All is physical. — PoeticUniverse
Physicalism is indeed a fairly common philosophical position among Materialists. But Quantum & Information Theories have undermined the confident assumptions of that outdated Classical worldview. My own worldview is still monistic, but the "single substance" is now invisible Information, not tangible matter. The "material" element of reality is what we see with our senses, but the "form" is only known via the sixth sense of Reason. Quantum scientists never actually see anything in the quantum realm, they infer such things as Quarks & Quantum Fields from mathematical reasoning. Even the so-called "particles" of QFT are "virtual" (i.e. potential or imaginary or Platonic forms). Of course, the quantum foundation of Reality remains under the purview of Physics. But it is so close to nothing that quantum Information theory overlaps with the concerns of Philosophy. Like poets, quantum scientists use concrete metaphors to describe their indescribable abstractions.
Physicalism is a form of ontological monism—a "one substance" view of the nature of reality as opposed to a "two-substance" (dualism) or "many-substance" (pluralism) view.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism
Aristotle analyses substance in terms of form and matter. The form is what kind of thing the object is, and the matter is what it is made of.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/substance/
Quantum Field :
In theoretical Physics, a quantum field is a metaphorical mathematical "structure", not an actual place, to allow scientist to understand ghostly things they can't see. The field is imaginary and has no physical material, but only Virtual particles that have the potential to become real.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/index.html
Quantum Philosophy :
https://theconversation.com/quantum-phi ... ity-150175
In the picture, Socrates is being given hemlock because he spoke too much nonsense about some invisible non physical goings on being so. — PoeticUniverse
Yes. And posters on this forum are still arguing about such non-physical non-sense, such as Life or Death.
Socrates spent his early years studying astronomy, geometry and other areas of sciences. ... Disappointed Socrates turned his attention to the study of the human character.
https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... d+socrates
Physics Needs Philosophy / Philosophy Needs Physics
___Carlo Rovelli, theoretical physicist
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/ob ... s-physics/
TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
God" (however you define it) is logically necessary but completely unknown? — SpaceDweller
Yes. Like the Quarks of sub-atomic theory, the First Cause is logically necessary, but known only by rational inference. Some people claim to "know" God directly & personally via meditation or prayer or revelation. But that is a Gnostic form of "knowing" (by faith) instead of the usual knowing by physical experience. Personally, I don't find those alternative methods useful, but if it works for you, who am I to denigrate your subjective knowledge.
Quarks :
any of a number of subatomic particles carrying a fractional electric charge, postulated as building blocks of the hadrons. Quarks have not been directly observed but theoretical predictions based on their existence have been confirmed experimentally.
Yes. Like the Quarks of sub-atomic theory, the First Cause is logically necessary, but known only by rational inference. Some people claim to "know" God directly & personally via meditation or prayer or revelation. But that is a Gnostic form of "knowing" (by faith) instead of the usual knowing by physical experience. Personally, I don't find those alternative methods useful, but if it works for you, who am I to denigrate your subjective knowledge.
Quarks :
any of a number of subatomic particles carrying a fractional electric charge, postulated as building blocks of the hadrons. Quarks have not been directly observed but theoretical predictions based on their existence have been confirmed experimentally.
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
This is also what doomed Decartes’ distinct mental and physical realms: they couldn’t exchange energy.
The addition of a ‘non physical’ or 'intangible' only enlarges the question to produce a regress. — PoeticUniverse
As usual, your material-mind arguments are reasonable . . . from the classical Physicalism perspective. Through that ground-glass lens, only the physical senses make sense. And that's probably how non-rational animals see their world. Fortunately for reasonable people, theoretical Philosophy, unlike empirical Science, is not limited to the 5 senses (perception) for information (useful knowledge) about the world. Instead, it enlarges the scope of investigation by using the sixth sense of Rational Inference (conception). Only a rational mind can deal with the non-physical mysteries of existence, such as the "hard problem" of Consciousness. Physicalists can't see Consciousness, because they are looking through the transparent lens of Sentience.
By that meta-physical means, we now know how Mental (Information) and Physical (Matter) can exchange energy. And I'm not talking about reductive Shannon Information (digital bits), but holistic Conscious Information (holistic semantic meaning). From that angle, the Mental & Physical realms are distinct philosophical categories, while empirical Science has no category for the Mental aspects of the world. But if Information is indeed fundamental, as some physicists now infer, then Matter & Energy can be reduced to a single universal (monistic) substance : Information -- the power to transform. Pace Descartes *1.
Thus, the modern scope of Quantum & Information physics has been enlarged to encompass both the Mental (non-physical) and Material (physical) aspects of the real world. And to eliminate the need for an infinite regress of physical worlds, to explain how our cosmic domain could be born from an "undefined", hence non-physical, mathematical point of Potential. Pace PU.
Property dualism :
It asserts that while mental states are physical in that they are caused by physical states, they are not ontologically reducible to physical states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_dualism
Physics + Math = Is Information Fundamental? :
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/i ... ndamental/
The mass-energy-information equivalence principle :
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.5123794
Energy is meta-physical Potential :
Scientists define “energy” as the ability to do work, but don't know what energy is. They assume it's an eternal causative force that existed prior to the Big Bang, along with mathematical laws. Energy is a positive or negative relationship between things, and physical Laws are limitations on the push & pull of those forces. So, all they know is what Energy does, which is to transform material objects in various ways. Energy itself is amorphous & immaterial. So if you reduce energy to its essence of information, it seems more akin to mind than matter.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html
Information transmission without energy exchange :
We show that it is possible to use a massless field in the vacuum to communicate in such a way that the signal travels arbitrarily slower than the speed of light and such that no energy is transmitted from the sender to the receiver. Instead, the receiver has to supply a signal-dependent amount of work to switch his detector on and off. Because of that, this kind of communication without energy exchange may be called "Quantum Collect Calling".
https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.3988
In mathematics, a singularity is a point at which a given mathematical object is not defined . . . . lacking differentiability or analyticity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(mathematics)
*1 Pace is Latin for “in peace,” and in footnotes it means something like “no offense intended” toward a person or source that you are contradicting.
Can fish see water?
https://www.reefsaltwateraquarium.com/w ... -water.jpg
The addition of a ‘non physical’ or 'intangible' only enlarges the question to produce a regress. — PoeticUniverse
As usual, your material-mind arguments are reasonable . . . from the classical Physicalism perspective. Through that ground-glass lens, only the physical senses make sense. And that's probably how non-rational animals see their world. Fortunately for reasonable people, theoretical Philosophy, unlike empirical Science, is not limited to the 5 senses (perception) for information (useful knowledge) about the world. Instead, it enlarges the scope of investigation by using the sixth sense of Rational Inference (conception). Only a rational mind can deal with the non-physical mysteries of existence, such as the "hard problem" of Consciousness. Physicalists can't see Consciousness, because they are looking through the transparent lens of Sentience.
By that meta-physical means, we now know how Mental (Information) and Physical (Matter) can exchange energy. And I'm not talking about reductive Shannon Information (digital bits), but holistic Conscious Information (holistic semantic meaning). From that angle, the Mental & Physical realms are distinct philosophical categories, while empirical Science has no category for the Mental aspects of the world. But if Information is indeed fundamental, as some physicists now infer, then Matter & Energy can be reduced to a single universal (monistic) substance : Information -- the power to transform. Pace Descartes *1.
Thus, the modern scope of Quantum & Information physics has been enlarged to encompass both the Mental (non-physical) and Material (physical) aspects of the real world. And to eliminate the need for an infinite regress of physical worlds, to explain how our cosmic domain could be born from an "undefined", hence non-physical, mathematical point of Potential. Pace PU.
Property dualism :
It asserts that while mental states are physical in that they are caused by physical states, they are not ontologically reducible to physical states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_dualism
Physics + Math = Is Information Fundamental? :
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/i ... ndamental/
The mass-energy-information equivalence principle :
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.5123794
Energy is meta-physical Potential :
Scientists define “energy” as the ability to do work, but don't know what energy is. They assume it's an eternal causative force that existed prior to the Big Bang, along with mathematical laws. Energy is a positive or negative relationship between things, and physical Laws are limitations on the push & pull of those forces. So, all they know is what Energy does, which is to transform material objects in various ways. Energy itself is amorphous & immaterial. So if you reduce energy to its essence of information, it seems more akin to mind than matter.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html
Information transmission without energy exchange :
We show that it is possible to use a massless field in the vacuum to communicate in such a way that the signal travels arbitrarily slower than the speed of light and such that no energy is transmitted from the sender to the receiver. Instead, the receiver has to supply a signal-dependent amount of work to switch his detector on and off. Because of that, this kind of communication without energy exchange may be called "Quantum Collect Calling".
https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.3988
In mathematics, a singularity is a point at which a given mathematical object is not defined . . . . lacking differentiability or analyticity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(mathematics)
*1 Pace is Latin for “in peace,” and in footnotes it means something like “no offense intended” toward a person or source that you are contradicting.
Can fish see water?
https://www.reefsaltwateraquarium.com/w ... -water.jpg
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
So, 'Nothing' does not challenge 'God', but the necessity of a single, simple base physical substance does, in that it required no creation. — PoeticUniverse
Yes. From your Physicalist perspective, "God" is No-Thing. But in my Enformationism view, G*D is Every-Thing, and is necessarily self-existent. Even a tower-of-turtles multiverse would have to be self-created in order to lay the foundation for the tower *1.
This physical information, to speak of it in a holistic way that you might like, can operate without a programmer and her problematic regress… — PoeticUniverse
Yes. But in my thesis G*D is both Programmer and Program, both Creator and Creation, both Sculptor and Marble. This is the holistic worldview of PanEnDeism (all in god). And it's only reasonable if ALL is omni-potential Information -- both the power-to-enform and the substance enformed ; both Mind and Matter. Similar to Spinoza's "universal substance", except updated to allow for a Big Bang beginning.
Panendeism holds that God pervades and interpenetrates every part of the universe and also extends beyond space and time,
https://religion.wikia.org/wiki/Panendeism
The Great 'IS' that is the monistic One would already have all possible realities of universes in it in a superposition, as it being Everything since what has no beginning can't have a direction inputted to it.
This is as a multi-verse, — PoeticUniverse
Yes, the omnipotential One is indeed timeless, spaceless, and super-posed. But the existence of our world implies that something transformed that omnidirectional Potential into an evolving world --- to collapse the superposition. In Quantum Physics that trigger is a measurement (technically, the decision of what to measure). No-Thing could not make such a fateful choice, but Every-Thing encompasses all possible worlds. And that essential "something" is what I call "Teleological Intention" (purpose ; design). Unfortunately, we time-bound creatures don't know the intended End of evolution. So, the term Eutaxiological may be more appropriate than "Teleological". Like the hero in the movie Tron, we don't know how the game will end, but we are motivated to win, i.e. to survive long enough to have an impact on the outcome.
Superposition is the ability of a quantum system to be in multiple states at the same time until it is measured.
Note -- Superposition of a world-creating system can be in all possible states (infinity) and all possible times (eternity) until a non-random intention is chosen. How? In Infinity/Eternity all things are possible.
Teleological :
Purpose-driven evolution, as opposed to Eutaxiological, meaning simply that evolution must have had a First Cause, even if the Final Cause (purpose) is unknown.
http://bothandblog7.enformationism.info/page12.html
Of course, in any universe that creates thinking life, such as in ours, the thinkers would wonder how such an apparently fine-tuned marvel could have happened. — PoeticUniverse
Yes. And here's how that could have happened.
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle :
“mathematical physics possesses many unique properties that are necessary prerequisites for the existence of rational information-processing and observers similar to ourselves”.
http://bothandblog7.enformationism.info/page10.html
*1 Tower of Turtles -- an infinite regress of causation
http://gnomon.enformationism.info/Images/turtles.jpg
Yes. From your Physicalist perspective, "God" is No-Thing. But in my Enformationism view, G*D is Every-Thing, and is necessarily self-existent. Even a tower-of-turtles multiverse would have to be self-created in order to lay the foundation for the tower *1.
This physical information, to speak of it in a holistic way that you might like, can operate without a programmer and her problematic regress… — PoeticUniverse
Yes. But in my thesis G*D is both Programmer and Program, both Creator and Creation, both Sculptor and Marble. This is the holistic worldview of PanEnDeism (all in god). And it's only reasonable if ALL is omni-potential Information -- both the power-to-enform and the substance enformed ; both Mind and Matter. Similar to Spinoza's "universal substance", except updated to allow for a Big Bang beginning.
Panendeism holds that God pervades and interpenetrates every part of the universe and also extends beyond space and time,
https://religion.wikia.org/wiki/Panendeism
The Great 'IS' that is the monistic One would already have all possible realities of universes in it in a superposition, as it being Everything since what has no beginning can't have a direction inputted to it.
This is as a multi-verse, — PoeticUniverse
Yes, the omnipotential One is indeed timeless, spaceless, and super-posed. But the existence of our world implies that something transformed that omnidirectional Potential into an evolving world --- to collapse the superposition. In Quantum Physics that trigger is a measurement (technically, the decision of what to measure). No-Thing could not make such a fateful choice, but Every-Thing encompasses all possible worlds. And that essential "something" is what I call "Teleological Intention" (purpose ; design). Unfortunately, we time-bound creatures don't know the intended End of evolution. So, the term Eutaxiological may be more appropriate than "Teleological". Like the hero in the movie Tron, we don't know how the game will end, but we are motivated to win, i.e. to survive long enough to have an impact on the outcome.
Superposition is the ability of a quantum system to be in multiple states at the same time until it is measured.
Note -- Superposition of a world-creating system can be in all possible states (infinity) and all possible times (eternity) until a non-random intention is chosen. How? In Infinity/Eternity all things are possible.
Teleological :
Purpose-driven evolution, as opposed to Eutaxiological, meaning simply that evolution must have had a First Cause, even if the Final Cause (purpose) is unknown.
http://bothandblog7.enformationism.info/page12.html
Of course, in any universe that creates thinking life, such as in ours, the thinkers would wonder how such an apparently fine-tuned marvel could have happened. — PoeticUniverse
Yes. And here's how that could have happened.
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle :
“mathematical physics possesses many unique properties that are necessary prerequisites for the existence of rational information-processing and observers similar to ourselves”.
http://bothandblog7.enformationism.info/page10.html
*1 Tower of Turtles -- an infinite regress of causation
http://gnomon.enformationism.info/Images/turtles.jpg
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
You have recognized the multiverse. That accords well. . . .
You have recognized the block multiverse. That is the answer! Accords well with timeless eternalism. — PoeticUniverse
Yes, but . . . the problem with the Multiverse conjecture is the same old Eternal Regress that you find hard to accept in anthro-morphic god-models. Also, how could something that is constantly changing and evolving be self-existent? That's the same old tower-of-turtles teaser.
Einstein's idealized Block Universe is indeed pictured as eternal, but it's also static : nothing new ever happens. Instead, all possibilities exist simultaneously & forever as inert potentials. In the dynamic Real physical world, that's impossible. But, in an Ideal Meta-physical realm, it's not only possible, but also logical (sequential cause & effect) ; as Plato implied in his descriptions of LOGOS.
That's why I interpret "Block Time" in terms of Aristotelian Potential, the notion of infinite possibility, which requires a trigger (First Cause) to actualize. Potential is not Real, but merely Ideal, until an intentional directional choice causes something specific to actualize. This is not magic, but similar to a physical phase change, such as liquid water to solid ice. The potential for solidity was always there in H2O, but an external trigger causes the change from Possible to Actual. Besides, as you pointed out : "Thus, all possible universes are real in the block multiverse, as timeless and all done, finished, most of them not having life or being outright flops".
The Materialism, Reductionism, Physicalism worldview leaves no role for Philosophy. In which case, this forum is a monumental waste of time, since we typically discuss things that are not things, but possibilities ; not actual or physical, hence unverifiable --- only arguable. Terence Green, in Philosophy Now, regarding A.J. Ayer and Logical Positivism says : "this is philosophy as a barren wasteland --- stripped of all that philosophy had . . . . traditionally been concerned with : why are we here? What should we do now that we are here? And how should we live?". Logical Positivism has no answer for such illogical questions. Logic is about mechanical formal processes, but human Reason is about meaningful Forms (potential desiderata). Again, Green says about scientific Logical Positivism, "it can't deal with statements such as 'God exists'.".
Desiderata : something that is needed or wanted. but does not yet exist.
Inert Potential : the voltage of an electric battery is simply a promise of future current. The promise is only fulfilled after some outside force completes the circuit, allowing useful current to flow. Eternal Ideal Potential likewise requires a Cause (intentional choice) to allow it to actualize into reality.
You have recognized the block multiverse. That is the answer! Accords well with timeless eternalism. — PoeticUniverse
Yes, but . . . the problem with the Multiverse conjecture is the same old Eternal Regress that you find hard to accept in anthro-morphic god-models. Also, how could something that is constantly changing and evolving be self-existent? That's the same old tower-of-turtles teaser.
Einstein's idealized Block Universe is indeed pictured as eternal, but it's also static : nothing new ever happens. Instead, all possibilities exist simultaneously & forever as inert potentials. In the dynamic Real physical world, that's impossible. But, in an Ideal Meta-physical realm, it's not only possible, but also logical (sequential cause & effect) ; as Plato implied in his descriptions of LOGOS.
That's why I interpret "Block Time" in terms of Aristotelian Potential, the notion of infinite possibility, which requires a trigger (First Cause) to actualize. Potential is not Real, but merely Ideal, until an intentional directional choice causes something specific to actualize. This is not magic, but similar to a physical phase change, such as liquid water to solid ice. The potential for solidity was always there in H2O, but an external trigger causes the change from Possible to Actual. Besides, as you pointed out : "Thus, all possible universes are real in the block multiverse, as timeless and all done, finished, most of them not having life or being outright flops".
The Materialism, Reductionism, Physicalism worldview leaves no role for Philosophy. In which case, this forum is a monumental waste of time, since we typically discuss things that are not things, but possibilities ; not actual or physical, hence unverifiable --- only arguable. Terence Green, in Philosophy Now, regarding A.J. Ayer and Logical Positivism says : "this is philosophy as a barren wasteland --- stripped of all that philosophy had . . . . traditionally been concerned with : why are we here? What should we do now that we are here? And how should we live?". Logical Positivism has no answer for such illogical questions. Logic is about mechanical formal processes, but human Reason is about meaningful Forms (potential desiderata). Again, Green says about scientific Logical Positivism, "it can't deal with statements such as 'God exists'.".
Desiderata : something that is needed or wanted. but does not yet exist.
Inert Potential : the voltage of an electric battery is simply a promise of future current. The promise is only fulfilled after some outside force completes the circuit, allowing useful current to flow. Eternal Ideal Potential likewise requires a Cause (intentional choice) to allow it to actualize into reality.
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
How come you are always referencing turtles when the buck clearly stops at my One as the base? — PoeticUniverse
The leap-frogging turtle metaphor applies to the implicit infinite regress when an eternal buck-stopping agent is denied. In religious arguments it's common to be challenged with "so who created your God?". But the question only makes sense if the deity is subject to the limitations of space-time and matter-energy. Most Christians have no problem answering with "my God is eternal and self-existent". But those who suggest a Multiverse or Many Worlds alternative would be embarrassed to respond with "so is my Multiverse". That sounds too much like "my Material god-substitute versus your Spiritual God". And physicality would logically require an infinite regression of world-cycles in space-time.
However, if your hypothetical One is -- like my ALL -- non-physical, then the turtle-cycle would be unnecessary. And that's why my hypothetical God-substitute is defined as "Ideal" instead of "Real", Which in traditional religious terms would be "Spiritual" instead of "Physical". It's my contention that the Jewish concept of "Spirit" was equivalent to the Greek notion of "Ideal". And both seemed to be referring to the mysterious force in Nature that we now call causal "Energy". It's invisible & intangible, and physical only in that it has observable effects on Matter. Infinite Potential covers all possibilities at once, with no need for physical cycles of reproduction or creation. Hence, the First Cause is like an eternal inexhaustible battery of pent-up energy that is loosed upon the world, only when a feedback circuit is made -- a space-time cycle.
As a similar non-physical notion, Einstein surprised many folks when he declared that Gravity was not a real force. Because everybody knew from personal experience that gravity pulls on real bodies with invisible rope. Even worse, his radical theory pictured Gravity as "warped space". Which makes as much sense as "curved nothingness". But pragmatic scientists eventually learned to go along with that blasphemy against Lord Newton. Yet, Alfred was not done with knocking the props out from classical physics. His outlandish ideas opened the door to Quantum Theory, which like quicksand has undermined the ancient Atomic Theory with invisible intangible Mathematical Fields as the fundamental reality of Physics.
Therefore, as a pragmatic idealist, I have learned to accommodate all those radical paradigm shifts, by accepting the view of an increasing number of physicists and cosmologists, that even those fundamental fields consist of nothing but Information. Which is that same "stuff" that used to exist only in metaphysical Minds. And now even the physical Brains that mysteriously generate invisible mind-fields are ultimately composed of, not things per se, but incorporeal relationships between things. In Math, we call those invisible geometric links "ratios". Which ironically are what we "know" only with our rational power of Reason.Thus, I conclude that the "One", the "All", the "First Cause", the "buck-stopper" is simply the Eternal Enformer.
G*D :
An ambiguous spelling of the common name for a supernatural deity. The Enformationism thesis is based upon an unprovable axiom that our world is an idea in the mind of G*D. This eternal deity is not imagined in a physical human body, but in a meta-physical mathematical form, equivalent to LOGOS. Other names : ONE, ALL, BEING, Creator, Enformer, MIND, Nature, Reason, Source, Programmer. The eternal Whole of which all temporal things are a part is not to be feared or worshiped, but appreciated like Nature.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page13.html
Information :
Claude Shannon quantified Information not as useful ideas, but as a mathematical ratio between meaningful order (1) and meaningless disorder (0); between know-ledge (1) and ignorance (0). So, that meaningful mind-stuff exists in the limbo-land of statistics, producing effects on reality while having no sensory physical properties. We know it exists ideally, only by detecting it via rational inference
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page11.html
TWO SIDES OF SAME COIN
https://pureella.com/wp-content/uploads ... uote-3.jpg
The leap-frogging turtle metaphor applies to the implicit infinite regress when an eternal buck-stopping agent is denied. In religious arguments it's common to be challenged with "so who created your God?". But the question only makes sense if the deity is subject to the limitations of space-time and matter-energy. Most Christians have no problem answering with "my God is eternal and self-existent". But those who suggest a Multiverse or Many Worlds alternative would be embarrassed to respond with "so is my Multiverse". That sounds too much like "my Material god-substitute versus your Spiritual God". And physicality would logically require an infinite regression of world-cycles in space-time.
However, if your hypothetical One is -- like my ALL -- non-physical, then the turtle-cycle would be unnecessary. And that's why my hypothetical God-substitute is defined as "Ideal" instead of "Real", Which in traditional religious terms would be "Spiritual" instead of "Physical". It's my contention that the Jewish concept of "Spirit" was equivalent to the Greek notion of "Ideal". And both seemed to be referring to the mysterious force in Nature that we now call causal "Energy". It's invisible & intangible, and physical only in that it has observable effects on Matter. Infinite Potential covers all possibilities at once, with no need for physical cycles of reproduction or creation. Hence, the First Cause is like an eternal inexhaustible battery of pent-up energy that is loosed upon the world, only when a feedback circuit is made -- a space-time cycle.
As a similar non-physical notion, Einstein surprised many folks when he declared that Gravity was not a real force. Because everybody knew from personal experience that gravity pulls on real bodies with invisible rope. Even worse, his radical theory pictured Gravity as "warped space". Which makes as much sense as "curved nothingness". But pragmatic scientists eventually learned to go along with that blasphemy against Lord Newton. Yet, Alfred was not done with knocking the props out from classical physics. His outlandish ideas opened the door to Quantum Theory, which like quicksand has undermined the ancient Atomic Theory with invisible intangible Mathematical Fields as the fundamental reality of Physics.
Therefore, as a pragmatic idealist, I have learned to accommodate all those radical paradigm shifts, by accepting the view of an increasing number of physicists and cosmologists, that even those fundamental fields consist of nothing but Information. Which is that same "stuff" that used to exist only in metaphysical Minds. And now even the physical Brains that mysteriously generate invisible mind-fields are ultimately composed of, not things per se, but incorporeal relationships between things. In Math, we call those invisible geometric links "ratios". Which ironically are what we "know" only with our rational power of Reason.Thus, I conclude that the "One", the "All", the "First Cause", the "buck-stopper" is simply the Eternal Enformer.
G*D :
An ambiguous spelling of the common name for a supernatural deity. The Enformationism thesis is based upon an unprovable axiom that our world is an idea in the mind of G*D. This eternal deity is not imagined in a physical human body, but in a meta-physical mathematical form, equivalent to LOGOS. Other names : ONE, ALL, BEING, Creator, Enformer, MIND, Nature, Reason, Source, Programmer. The eternal Whole of which all temporal things are a part is not to be feared or worshiped, but appreciated like Nature.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page13.html
Information :
Claude Shannon quantified Information not as useful ideas, but as a mathematical ratio between meaningful order (1) and meaningless disorder (0); between know-ledge (1) and ignorance (0). So, that meaningful mind-stuff exists in the limbo-land of statistics, producing effects on reality while having no sensory physical properties. We know it exists ideally, only by detecting it via rational inference
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page11.html
TWO SIDES OF SAME COIN
https://pureella.com/wp-content/uploads ... uote-3.jpg
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
↪PoeticUniverse
"why are we here? What should we do now that we are here? And how should we live?"
___Gnomon
Cool video! So the answer is Be Here Now? Don't worry about what was, or will be. Sufficient unto the day
"why are we here? What should we do now that we are here? And how should we live?"
___Gnomon
Cool video! So the answer is Be Here Now? Don't worry about what was, or will be. Sufficient unto the day
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
That's fine for some, but it's not 'God'; it's just the simple basis of the more complex as the Ground of Determination. — PoeticUniverse
Of course. That's the point of the Multiverse hypothesis. Instead of a First Cause, it's a more-of-the-same-forever infinite (no beginning or end) chain-of-causation --- or a cosmic Conga Line of turtles, if you prefer a more concrete image.
? The one and only basis remains; no regress. — PoeticUniverse
Yes, but is the "One" physical & ever-changing, or meta-physical & omni-potential?
Einstein's discovery of the quantum discreteness of photons proved true, so it was not outlandish. — PoeticUniverse
True. But at the time it sounded unorthodox, hence "outlandish" (alien ; foreign) for the wave-propagation orthodoxy of the day.
Why No One Believed Einstein :
https://daily.jstor.org/why-no-one-believed-einstein/
We do see the mind-fields, and that is all we ever 'see'; they're as maps made in the brain process of consciousness. — PoeticUniverse
Is that what psychics "see" as the human Aura? What color is yours? Mine is boring beige.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aura_(paranormal)
https://cf.ltkcdn.net/paranormal/images ... r-test.png
Of course. That's the point of the Multiverse hypothesis. Instead of a First Cause, it's a more-of-the-same-forever infinite (no beginning or end) chain-of-causation --- or a cosmic Conga Line of turtles, if you prefer a more concrete image.
? The one and only basis remains; no regress. — PoeticUniverse
Yes, but is the "One" physical & ever-changing, or meta-physical & omni-potential?
Einstein's discovery of the quantum discreteness of photons proved true, so it was not outlandish. — PoeticUniverse
True. But at the time it sounded unorthodox, hence "outlandish" (alien ; foreign) for the wave-propagation orthodoxy of the day.
Why No One Believed Einstein :
https://daily.jstor.org/why-no-one-believed-einstein/
We do see the mind-fields, and that is all we ever 'see'; they're as maps made in the brain process of consciousness. — PoeticUniverse
Is that what psychics "see" as the human Aura? What color is yours? Mine is boring beige.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aura_(paranormal)
https://cf.ltkcdn.net/paranormal/images ... r-test.png
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
It remains as the physical One; its rearrangements are temporary; it doesn't make new substances; it is ever itself. — PoeticUniverse
Sounds like the TAO, or LOGOS, to which I compare my G*D concept. However, like Energy, G*D is not a physical object, but a functional process or flow. It's an "essence" not a physical substance. It's ineffable ; so you can't point to it and say "there it is". It's a holistic pattern of relationships, not an individual thing ; so you can know about it, but not see it. Therefore, as a system, I call it "Meta-Physical", in the sense that it is more than the sum of its physical parts.
TAO : The Tao can be roughly thought of as the flow of the Universe, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced.
In all its uses, the Tao is considered to have ineffable qualities that prevent it from being defined or expressed in words.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao
Since, with no beginning, it ne’er became;
Thus no Alif through Ye: it’s e’er the same. — PoeticUniverse
That's why I distinguish the meta-physical eternal TAO or G*D or LOGOS from the space-time bubble of the physical temporal world :
First begat in a Bang, destined to die in a Sigh . . . . .
Sounds like the TAO, or LOGOS, to which I compare my G*D concept. However, like Energy, G*D is not a physical object, but a functional process or flow. It's an "essence" not a physical substance. It's ineffable ; so you can't point to it and say "there it is". It's a holistic pattern of relationships, not an individual thing ; so you can know about it, but not see it. Therefore, as a system, I call it "Meta-Physical", in the sense that it is more than the sum of its physical parts.
TAO : The Tao can be roughly thought of as the flow of the Universe, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced.
In all its uses, the Tao is considered to have ineffable qualities that prevent it from being defined or expressed in words.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao
Since, with no beginning, it ne’er became;
Thus no Alif through Ye: it’s e’er the same. — PoeticUniverse
That's why I distinguish the meta-physical eternal TAO or G*D or LOGOS from the space-time bubble of the physical temporal world :
First begat in a Bang, destined to die in a Sigh . . . . .
Re: TPF : Universe from Nothing theory
Isn't this more than 'Nothing'. Isn't it still a something in some kind of realm as above in that realm's level as tangible to that realm but not to ours? — PoeticUniverse
Yes, but it's a mental something (subjective idea, not objective object). So such abstract universals as G*D or TAO don't fall under the category of physical scientific things. Instead, they are metaphysical philosophical non-things. Knowable, but non-tangible. Holistic all-things, but not reductive things. More than nothing, in the sense that Infinity is more than nothing.
Thing :
1. an object that one need not, cannot, or does not wish to give a specific name to.
2. an inanimate material object as distinct from a living sentient being.
"The Way" is more than the pavement.
https://parade.com/wp-content/uploads/2 ... -Scott.jpg
Yes, but it's a mental something (subjective idea, not objective object). So such abstract universals as G*D or TAO don't fall under the category of physical scientific things. Instead, they are metaphysical philosophical non-things. Knowable, but non-tangible. Holistic all-things, but not reductive things. More than nothing, in the sense that Infinity is more than nothing.
Thing :
1. an object that one need not, cannot, or does not wish to give a specific name to.
2. an inanimate material object as distinct from a living sentient being.
"The Way" is more than the pavement.
https://parade.com/wp-content/uploads/2 ... -Scott.jpg
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests