I agree intelligence is everywhere. Where does information come from if we are just brains in vats - not that I'm keen on that old chestnut or such matters as Putnam's "semantic disproof" of an instance of it. The realists only insist on the real for what it does in explanation as against other hypotheses, including acceptance of before human time and distrust of such argumentive dodges as the world being created in 4004BC complete with memories and fossil record. I am very unsure what we prod with out 'sticks' or our attention is attracted to. Some of our equations work out better if two dimensions of time are included and all origins turn out to be endlessly deferred, even that of 'no time' if this universe was created in another.
On Mar 25, 3:14 am, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 24, 4:12 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Once upon a time, 14 - 20 billions years ago, all matter > > (all elementary particles and all quarks and > > their girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks, > > all kinds of waves: electromagnetic, gravitational, > > muons… gluons field ….. etc.) – were assembled in a “single point”. > > Since spacetime is ultimately the same thing, the idea of everything > being a single point (having zero space) also means there was no time. > No time means the same thing as all time, which makes sense since > there is no frame of reference outside of the singularity with which > to establish any kind of sequence. > > What I think this *must* mean is that the singularity is not an event > that happened x billions of years ago, rather it is an event which > never happened but which is perpetually projected ever further > backwards. As this happens, space expansion happens within the > singularity from within rather than the singularity expanding into an > infinite void. Such a void cannot exist outside of the singularity > since it is the singularity itself which is creating space and time, > as well as causality and sequence itself. > > I call this the 'Big Diffraction', as it is no more an expansion of > matter into space as it is an ingression of non-matter into the > singularity. Instead of a cosmology which imagines a hypothetical > explosion at the dawn of time as viewed from a distance by a generic > voyeur, we must recognize that this is an impossible perspective as > the singularity cannot possibly have an exterior. It is not merely an > innocent way of conceiving a physical event, but actually hopelessly > confuses the reality of the thing. There was no explosion and no > expansion. Those are reverse engineered narratives based upon our own > scales of time, space, density, etc. At the 'time' of the actual > event, concepts like intensity and magnitude would be inconceivable as > they had literally not been invented yet. A singularity has no measure > or frame of reference, it is boundary-less in every sense, as it would > have to be in order to contain the entire cosmos condensed to a single > point-event. Within that point, must be all the potential for all > times and places as well as all mass-energy. > > > It means that all information also was assembled in a "single point". > > Not necessarily. Not if information isn't 'real'. I think information > is subjective. It arises through the enactment of timespace (the > ingression of the vacuum into the singularity) as sensorimotive > experience which accumulates as significance. > > > And then after big bang all particles flew in different sides. > > # > > Suppose, that every particle is the owner of some information. > > Then it was impossible to create Intellect Existence by the chance > > during as short time as 14 billions years after ‘big bang’. > > The intelligence could have never appeared by the chances > > according to Theory of Probability (as per the infinite monkey > > theorem ). > > Intelligence is everywhere. Just not human intelligence. > > Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
