uniqueness of human being into nature.
It's fine and i think neither you and me have any kind of truth about it.
Our vision work for us and it's all good.
At least we agree on definition of anthropomorphism. 🙂
Last edited:
My post about the three monotheistic religions is NOT intended to discuss any religious dogma as that goes against the rules of these fora. It should be read as a statement of a fact about these religions' beliefs about their God.
Note: I write "God" as a sign of restpect towards religious people and their beliefs as is expected in a civilised discussion. My statement does not necessarily reflect my beliefs.
Note: I write "God" as a sign of restpect towards religious people and their beliefs as is expected in a civilised discussion. My statement does not necessarily reflect my beliefs.
The Earth is flat to a very good approximation. 🙂 I built my house assuming the ground upon it was to be built as a FLAT surface.diyiggy said:
vade retro anthropomorphism... yuk 😉
We project like monkeys whom sending banana skins through the faces of the most simple evidences. (which is making human being not exceptional or among others species but if you consider nukes improved the farting through the world when used)
... there are unfathomable mystheries in the life like the utility of statins... but beliefs are very confortable for the rewards circuit we need to live confortable in our shoes... I think the "Earth is flat" paradigm was put on the table again by Nike ! It's a plot to control the masses by their feets. ... ok I dropped the milk for something harder I must confess 🙂
We project like monkeys whom sending banana skins through the faces of the most simple evidences. (which is making human being not exceptional or among others species but if you consider nukes improved the farting through the world when used)
... there are unfathomable mystheries in the life like the utility of statins... but beliefs are very confortable for the rewards circuit we need to live confortable in our shoes... I think the "Earth is flat" paradigm was put on the table again by Nike ! It's a plot to control the masses by their feets. ... ok I dropped the milk for something harder I must confess 🙂
Last edited:
Thank you for saying this.
"God" is the most elaborate non-answer to the questions we ponder. "God" adds nothing to the conversation except a layer of nonsense. "God" is the ultimate non-answer to the questions, a huge nothing burger of a distraction, a patently dishonest claim.
No.
What is the force that overcame the initial entropy of the universe? This is not a trick question. It's still happening right now.
I'm tasking the Dept. of Entropy to come up with an answer!
Attachments
Thomas Hertog ( S.Hawking long time collaborator) just released a book about all this ( i didn't had time to read it still).
It seems they were amazed by some form of organisation which happened just after the big bang leading to what we are now.
Of course question about a force at work behind appeared.
From T. Hertog it seems they kept on thinking it is (lucky) randomness.
It seems they were amazed by some form of organisation which happened just after the big bang leading to what we are now.
Of course question about a force at work behind appeared.
From T. Hertog it seems they kept on thinking it is (lucky) randomness.