Jump to content
Science Forums

How Does Individual Life 'you' Populate This Universe?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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.com/threads/entropy-vs-anti-en

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, t

I am not so sure about that.  Whoever or more likely whatever is posting this has not responded in any way to any of the comments made by myself or others over the last two years.  I assume it is some

Posted Images

16 minutes ago, write4u said:

And who is the sentient observer?  The aggregate or the individual?

The significant conclusion being proposed is that individuality brings no sentience, nor consciousness, no awareness, no intelligence, no senses, only ones temporary positions in space time. Such advanced features are only emergent features of complex hosts, species. NASA is not looking for people, fish, insects or any multicellular organism on Mars or in Venuses' atmosphere, but they are nonetheless looking for life. Nature implements no significant distinction between one viable host form and another. What can evolve may, and such viable hosts become candidates to instantiate any individual position of view. You are made distinct on earth and throughout nature writ large, from every other individual by your unique degrees of freedom of the universal quantum entanglement spectrum (QEF). In each lifetime, ones' QEF is instantiated, or tuned if you will, by your EM within your EC withn your gestating viable host form to establish your presence as a target for whatever senses and capabilities your particular viable host defines whether single or multicellular .

Everywhere throughout nature, the living cell, or its equivalent, is life and so is your pet poodle, as are you and all else that is alive. The greatest challenge of this topic is to realize what aspect of being is necessarily present in a single cell as well as in all other forms of life. Hence, we may dismiss consciousness, self-awareness, sentience, intelligence etc. by most modern scientific definitions. When humanity understands this we would have discovered the natural entangled state and the position of view.

The entanglement spectrum is part of nature. It is known to exist by modern science. It is being harnessed for use in technologies which may become available to you and me in the near future. However, long before that, perhaps even before the big-bang, nature has implemented entanglement for, among other things, the implementation of individuality in living entities.

Think of it this way...Essentially, you have or own a part of the QE spectrum. This part, your QEF is all yours and it will always belong to you. Don't panic this is not a mystical statement; it is a scientifically plausible premise. It is as if your individuality was defined by a unique band of FM-frequency on the electromagnetic spectrum (EMF). Any host (radio) that tuned in your EMF would instantiate you, that is to say, establish your being, your position of view (POV), your presence as a solution of state in this space-time, thereby tethering you to this particular host (radio/body). Dispense with any notion of personality, or behavior or memories or such of past instantiations (lives). These all extinguished along with any former hosts you may have had. The monogamy of entanglement is the property of the QE spectrum which maintains individuality. For interested readers I recommend that you research the general concept of; monogamy of entanglement;

http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0310037

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1867

In nature, it is the QE spectrum that assumes this role. Your QEF is an aspect or degree-of-freedom of the QE spectrum (similar to frequency) and is relativistically unconstrained (does not need comets or spacecraft to lumber through space-time) and implements your individuality in any viable form that emerges anywhere in this universe. This is essentially a form of coherent state information transference or natural teleportation see the links below for these general concepts.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v518/n7540/full/nature14246.html

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1409/1409.7769.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2021 at 10:04 AM, tonylang said:

The greatest challenge of this topic is to realize what aspect of being is necessarily present in a single cell as well as in all other forms of life. Hence, we may dismiss consciousness, self-awareness, sentience, intelligence etc. by most modern scientific definitions. When humanity understands this we would have discovered the natural entangled state and the position of view.

I like the idea of EM frequencies as information carriers. However, in order to process the information there must be a translating mechanism.

Here is where I really like Max Tegmark's hypothesis of physical patterns which respond to specific frequencies and produce an experiential physical response. There is no molecular difference between a live beetle and a dead beetle, only the way the molecules are arranged and interact with each other (or not).

And here is where I like the concept of ORCH OR (or IIT) which employs a fundamental but extremely efficient information transport system contained in the microtubule network.  The fact that this system functions at micro scales and is able to respond to the most subtle frequency distribution, I really believe the answers to the "hard" question must lie at this level and is obviously already present in living organisms on earth. 

If there was a truly pervasive abstract elan vital, why then is life so rare and reserved for planets with very specific ecological properties?  The very presence of natural selectiveness suggests that only specific organizational biomes (complex biological patterns) allow for emergent dynamical life forms and that the guiding equations of these patterns are mathematical in essence, which are able to respond reliably to mathematically valued information.

IMO, mathematics are an essential component of a universe which consists by dynamical interaction of specific values via mathematical functions, where dynamical expressions are guided by inherent potentials of matter. 

Value Input <--- > Mathematical Function <----> Value Output

Edited by write4u
Link to post
Share on other sites

The thought experiment in the original post of this thread "The LINE Scenario; Earth is gone..." is meant to challenge ones Earth and human centric mentality. It is meant to guide nimble minds to realize what is empirically necessary to define and implement life and individuality throughout this vast universe and in nature writ large. The LINE scenario forces one to acknowledge that in this accelerating, expanding, Higgs constrained universe, the vast distances separating viable habitats for life cannot be bridged by matter or by electormagnitism or by any classically mediated phenomenon.

How you arrived on Earth is also how you will arrive on ECO-2. The LINE scenario forces us to realize first and foremost that your presence in this and in any viable ecosystem in this universe can only be non-locally instantiated. Mass-energy constraints dictate that individual instantiation, ones’ presence in life, cannot be rendered universally mobile by the local collections of baryonic atoms that define whichever ecosystem or host form you happen to find oneself in. This universally ubiquitous non-local implementation via natural entanglement does not lessen or enhance the probability of the emergence of viable ecosystems or the evolution of its living hosts. Natural entanglement is agnostic to the particular local implementation, evolved or not, of any viable hosts for life that may emerge. Most are not able or willing to think in these terms but that is as it will be. Progress by mortality means these ideas will be more easily accepted by these same individuals early in their future instantiations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are looking for an elan vital, an abstract force apart from what is know n about the universe. 

IMO, there isn't any. Biochemistry (a specific pattern) is "required" for dynamical ecology to emerge and when there is sufficient dynamical ecology (specific patterns), life becomes a necessary emergent result.

H and O are required for H2O to self-assemble into a pattern with emergent qualities. When there is sufficient H2O the pattern must necessarily emerge as a solid (ice), a liquid (water), or a vapor (gas), emergent properties which are not inherent in individual H or O atoms, but are dependent on the molecular patterns influenced by exterior conditions such as temperature.

Elan vital is contained in the four fundamental forces  

Quote

 

Fundamental force, also called fundamental interaction, in physics, any of the four basic forces—gravitational, electromagnetic, strong, and weak—that govern how objects or particles interact and how certain particles decay. All the known forces of nature can be traced to these fundamental forces.

Ordered from strongest to weakest, the forces are 1) the strong nuclear force, 2) the electromagnetic force, 3) the weak nuclear force, and 4) gravity.

 

https://wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2013/05/22/why-is-gravity-the-strongest-force/

Therefore I do like Tegmark's conceptualization that matter arranged in specific patterns according to these fundamental forces, will exhibit emergent qualities of which Life is but one expression, and all of it's ingredients are already present in localized ecological systems.

Expressions of dynamical energy, growth, division, chirality, predation, aging, conversion,  are present in near infinite variety caused by one or several of fundamental universal forces in concert. It's when these natural expression are combined, one specific form of dynamism emerges among others, which we have dubbed "Life". 

But there is no special abstract impetus that imparts life in matter apart from what is known to exist. It isn't "necessary".

A lump of coal is not alive, even as it contains massive amounts of carbon, one of the most versatile atoms present in complex bio-molecular patterns. Carbon must become part of a dynamical system of many molecules, before it becomes part of a living dynamical system.

Personally, I still consider the microtubule network as a fundamentally "required" EM processing system (patterns) for dynamical (lifelike) expression in even relatively simple complex organisms, such as bacteria.

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001213#

Edited by write4u
Link to post
Share on other sites

The one statement Tegmark made which struck me as a possible falsification of elan vital  is contained in his observation that if life and consciousness are an emergent phenomena of the physical world, they can be analyzed and codified, i.e. the "easy" part.

OTOH, if there is an extraneous abstract force that alters the normal physical interactions, then that force would be a measurable quantity, i.e. part of physics.

So, if no anomalies are observable in the emergence and evolution of life and consciousness, it must be due to the absence of a measurable external "additional" guiding equation. 

Does this not suggest that all the necessary constituent parts are already present and no additional abstract force is required for Life to emerge as another expression of dynamical self-referential physical existence, under favorable ecological conditions?

Edited by write4u
Link to post
Share on other sites

Max's ideas or indeed any plausible description of local phenomena or conditions or of universal physics that is in fact viable for the implementation of living host forms is welcomed by the LINE hypothesis.

However, what is missing in all this is you. What is necessary to instantiate each instance of your specific presence here and elsewhere. The questions addressed by the LINE hypothesis is; What is it that most fundamentally defines you in nature? Not ones current species. How is that similar or different from what defines me whether I am instantiated on earth along with you or far away on ECO-2? Can we naturally swap places? The Copernican principle dictates that the answer is yes. Known physics suggests that natural entanglement mediates this universal mobility of individuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tonylang said:

What is it that most fundamentally defines you in nature?

What defines anything in nature?  A dynamic pattern of biological values and orderly functions, expressed as what humans have named "living" organisms.

IMO, David Bohm invented the most exact terminology in his paper "wholeness and the implicate order".

Our DNA is a mathematical code of cellular potential (implicate order). Microtubules are the biological translating machines which explicate the inherent biological potential into a living organisms, an individual (wholeness).

Microtubules in Bacteria: Ancient Tubulins Build a Five-Protofilament Homolog of the Eukaryotic Cytoskeleton

  • Published: December 6, 2011

Abstract

 

Quote

Microtubules play crucial roles in cytokinesis, transport, and motility, and are therefore superb targets for anti-cancer drugs. All tubulins evolved from a common ancestor they share with the distantly related bacterial cell division protein FtsZ, but while eukaryotic tubulins evolved into highly conserved microtubule-forming heterodimers, bacterial FtsZ presumably continued to function as single homopolymeric protofilaments as it does today. Microtubules have not previously been found in bacteria, and we lack insight into their evolution from the tubulin/FtsZ ancestor. Using electron cryomicroscopy, here we show that the tubulin homologs BtubA and BtubB form microtubules in bacteria and suggest these be referred to as “bacterial microtubules” (bMTs). bMTs share important features with their eukaryotic counterparts, such as straight protofilaments and similar protofilament interactions. bMTs are composed of only five protofilaments, however, instead of the 13 typical in eukaryotes. These and other results suggest that rather than being derived from modern eukaryotic tubulin, BtubA and BtubB arose from early tubulin intermediates that formed small microtubules. Since we show that bacterial microtubules can be produced in abundance in vitro without chaperones, they should be useful tools for tubulin research and drug screening.

Author Summary

Quote

Bacteria are generally distinguished from the cells of fungi, plants, and animals (eukaryotes) not only by their much smaller size but also by the absence of certain subcellular structures such as nuclei, internal organelles, and microtubules. Using state-of-the-art microscopy, we demonstrate here that microtubules do exist in some bacteria. These bacterial microtubules are built from proteins that are closely related to the microtubule proteins in eukaryotes. Bacterial microtubules are smaller in diameter than their counterparts in eukaryotic cells but have the same basic architecture. We propose that bacterial microtubules represent primordial structures that preceded eukaryotic microtubules evolutionarily. Because bacterial microtubules can be produced and handled in the lab more easily than their eukaryotic counterparts, they may become useful tools for microtubule research and anti-cancer drug screening.

journal.pbio.1001213.g001 Figure 2

Figure 3 Figure 4

Figure 5Figure 6

Figure 7

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001213#

Edited by write4u
Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize that my evolutionary perspective is simplistic, but IMO that is exactly what it needs to be. The Universe started in Chaos, from chaos emerged order (entanglement?)

I ask what came first Chaos or Entanglement? Did Entanglement emerge from Chaos or is it the other way around?

Edited by write4u
Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming such 'dynamic patterns' can arise where possible throughout this universe, without travel , ergo is not Higgs constrained, what prevents the duplication of your 'dynamic pattern'? Such duplication would simultaneously instantiate multiples of you in this universe ? How is your dynamic pattern monogamistic throughout space-time. If you agree that only one of you can exist at one time then this pattern must enforce only a singleton instance of you. This is the role of death, to live you must first not be alive, because there can be only one of you in existence at a time. This is the monogamy of individuality. The life instantiating mechanism must engender these properties. In known physics it is only entanglement that is both monogamistic and also is not Higgs constrained and is therefore able to mediate the universal mobility of individuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2021 at 9:43 AM, tonylang said:

 Such duplication would simultaneously instantiate multiples of you in this universe ?

All biological organism (species) are multiples of each other, with minor variations. Patterns in a dynamical environment can only approximate the ideal form as ordered by natural selection of local conditions.

Hence the fractality of the universe proposed in CDT (causal dynamical triangulation) 

CDT

Introduction

Quote

Near the Planck scale, the structure of spacetime itself is supposed to be constantly changing due to quantum fluctuations and topological fluctuations. CDT theory uses a triangulation process which varies dynamically and follows deterministic rules, to map out how this can evolve into dimensional spaces similar to that of our universe.

Quote

The results of researchers suggest that this is a good way to model the early universe[citation needed], and describe its evolution. Using a structure called a simplex, it divides spacetime into tiny triangular sections. A simplex is the multidimensional analogue of a triangle [2-simplex]; a 3-simplex is usually called a tetrahedron, while the 4-simplex, which is the basic building block in this theory, is also known as the pentachoron. Each simplex is geometrically flat, but simplices can be "glued" together in a variety of ways to create curved spacetimes, where previous attempts at triangulation of quantum spaces have produced jumbled universes with far too many dimensions, or minimal universes with too few.

Quote

CDT avoids this problem by allowing only those configurations in which the timelines of all joined edges of simplices agree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation

Edited by write4u
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, write4u said:

All biological organism (species) are multiples of each other, with minor variations. Patterns in a dynamical environment can only approximate the ideal form as ordered by natural selection of local conditions.

Hence the fractality of the universe proposed in CDT (causal dynamical triangulation

I will let this speak for itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2021 at 9:43 AM, tonylang said:

Assuming such 'dynamic patterns' can arise where possible throughout this universe, without travel , ergo is not Higgs constrained, what prevents the duplication of your 'dynamic pattern'?

AFAIK a wave is a dynamic pattern which is not Higgs constrained. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tonylang said:

I will let this speak for itself.

That's not very enlightning. Do you disagree and if so, why?

If I understand entanglement, if all particles (quanta) were entangled we'd have two identical universes, one an exact mirror image of the other even in a dynamical environment.

I see a difference between entanglement which is invariable, and connectedness which is variable, and allows for variation while being related in essence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, write4u said:

AFAIK a wave is a dynamic pattern which is not Higgs constrained

A wave is very much Higgs constrained. The Higgs field not only induces relativistic mass to waves of baryonic particles but also informs the maximum universal speed limit which is the speed of waves of massless bosons like the photon (light). The necessary foundation needed to interrogate ideas such as the LINE hypothesis or Max's ideas or relativity and evolution requires a strong prerequisite grounding in the sciences, physics and cosmology by any means. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Superposition vs Entanglement.

 

The LINE hypothesis proposes that a particle in a state of superposition is a single particle in this space-time entangled to metamatter in the Hilbert-space called the metaverse. In superposition, the particles’ degrees of freedom (DOF) are continuously instantaneously shared or teleported between it and its entangled metamatter. This sharing manifests in this space-time as the particle existing in multiple states simultaneously. Collapse of any superposition state involves disentanglement of the particle from its entangled metamatter via foreign infiltrations called measurement or observation. This disentanglement from metamatter leaves the particle in this space-time in only one of the possible shared states and the metamatter in some metaverse version of the remaining state.

 

Like natures perfect slot machine, collapsed particle states are individualized and utterly unpredictable or random, hence does not collectively scale to produce macroscopic effects such as duplication or to a cat being simultaneously dead and alive. So, although such particles may compose a cat in this space-time, there can be no corresponding metamatter cat in the metaverse. This is because metamatter does not operate by the same or even similar laws of physics as the physics of any verse that it may produce.  What particles in any verse are doing is completely distinct from what its entangled metamatter is doing within the metaverse. The shared states involved in superposition are those states that remain uninvolved, unobserved, ergo; coherent, within its universe and so are available for entanglement with similarly available metamatter.

 

Entanglement between multiple particles in this space-time involves entanglement by those same particles with the same, in-common particles of metamatter simultaneously. In so doing, mutually entangled particles in this space-time also share available coherent states simultaneously and instantaneously with each other and thereby are in a superposition of those states. In this universe, when any one of the entangled particles decoherer or are measured, one of the shared DOF states randomly remains with one particle and the other possible state, by default remains with the remaining particle. The state of in-common entangled metamatter in any of these scenarios is unknowable to any emergent verse. Consequently, entanglement in this universe may involve each particle being entangled with multiple metamatter particles which are also entangled with each other within the metaverse. Hence, upon the decoherence or measurement of one entangled particle in this universe, the accompanying state held in matamatter is instantaneously teleported to the other participating particle in this universe. Alternatively, both particles may be simultaneously entangled to the same single metamatter particle for the duration of the entangled state. When one entangled particle is collapsed, it instantiates only one of the possible states as it disconnects from its entangled metamatter. The remaining state is instantaneously transmitted to the other participating particle. This disentanglement is known as the quantum flip. It is these interactions that instantiate the individual position of view (POV) in this space-time.

 

What then is the essential behavior or involvement between metamatter particles within the metaverse? What manifestations can such unfamiliar particles imbue that could give rise to the pivotal emergent state, that is a temporary but recurring claim on territory, a single point in space-time, shrouded and protected for a time by any viable host form that can emerge within any viable habitat, the state known as individuality? One clear advantage that we have in making such determinations is, while we live, we are each in possession of one exhibit of evidence of the product of the metaverse. It is ones’ position of view (POV) that defines ones’ individuality. The proper evaluation of this exhibit of evidence is severely clouded by the very prominent host form to which the POV is instantiated in any life, and yet in every moment of life one is experiencing this product of the metaverse. The key lies in discovering the entanglement  cell (EC) and molecule (EM).

 

Life is one of the strangest, most unforeseeable emergent phenomena we know of. This is because individuality is most fundamentally not a product of this universe but of the metaverse. Like a fragile bubble on the surface of a body of water, the POV is a delicate emergent confluence of different states of information forming a temporary alliance from which we may experience life, for better or for worst. What details can be gleaned from this rarefied perspective in nature? The more we can know the better. The intimately involved aspects and DOF of the metaverse exposed by individuality may become of some practical use. Metamatter satellites and detection of the QEF for example, as well as the deliberate instantiation of individual POV will be of great interest once accepted.  Beyond these only time and intensive research will tell.

Edited by tonylang
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...