Without being able to know the origin of a universe, one can’t know what level of deterministic action was responsible for it’s creation. For example if a planet like Mars was terraformed into a warm, wet self sustaining environment, and a visitor was unaware of the technical intervention and transformation, they might conclude the planet was in a natural state. We are examples of the universe using intelligence to further its creation, so it’s likely that intelligence is used in greater capacity elsewhere in the universe as well. Intelligence is just one of many deterministic processes at play in a given universe.
Are you suggesting there is other life in the universe? I agree. Are you suggesting this other life may be more evolved than humans? I agree. Are you suggesting that alien lifeforms might be able to terra-form? I agree.
But now you are no longer talking about God, that supernatural creature which dwells outside of the universe altogether and made LIGHT on command, before he created the universe itself. That's not Terra-forming, that's Universe-forming.
Deterministic randomness is a contradiction of terms. If something is determined, it isn’t random
If I said random it's wrong. Rather than
linear determinism, the term I was thinking of is "
deterministic chaos"
This behavior is known as
deterministic chaos, or simply
chaos.
The theory was summarized by Edward Lorenz
Chaos theory has applications in several disciplines, including
meteorology, anthropology,
[11][12]sociology,
physics,
[13]environmental science,
computer science,
engineering,
economics,
biology,
ecology, and
philosophy. The theory formed the basis for such fields of study as
complex dynamical systems,
edge of chaos theory, and
self-assembly processes
Correction, in it’s complete state of revelation, it demonstrates a detailed deterministic process, not a random one
No, because there were no cakes. There was only some goo, a random bunch of compound chemicals, many thousands of them.
Watch the Hazen clip, he shows the result of the Miller-Urey experiment and comments on the results.
There’s not a shred of evidence to support the notion of multiple universes, but it dosn’t make the speculation of such unreasonable
Aaah, but there is evidence that would support the notion of a multiverse. That's why it was proposed in the first place. Evidence that pointed to a possible multi-verse. At one time we thought there were just two dimensions, but observation suggested the existence of a third dimension. Still later we attached time to the fabric of space. This is all very mathematical.
Without being able to know the origin of a universe, one can’t know what level of deterministic action was responsible for it’s creation. For example if a planet like Mars was terraformed into a warm, wet self sustaining environment, and a visitor was unaware of the technical intervention and transformation, they might conclude the planet was in a natural state.
Alas Mars is in the exact state it should be from the mathematics of its position within the solar system. If it were wet, then there might be cause for question. But it isn't. A dry Mars is not evidence of a God. It is evidence of mathematical entropy.
We are examples of the universe using intelligence to further its creation, so it’s likely that intelligence is used in greater capacity elsewhere in the universe as well. Intelligence is just one of many deterministic processes at play in a given universe.
Well, we're real close, but I see this as a purely implacable mathematical pseudo-intelligence, which is just as capable of creating what we see in a dynamic universe as a motivated designer using mathematics.
I have no reason to disagree. But we don’t know if the BB was live or Memorex. Was it a GMO seed, or the natural variety?
So your God now has retreated to before the BB? You do not dispute the hypothesis of the BB, I hope.
Every aspect of reality can be expressed mathematically, and energy is as much a part of the form and function of intelligence as any other determined aspect.
Precisely, there is nothing non-mathematical in the universe. Which means it needs no external direction, mathematics direct themselves, remember, they are deterministic. All that is required is energy.
Not that I do, but I could simply assume that the universe is a creation of an unknowable deterministic God, and it would not necessarily conflict with any other scientific truths or propositions, since the position of God would always be outside the sphere of perception.
OK, I am in total agreement. But that does not allow for a willful God who can act against the mathematics. Divine anger and punishment, other than natural calamities are unscientific and can not be expected to replace the infinite elegance of mathematics.
That’s kind of where we all truly exist. It’s where subjective meaning is assigned to experience.
I agree, personally we experience reality subjectively. However our instruments record reality objectively and that is often quite different from what we subjectively experience. After all, our emotional experiences are mere electro-chemical holographic representation in our brains. All we do is making best guesses of what we experience as reality (Anil Seth). Science relies on the recorded evidence, not the speculative experiential evidence.
Look at the speculation that our reality is just a simulation, where an outside intelligence(God, or future game developer) has engineered our computational existence. There’s no shortage of reasoned possibilities to explain reality.
Kinda like Tegmark's mathematical universe. It does not require a designer. Mathematical values and functions are all that is required for creating a dynamic 3D physical universe.
The program consists of cosmic constants, natural mathematical potentials enfolded in the geometry of spacetime
Consider chemical "quorum sensing", a purely mathematical chemical ability for perfoming work. Bacterial quorum sensing is outside our range of our perception. Yet it is part of our organic multicellular Eukariotic system. A mathematical pattern which brings variety to every rganic expression in nature.
All notions of reality beyond the scope of our perception are going to be a subjective form of abstraction. You think all astrophysicists share the same speculation on universal origins?
No, but remarkably they all express a sense of discovery of pre-existing mathematical patterns and orders when they probe the mathematical as well as the physical structured patterns possible in the formation of the universe.
How do you compare the relative value of various propositions unless they are given some degree of consideration? If science wasn’t constantly looking at a range of potentialities it would be a disservice to the practice.
True, but we can assign a set of a priori necessary conditions and apply Occam's Razor.
Where does a motivated anything reside? How about where it lives. The creator, God, game developer, can reasonably be assumed to be beyond our perception, just like a theoretical particle in superposition, or that same particle in a pilot wave
And there is the crux of the question. It is the assumption of a necessary motivated mathematically functioning intelligence which is the fertile ground for mystical speculation.
Where can intelligence be reasonably expected to reside? ........... Define Heaven...?
The simple answer is that a sentient intelligence is not required in mathematics. Mathematics itself is a pseudo-intelligent matrix of interacting values and functions. A purely mathematical Universe (all objects and actions are mathematical expressions), which writes its own deterministic script by evolution over time and space.
......he is a jew.
