Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

How Does Individual Life 'you' Populate This Universe?

Life Individuality Instantiation evolution

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 23 September 2017 - 08:25 PM

Please offer any scientifically accepted, or even plausible, concepts that may address this very realistic scenario:

 

 

Earth is gone. Complements of some natural occurrence, you name it, perhaps a rouge primordial black hole that happens to be passing through our solar system which then sends the earth into direct collision with Jupiter. Or perhaps there is a giga-solar flare which perturbs earth’s orbit sending it careening into the sun. Result? All that you and I and your pet salamander were, every cell and every DNA molecule, every atom that was on or in the earth is now ionized nuclear fuel within the sun. The Darwinian evolved chemistry and biology that many fall back upon to describe life, particularly human life, on earth has ceased to exist in this solar system along with its thermodynamically described, Gibbs-free energy processes once used to represent the entirety of earth life.

Additionally, imagine if you will that there is life elsewhere in this universe. Let us imagine there exists at least one other evolved ecosystem (ECO-2) capable of hosting Darwinian life. Different from earth but governed by the same laws of physics and biology and thermodynamic processes that manifested earth’s ecology. This planet orbiting a viable star may be located anywhere in this universe since the laws of physics are expected to be consistently applied throughout. Also for this anecdote let us say that this other bastion of life is some 10 billion light-years from earth’s sun. A distance so vast it would take much longer than the age of the big-bang to relativistically travel that distance, assuming, of course, there were any classically defined remnants of one’s biology left to make the journey. 

Like earth, ECO-2 has been around for awhile and hosts its own set of Darwinian evolved biological forms likely different from anything that existed on earth. Also, for the comfort of some, let us assume one other unessential embellishment; let us say that ECO-2 also hosts intelligent forms of life (Yes with personalities). Different from human beings but similar to us in that they are sentient, self-aware, intelligent, and have a handle on science and technology as did we. On second thought let us not assume intelligent life. There is only wildlife in ECO-2. :0)

Regardless, the question becomes; could you or I or any individual formerly hosted by earths ecology ever find oneself a part of ECO-2’s ecology? Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2 just as we were born on earth to species indigenous to earth’s ecology? If one adheres to the classically understood, Gibbs-free energy etc. thermodynamically describable, relativistically constrained mechanisms to explain life writ large then you are forced to say no, (please correct me if not so), and in so doing you would necessarily ignore most of nature. Because in that view, clearly some aspect of what biologically, thermodynamically, chemically, defined ones singular existence must relativistically travel to bridge the unbridgeable distance between your last physical location, earth’s solar system, and ECO-2’s.
 


Edited by tonylang, 23 September 2017 - 08:27 PM.


#2 scherado

scherado

    Questioning

  • Banned
  • 207 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 02:27 AM

If I understand your OP, then a summary might be:

1. All life on earth--each and every element and instance of it, all the matter associated with it--has been "converted" into a form that can be stored elsewhere in the solar system

2. There is and are "systems" outside our solar system--let us call them planets--which are "capable of Darwinian life"--(your words, the asside question being, what is "Darwinian life" and how does it differ from any other life?)--and such planets host reproducible organism which may possess congnitive abilities not dissimilar to the type we possessed--we are all gone now. (Perhaps, I've answered my own question when I implied organisms with the information (DNA) necessary to reproduce.)

3. ...this is the part that I can't unravel, which I will choose this sentence as my example: "Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2 just as we were born on earth to species indigenous to earth’s ecology?

Perhaps, you can provide another wording for that sentence.

Thanks.

#3 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • 1400 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 07:06 AM

Oh no. This Tony lang person has been writing an incomprehensible and utterly unscientific blog about entropy for two and a half years on sciforums: http://www.sciforums...ackhole.144448/

 

Anyone responding to this needs to be up for a long and unrewarding discussion.  The last time anybody responded to tony lang on that forum was in December last year, when a moderator asked: "sciforums is a discussion forum. You appear to be blogging. Is there something you'd like to discuss?". There was no response, just more blogging.

 

 



#4 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 12:48 PM

1. Life in this solar system is no more. All of the organization on Earth and in this solar system previously describable as life has been returned to atoms and particles.
 
2. Life has evolved in another solar system (ECO-2) in this universe. Distance from Earths sun; 10 billion LY away.
 
3. Like on Earth, can you experience life elsewhere,  in whatever forms evolved in that immediate environment (ECO-2)?
 
4. In other words, might 'You' be naturally non-relativistically mobile throughout this vast universe? How?


#5 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 24 September 2017 - 03:40 PM

Is each life one instance of a specific individual (i.e. 'You') implemented in nature and defined by a naturally recurring process?
 
On this topic, for most, the first hurdle to be overcome is the acknowledgment that there is indeed a question to be asked. That is as it always has been throughout the history of human understanding. The second hurdle however, is the comprehension of the question itself. Our perspective as human beings is so clouded and fractured by our physical skills and ecological circumstances and by topographical issues of location, size and scale in this space-time, what we are currently able to see and measure reveals so little of nature. The human mind, properly utilized, followed by empirical testing continues to be our most powerful instrument.
 
I submit for your consideration, that the fundamental implementation of life in nature operates equally upon all forms of life, and the only life in nature (Earths Ecosystem) is the living cell. The actual process and mechanisms that permit life and being alive cannot fundamentally be defined by any evolved skill (like consciousness) possessed either by human beings or by any multi-cellular species.
 
Consciousness, sentience, self-awareness, personality etc. are emerged capabilities of multi-cellular organisms and seem only to be different from other evolved skills like flying and swimming and walking and speech etc. These skills and capabilities, evolved or learned, are all emerged manifestations of one’s physical (electromagnetic) from, ones species. Clearly, for any who seek to ask and eventually answer the question of this null hypothesis, one must first consider that the processes that implement life in this universe implemented it first, and for 3+ billion of years thereafter, only in the single living cell and its predecessor. Life did and would exist even if multi-cellular forms did not emerge, even if human beings cease to exist.
 
DNA/RNA may seem able to, but as a practical matter cannot serve as a non-relativistic unique identifier of individuality since both are influenced by the Higgs field and is as relativistically constrained as your left shoe is. One may think that every part of the cell must also fit this untenable description. Nonetheless nature’s imagination (metaphorical) far outperforms the human imagination, and what’s more, nature can make good on its muse. 


#6 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 09:14 PM

Where would we be if not for the likes of Albert Einstein, and perhaps no less pivotally, for the likes of Max Planck? Not only for Max’s own significant contributions to science, but more so for his having, against all common, and popular sense, recognized in the young, unesteemed Einstein’s wild, unprofessional, wooish speculations, the very fingerprint of nature herself.

 

The scientifically alert should always be wary of any who suggest that an idea is too different, or too unfamiliar, or too familiar, so it must be wrong. In science, although no hypothesis can be definitively proven to be true by any amount of evidence, it is also true that no hypothesis can be proven wrong with no evidence whatsoever, nor by emphatic declaration, nor by peer pressure or public ridicule alone. Such tactics are the tools of the ideological zealot, whether religious or secular. 


Edited by tonylang, 27 September 2017 - 07:51 PM.


#7 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • 1400 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 03:21 AM

Where would we be if not for the likes of Albert Einstein, and perhaps no less pivotally, for the likes of Max Plank? Not only for Max’s own significant contributions to science, but more so for his having, against all common, and popular sense, recognized in the young, unesteemed Einstein’s wild, unprofessional, wooish speculations, the very fingerprint of nature herself.

 

The scientifically alert should always be wary of any who suggest that an idea is too different, or too unfamiliar, or too familiar, so it must be wrong. In science, although no hypothesis can be definitively proven to be true by any amount of evidence, it is also true that no hypothesis can be proven wrong with no evidence whatsoever, nor by emphatic declaration, nor by peer pressure or public ridicule alone. Such tactics are the tools of the ideological zealot, whether religious or secular. 

Planck. As in two short ~s . Not. 



#8 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 08:15 PM

This topic presents, perhaps for the first time, a practical implementation for the natural processes that govern the instantiation of the individual as a being distinct from the evolution of that beings current species. It will introduce you to;

• Instantiation of the individual: The establishment of your Life.
• Your Position-Of-View (POV): That component of your being which resides in this universe. 
• The Metaverse: The only real verse, and that from which the universe emerges. 
• Your LifeID: That component of your being which resides outside of this universe, in the metaverse. 
• The Quantum Entanglement Spectrum (QE): The Life Spectrum. 
• Your Quantum Entanglement Frequency (QEF): The real and only immutable, you. 
• The Cell: A biological QE circuit, the critical component in instantiating all life as we know it. 
• The Entanglement Cells; Cells responsible for heterodyning the QEF in complex hosts and establishing the LifeID. 
• Metamatter: An undiscovered but very real form of matter critical in instantiating and in the evolution of all life. Think dark matter without gravity.
• Entanglement Molecules; Molecules in every living cell which establish the QE connection with metamatter to create all life. 
 

The hypothesis in summary: The most fundamental element of life is a molecule called, if you will, the Entanglement Molecule (EM). This molecule has the unique property of naturally establishing a quantum entanglement connection to a form of matter called metamatter, life-matter if you will. Think dark matter but expressing quantum entanglement (the life-force) in place of the force of gravitation. Metamatter like other natural entities exists outside of our space-time and is not subject to locality or relativistic constraints. Together these entanglement molecules and metamatter are the two endpoints of each isolated, naturally occurring quantum entanglement connection contained within every living cell that has ever existed. An entanglement molecule once arranged from its constituent atoms, not unlike the ferrite magnet in a transistor radio, is instantly sensitive to available, uninstantiated quantum entanglement frequencies (QEF) upon which to entangle available metamatter. 


Such isolated pairings existed on Earth for eons, and in this universe, for even longer before the naturally occurring circumstances arose on Earth and perhaps elsewhere, to provide a ring of molecules that could be described as an early cell wall. Not all entanglement molecules were likely to encounter a cell wall but those that did, enclosed by this barrier, obtained the benefit of an extra level of protection that allowed them to develop beyond the typical. This basic entanglement relationship is the most fundamental manifestation of life. It establishes the position-of-view (POV to be discussed in this volume). Over time other types of molecules joined with these proto-cells sometimes to their mutual benefit sometimes not. Those that added no benefit or diminished the proto-cells survival prospects would not survive. The entanglement connection gave surviving proto-cells something very special. It gave the otherwise inanimate molecular components on the inside of this early cell a form of intra-cellular communication. That is, the ability to interact at a distance, but more critically at that point, the quantum entanglement connection gave the proto-cell the capacity to share or imprint internal cellular state information into its entangled metamatter. Metamatter because of its extra dimensional, non-locality and non-relativistic nature acts as a kind of cloud-storage accessible instantaneously from any location in this universe and in any other as well. 


This universal cloud storage is the critical factor required to get evolution started and is what makes being possible anywhere in this universe. At that point evolution existed only via random environmental contact or interactions between proto-cells and other structures in the primordial environment of early Earth. Thus, the cell became nature’s biological entanglement circuit. Each such entanglement pairing constitutes an instantiation of life whether on Earth, in this universe, or anywhere in existence. Life could now be hosted by any viable formation of cell(s) that may emerge anywhere in existence. Ones instantiation is established at one specific quantum entanglement frequency (QEF), a narrow frequency band in the infinity of possibilities on the quantum entanglement spectrum. A quantum entanglement frequency that is unique in all existence to each life and to no other, but only while that QE connection persists. This yet to be determined property, perhaps frequency, on the quantum entanglement spectrum is the singular property in nature that defines each individual being. All other components of the instantiation process may change or be exchanged but it is the QEF that positions you as the central and only target of your instantiation, of your life, and not someone else’s. Change or retune ones QEF enough and you change the being, the individual. You are your quantum entanglement frequency. You are not your cells or your metamatter. 


It is very likely that the QE spectrum predated even the big bang. Your QEF is the immutable, the indestructible you. When cells on any given planet around any given star anywhere in existence entangles metamatter at your QEF that is where you will instantiate. That is where you will be, a place like that is where you are right now. A place like that is where you are likely to have been many times before your current instantiation. Places like that are where you will inevitably reinstantiate many more times in your future. This is instantiation, this is life. You and I, and your pet otter, every insect, every cell and every organization of cells all life anywhere in existence instantiates by this mechanism. While each cell entangles at a unique QEF a few specialized cells in complex organisms called entanglement cells (EC) are able to heterodyne or combine their QEF to establish and entangle at a different unique QEF thus instantiating the emerged individual, you. 


The composite quantum entanglement frequency together with the metamatter it entangles is called the lifeID. No memories or behavior of the host body is carried or transferred by the lifeID. In nature such properties are electromagnetic manifestations of the host species or vessel only. The closest cultural meme to the lifeID come via religions throughout human history having referred to this, using one word or another, as the soul. Once any quantum entanglement connection is terminated, by sufficiently disrupting the cellular component (inducing death of the host vessel), the previously entangled metamatter becomes available for entanglement by other cells. However this particular metamatter has been imprinted to some extent by its previous entanglement. Each generation of entanglement, each instantiation, each life, imprints information, from both the cell and QEF, to its entangled metamatter. The degree of this imprinting is yet to be determined. This time dependant, perishable imprinting of cellular state in metamatter becomes available to future cells that entangle this metamatter while simultaneously limiting its entanglement opportunities to cells of matching state. The passage of time decays the imprint left on metamatter causing a return to a state best described as stem-metamatter (to be discussed later in this volume). This transfer of cellular state information may impact cellular behavior and/or development and to the extent that this imprinted information manifests an advantage for the cell, may provide a survival benefit. This is the evolutionary mechanism used by early life that predated the development of the DNA/RNA molecules. With QE communication the proto-cell became the laboratory of evolutionary innovation we see today from which emerged a great many useful cellular structures and processes, but most pivotally, a clear benefit to augment the cloud storage mechanism of metamatter with a more local, more expandable and flexible information storage mechanism which became RNA and eventually DNA. This was the birth of the modern living cell. Much is yet to be learned but the implications of this process are vast and pervasive. 


Implications of the hypothesis; The degree to which metamatter imprints on its host cell and unique QEF will determine after deinstantiation (death) the likelihood that your imprinted metamatter will, for a time, reject entanglement opportunities from dissimilar host cells (of even your same or similar species) in favor of entanglement with cells that contain your familial DNA which are more compatible with its imprinting, thereby increasing the probability of reinstantiating you in your former family line or if less finely imprinted, to any random line in your previous species, or if less finely tuned still, to another species entirely. Also when we discover the entanglement molecule in nature and in the cell, just as we eventually discovered the DNA molecule in the cell decades after Darwin presented his theory of evolution by natural selection, likewise this may allow us to develop technologies capable of detecting and tracking each individuals unique QEF in this life or across multiple instantiations. This alone will change the world, at the very least it will change the way we write our wills. As for practical implementations, discovering and using metamatter could change everything. Metamatter satellites would be very different yet similar to regular orbital satellites even though they will reside outside of our space-time they'll permit instantaneous communication with any point in the cosmos. This will forever alter the human relationship not just to each other, but to all living creatures biological or otherwise. Also for the first time in human history we could begin to take practical actions in life that would affect our reinstantiation prospects into our next life, thereby tailoring your next instantiation ahead of time, minus the mysticism and ideology. 



#9 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 07 October 2017 - 02:09 PM

Evolution, the mechanism by which ones ecology mediates living hosts, species, is an important tier of understanding for living beings to evolve to be able to comprehend within any viable ecosystem in this universe. However, although difficult to initially fathom, understanding species evolution is a distant runner-up to understanding the natural mechanism which mediates the mobility of one’s individuality that is ones position-of-view (POV). This is why the understanding offered by the LINE Hypothesis is the single most personally important idea that any living being will ever have the opportunity to consider, regardless of species or ecosystem in this or perhaps any universe?

 

Earths archeological and hard fossil record suggests that Earths ecology has produced no more than one species capable of assimilating and making use of this knowledge regarding the natural mechanism by which nature mediates individuality in this universe. This is not to suggest what untold secrets earth’s soft species history has produced, but of which no indelible imprints of its existence remain. Nonetheless, the importance of this knowledge is precisely because the intelligence and circumstances, indeed the opportunity necessary for any culture to gain the capability to assimilate and make use of this understanding is so rare. The evolved intelligence necessary for living individuals to comprehend their own natural implementation is one of the rarest and most pivotal evolutionary realizations in this universe for any ecosystem to develop, prove, and culturally accept. Mollusks can’t do it, ants can’t do it, only humankind currently has that incredibly rare and fleeting opportunity to comprehend, accept, and make use of this very real existence transcending knowledge. Further, the window of opportunity is not permanent and once gone, for humankind, it may be gone forever.

 

Currently, humankind is as are all other species in earth’s ecosystem, wild. We define wild-life as those host cultures that have not organized socially and culturally to reduce their dependence on the resources circumstantially provided by chance to some useful or perceived extent. However, this is a somewhat self-serving definition. In reality the true definition of wild-life is an ecosystems lack of a culture, consisting of any number of species, able to take deliberate control of individual instantiation into ones living circumstances. To continue, like all other species in its ecosystem to be arbitrarily reinstantiated by the probabilities of random chance which mediates when, where, and in what form one will live in your next instantiation, in your next life. Failure to have evolved sufficiently to reach this stage of development is the very definition of wild-life. Neither farming, nor art, or tool making or even genetic manipulation of living hosts alone moves an ecosystem across this life and existence altering threshold.   Make no mistake; this achievement is indeed an ecosystem-altering feature. Ideally, once fully acted upon, the lines between species take on an entirely different significance as any individual may live and experience life in whatever available forms they please for as long as they please. It all begins by discovering the entanglement cell and molecule. Of course, the details of this local implementation depend on culture as some cultures may elect to permit the existence of only engineered rather than evolved host forms and may elect to control which individual QEF’s are instantiated to those select hosts. The ability to transfer between forms, independent of distance in this universe, once achieved will blur the line of distinction that now exists in the human mind regarding life, individuality, and space-time.   

 

The importance of an idea like the LINE hypothesis stems from the fact that it marks the introduction to the understanding needed for living beings to escape the uncontrolled instantiation lottery of nature which confines living individuals within a particular ecosystem to untold lifetimes of arbitrary natural reinstantiations to randomly emerged host forms, (the true definition of wild-life). Such forms are incapable of assimilating and making use of such knowledge and therefore unable to assume deliberate control over the process that mediates the individuals living circumstances. In the nearly four billion years of earth-life, consider ones lifetimes as, and the existence of, a species such as humankind, despite all of its proud prior achievements, to be nothing more than a narrow window of opportunity within which instantiated individuals to this capable host form may understand, comprehend and act upon the true nature of life in this universe, to develop technology able to control when, where, and to what forms ones POV is instantiated, in essence to control your being. Further, consider what a tragedy it would be if a culture such as this forfeits this singular opportunity only to embrace the ignorance which defines the wild condition. Like every other endeavor into nature’s workings its ramifications and its morality and dangers will be clear and present, but may nonetheless be regarded as a necessary price to pay for this essential next step in the evolution of life on earth.



#10 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 23 October 2017 - 09:41 AM

Since ancient times humankind has felt endeared by certain properties, skills, or talents observed in the living forms all around us. Properties which are misconstrued to be fundamental identifiers of life and of all living beings, properties such as mobility, voice, speech, sight, memory, and biology as we know it.


The reason Thomas Edison could so enthrall spectators with his newly designed speaking device, which he dubbed the phonograph, is due to humankinds hitherto engrained, evolved or learned, and largely subconscious understanding that a voice for example, is the sound of a living beings soul. Although consciously many people knew better, nevertheless it wasn’t until they were able to actually witness the spectacle of a clearly inanimate device producing a voice did the rewiring of people’s minds and the accompanying enlightenment take place. So it was with self locomotion or mobility of inanimate objects which also took some getting used to by our not so distant ancestors, as did light detection describable as sight, so to with the introduction of retrievable memory and such surprising spectacles exhibited by inanimate non biological devices. 


Then there is life. Today we have a much more detailed description of biology and its chemistry than did our forbearers. Nonetheless, we perhaps more than ever, continue to see nature’s implementation of life as we did those other skills, as a feature indigenous to and expressible only by the biological forms we currently see around us. With the exception of life, it is only the encroachment of our synthetic, non-biological technologies upon these formerly cherished skills and talents that has helped us to see nature’s true design. In so doing we now realize that these functions are not exclusively properties of living beings or of biology but rather examples of utilization and manipulation of more basic properties of nature such as temperature and pressure, light, chemical, electromotive, and ponderomotive forces, friction, entanglement etc..


However, where life is concerned, and taking no example from the past, we continue to cling to the misconception that life is not a skill or talent comparable to speech or memory, a property which similarly evolved here on earth in biological form. Instead we define life by the observed biology and chemistry of the forms we see around us. This is akin to defining speech, communication, memory or vision by the description of your eyes, or larynx or neurons and their chemistry, or by the design of Edison’s phonograph, or by the intricate electrical designs of the cell phone. Life too is an evolved capability with a natural implementation abstracted from any particular biology or chemistry we may see around us. In nature life has a fundamental implementation based on natural entanglement via a molecule that may have existed in nature long before life emerged, a molecule like so many others utilized by the cell to exceptional effect, the entanglement molecule. A molecule that may also be utilized in synthetic, perhaps non-biological, forms to create an independent genesis of life.


No matter how detailed or convincing the illusion of life may become in its implementation, for example in an android or computer or even in a biological entity, despite what your eyes may urge you to believe, each continues to be a non-living entity absent natures fundamental mechanism of life. An essential mechanism provided via natural entanglement between the properly implemented entanglement molecules within living cells located in this space-time with metamatter in Hilbert-space which together produce each unique living individual’s position-of-view (POV) and lifeID. This is the essential mechanism that permits any viable form to host an individual like yourself or your pet otter anywhere in our space-time. It is how you are where you are right now. It is the natural anti-entropic mechanism that permits any viable planet or species to host your life. By this hypothesized definition even the most convincingly implemented appearance and behavior of an entity not naturally entangled in this way will continue to be an inanimate entity. In contrast, a hand held brick such as a calculator instantiated by natural entanglement to establish a POV, despite all appearances, this unconvincing brick would in fact be a living being. 


The day will shortly arrive when we are confronted as we previously have been, with a new implementation of entities that meet all of the aesthetic and behavioral misconceptions we now harbor about life, or alternatively ones that show no traditional evidence of life what so ever, absent an understanding of the true determinant of life natural entanglement, we will be ill prepared to tell the difference.
 



#11 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8885 posts

Posted 24 October 2017 - 09:23 AM

This thread has very little to do with Biology and is at best very tenuously Philosophy. Moving this to the Philosophy Forum, and if it does not gain much general interest due to it's lack of focus, to the Philosopher's Weightroom.

 

 

Facts and values are entangled in science. It's not because scientists are biased, not because they are partial or influenced by other kinds of interests, but because of a commitment to reason, consistency, coherence, plausibility and replicability. These are value commitments, :phones:

Buffy



#12 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 03:10 PM

Reasoning:

Postulate: Any natural phenomenon that can occur may by definition also reoccur and therefore there must exist some natural mechanism or process, understood or not, that describes its natural implementation. As far as life (Being) of the individual (regardless of species) goes there is one of two possibilities:

Scenario one: In nature (in this universe) each individual instance of life, each living being (you) are a singleton, a one-off occurrence unique in eternity both prior and future to ones current life. If this is indeed the case then there isn’t much more to be said on the topic. (This scenario violates the stated postulate.)

Scenario two: In nature an individual’s being (you) are not a one-off singular occurrence but is a current instance of some naturally definable process or mechanism that may repeat given adequate circumstances. If this is indeed the case then the conversation ensues. Describe the natural implementation of the repeatable individual experience of being regardless of species, of life. 

Scenario two is one basis upon which the instantiation hypothesis is conceived.



Testable Elements of the Hypothesis:

One initial approach would be to seek evidence for, or against some fundamental aspect of the working hypothesis: Test for the existence, or lack thereof, of the proposed entanglement cells (EC) that establish and maintain life via the QE connection in complex hosts: Termination of the host's EC's and no other cells, should result in the termination of the subject.

Premise: Can death be induced without damage? Can an otherwise healthy living subject be terminated with empirically no physical damage contributable to the subject’s termination, Barring any limitations of technical proficiency or of equipment in analyzing and identifying the root cause of the subject’s death.

Axiom: There exists some absolute minimum number of cells that may be terminated in any complex organism whereby such cells may be scientifically established to be the root and only cause of death of the subject organism with no pre-mortem adverse effects to other cells in the subject. Cells that meet these criteria are candidates for the theorized entanglement cells and the collection has a high probability of including some or all of the subject’s proposed entanglement cells.

Practical Test: Perform controlled experiments using approved subjects, i.e. fruit flies, to terminate the minimal number of cells per specimen to conclusively induce death of the test subject. Carefully repeat and document the number and location of target cells per subject for each scientifically substantiated successful sample. Repeatability per species is mandatory as the specifics may vary from species to species or subject to subject. In qualifying samples the cells that are the root cause of death must be gradually minimized and physically isolated. Cellular damage must be limited to only the target cells for a duration beginning at the time of the target cells death up to and including the time of confirmed subject death. In other words, for a successful trial no cells in the subject other than the target cells may be adversely physically affected pre-mortem.


Edited by tonylang, 26 October 2017 - 03:11 PM.


#13 tonylang

tonylang

    Curious

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 08:49 AM

Unfamiliar though it can be, only physics describes your presence in whatever environment one finds ones self. The question is; what are the actual physics that mediates how you instantiate on any particular randomly emerged planet among the untold number of planets that happen to be viable for life regardless of the distance between them, that can exist either naturally or artificially (ergo; A Mars colony)?

 

You were born to an existing species on this planet just a few decades ago. After you’re done here the same physics demands repeatability and will operate similarly again whether on earth, if it still exists and viable, or elsewhere. Clearly neither Earth nor any species on it is permanent (ergo the scenario). Therefore science demands that other viable instances of planet and species must circumstantially fulfill the same requirements in your future. To doubt this is to be Earth and human centric (ergo; religious). This natural mechanism must be non-local because planets and species are local but can emerge anywhere in space-time. Spooky as it may be, this mobility of individuality demands an empirical scientifically describable mechanism ergo:Physics.