Fundamental or nearly fundamental energy and the origin of Intelligence?

[Dennis Tate]

But your opinion is, to an egregious extent, uninformed.

This forum has been around since 2000 or so......
when these discussions are read again by others a decade or so from now.......
you may be surprised who is by then known to be less than so well informed.

 

[Dywyddyr]

This forum has been around since 2000 or so......
when these discussions are read again by others a decade or so from now.......
you may be surprised who is by then known to be less than so well informed.

Only if the forum switches completely to woo-mongers and believers would I be surprised. They're the only ones that will lend you any credence.
Fortunately those posters who know, and respect, science (and this is, nominally, a science forum) won't be taken in by the nonsense you espouse.

 

[DaveC426913]

This forum has been around since 2000 or so......
when these discussions are read again by others a decade or so from now.......
you may be surprised who is by then known to be less than so well informed.

Yes, you're not the first to dream that you will be vindicated some time in the future, when world is ready for your advanced thinking. Write4U has been fantasizing that for years.

 

[Write4U]

Outside the brain there is no known medium that is able to generate controlled hallucinations as Anil Seth posits.
Wait, there is such a thing as a "fata morgana", but that phenomenon is well understood and has nothing to do with conscious sentience.

Maybe so, but that image is not a fata morgana (despite the almanac caption.) It is a false horizon.

Thanks for the correction on the nature of the "illusion".

 

[Write4U]

Yes, you're not the first to dream that you will be vindicated some time in the future, when world is ready for your advanced thinking. Write4U has been fantasizing that for years.

And justly so. I make no claims about having any part in the discovery of these natural phenomona, I merely draw attention to these burgeoning areas of scientific inquiry.

And our current vaccinations are based on bacterial and viral "quorum sensing", as are areas of robotics.
"Microtubule" research is expanding at an exponential . ORCH OR and IIT are very much in current research in neuro science

Abstract

To study the effect of various factors on the microtubule system, one of the main cytoskeletal elements in the cell, which organizes the intracellular transport of different organelles and is necessary for mitosis and meiosis, a computer model of this system is created. Using a stochastic approach, the model describes the microtubule assembly/disassembly as a set of chemical reactions with certain rate constants.

Microtubules are visualized in the computer program field, which makes the model vivid. The program imitates the dynamics and structure of the microtubule system with high reliability. The parameters calculated by the model correlate with the corresponding parameters of microtubules in living cells. This approach to modeling microtubules and similar systems continues to be developed so that the models would better describe living systems and the effect of a still broader range of factors could be studied.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0006350906050186

A artificial computer based on MT principles would be called an Artificial Intelligence. In nature that would be called Natural "Intelligence"

p.s. anyone who wants to know more about MT, do refer to;
Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

p.s. It is still relegated to the sub-forum "pseudoscience", but I am confident there will come a time it will be recognized as an important area of serious scientific research. And I suspect that time is very near. There are now thousand of researchers and formal papers on the function and importance of MT in the world of Eukaryotic organisms.

 

[DaveC426913]

"Microtubule" research is expanding at an exponential . ORCH OR and IIT are very much in current research in neuro science

Reported as spamming. Please review your Moderator warnings.

 

[Write4U]

Bye bye.........

 

[DaveC426913]

Bye bye.........

Whew! Finally.

:Fighting misinformation one thread at a time:

 

[Dennis Tate]

Yes, you're not the first to dream that you will be vindicated some time in the future, when world is ready for your advanced thinking. Write4U has been fantasizing that for years.

Based on my first reading of this article......
I am even rather hopeful that there is a paragraph or two in here that I can use later on........
maybe?????

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/einsteins-greatest-blunder/

Einstein's Greatest Blunder?
He abandoned the idea of a static, nonexpanding universe in 1929—but some physicists are beginning to reconsider it

• By Cormac O'Raifeartaigh on February 21, 2017

The Einstein World

In his seminal Cosmological Considerations paper of 1917, Einstein showed that general relativity could indeed give a consistent model of the static universe. However, two assumptions were necessary. First, the universe was of closed spatial geometry (like a three-dimensional sphere) and had no beginning or end in time. Second, a consistent solution necessitated the introduction of a new term to the field equations of relativity.

 

[river]

Based on my first reading of this article......
I am even rather hopeful that there is a paragraph or two in here that I can use later on........
maybe?????

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/einsteins-greatest-blunder/

Einstein's Greatest Blunder?
He abandoned the idea of a static, nonexpanding universe in 1929—but some physicists are beginning to reconsider it

• By Cormac O'Raifeartaigh on February 21, 2017

The evidence of an expanding Universe was really strong , at the time .

Now some are beginning to question this .

 

[Dennis Tate]

The evidence of an expanding Universe was really strong , at the time .

Now some are beginning to question this .

Thank you for this....... I honestly did not know that this was happening?!

Wow?????!!!!

I tend to lean away from the idea of a "static universe/ Multiverse" but my reasoning is based on philosophy and parapsychology and pseudoscience?!

If you are really bored and wanted to research "18 Planes of Existence, Rabbi Nachman" you would hit one of the articles that has me leaning toward Bosonic String Theory as opposed to M-Theory.

 

[river]

The expansion of space is fundamentally by the magnetic field . And the magnetic field is based on , the physical .

No magnetic field can exist , without the physical .

 

[river]

The Greater the Energy , Galaxies , Quasars etc . Heat . The larger the magnetic field is .

 

[Dennis Tate]

And justly so. I make no claims about having any part in the discovery of these natural phenomona, I merely draw attention to these burgeoning areas of scientific inquiry.

And our current vaccinations are based on bacterial and viral "quorum sensing", as are areas of robotics.
"Microtubule" research is expanding at an exponential . ORCH OR and IIT are very much in current research in neuro science

Abstract https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0006350906050186

A artificial computer based on MT principles would be called an Artificial Intelligence. In nature that would be called Natural "Intelligence"

p.s. anyone who wants to know more about MT, do refer to;
Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

p.s. It is still relegated to the sub-forum "pseudoscience", but I am confident there will come a time it will be recognized as an important area of serious scientific research. And I suspect that time is very near. There are now thousand of researchers and formal papers on the function and importance of MT in the world of Eukaryotic organisms.

Why would this post be considered spamming?

Reported as spamming. Please review your Moderator warnings.

I actually invited Write4U to this discussion that I began because I had read his other discussion and I thought that there was a possible connection??????

I personally don't have the technical jargon to explain the connection......
but I thought that the connection was likely there?????

I ran into the idea of something that sounded like microtubules in an article on String Theory that I believe I quoted in post number two on page one.

"It was not until 1920 that the idea of linking electromagnetism and
gravity resurfaced. At that time a new theory of gravitation had been proposed by Albert Einstein (1879-1955), called the general theory of relativity. It was a replacement of Newton's theory, which had stood unchallenged since 1687. Inspired by Einstein's work, a young German mathematician named Theodore Kaluza was seized by a curious idea. The theory of relativity links space an time together to form a four-dimensional space-time continuum. What would happen, mused Kaluza, if general relativity were formulated in five rather than four dimensions? This is what Kaluza did, and to everyone's astonishment it was discovered that five-dimensional gravity obeys the same laws as
four-dimensional gravity as well as Maxwell's laws for the electromagnetic field. In other words, gravitation and electromagnetism are automatically unified in five dimensions, where electromagnetism is merely a component of gravity!"

The only drawback of the theory concerns the extra dimension. Why
don't we see it? An ingenious answer was provided by Oskar Klein. A
hosepipe viewed from afar looks like a wiggly line, i.e. one- dimensional.
However, on closer inspection it can be seen as a narrow tube. It is, in fact,
two-dimensional, and what was taken to be a point on the line is actually a
little circle going around the tube. In the same way, reasoned Klein, what we normally regard as a point in three dimensional space could in reality be a little circle going around a fourth space dimension. Thus Kaluza's extra
dimension might well exist, but be impossible to detect because it is closed
(circular) and rolled up to a very small circumference. In spite of
these bizarre overtones, it seems probable that in future a "theory of everything" will make use of the idea of unseen higher dimensions."
....

Could not the idea of "microtubules" be roughly equal to the hosepipe postulated by Oskar Klein?

 

[river]

Why would this post be considered spamming?



I actually invited Write5U to this discussion that I began because I had read his other discussion and I thought that there was a possible connection??????

I personally don't have the technical jargon to explain the connection......
but I thought that the connection was likely there?????

I ran into the idea of something that sounded like microtubules in an article on String Theory that I believe I quoted in post number one or two on page one.



Could not the idea of "microtubules" be roughly equal to the hosepipe postulated by Oskar Klein?

Is microtubules thinking wrong ? Completely .

 

[Dennis Tate]

Is microtubules thinking wrong ?

It sure reminded me of the "hosepipe" idea from Oskar Klein?????

 

[Dennis Tate]

Reported as spamming. Please review your Moderator warnings.

You really smart people seem to be awfully hard on each other over what could be considered somewhat similar sounding ideas???????

 

[river]

It sure reminded me of the "hosepipe" idea from Oskar Klein?????

Why ?

 

[Write4U]

Write4U said: ↑
And justly so. I make no claims about having any part in the discovery of these natural phenomona, I merely draw attention to these burgeoning areas of scientific inquiry.

And our current vaccinations are based on bacterial and viral "quorum sensing", as are areas of robotics.
"Microtubule" research is expanding at an exponential . ORCH OR and IIT are very much in current research in neuro science

Abstract https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0006350906050186

A artificial computer based on MT principles would be called an Artificial Intelligence. In nature that would be called Natural "Intelligence"

p.s. anyone who wants to know more about MT, do refer to;
Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

p.s. It is still relegated to the sub-forum "pseudoscience", but I am confident there will come a time it will be recognized as an important area of serious scientific research. And I suspect that time is very near. There are now thousand of researchers and formal papers on the function and importance of MT in the world of Eukaryotic organisms.

Why would this post be considered spamming?

I think this may explain.

'Philosophy as bloodsport' redux

This brief piece by Norman Swartz is worth reading, or rereading. He claims that, unlike other disciplines, philosophy has a vicious streak that tends to alienate women (and no doubt lots of men), and in conference/colloquia settings leads to valuing the devastating "gotcha" point over thoughtful and helpful feedback, even if that "devastating" point looks quite innocuous after a bit of thought. I wonder whether any of you have stories of particularly bloodthirsty conference/colloquium presentations. Is it as bad now as Swartz made it out to be in 1994?

https://www.sfu.ca/~swartz/blood_sport.htm

This sport is quite prominent on this site. The above is an example.

p.s. I like your cognition of spontaneous self-assembly in nature. IMO, it is essential to the dynamics of evolutionary processes.

p.p.s. river
I never claimed that microtubules think. They process data at fundamental energy levels.
My claim is that consciousness emerges from MT (neural) networks and that this concept is supported and researched by many serious scientists, including Roger Penrose.

 

[Dennis Tate]

Why ?

I have noticed that strangely vehement arguments can occur over what looks or sounds like rather similar terminology.

Write4U is correct in post number seventy nine .... any idea that may seem to set the stage for anything resembling "philosophy" seems to scare or offend a high percentage of people

"It was not until 1920 that the idea of linking electromagnetism and
gravity resurfaced. At that time a new theory of gravitation had been proposed by Albert Einstein (1879-1955), called the general theory of relativity. It was a replacement of Newton's theory, which had stood unchallenged since 1687. Inspired by Einstein's work, a young German mathematician named Theodore Kaluza was seized by a curious idea. The theory of relativity links space an time together to form a four-dimensional space-time continuum. What would happen, mused Kaluza, if general relativity were formulated in five rather than four dimensions? This is what Kaluza did, and to everyone's astonishment it was discovered that five-dimensional gravity obeys the same laws as
four-dimensional gravity as well as Maxwell's laws for the electromagnetic field. In other words, gravitation and electromagnetism are automatically unified in five dimensions, where electromagnetism is merely a component of gravity!"

The only drawback of the theory concerns the extra dimension. Why
don't we see it? An ingenious answer was provided by Oskar Klein. A
hosepipe viewed from afar looks like a wiggly line, i.e. one- dimensional.
However, on closer inspection it can be seen as a narrow tube. It is, in fact,
two-dimensional, and what was taken to be a point on the line is actually a
little circle going around the tube. In the same way, reasoned Klein, what we normally regard as a point in three dimensional space could in reality be a little circle going around a fourth space dimension. Thus Kaluza's extra
dimension might well exist, but be impossible to detect because it is closed
(circular) and rolled up to a very small circumference. In spite of
these bizarre overtones, it seems probable that in future a "theory of everything" will make use of the idea of unseen higher dimensions."
....

"Although nature manifests four distinct forces, physicists believe that
each may be part of a smaller number of more primitive forces. At high energy, the electromagnetic and weak forces appear to merge into a single "electroweak" force. Some "grand unified theories" suggest that a further amalgamation takes place between the electroweak and strong forces at as yet unattained energies. The most ambitious unification schemes envisage an amalgamation of all four forces into a single "superforce" at ultra-high levels of energy."...

"The real burden in the next three centuries will not be the development of fancy mathematics, but the experimental testing of these ambitious theories. All current thinking about total unification assumes that the effects of linking all the forces and particles together will only become manifest at energies that are some trillion times greater than those currently attainable in particle accelerators. Probably we shall never reach such energies directly" ( A Theory of Everything" Volume 21 of "The World of Science)​