On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 4:59 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net <
socra...@bezeqint.net> wrote:

> Cells make copies of themselves.
> Different cells make different copies of themselves.
> Cells  come in all shapes and sizes.
> Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves
>  and during pregnancy process of  9 months gradually ( ! )
> and by chance ( or not by chance )  they change  own
> geometrical form from zygote to a child.
> Cells  come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you.
> Cells  they are you  ( !? )
> This is modern biomechanical /chemical  point of view.
> #
> Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’
> But this explanation  is not complete.
> Cells have an energy / electrical potential.
> Cells have an electromagnetic field.
> Therefore we need to say:
> ‘ Cells  and electromagnetic field - they are you.’
> ===.
> Is this formulation correct?
> Of course it is correct.
> Why?
> Because:
> Bioelectromagnetism (sometimes equated with bioelectricity)
>  refers to the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic fields
> produced by living cells, tissues or organisms.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioelectromagnetism
> What does it mean?
> It means there isn’t biological cell without electromagnetic fields.
> It means that in the cell we have two ( 2 ) substances:
> matter and electromagnetic fields.
> And in 1985   Richard P. Feynman wrote book:
> QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter
> The idea of book -  the interaction between light
> ( electromagnetic fields ) and matter is strange.
> He wrote: ‘ The theory of quantum electrodynamics
> describes Nature as absurd from the point of view
> of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment.
> So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd. ‘
> / page 10. /
> #
> Once again:
> 1.
>  Cells  and electromagnetic field - they are you.
> 2.
> We  cannot understand their interaction and therefore
> we don’t know the answer to the question: ‘ who am I ?’
> ===.
> Socratus.

I don't think it is proper to say we are atoms, or we are cells.  Matter
gets replaced, cells get replaced, what survives is our pattern.
Computational theories of mind reinforce and formalize this idea further:
material is inconsequential, as any universal computer regardless of its
substrate, can reproduce the patterns of any other.

I like this Feynman quote on identity:

"This is what it means when one discovers how long it takes for the atoms
of the brain to be replaced by other atoms, to note that the thing which I
call my individuality is only a pattern or dance. The atoms come into my
brain, dance a dance, then go out; always new atoms but always doing the
same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday. "

While quantum effects are strange, they can make sense under theories of
mind that define identity as a certain pattern of computation or
information.  In Russell Stansish's book *Theory of Nothing* (in chapter 7
available here: http://www.hpcoders.com.au/nothing.html ) he actually
derives the postulates of quantum mechanics from his theory of observation
in an infinite ensemble.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to