Japers! Does this mean God is making a comeback? Or some form of intelligence as prior to matter? An intelligence which loves dogs, and maybe even humans?
Well, a highly evolved universe is a VERY strange beastie. Evolution at that level has some MOST peculiar implications, which I will be exploring. And the fact that our particular universe generates so many people and dogs might tell you something about its tastes… sorry, about the possibility space it is currently locally exploring…
This is amazing. I’ve been trying to do much of the same over the years; undergrad in physics, MS in computer science. Will love to read what you come up with here. More than happy to swap notes if you’re interested in comparing maps with a fellow traveler.
I'm very pleased this connected with you so strongly, Mark. Yes, we should talk sometime. (I've just wandered off and looked at some of your writing; I think we are describing some of the same things from very different, but complementary, angles.)
Wow, this was incredibly well written, and I really enjoyed it! It’s a different perspective than what i’m used to, but its more human than “current science,” it’s got a personality to it. This got me thinking about my own interpretations of the universe and what conclusions your work will draw in the future. For instance, as I read through I became more inclined to believe that the universe is an actual organism of an incomprehensible scale; perhaps extending and participating in life on a different dimension than we can observe. Like the universe is one human body and the solar system is a microfilament within a singe cell on its pinky toenail. Perhaps the universe isn’t “living” and “breathing” as we and other organisms are, but I agree-- life isn’t created as spontaneously as we interpret it to be. I think in order to change the approach from these current views, the “meaning of life” (or rather, the definition of it) also has to change.
(I came from your post about the end poem, which I really, really enjoyed-- and I have virtually no background or experience in science outside of a high school physics classroom and my own interpretations. I am super interested in what you have to say, and I can’t to read on!!)
Thank you Allie. Yes, I basically do think of our universe as, essentially, "an organism of an incomprehensible scale". As you'll see in my other posts, I feel there's a lot of evidence that our universe evolved - that it's descended from a long line of earlier, simpler universes. The best theory to explain how that might have happened is cosmological natural selection (first outlined by the physicist Lee Smolin in the 1990s). Bear in mind, evolution is the only mechanism we know of that can generate efficient, optimised complexity from a simple, non-optimised starting point, simply by iterating again and again. Why wouldn't that be the explanation for the efficient, optimised complexity we find at all scales in our universe? What other explanation can the mainstream offer? If so, the basic parameters of matter have been fine-tuned by that evolution to generate this complex universe, including DNA lifeforms like us. (Fundamental particles evolved; matter evolved; evolution evolved.) So yes, our universe develops like an organism, following an evolved path...
I was pursuing a similar approach to the question of the nature of the universe years ago, mostly focused on physics (fun fact: if you make the pct of dark energy the head, the pct of dark matter the tail, and the pct of matter the eye, the universe makes a very nice looking Yin Yang).
Eventually I tried a different tact, wondering if it had described itself with an Easter Egg hidden in our lore.
Which quickly led me to The Gospel of Thomas ("the good news of the twin") which described how we were in a copy of a universe in the image of an earlier humanity explicitly for the purposes of self-discovery, self-determination, and to have the inalienable birthright of an afterlife that escaped our predecessors.
Its later followers, the Naassenes, even thought the creator of this world was itself brought forth by the original illustrious humanity, and was interpreting the sower parable in the context of Lucretius's "seeds of things."
When you say that the universe was writing through you in composing the End Poem, it may be that you were right. I get the sense its being fairly talkative. Hopefully you get the chance to channel it more with the new book.
Though interdisciplinary approaches that reject assumptions of methodologcal naturalism and reductionslism may have strange bedfellows, and it may be not everyone wants to hear what the universe has to say.
Sensacional, tudo o quem vem a mim por pura bondade e sinceridade, de forma alguma eu deixaria de agradecer e reconhecer estas sábias palavras, talvez eu é que não estou preparado para ouvi-las.
Parece que o universo está tentando falar comigo através de você, claro que todos nós temos um ponto de vista sobre um determinado assunto, e muitas das vezes eu sempre digo, que, não é por que um está certo, que o outro precisa estar errado? E entendo que talvez seja necessário dizer palavras que possam despertar quem precisa, e é louvável está ação, entenda que temos que respeitar a natureza das coisas, e entender que todo o processo é escalado por etapas, e entender que quando eu excedo com as palavras, procurando forçar o outro a fazer o correto, por mais que a escada está na parede errada, no meu ponto de vista, a melhor ajuda e perguntar o que o ajudado precisa, é trazer luz, dizer o que precisa ser dito sem códigos, já parou pra pensar que o seu remédio pode ser a causa, nada melhor que a simplicidade na comunicação com objetividade, todo excesso esconde uma falta!
Rafa Vieira
Julian,
How are you?
It seems like the universe is trying to speak to me through you. Of course, we all have a point of view on a given subject, and I often say that just because one is right, the other has to be wrong. And I understand that it may be necessary to say words that can awaken those who need it, and this action is commendable. Understand that we have to respect the nature of things, and understand that the entire process is scaled in stages, and understand that when I overdo it with words, trying to force the other to do the right thing, even if the ladder is on the wrong wall, in my point of view, the best help is to ask what the person being helped needs, it is to bring light, to say what needs to be said without codes. Have you ever stopped to think that your medicine may be the cause? There is nothing better than simplicity in objective communication. Every excess hides a lack!
hey! great post, i started looking through your site after looking at your history of the end poem things and i found this and i just have to say i disagree so completely i felt i needed to comment! you state that you cannot understand a whole no matter how well you know its constituent parts, many have said this as well, kurzgesagt comes to mind, however i see absolutely no evidence or proof of this or any reason why its true, the reason we study fields at a higher level then physics is because we are humans prone to mistakes in a universe with no obligation to be understandable to our finite minds, there is great insight to be had in seeing for yourself what comes of these things to check your results, or simply due to the fact that there is randomness at play, most likely literal and most certainty practical, as these random events can change how a radioactive particle decays and impacts where its emission goes eventually leading to one organism aquireing a mutation that would send it down the long path to become a dog, a dog cannot be predicted due to this but knowing of a dog and being able to completely catalog all of its parts allow us to use even the most basic level physics to see why it goes up the stairs, when larger things act in unexpected ways these ways ALWAYS end up making sense, we just didnt see that that could happen, this even happens in simulations of the lowest level WE MAKE. when it comes to dark matter and other such hypothesized explanations for unexplained results there have always been people who think that gravity works in different ways at higher scales, not because of some order in our universe but because these are the nonsense set of laws we got stuck with to try and figure out, modified gravity and dark matter and both reasonable explanations! dark matter is reasonable because we already know of particles like neutrinos that very weakly interact with certain forces, there is no reason to think they are alone in that!!! again, the universe is under no obligation to make it easy for us to understand it, its merely the universe that was capable and ended up producing humans and dogs for that matter!
One final thing, dark matter does not hide its use as an uncertain explanation to fix our models, it already calls itself something as ridiculous as angels or the holy spirit, its called dark matter, the dark part has always been a reference to this! the same with dark energy, the dark part is that very admission of uncertainty that you say would be obvious if we called them angels, it was already made obvious!
Japers! Does this mean God is making a comeback? Or some form of intelligence as prior to matter? An intelligence which loves dogs, and maybe even humans?
Shhhh! Spoilers!
Well, a highly evolved universe is a VERY strange beastie. Evolution at that level has some MOST peculiar implications, which I will be exploring. And the fact that our particular universe generates so many people and dogs might tell you something about its tastes… sorry, about the possibility space it is currently locally exploring…
Certíssimo parabéns!!
Love this, for so many reasons.
Thank you, Steve.
Eu também!!
This is amazing. I’ve been trying to do much of the same over the years; undergrad in physics, MS in computer science. Will love to read what you come up with here. More than happy to swap notes if you’re interested in comparing maps with a fellow traveler.
I'm very pleased this connected with you so strongly, Mark. Yes, we should talk sometime. (I've just wandered off and looked at some of your writing; I think we are describing some of the same things from very different, but complementary, angles.)
Sim, gosto muito da sua linguagem e da sua linha de raciocínio!
Wow, this was incredibly well written, and I really enjoyed it! It’s a different perspective than what i’m used to, but its more human than “current science,” it’s got a personality to it. This got me thinking about my own interpretations of the universe and what conclusions your work will draw in the future. For instance, as I read through I became more inclined to believe that the universe is an actual organism of an incomprehensible scale; perhaps extending and participating in life on a different dimension than we can observe. Like the universe is one human body and the solar system is a microfilament within a singe cell on its pinky toenail. Perhaps the universe isn’t “living” and “breathing” as we and other organisms are, but I agree-- life isn’t created as spontaneously as we interpret it to be. I think in order to change the approach from these current views, the “meaning of life” (or rather, the definition of it) also has to change.
(I came from your post about the end poem, which I really, really enjoyed-- and I have virtually no background or experience in science outside of a high school physics classroom and my own interpretations. I am super interested in what you have to say, and I can’t to read on!!)
Have a wonderful day :)
Thank you Allie. Yes, I basically do think of our universe as, essentially, "an organism of an incomprehensible scale". As you'll see in my other posts, I feel there's a lot of evidence that our universe evolved - that it's descended from a long line of earlier, simpler universes. The best theory to explain how that might have happened is cosmological natural selection (first outlined by the physicist Lee Smolin in the 1990s). Bear in mind, evolution is the only mechanism we know of that can generate efficient, optimised complexity from a simple, non-optimised starting point, simply by iterating again and again. Why wouldn't that be the explanation for the efficient, optimised complexity we find at all scales in our universe? What other explanation can the mainstream offer? If so, the basic parameters of matter have been fine-tuned by that evolution to generate this complex universe, including DNA lifeforms like us. (Fundamental particles evolved; matter evolved; evolution evolved.) So yes, our universe develops like an organism, following an evolved path...
Delighted you are enjoying these ideas!
Sua forma de se expressar é extraordinária!!
I was pursuing a similar approach to the question of the nature of the universe years ago, mostly focused on physics (fun fact: if you make the pct of dark energy the head, the pct of dark matter the tail, and the pct of matter the eye, the universe makes a very nice looking Yin Yang).
Eventually I tried a different tact, wondering if it had described itself with an Easter Egg hidden in our lore.
Which quickly led me to The Gospel of Thomas ("the good news of the twin") which described how we were in a copy of a universe in the image of an earlier humanity explicitly for the purposes of self-discovery, self-determination, and to have the inalienable birthright of an afterlife that escaped our predecessors.
Its later followers, the Naassenes, even thought the creator of this world was itself brought forth by the original illustrious humanity, and was interpreting the sower parable in the context of Lucretius's "seeds of things."
When you say that the universe was writing through you in composing the End Poem, it may be that you were right. I get the sense its being fairly talkative. Hopefully you get the chance to channel it more with the new book.
Though interdisciplinary approaches that reject assumptions of methodologcal naturalism and reductionslism may have strange bedfellows, and it may be not everyone wants to hear what the universe has to say.
Sensacional, tudo o quem vem a mim por pura bondade e sinceridade, de forma alguma eu deixaria de agradecer e reconhecer estas sábias palavras, talvez eu é que não estou preparado para ouvi-las.
Julian,
Tudo bem?
Parece que o universo está tentando falar comigo através de você, claro que todos nós temos um ponto de vista sobre um determinado assunto, e muitas das vezes eu sempre digo, que, não é por que um está certo, que o outro precisa estar errado? E entendo que talvez seja necessário dizer palavras que possam despertar quem precisa, e é louvável está ação, entenda que temos que respeitar a natureza das coisas, e entender que todo o processo é escalado por etapas, e entender que quando eu excedo com as palavras, procurando forçar o outro a fazer o correto, por mais que a escada está na parede errada, no meu ponto de vista, a melhor ajuda e perguntar o que o ajudado precisa, é trazer luz, dizer o que precisa ser dito sem códigos, já parou pra pensar que o seu remédio pode ser a causa, nada melhor que a simplicidade na comunicação com objetividade, todo excesso esconde uma falta!
Rafa Vieira
Julian,
How are you?
It seems like the universe is trying to speak to me through you. Of course, we all have a point of view on a given subject, and I often say that just because one is right, the other has to be wrong. And I understand that it may be necessary to say words that can awaken those who need it, and this action is commendable. Understand that we have to respect the nature of things, and understand that the entire process is scaled in stages, and understand that when I overdo it with words, trying to force the other to do the right thing, even if the ladder is on the wrong wall, in my point of view, the best help is to ask what the person being helped needs, it is to bring light, to say what needs to be said without codes. Have you ever stopped to think that your medicine may be the cause? There is nothing better than simplicity in objective communication. Every excess hides a lack!
Rafa Vieira
hey! great post, i started looking through your site after looking at your history of the end poem things and i found this and i just have to say i disagree so completely i felt i needed to comment! you state that you cannot understand a whole no matter how well you know its constituent parts, many have said this as well, kurzgesagt comes to mind, however i see absolutely no evidence or proof of this or any reason why its true, the reason we study fields at a higher level then physics is because we are humans prone to mistakes in a universe with no obligation to be understandable to our finite minds, there is great insight to be had in seeing for yourself what comes of these things to check your results, or simply due to the fact that there is randomness at play, most likely literal and most certainty practical, as these random events can change how a radioactive particle decays and impacts where its emission goes eventually leading to one organism aquireing a mutation that would send it down the long path to become a dog, a dog cannot be predicted due to this but knowing of a dog and being able to completely catalog all of its parts allow us to use even the most basic level physics to see why it goes up the stairs, when larger things act in unexpected ways these ways ALWAYS end up making sense, we just didnt see that that could happen, this even happens in simulations of the lowest level WE MAKE. when it comes to dark matter and other such hypothesized explanations for unexplained results there have always been people who think that gravity works in different ways at higher scales, not because of some order in our universe but because these are the nonsense set of laws we got stuck with to try and figure out, modified gravity and dark matter and both reasonable explanations! dark matter is reasonable because we already know of particles like neutrinos that very weakly interact with certain forces, there is no reason to think they are alone in that!!! again, the universe is under no obligation to make it easy for us to understand it, its merely the universe that was capable and ended up producing humans and dogs for that matter!
One final thing, dark matter does not hide its use as an uncertain explanation to fix our models, it already calls itself something as ridiculous as angels or the holy spirit, its called dark matter, the dark part has always been a reference to this! the same with dark energy, the dark part is that very admission of uncertainty that you say would be obvious if we called them angels, it was already made obvious!
Você está correto, parabéns!!