161–170 of 404 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now you're getting it.
I am, but this is just not what those words mean, to anyone.
"Biologists cannot even agree on a unique definition of life itself; but that hasn’t stopped them from unraveling aspects of the cell, the double helix, photosynthesis, enzymes and a host of other living phenomena"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How did that lump of plutonium become a lump? That part wasn’t natural.
"How did that lump of plutonium become a lump? That part wasn’t natural." Allow me to become a little philosophical but since human beings which are product of nature made plutonium, isn't the making of plutonium natural too? I mean everything that is happening in this universe is natural! I know the general usage of the words "artificial" for human-made and "natural" for everything else. But when we are talking at t…
Easily answered:
* We don't know how consciousness comes into being, indeed we can't rigorously define it or unambiguously identify its presence or absence.
* We believe we have it, but we aren't sure whether other animals and/or objects possess it.
* Therefore, based on Occam's razor, we may provisionally assume that all matter possesses some degree of consciousness -- this is the simplest assumption.
* The alternative would be to argue for a consciousness exceptionalism in "life" forms for which there is no evidence and many counterarguments.
* Therefore it follows that ... wait for it ... life is not a special state of matter or energy.
* Therefore the emergence of life doesn't represent a phase transition that confronts physical laws or requires an explanation.Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's almost teleological. Many people have ruled out God, but still want there to be purpose or direction.
Thats exactly what it is i think. Theyre unable to find meaning in the real world and need an equally mystical hand waivey narrative
All theories are just ideas or musings in the beginning. Until they are further defined, researched and proven.
Things like the earth circling the sun, sounded crazy at first. It also went against god.
If all independent 'thoughts' are diss-allowed because only "god" can provide the answers, then we'd still be living in trees wondering why the sun comes up.
How do you think we have anything, without someone, at some point, asking 'how does this work?'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok. What's an example of something low but non-zero on the spectrum of life? I'm having trouble thinking of one that isn't more properly "life-like".
Viruses? New understandings of mega-viruses have let us to believe that the line is really quite fuzzy. Some of these larger viruses have double stranded DNA, some have ribosome like functions, some have ERs, etc. Kinda like a cell, but missing random parts that make them truly alive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandoravirus
"Is the emergence of life an expected phase transition in the evolving universe? (arxiv.org)" Easily answered: * We don't know how consciousness comes into being, indeed we can't rigorously define it or unambiguously identify its presence or absence. * We believe we have it, but we aren't sure whether other animals and/or objects possess it. * Therefore, based on Occam's razor, we may provisionally assume that all ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How did that lump of plutonium become a lump? That part wasn’t natural.
"How did that lump of plutonium become a lump? That part wasn’t natural." Allow me to become a little philosophical but since human beings which are product of nature made plutonium, isn't the making of plutonium natural too? I mean everything that is happening in this universe is natural! I know the general usage of the words "artificial" for human-made and "natural" for everything else. But when we are talking at t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Check out the work of Ilya Prigogine - he won a Nobel prize in the 70's for his work on self-organizing complexity. There is a selection force in the universe for increasing complexity, being driven by the dissipation of energy. When you have systems in non-equilibrium, there is a strong pressure to explore the possibility space to find ever more efficient ways to dissipate energy. A bacteria the size of a grain of s…
Very interesting. Do you have an intuition for why there is selection pressure towards energy dissipation?
Energy MUST flow. No matter how energy is captured and stored, there is a pressure for it to continue moving.
The movement of energy means that matter is always moving, and new configurations are always being "discovered."
Some configurations allow for energy to flow more easily, and when one of those configurations is "discovered" the movement of energy keeps that configuration in place. I think it's literally a strange attractor from chaos theory.
Areas of stable energy flow create correlations across space time that allow for more complex correlations to emerge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Check out the work of Ilya Prigogine - he won a Nobel prize in the 70's for his work on self-organizing complexity. There is a selection force in the universe for increasing complexity, being driven by the dissipation of energy. When you have systems in non-equilibrium, there is a strong pressure to explore the possibility space to find ever more efficient ways to dissipate energy. A bacteria the size of a grain of s…
So we're all agents of Entropy, spinning our circles until we die all in the service of heat death? I don't like it!