Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message: From: Harold Orbach <h...@ksu.edu<mailto:h...@ksu.edu>> Date: February 16, 2016 at 10:26:50 AM CST To: "online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com>" <online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com>> Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: 'Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?' – Published in Journal 'Advances in Life Sciences' Perhaps, instead of this idle speculation you ought to consider the confirmation of Einstein's hypothesis of gravity waves that has now been confirmed and reconfirmed of black holes engulfing other black holes and its implications for "life" over time in the universe. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 16, 2016, at 9:43 AM, Stephen Jarosek <sjaro...@iinet.net.au<mailto:sjaro...@iinet.net.au>> wrote: >” I think we need to be humble at this early stage of our knowledge about the >universe. It could well be that intelligent life is plentiful. And of course >unintelligent single cell life would be even more plentiful. Also it could be >that fancy life is rare.” I see an interpretation emerging that might enable us to be a bit more bold. Here’s what we know with some certainty: 1) The elements and compounds as they exist on Earth are probably the same elements and compounds that are likely to exist elsewhere throughout the universe; 2) The elements and compounds as they exist on Earth are “engineered” with very precise properties that make life possible. We saw this in this video clip<https://youtu.be/FzcTgrxMzZk> that I posted a couple of weeks ago. The astonishing complexity within a cell would be impossible without the very precise properties of the same “dumb dirt” that is likely to exist on other planets throughout the universe; 3) It is the persistence of complexity across time that renders null and void any notion of persistent complexity by dumb luck. Entropy and all that. How do we know this? We know this because we inhabit a planet where complexity persists across time... the evidence is all around us, in our very own persistence across time. It therefore follows that the same resistance to entropy, the same persistence of complexity, will be abundant in any direction we might care to point our telescopes; 4) Within the context of Peircean biosemiotics, there exists the framework for the mind-stuff – the “knowing how to be” - that resists entropy. CONCLUSION: So long as a moderately-sized planet, rich in elements and compounds, exists within a “habitable zone” around a star, the “dumb dirt” of which it is comprised will predispose it to become a living, breathing planet. Life is the universal given... a certainty, not just a “possibility” or “maybe”. sj From: online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com> [mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stanley A. KLEIN Sent: Tuesday, 16 February 2016 1:55 PM To: Online Sadhu Sanga Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: 'Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?' – Published in Journal 'Advances in Life Sciences' To Stephen Jarosek, I think we need to be humble at this early stage of our knowledge about the universe. It could well be that intelligent life is plentiful. And of course unintelligent single cell life would be even more plentiful. Also it could be that fancy life is rare. To C. Dass Also it could be that consciousness is primary before universe. Actually as Penrose points out the deeply mysterious way our world works could well have a wondrous power that many call cosmic consciousness and that others call revised Standard Model at the bottom. I think your approach of giving the wondrous aspects of the universe the name "consciousness" is fine. with me. I like that more glorious language. In the West it is called God language. In the East it is called Consciousness language. In your latest posting you said: Your proposal leads to the conclusion that consciousness produced from inert chemicals because every living cell is also conscious. But there is no evidence for consciousness originating from non-conscious substance. . And even more recently you said: " Now you say that 'We should be aware that the way it likely started was by some special environment that have the useful ingredients of for life.' How it is different from those who say that life has been created by a creator by some special creation?" Yes I agree that there is no difference between those two languages. Dear C. Dass. I now have a question for you. Do you believe in psychic phenomena like precognition or telepathy? The wondrous aspect of these psychic phenomena is that they can NOT be explained by standard science. The nifty thing about psychic phenomena is that which of the two wondrous languages is more appropriate can actually be tested by relatively simple experiments. Stan On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 3:05 AM, Stephen Jarosek <sjaro...@iinet.net.au<mailto:sjaro...@iinet.net.au>> wrote: Stan, I think that your estimate as to the prevalence of life throughout the universe is just a little pessimistic and, might I suggest, unfounded. I suggest the opposite, namely, that life is abundant throughout the universe and that there is no Fermi paradox<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox> whatsoever. That is, even in a universe teaming with life, assuming conventional radio-wave communication as the only one available, here are the reasons that we are extremely unlikely to ever establish direct contact with aliens: 1) Space travel at even a fraction of light speed is seriously injurious to health, and this NewStatesman article<http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech/2015/04/near-light-speed-travel-increasingly-impossible-according-maths> explains why; 2) ROI - Return on investment. Think about the logistics of Arecibo-type communications (1974). 25,000 years to reach M13, and then wait for a further 25,000 years for a reply. While it may be "possible" to transmit a powerful, narrow beam as far as a quarter of the diameter of our galaxy away, the huge expense with zero commercial/cultural return, for a civilisation which won't last even a fraction of the duration (given current trends), is a dumb investment decision; 3) By contrast, more conventional transmissions might be lucky to reach 30 stars maximum (15LY?), but we need to factor incentive and cost-benefit motivations into our discussion of likelihoods. ROI, interstellar and not just local, speaks to the cost-benefit realities of interstellar communication. The question of possible undiscovered technologies remains... but if we don’t have them, then we won’t be making contact with even the chattiest of interstellar neighbours until we do. CONCLUSION: There is NO Fermi paradox. The universe looks to us precisely as it should look even with advanced civilizations thriving throughout the universe as the given. We might be especially reminded of a familiar, old cliché - “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” sj From: online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com> [mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stanley Klein Sent: Tuesday, 16 February 2016 12:35 AM To: online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: 'Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?' – Published in Journal 'Advances in Life Sciences' Dear C. Dass, I already responded about Origin of Life saying that one possibility is that it is very, very, very difficult to start life, with maybe just one chance in 10^120 for it to be in our universe, in our galaxy on our planet. And I also said that maybe in 20 years some clever researchers will figure out a way for the the likelihood to be a lot higher, like one chance in a million planets. That would make it likely that we'll receive signals from ET in the next hundred years, and maybe sooner. On the biodiversity topic you'll have to be more specific since we see bacteria biodiversing as we use more antibiotics. So could you propose a specific example. Like evolution of the eye? Evolution of human intelligence largely depend on evolution of language. Why do you reject evolution of intelligence? In any case pick a very specific example for us to explore together. Stan -- ---------------------------- Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03 Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138 Conference 'Science and Scientist': http://scsiscs.org/conference Donate: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin Online Classes: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/#instructions Sadhu-Sanga MP3s: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact ---------------------------- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to online_sadhu_sanga+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sanga+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com<mailto:online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com>. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu<mailto:peirce-L@list.iupui.edu> . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu<mailto:l...@list.iupui.edu> with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
