I
IWantGod
Guest
I gave an argument, and you failed to respond to it.
- Status
I
IWantGod
Guest
So quantum physics doesn’t describe objects that change? There are no quantum events according to you? And what exactly is an illusion of change?
You don’t know what you are talking about, you are just throwing out irrelevant concepts that have nothing to do with whether or not a thing has a necessary act of reality.
You don’t know what you are talking about, you are just throwing out irrelevant concepts that have nothing to do with whether or not a thing has a necessary act of reality.
I
IWantGod
Guest
That is not true. And if you are going to argue as such then you need to provide evidence, are present a logical argument; not just assert your preference.
I
IWantGod
Guest
So there is a change in the mind of an observer and no change at all outside of his mind. None of this represents any known scientific theory. This is your philosophical belief. If physical events are not occuring then it is meaningless to speak of physical events at all including quantum physics.
Last edited:
P
Pat_Albertson
Guest
I think that the question implies that the old school meaning for essence would be found in the feline phenotype, whereas of late (more and more since 1952), the essence of a is to be found in the pattern of feline DNA. This necessitates consideration of the extended phenotype, the way in which the genetic code is progressively built up into larger and larger structures, and ultimately into patterns of behavior which extend outside of the feline body.
Indeed, it is especially the case with parasites that part of their extended phenotype is the types of harm they do while exploiting the host, which means that the extended phenotype of a parasite extends to certain types of pathology in the host’s body.
Coming back to cat’s, a part of a cat’s extended phenotype is the grey nondescript camoflage color of mouse fur, just as part of the extended phenotype of a mouse is a cat’s ability to hear up to 60000 hertz.
The number of genetic combinations which could result in a very catlike animal (so catlike that such an animal, if brought into existence, could interbreed with a regular natural cat) is utterly inconceivably vast, far far more numerous than all the particles in the visible universe. This vastness is par for the course when combinatorics are taken into consideration.
It is probably not possible to specify exactly where the genetic boundaries constituting cat-ness lie, but relatively simple and unsophisticated mathematical methods exist which can take any random but somewhat longish (containing at a minimum roughly 100 to 200 SNPs) strand of DNA and plot it as a projection onto a 2d or 3d plot and then check to see if it falls into the middle of a cat cluster.
Old school essence (OSE), while nice for philosophical discussion, is probably less relevant these days than new school essence (NSE) (I just made those terms up
). The NSE, involving as it does the radical transformation from genotype to phenotype, is understandably somewhat confusing for those who wish to get at the essence of essence, but I think that from now on we cannot dismiss these concepts.
Incidentally, the only thing DNA really codes for is strings of amino acids destined to be assembled into proteins in the ribosomes, but the amino acid strings, once strung together into proteins, self-assemble, and then those assemblies stick to other assemblies, and so on and so forth up into organelles, which form cells, which form tissues, which forms organs, and then bodies, which in turn act upon the environment in an extended phenotype which terminates at some indefinable and abstract ‘distance’ well outside the feline body but still well short of infinity.
Indeed, it is especially the case with parasites that part of their extended phenotype is the types of harm they do while exploiting the host, which means that the extended phenotype of a parasite extends to certain types of pathology in the host’s body.
Coming back to cat’s, a part of a cat’s extended phenotype is the grey nondescript camoflage color of mouse fur, just as part of the extended phenotype of a mouse is a cat’s ability to hear up to 60000 hertz.
The number of genetic combinations which could result in a very catlike animal (so catlike that such an animal, if brought into existence, could interbreed with a regular natural cat) is utterly inconceivably vast, far far more numerous than all the particles in the visible universe. This vastness is par for the course when combinatorics are taken into consideration.
It is probably not possible to specify exactly where the genetic boundaries constituting cat-ness lie, but relatively simple and unsophisticated mathematical methods exist which can take any random but somewhat longish (containing at a minimum roughly 100 to 200 SNPs) strand of DNA and plot it as a projection onto a 2d or 3d plot and then check to see if it falls into the middle of a cat cluster.
Old school essence (OSE), while nice for philosophical discussion, is probably less relevant these days than new school essence (NSE) (I just made those terms up
). The NSE, involving as it does the radical transformation from genotype to phenotype, is understandably somewhat confusing for those who wish to get at the essence of essence, but I think that from now on we cannot dismiss these concepts.Incidentally, the only thing DNA really codes for is strings of amino acids destined to be assembled into proteins in the ribosomes, but the amino acid strings, once strung together into proteins, self-assemble, and then those assemblies stick to other assemblies, and so on and so forth up into organelles, which form cells, which form tissues, which forms organs, and then bodies, which in turn act upon the environment in an extended phenotype which terminates at some indefinable and abstract ‘distance’ well outside the feline body but still well short of infinity.
I
IWantGod
Guest
How observers create reality
Brian D. Josephson
Mind–Matter Unification Project, Department of Physics, University of Cambridge, J J Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK.
ABSTRACT
Wheeler proposed that repeated acts of observation give rise to the reality that we observe, but offered no detailed mechanism for this.
Like i said none of this represents a known scientific theory. An interpretation of QM says that we affect reality when we observe it, which is different from
In other-words your argument is irrelevant.
Brian D. Josephson
Mind–Matter Unification Project, Department of Physics, University of Cambridge, J J Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK.
ABSTRACT
Wheeler proposed that repeated acts of observation give rise to the reality that we observe, but offered no detailed mechanism for this.
Like i said none of this represents a known scientific theory. An interpretation of QM says that we affect reality when we observe it, which is different from
- The idea that physical activity exists in our heads
- That we are actually bringing into existence the physical reality around us rather than just changing it.
In other-words your argument is irrelevant.
Last edited:
I
IWantGod
Guest
If this is meant to mean that physical reality does not exist unless we observe it, then i can only reject it since the statement is self contradictory. It’s not even a valid hypothesis.
If we are not talking about physical processes then we are no-longer doing physics.
I
IWantGod
Guest
- Status