A New Physics Theory of Life | Quanta Magazine
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
A New Physics Theory of Life | Quanta Magazine
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-t
You should read up on Boltzmann's Brains. It is an extreme example of how an
infinite (not just our 18 billion lightyear wide local bubble) could give rise
spontaneously [randomly] to brains in space that have memories of a universe
"just like ours" and think that they're IN such a universe for
Again, I offer this ACTUAL SCIENCE as an approach to discovering the genesis of
orderliness.
It does not seem to be true that randomness and entropy are the Sword of
Damocles they are made out to be. It seems the core dynamic of creation is
DIRECTLY OPPOSITE of that -- it seems that there's
Richard, I wonder if the whole hierarchical thing happened because homeo
sapiens stood up on two legs! Then the tendency to think of development as
being ONLY a vertical process took over. I now tend to think of human
development as a multi directional process, thinking of the brain as maybe
ha
On 5/4/2014 6:22 AM, TurquoiseBee wrote:
But by that very preferring, you raise the state of no hierarchy to
the top of the heap of states!
For *me*, Share. I didn't try to sell it to you.
>
It's kind of difficult to write computer code without using a hierarchy.
Go figure.
The first codin
Curtis, for me there is already a sense that human choice is an illusion: in
the sense that life force, or whatever one might call it, is driving
everything, even our neural firings! Probably even that nano second I mentioned
before, when a smoker decides to go for a walk rather than light a cig
Glad you had a great trip to the big A !
This is very interesting and I think you have put your finger on the most
important issue that makes this topic fascinating to me. I hope there is this
kind of choice point and am open to the idea that there might be techniques
(perhaps meditation) that
Jedi, but why are we here to understand? Is it not at least to survive? Survive
so that we can develop fully which is what I think we're here to do. Whatever
the heck that will mean!
All this discussion brings to my mind one of my favorite Maharishi ideas: save
the psychology. Which I think
On 5/4/2014 1:39 AM, TurquoiseBee wrote:
Possibly, possibly not. I have to admit that it was a really great
day, and that getting to know this lady was the most fun I've had in a
long time. You know that thing where two people just make each other
laugh...that happened, so no complaints from my
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
To demean points of view he disagrees with is high on Barry's list of personal
values.
Er, I mean, preferences...
Compulsions.
Rhetorical question. No need to reply. I was just amused that neither you nor
Share can conceive of h
> > > > My guess is that having preferences or hierarchies is hard wired into
> > > > us for survival value.
> > > I disagree. I see nothing wrong with preference or believing in
> > > hierarchies, but I definitely don't see them as the same thing. Despite
> > > your attempt at what you
To demean points of view he disagrees with is high on Barry's list of personal
values.
Er, I mean, preferences...
Rhetorical question. No need to reply. I was just amused that neither you nor
Share can conceive of having a preference without the presence of some kind of
hierarchy. I
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
Rhetorical question. No need to reply. I was just amused that neither you nor
Share can conceive of having a preference without the presence of some kind of
hierarchy. I would suggest that this is pretty limited thinking. But if it
makes you
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
My guess is that having preferences or hierarchies is hard wired into us for
survival value.
I disagree. I see nothing wrong with preference or believing in hierarchies,
but I definitely don't
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
My guess is that having preferences or hierarchies is hard wired into us for
survival value.
I disagree. I see nothing wrong with preference or believing in hierarchies,
but I definitely don't see them as the same thing. Despite your attempt at
Comments below...
Because the thing is, humans, at a fundamental level, cannot prefer or value
more highly, what they even unconsciously hold as detrimental.
Nonsense. People do this all the time, continue behaviors that they consciously
*know* are detrimental to them. Their position within an
to try to postulate a lack of
free will just because I've occasionally experienced something that feels like
that subjectively. I don't buy the dogma that suggests that having an ego and a
sense of self is in any way lesser than having a non-ego, not-the-doer sense of
Self. They're just
x27;t have to try to postulate
a lack of free will just because I've occasionally experienced something that
feels like that subjectively. I don't buy the dogma that suggests that having
an ego and a sense of self is in any way lesser than having a non-ego,
not-the-doer sense of Self. The
From: Share Long
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Sunday, May 4, 2014 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: One last set of thoughts for Curtis
turq, I think most humans have a hierarchy, if only in that they have preferred
states. Your preferred state is t
Curtis, just to add the ideas of a Buddhist, Tara Goleman-Bennett in whose book
I first encountered the notion that the brain's neural pathways are like ruts
in a dirt road. The more we go down a specific direction, the deeper that rut
becomes so that we're even more likely to take that directio
to try to postulate
a lack of free will just because I've occasionally experienced something that
feels like that subjectively. I don't buy the dogma that suggests that having
an ego and a sense of self is in any way lesser than having a non-ego,
not-the-doer sense of Self. They
anything more *than* feelings. I don't have to try to postulate a lack of
free will just because I've occasionally experienced something that feels like
that subjectively. I don't buy the dogma that suggests that having an ego and a
sense of self is in any way lesser than having a non
From: "curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, May 3, 2014 5:24 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: One last set of thoughts for Curtis
Barry,
Your post is on point for a few reasons. One, I am crazy about proprioceptive
exercises. My living
From: "curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, May 3, 2014 5:24 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: One last set of thoughts for Curtis
Have a great time in Amsterdam where your free choices will be challenged by a
cornucopia of deligh
Based on ideas that began with the work of mathematicians Benoit Mandelbrot and
John Conway, the physicist Stephen Wolfram has some interesting ideas on the
nature of free will. Wolfram has been investigating simple computational
systems that have very simple starting conditions and very simple
Barry,
Your post is on point for a few reasons. One, I am crazy about proprioceptive
exercises. My living room looks like a training camp for Cirque! Plus I have
had to spend some time in assisted living facilities for personal and
professional reasons lately so this is an up topic for me.
I a
Judy at her best, all great distinctions.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
Actually, this distinction is pretty elementary with regard to neuroscientific
studies; it really isn't something that has just never occurred to the
researchers. Libet's studies, for example, looked dir
Actually, this distinction is pretty elementary with regard to neuroscientific
studies; it really isn't something that has just never occurred to the
researchers. Libet's studies, for example, looked directly at the apparent time
lag between decisions made on the unconscious level and when they
28 matches
Mail list logo
