Write4U's stream of consciousness

LOL

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The original plasma state of the universe was chaotically disordered. Chaos Theory spells it out clearly.

Chaos Theory

What is Chaos Theory?

Principles of Chaos

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It is also the foundation for evolutionary processes

Order / Disorder

https://fractalfoundation.org/resources/what-is-chaos-theory/

The Origins of the Universe: Inflation

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Inflation works as a cosmic microscope to see the quantum fluctuations in the very early Universe

And the emergent (evolving) consciousness of the mathematically deterministic processes that got us here. i.e. Science.
more... https://www.ctc.cam.ac.uk/outreach/origins/inflation_zero.php

In a mathematical universe, with sufficient resources, any dynamical activity will eventually lead to the evolution and emergence of self-organization of regular measurable patterns.

On Earth we have not yet discovered all the varieties of mathematical patterns in nature. There may be a potential infinity of complexity. But from my limited perspective, it started with an inflating singularity, an exponentially growing abstract "value" (energy?) that subsequently became inhabited by deterministically self-ordering (fractal) patterns inside the spacetime geometry. The earth itself is part of the potential expressions of evolutionary processes throughout the Universe and its (growing?) available "hospitable surface area" for life and emergent consciousness.

Consider that the 3lbs human brain alone contains more synaptic data exchange points, in close proximity, than the number of stars (solar systems) in this galaxy. Quote a nano-scale data transmission network.

I like the expression, "Wholeness and the Implicate Order". It is an "objective" conceptual mathematical model.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Talking about evolving consciousness.

The Human Brain in Numbers: A Linearly Scaled-up Primate Brain

The human brain as a special brain

more .... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776484/

Interestingly, I found a paper on a genetic mutation that might shed light on this extraordinary evolutionary "leap" in brain complexity.

Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes
Alec MacAndrew

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

more ... Conclusion

http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

I have done a cursory trace, and the timeframe for this rare beneficial mutation appears consistent with the split of Humans from our common ancestor.

What if this new single chromosome that was the sum of two merged individual parts contains the instruction for more complex brain growth, resulting in a "clever" ancestor that introduced his gene count into the general gene pool? In a relatively few generations, this split might have resulted in a small troupe leaving the forest for the plains.... etc.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Half the stuff you have posted, is with respect to Quantum /quantum fields.

QT is not deterministic.

 

They discovered this in the 1990s and did further work in the 2000s.

You are over 20 years behind,just get a decent book on Evolution/genetics.

 

It's probabilistic, but the law of "cause and effect" is already present during the inflationary epoch, no?

Thanks for the update.
And what were the results of the hypothesis that chromosome 2 was responsible for the evolutionary leap in brain power? I am eager to know!

After all, we have the normal evolutionary chronology represented in the other hominids, and chromosome 2 is associated only with humans.

Seems that 2 great coincidences suggest a connection with increased neural brain growth, the one excellence that sets us truly apart from our more conventional natural cousins, not counting cosmetic changes.

 

None of which has the remotest connexion to a mixed state in quantum mechanics.

This is senile rambling.

 

Cause and effect?
We are talking about quantum nature of one particular model of the very early universe.
This is nothing to do with "cause and effect."

 

Explain how a "quantum field" is not chaotic and how self-forming patterns within that field are not the result of "cause and effect" .

And I believe that this applies generally to all possible "models" of the very early universe.

Self-organization is a result of cause and effect. And recurring self-organization evolves via mathematical principles.

 

No.

 

Are you going to tell me self-organization evolves via physical principles?

principles of physical science

The development of quantitative science

https://www.britannica.com/science/principles-of-physical-science.

Scientific law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law#

 

You want me to explain why your conclusions are nonsense?
I have already explained why your posts are nonsense.

 

"What you believe" about pretty much everything you post, is either well documented science and you are restating it with pastes or misrepresenting it.

Usually a mixture.

 

No, you haven't explained why you believe my post are nonsense. You state only that they are nonsense.
I want you to explain why you are right and I spout nonsense.

I could tell you, that you are spouting nonsense without telling you why, and where would that get us?

Does the quoted science in support of my posts not indicate that my conclusions have some foundation in science? If my interpretation is wrong, you have failed to indicate exactly where and how it is wrong. You leave very little room for explanations, except for insisting on a "teary-eyed" apology for being stupid.

Why am I still waiting for an explanation (preferably with an example) where I am misrepresenting science.

You can be a teacher or a critic. I admire teachers, I loathe critics.

That is precisely why I accompany my (condensed) posts with quotes from Science, to avoid any possible misunderstandings.

Alas, even my quoted sciences are considered "tainted" by my pen. "Fruit from a poisoned tree"?

 

I gave you a chance my friend and you did not take it.
No more engagements.
You post something wrong I will correct it where I can for the benefit of you and observers, advice from Exchemist.
It's best this way.

 

And I will challenge you on the specific issue you are claiming to be "debating".

 

I'm not debating anything just correcting when I know.

 

I suggest you go back over previous conversations about where I offered information on STEM.

 

This post of yours illustrates the point perfectly. We have made clear we are not going to "debate" anything with you, because you do not listen to anything people say.

And yet here you are, referring to us "debating", thereby showing that.......you do not listen. QED.

 

Just to clarify Write4u, in case you Google QED and start pasting Feynman diagrams.

This QED is not a quantum acronym reference.
This is the Latin saying meaning "it has been demonstrated."

Quod erat demonstradum.