Does cosmology answer why the universe exist?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Saint, Nov 9, 2020.

  1. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Well, as long as there's intelligence of some kind maintaining the formal system and its rules and maxims for manipulating symbols.

    In the world itself, whether two whirlpools in a lake are really distinct entities (one and one) or already a set of two (one with the lake) and so on as the scene enlarges (or shrinks), depends upon perspective and the motive behind or function of a cognitive discrimination. Which, for that, includes a dedicated preference for consideration of that circumstance from a macroscopic level that doesn't stray beyond the immediate, local surface of the Earth.

    Oh, I forgot... The universe in general lacks biologically evolved intelligence and isn't an observer or doesn't produce phenomenal visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, gustatory manifestations and sensations to represent information received from other arrangements(?) of excitations transpiring in quantum fields. Nor understands anything as technical description. It just sort of "is" rather than being of an epistemological or mimetic ilk.

    Silly me.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    I like the concept of a quasi-intelligent mathematical (logical) essence to spacetime.

    To me, that apparently functional concept seems to solve so many of the existential questions that have been the cause for so much disagreement over the millenia.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,360
    Actually, a lot of animals can count, so that probably pre-dates human beings.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,045
    You might want to take your own advice.
     
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,360
    Once again, it seems that you haven't taken enough time familiarising yourself with my posts, or you would realise that your advice here is superfluous.
     
  9. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,331
    I like it when you don't post anything.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    Do you mean posts like this;

    The intelligent states. I. Group‐theoretic study and the computation of matrix elements

    Abstract
    https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.523840

    Unlike you, at least I post something and engage in productive discussion on high quality subjects.

    If my posts annoy you, I'm a happy guy. At least you take notice. Perhaps even read what I post. If not, then your opinion of my posts means squat and belong more to trolls.

    You are a post-void altogether. If you go away, no one would notice.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2021
  11. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,045
    As if that's not a completely vacuous proclamation.
     
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    No, the mathematical properties are implied in the inherent potentials of the rock, before they are applied.

    To rephrase your statement; the rock is a dense molecular pattern organized by physical process in accordance with applicable mathematical laws.

    The Deeper Roles of Mathematics in Physical Laws
    Kevin H. Knuth Departments of Physics and Informatics University at Albany (SUNY), Albany NY, USA

    “Familiarity breeds the illusion of understanding” - Anonymous

    Abstract
    Introduction
    more ........
    https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1504/1504.06686.pdf
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2021
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Dimensionless constants, cosmology, and other dark matters
    Max Tegmark,1,2 Anthony Aguirre,3 Martin J. Rees,4 and Frank Wilczek2,1 1 MIT Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA 2 Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA 3 Department of Physics, UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California 95064, USA 4 Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 OHA, United Kingdom (Received 1 December 2005; published 9 January 2006)
    http://www.nat.vu.nl/~wimu/Varying-Constants-Papers/Tegmark-PRD-DimensionlessConstants.pdf
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,360
    This is incorrect. Rocks are not patterns.

    A pattern is conceptual. A rock is a physical object.
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    Generically speaking, yes a rock is a physical object . A human is also a physical object, but it isn't a rock. And what sets these two physical objects apart? The pattern in which the molecules are arranged. Each physical object is arranged in a specific molecular pattern that defines the physical object as rock or human.

    Structure vs Pattern - What's the difference?

    https://wikidiff.com/structure/pattern#

    A rock is a physical object, i.e. a number of molecules arranged in a specific pattern. A crystal is a perfect example. Most rocks are crystalline. All matter is composed of molecules arranged in specific patterns of specific densities. Atoms are expressions of sub-atomic particles arranged in specific patterns.

    Crystal structure


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Crystal structure of table salt (sodium in purple, chloride in green)

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

    Crystal structure
    https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Crystal pattern


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    "Dense" surfaces of silica polymorphs: (a,b) "Dense cristobalite", side and top views; (c,d) "Dense surface" of quartz (001), side and top view; (e,f) "Shifted surface" of quartz (001), side and top views; (g,h) "Dense stishovite", side and top views. Blue and red balls are silicon and oxygen atoms. Purple atoms are subsurface oxygens in stishovite. Each surface has four-coordinate Si and two-coordinate O-atoms on the top, and the surface layer can be described as a honeycomb made of corner-sharing SiO 4-tetrahedra.

    https://www.researchgate.net/figure...ristobalite-side-and-top-views_fig2_326921274

    I don't know why these semantics are important in context of the narrative of a mathematical universe.
    You insist on calling a rock a physical object and I have no objection to that.
    I call a rock mathematical object, a dense molecular pattern and you reject that. Why?
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2021
  16. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,331
    Your posts are so informative.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Taking you off of ignore is such a mistake.
     
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    I think you are missing the analogy.

    I certainly did not miss you. You don't seem to have any information at all.
    Perhaps you consider what you wrote above is information. After all, you took me off ignore to write it, wow!
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,360
    I just told you. A pattern cannot be an object, or vice versa. To think that they are the same is to make a basic category error: to confuse an abstract concept with a physical object.

    I don't buy into that "narrative". You assume as true something that actually requires a demonstration. Your assumption doesn't do anything to convince me that what you believe is true. Understand?
     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    But that is the very point. The abstract concept of cause and effect does not lie in myth and mystery, it lies in mathematics.
    I believe that there is ample proof of the mathematical nature of the universe. Look around you. There are mathematical patterns all around. They are inescapable.

    And what do you believe is true? And are you able to demonstrate that what you believe is true, is true?
     
  20. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,789
    Christ, this guy's a bore.
     
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,360
    Indeed. And you keep missing it, every time.
    You have yet to establish anything of the kind.

    Cause and effect aren't mathematical concepts. They have to do with time, for starters, which is a physical concept.
    Didn't I just tell you that your assumptions are not enough to convince me? Stop telling me what you believe, over and over, and start telling me why you believe it.
    You have yet to show that those patterns are independent of human perception of them, which is vital for your thesis.

    More importantly, you have yet to show that any pattern can produce something physical (out of nothing), under any circumstance.

    I believe a lot of things are true. I hope that I could demonstrate the truth of a lot of them if required to, or at least produce some evidence that points in the direction of their being true.

    Put it this way: I try not to believe that things are true, if I have no evidence at all that they are true. How about you?
     
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    Yes I refuse to accept your narrow interpretation of the term "pattern"
    I have presented indisputable evidence that rocks, and specifically crystals are formed by the patterns which are the mathematical organizing function of different species of rocks (crystals).
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,772
    And you're a hoot.
     

Share This Page