But great, that you found interesting too. Keep having dialectic discourse and reflecting about the topics until the truths emerge out of the pure reason just like Socrates and his interlocutors had done, seems still one of the best ways doing philosophy. I must thank you for that. cheers. — Corvus

Maaan! This "guy" has a way! Pure reason (something I despiced before) are a shining beackon now. Dialectic discourse made clear in practice! He truly deserves a medal. And then to think Popper was assigned the title "Sir"... The real sir resides here. A tear leaves my eye. NO irony involved!

What is an interlocutor has become clear now too! Gee, you should have been a philosophy teacher! But enough but licking now. I'll give a kiss only.

You can’t fully quantify brain information. — Possibility

It depends. If you mean simply entropic information then it can. The value will lay somewhere between that of a gas of free or interacting particles at high temperature, and the same particles at zero temperature. Of course this gas has to interact with the medium it's in (the body) to exist at all as a separate entity. The same holds for the body. In fact all interacting field shape one another.

There is a different form of information. I think you know which reading your stuff.

I saw a bee on top of an empty bottle Amarischia. She was looking in attracted by the sweet smell. Damned, I thought. That could be me. But without knowing.

I answer in a moment. We are eating and our puppy dog is barking... Puppy love...

Should have known this thread would be crackpot-bait, — Seppo

How do you know I'm a crackpot? The universe has shown itself to me. Sometimes it all falls in place. Without pressing, stressing, or consciously contemplating it. Of course you have to have knowledge first of QFT and GR. And I have both. It came Naturally.

I dont deny the HBBT. But I found a way to make it start.

Gee! You know how to express yourself! The meaning of a dialectic discourse is clear to me now! Thanks again and I hope you win the lottery! Then can we have endless discourse... No, just kidding! Dont let your office stress you too much! :smile:

Thanks! I tend to be around here on and off most days. I might be doing other stuff, and not able to engage more than would like to. :) — Corvus

I think you did already enough! At least, for me, by participating in this discusdion..

Glad to hear it sir. :strong: :wink: — Corvus

Im glad you came back! Very good last reply to your "opponent", by the way... :smile:

I still reject the view that there is more to the mind than neural functions embedded in a body embedded in a world. — Banno

Why do you reject that? How can a material process experience pain or see sounds, hear colors (though normally it is the other way round), feel itch, dream, or love and be angry? Because these qualities are emergent like temperature? I think this is the hard problem.

What is relevant to OP with the analogue devices would be their in/outputs being continuous voltage rather than digital 0/1 bits, that is same with the human brain — Corvus

You have answered my question! :love:

Great answer but I dont realy understand a hyperreality. Whats that? A reality subsuming all realities?

Will communism arrive one day Naturaly? I dont see a bright future if materialistic capitalistic science-based technological growth of the economy keeps hold of the globe. But who am I to forbid a millionaire to be a millionair. And already in childhood we are made familiar with it. "Oh how nice, that litgle one has already understood how to enlarge his marble capital; smart kid!". Now I too liked to have a collection. But I was also told at scool everybody should get the same. Untill 10 years, say. Then the attitude changed...

QM determines that energy is fundamental — Possibility

QM determines the evolution of mass. To include energy quantum field theory has to be involved, the 7 gauge fields (they INTERACTIONmediating fields) representing energy, like the photon field. Dont be awed by qft. Its very easy conceptually. The math is merely used to impress.

Energy is

So in fact all men are equal but differently formed inormation structures? To put it in a highly abstract way — Prishon

In fact a bee equals a people...

Of course the things get not destroyed in the litteral sense. If I define an electron to be three rishons then the electron is not destroyed. But defining means placing it in another framework. In that sense its destroyed.Or better, changed into something new. Because, then whats the electron itself? The three rishons? The electron as a point particle? The last has a different definition from the three rishon definition. Off course a different definition can be given on top. The electron, just as virtual particle pairs, is just a popular scientific picture. A "real" particle is an excitstion of an electron field. But then again, an excitation *can* be expressed as a collection of simultaneous trajectories in phasespace. So what is the real thing? The mathematical field or the trajectories it describes? Particle Scientists are inclined to say the excitation of the field (the math) is more real. Or better: real. Logical, because with that they can make an impression on whoever.

In Afghanistan, the only jokes in circulation are about a certain Mollah Nasruddin. — Olivier5

Why should that be indeed? I think all fundamentalists (be they religious or non-religious) take themselves too seriously. There was a right fundamentalist her 10 years ago (Europe, in Sweden, Im sure you have heard about it) who shot over 80 peple dead. They were trapped on an island... Parttaking in a socialist-organized holiday. The tears come in my eyes just thinking aboug that. Why he did that. He was a human too. But why going such a path?

Anyhow, jokes should be abundant. Wherever! :smile:

Logically then, the only possibility for a singularity is therefore to become “un-single” ie. internally “divide” into two or more properties. Because change cannot occur in a single state. What would it change into if it remains the same all the time? Change requires an A and a B. — Benj96

Very true. There wasn't a point-like singularity in the beginning though. There was a Planck-sized accumulation of quantum fields fluctuating (virtual particles, to make it popular scientific visible). This tiny ball (of which the accompanying real particles are 4dimensional spatial spheres wrapped up on a rolled up 5dimensional space) expands on a 4dimensional infinite space. The virtual particles (the field fluctuations) get real after expanding on this fixed space (which, in 2d, has the form of a cut-open torus with a Planck-sized mouth). The fluctuations accelerate away from each other, around the Planck-sized mouth) from each other to become real particles, or better, to become field excitations interacting by gauge field fluctuations.

Sorry. — Olivier5

Dont be!!! Im not sure where that lol-smiley is for but I had to laugh from the inner bones because its truly funny! You just made me laugh. I couldnt hold it in fact! God is there but I dont care about him. I rather care about his creations!

energy isn't sentient, it doesn't think nor does it feel. — TheMadFool

It doesnt indeed. But what's the Nature of mass/energy? You can view mass/energy as point-lke (or a Planck sized 4d sphere, like a circle on a tiny curved cilinder), but what is it. What,s that particle carrying besides charges?

Thanks for the link! I can read there:

Although now with several contributed works, the number of submissions to the journal remains thin, often inappropriate, and all but never from academic philosophers or graduate students, whose concerns still seem to reflect unhealthy preoccupations with Nietzsche, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Marx, and the farcical and pretentious mash of "Theory," often with the addition of a term, "Critical," that really only means "Marxist," that is circulated in departments of English, Sociology, Anthropology, etc. -- and which has now spilled out into museums, the media, general "education," politics, and cowardly corporations.

How true!
Im writing a book. I have experience in writing, buf a philosophical/scientific story I havent actually written. Many short pieces yes. Mainly a lot of questions and answers on various physics sites and almost all sites on StackEchange (FACKExchange...). Only to be banned. I have started writing about my adventures on these sites and can use that to hop from subject to subject. From biology (I got banned for questioning the central dogma), to economy (idem dito for questioning the growth model), to physics (idem dito for proposing the rishon model), to philosophy (idem dito...), the brain, AI, cosmology, etc. etc. Now finally the pieces have fallen in place, I find it time to speak out (as I already did a bit here...). The book has as a working title is: "Hallo, wij schrijven...", meaning "Hello, we write...". The first words preceding the announcement of a suspension, ban, and a network-wide ban finally. Now Im not the uncomprehended guy. I think I just have found a truth about the physical and non-physical universe and all magic going on inside it. And I want others to join me on the trip. Thats all...

Noooo! Not now! Pleaeaease. Im tired and need some sleeeep... :smile:

But I'll be back. To getcha

We were posting exactly the same moment! I think about the create question. It was crystal clear the moment I wrote it... My brain is tired. The inner world tells me to slow down a bit... :smile:

And so is my wife...

Do you ask it the reality that I have in my mind about a tree I am just observing also exists as such in the physical universe? How can that be? One is mental and the other is physical. What I have in mind is a representation of the tree. What exists in the physical universe is the tree itself.
Or maybe you mean something else? — Alkis Piskas

I understand what you mean. The reality of you thinking about a tree and actually seeing one (let's limit ourselves to vision only; other sensory sensations can be treated the same way but with modification of what's observed; our ratio, be it religious, scientifi, instinctive, or whatever, orders these sensations, impressed by the senses), are two different ones. The minds eye view (including whatever ordening is involved) is the same as the view when looking. If you daydream you can imagine walking around a tree or climbing in it. This is different (obviously) from walking around a tree in the physical world. That tree has a physical , matter-like existence.This matter is not present when you think. Obviously. But whats the Nature of matter? Isnt it possible that it contains some "magical" "stuff"? That consciousness emerges because of this stuff? That it doesnt emerge because the physical process is complicated but because this "essence" content" moves along with these complicated matter processes (as they are tied together, the magic being the content of matter)? In the brain only the magic stuff reveals itself, though it can be examined materialistically in say a neuron scan, just as looking at that tree. The matter side of the medal manifests itself as matter only when the magic side of the medal has separated too, in the brain. The tree has magic stuff inside too. But in a tree the two sides of stuff (so, again, matter with magical essential content, which are inseparable; only a living creature experiences the two sides separatly) are still two unmanifested ones. The division matter-essence has not yet taken place (the stuff isnt litterally divided as matter and magical essence are inseparable). The body is the intermediate between the mental (essential, magical) inner world and the material outer world. The inner world can potentially contain all sructures there are in the matter world and can influence that matter world. By thought patterns or by the body. For now... my brain hurts... A physical process with magic content. But not nice. Things like experience of space and time are emergent but they show the world as it is. But... and now I stop...

conducting himself in a sensible manner. .... — SEP, Pyrrho

I can see where "making sense" has its origin now. "Sensible" just means to rely on your senses. Thw two remind me of Plato and Aristotle (also P&A).

I trust Darwinian selection will winnow you out before too long... — Wayfarer

I trust God to have mercy on you.

Yes. It takes some time to test a theory indeed. GR is still being tested. The first test was made by Edington I think. Maybe Mercury can be viewed as a test too. But thats more an observation. Testability plays a role. A huge role in fact. Who does not want his theories to be tested? I know I would! This can off course be contested. Again, great video. Im curious what that first guy has to say about the beginning (of the universe). Thanks again.

Physicists on Popper: — frank

Great video! I have watched some parts and will certainly watch the whole! I didn't know how Tegmark looked. I have always been against him. That is to say his level 1 multiverse. I am not against him anymore, but against his multiverse (at least the type 1 and 2) I am still. Popper is celebrated and off course they say nice things. But not really confirming. Its all about testability. If I were there the situation would have been different. I would offer them a possible TOE and speak against Popper... And put them to the test. For sure they must be testable. Like Popper himself.

Read Popper — 180 Proof

No thanks. After having read one book of him and his falsificationism I have grown up. All his books, I can say without actually having read them, will be a waste of my time. Now Im a big fan of wasting my time (I saw it written somewhere here that this is better than let time waste you). Or my time being wasted. But his three worlds combined with falsificationism I will not let again do that. The book tries to catch science in a pseudo scientific way. It offers a picture of how science should be and Popper's method of doing science rings true only in an artificial world. This world contains obedient slaves of Popper only and these slaves think and act in accordance with the great leader to construct and maintaining exactly the world he describes in his book. Science would die slowly. So the advice to read Popper is a bad one. Unless you are interested in his wicked ways and need an antropological subject matter...

Im not sure what merit(s) made him a "Sir" in the UK. I can think of something but that's quite inappropiate to mention on a philosophy site.

P.S. I wish we knew the gender of the 3 involved. It would be a big help in resolving the problem, right? — TheMadFool

Interesting addendum! I'll think again. I like this! :smile:

In geometric terms, the eternal triangle can be represented as comprising three points – a jealous mate (A = science) in a relationship with an unfaithful partner (B = the state) who has a lover (C = religion)...A feels abandoned, B is between two mates, and C is a catalyst for crisis in the union A-B. — Wikipedia

This is the kind of answer I like! Tickles the imagination and offers a nice and comprehensible way to analyse a problem or question in a non-too-abstract way. Let me contemplate and further the love triangle. :up: :smile:

Once we figured out how to do it, we couldn't stop. — Bitter Crank

If only they had invented condoms too back then. I used to think that people saying the Earth is over populated were totally wrong. Im not so sure now!

The hand of God. The Anthropic principle. The basis of self organization. Natural Law. The forces we feel at our center all seem to be linked? Different words for the same stuff maybe? — Pop

I think you mention different things here. Natural law (Law) takes care of evolution. Not of initial conditions. The Anthropic Pribciple comes closer but doesnt explain the Natural law. The Hand of God takes care of both.Im not sure what you mean by the force we feel at our center. Is it sexual? Then yes. ;)

No. Darwin's evolution will winnow out the future offspring of the vaxxars. Thats why they are selfish.

So in fact all men are equal but differently formed inormation structures? To put it in a highly abstract way.

What a strongly felt, not to say overratedly obeying and embracing attitude I feel here towards just a piece of Coronavirus DNA to be shot in the blood by a needle. Fuck that vaccine! The pharmaceutical companies rub their hands. The millionairs profiting from it that is. "Ha, very nice! Pandemic! Let a few million die first and then sell the vaccine to the richest countries. About the poor counties we dont care!" First letting millions die because of a virus they manufactured. And then let the poor population die. MF's!!!

It would have been the best if everybody was forbidden to take it. With the force of the gun!

I guess we could say we are locked in... — Tom Storm

We are not locked in. We are locked in between.

That creative force is what was called "the Will of God"

I think I underdtand this. All present forms have their origin at the big bang (about which I have some pretty non convential thoughts as well as about the stuff thats in it; the reason for many bans on physics forums). So the initial state had to be slightly nonrandom. The hand of God(s)?

To answer your question. The mind/body problem involves both physics and metaphysics. Physics for the material aspects and metaphysics for the mind aspect.

Consider them both as aspects of the combined stuff. Matter on the outside and metaphysical content inside.

Once upon a time, the stuf was one. When animals developed there was a division. The magic essence content part of that stuff became mind and the matter part became matter. Because the both are expressions of the combined potentiallity, the outer physical world are interdependent. The mind expression of that content stuff is still tied to matter and the expression of that matter stuff contains essence. It we eat stuff the mind quality gets expressed in our brain. This causes the matter to become visible. The body is the intermediate and can be considered the real self. Outside you can see the difference and inside you can feel the difference.

The brain is the brain. It's probably not useful to think of the brain as a digital computer or as an analog computer. — InPitzotl

Thats all I want to know.

Oh. If anyone is lecturing than it's you.

Gesus!!! A wholelottafucking going on back then

The gods can do whatever they like. But why should they transform reality in a black and white vector space? You can give the vectors color but dont they need instructions first (like us) to transform the elements of reality into vectors? Vectors are just linepieces with an arrow. Whats the difference between a quark arrow and a dreamed quark arrow? Lets assume the gods could make such a space appear instantly. Aint that reality, if WE could construct it, a reality thats artificial?

@InPitzotl

But do you think the brain is an analogue unit?

Individuals are morally obligated to get vaccinated — Srap Tasmaner

Oh come on! Moral obligation? Maybe its best for the community if the major part dies first!