The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?  (Read 14859 times)

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #25 on: 05/05/2015 16:49:57 »
So what you are saying is that death is possible with no evidence of failure of any organ. provided that you can locate your hypothetical and so far invisible cells and disentangle them from your hypothetical metamatter. But your proposed experiment only involves killing cells we already know about, so it won't demonstrate anything of the sort - at least, not to the mind of a scientist.

Why choose something as complicated as a fruit fly? Start with a unicellular animal or a bacterium, which must surely possess whatever it is you are looking for, and think of a way of killing it without disrupting its function. Or is that too much of an oxymoron?
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #26 on: 05/05/2015 21:58:59 »
“ But your proposed experiment only involves killing cells we already know about, so it won't demonstrate anything of the sort - at least, not to the mind of a scientist. “


As is common in biological research the selection of candidate cells for termination in each trial is a process that each team is free to administer as they see fit. Time to success will hinge upon the teams ability to achieve successful trials as described while decrementing the selection of candidate cells for termination in the most efficient manner going forward, so long as it is with the primary goal in mind as stated.


“Why choose something as complicated as a fruit fly? “

Your approach would describe one technique for seeking the entanglement molecule (EM) not the entanglement cell (EC). Beginning by directly searching for a type of molecule and its function may be somewhat more difficult to seeking a class of cells which are expected to have such a large functional effect as termination on the subject with no destructive affect upon the subjects systems.

While all living hosts are hypothesized to implement entanglement molecules (EM) to instantiate life, entanglement cells (EC) are proposed to have evolved and function as described only in some complex hosts. They are cells like many other cells in living hosts in earths’ ecosystem, known or unknown, that are pending further or perhaps initial identification or description by science. We have a long history of studying unknown or poorly understood structures in biology, this is no different.
« Last Edit: 05/05/2015 22:03:34 by tonylang »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #27 on: 06/05/2015 00:12:49 »
Quote
a class of cells which are expected to have such a large functional effect as termination on the subject with no destructive affect upon the subjects systems.

You are ignoring the key point of my reductio ad absurdam. In the case of a single celled organism, there is only one class of cell, and it's very much alive. Now add more cells to make a symbiont or a complex single organism, and you still don't need an entanglement cell to make it alive.

Evolution of complex systems from simple ones does not require a hitherto undiscovered cell which is essential to the life of organisms with n +1 different cells but not to those with n cell types. Thus your hypothesis only has credence if you accept that "n+1" species were created rather than evolved: and there is no evidence for that axiom. 

More fundamentally, multicelled species actually develop from a single cell. We know that you can do all sorts of damage to an undifferentiated blastocyst without killing it: you can delay its differentiation, or even divide it into multiple clones, so whatever "instantiates" life must have been present in the initial cell and is therefore not a property that distinguishes complex beings from unicellular animals. 
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #28 on: 07/05/2015 22:21:07 »
At first the comprehension that ones’ first person individuality is abstracted, separate, and distinct from the evolution, development, and life of ones’ cells is a tough hurdle for the mind to overcome. Even as it is viewed from various perspectives, and in the absence of clarifying empirical evidence, it requires some time alone in contemplation and a steely objectivity to come to realize the truth of it. However humankind has had this problem before.


It is essential to recognize that maintaining life and maintaining an emerged individuality are both essential but separate functions of living hosts. The hosting of life via natural entanglement is an evolved property of inanimate matter whereas emerged individuality (Heterodyned by EC's) is an additional evolved skill of living multi-cellular organisms. The function of the entanglement cells (EC) in complex hosts is not to establish life in a multi-cellular organism. Each cell is already alive complements of the natural entanglement by its entanglement molecules (EM). Rather the role of the EC is to instantiate individuality, establish the position-of-view the target for experience of the emerged being. This unique composite natural entanglement with metamatter is separate and distinct from the natural entanglement established by each of the other (non-EC) living cells which comprise ones’ host body. Ergo; in nature you are not your body. This is why you can sever an entire leg or destroy a large portion of your brain , or drink beer and remain you. That is to say, maintain your individuality. This individuality is not about appearance or behavior or personality or intelligence or even consciousness, it is ones’ continued position–of-view via natural entanglement. You remain you because the emerged individual is separate and distinct from that of the trillions of non-EC cells that maintain its operation.

Each single cell which comprises your body is itself naturally entangled and is in nature a living individual, as is the emerged individual, you whose multi-cellular form and functions each non-EC cell help to maintain. This says nothing of your individuality. Further, this same implementation operates for leaves, trees, hair, internal organs etc. each are clearly multi-cellular and are alive but may only be collections of individualized living cells which are held together, and perhaps on some level, function together. Such an association of living individuals may or may not have evolved the capacity to heterodyne to establish a secondary emerged natural entanglement connection to metamatter.  That is to say, they have not become an emerged individual like a beaver or a dolphin, human or an ant. Making a distinction between the position-of-view of a cell or a simple association of cells and the heterodyned composite POV of an emerged individual is a tenuous endeavor fraught with uncertainty absent the principles described in the instantiation hypothesis. In earth-life it is the hypothesized entanglement cells that are the evolutionary components of living hosts responsible for this advanced feature of emerged individuality. These terms and distinctions are necessary because our eyes and instruments deceive us; the largest life form in earth’s ecosystem the sequoia tree may very well not possess an emerged individuality whereas some of the smallest may.

 Nature implements life by the same fundamental mechanism no matter the hosts form. In nature this sort of scalable, extensible implementation is the very definition of simplicity. It is the entanglement molecule that is hypothesized to fundamentally establish and maintain all life via natural entanglement in every living cell. One QE connection at some unique QEF is one individual. How this QE connection is established or maintained, composite or not, is irrelevant to natures design. Earth-life offers one (carbon based) approach to hosting nature’s implementation of life. Other planets may very well evolve other approaches. We may someday manufacture yet another.   This implementation is what permits the universal mobility of individuality. Hosts for life and their constituent components whether single cellular or otherwise are local in space-time and have no natural universal mobility requiring physical travel (i.e. via comets or spacecraft).
« Last Edit: 08/05/2015 00:33:12 by tonylang »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #29 on: 07/05/2015 23:29:08 »
You would do well to study slime moulds before pontificating on individuality.

The treatment of "nature" as an agent rather than a set of observations, can lead you into all sorts of erroneous thinking - but you won't be the first or last to make that mistake. Beware of bringing mystical philosophy to a science forum.
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #30 on: 11/05/2015 12:13:41 »
To date the most promising structure yet discovered which displays some of the features and function consistent with those predicted by the instantiation hypothesis for the entanglement molecule (EM), while perhaps falling well shot of complete equivalence, is the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) complex. This photosynthetic antenna complex is the naturally occurring molecular structure responsible for the photosynthetic non-classical conduction observed in living plant cells via natural entanglement. In green algae it operates to overcome the otherwise inefficient latency of classical mechanisms which would result in a devastating loss of anti-entropic information needed from sunlight for the continued evolution of viable hosts on this planet.


Likewise, a similar natural entanglement antenna complex describes the predicted entanglement molecule which instantiate the living individual to available hosts wherever they may emerge in this universe. This Entanglement is between the living hosts (cells) and a form of matter (metamatter) in Hilbert-space made accessible only by the non-locality, non-relativistic reach of natural entanglement. It is indeed a true testament to the amazing ingenuity and flexibility of nature that such an implementation is not only possible, but naturally emerges, for life may not exist without it. This instantiation mechanism is the most plausible solution to the conundrum of individuality in this universe posed by the scenario of this thread.


If the entanglement molecule indeed predated the cell then, structurally if not functionally, it must be of a different design than the FMO complex. The FMO is a protein based structure assembled from complex amino acids and likely evolved within the cell here on earth or planets nearby. To predate the cell the EM must permit natural entanglement by utilizing a more fundamental elemental design. The entanglement molecule may be one with which we are already familiar.
« Last Edit: 11/05/2015 12:16:28 by tonylang »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #31 on: 11/05/2015 16:53:19 »
Quote
while perhaps falling well shot of complete equivalence,

in other words, nothing like it at all.

Quote
and a form of matter (metamatter) in Hilbert-space made accessible only by the non-locality, non-relativistic reach of natural entanglement.

I live in the countryside. I can recognise bullshit when I smell it.

Quote
to the conundrum of individuality

I see no conundrum. All living things have different chemistry (due to the instability of DNA) and history
(Pauli's exclusion principle) and are therefore individual.

 
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #32 on: 11/05/2015 22:36:16 »
Nature and science both collude to create a history of ideas which many, during the course of one lifetime, or another, find repugnant, unbelievable, or just inconvenient. On those too numerous occasions when such resistance was permitted to stifle free inquiry humanity has suffered in more ways than one. If an idea is proven not to describe nature, such poof is just as enlightening as its confirmation. Developing ideas and then determining which ideas describe nature and which ones do not, by testing not by emphatic declarations is what defines the scientific process. 

 The notion held by many that an individual is alive and present in this form, in this place, at this moment, exclusively because ones particular body and particular species emerged where it has when it has, is very likely to be false. In nature it is likely that you have, can, and will experience life in any available form in any viable environment in this universe or in existence and the instantiation hypothesis may describe the natural mechanism that makes this possible.   
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #33 on: 14/05/2015 15:46:08 »
"If you analyze it closely you will, I think, find that it is just a little bit more than a collection of single data (experiences and memories), namely the canvas upon which they are collected. And you will, on close introspection, find that what you really mean by ‘I’ is that ground-stuff upon which they are collected." [Schrödinger, Erwin (1992-01-31). What is Life? (Canto) Cambridge University Press]


The next fertile undiscovered frontier of science is the study of how the individual (you) naturally inhabit this universe. This topic speaks to the really interesting question of how any life, you, came to be where you are in the form that you are. Consciousness, self-awareness, sentience are evolved attributes had by very few forms of life in earth’s ecosystem, yet all are just as alive in nature. Such attributes cannot be relevant to either nature’s fundamental implementation of life, to being alive, or to experience. Experience may be enhanced by these attributes as they evolve in more complex hosts or species, but the phenomena which establish an instance of life likely brings no experience at all.


The position-of-view (POV) as described by the instantiation hypothesis is implemented by a fundamental property of nature called natural entanglement. This process produces the POV which localizes you in your space-time, whether you have five, one, twenty or no senses. Regardless of what or where ones living form may be in this universe. Effectively ones POV is the target for all of the sensory information we call experience. Any beings lifeID is temporarily localized to its host body by the naturally occurring entanglement between its physical host such as ones cell(s) together with a non-relativistic form of matter called metamatter (in Hilbert-space). The POV of each individual life can be represented mathematically by its unique wave function. This wave function is a unique solution of state for the individual in space-time and is the term missing from many of our quantum mechanical solutions. The POV is nothing less than the mathematical representation of a living being.


In life the POV brings no experience but only that which may have an experience. In nature a POV is the mathematical representation of a lifeID established either by entanglement of a single cell to metamatter, or alternatively by the heterodyning of multiple entanglement cells (EC) to metamatter. If you are in fact alive then your composite lifeID and its position-of-view together constitutes your being regardless of your physical state, form, condition or location in space-time. If the entanglement hypothesis accurately depicts the reality in this universe and the entanglement molecule exists, then it represents the most fundamental physical component of life as we know it. Like the Top-Quark, or the Higgs, the Ether or DNA, the entanglement molecule may someday be isolated and identified either in the cell or in the environment. or not. Either way we may learn something along the way.
 

Offline poleflux

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #34 on: 21/05/2015 06:48:44 »
Life is so rare because of the circumstances necessary to spark life in the first place.  Not at all common as some would have you believe.  Here is the recipe for life:

a giant water ice planet with a salt core maintaining liquid water below the frozen atmosphere.

a planetary impact with a rocky iron planet rich in volatile elements and just the right size.

a back splash upon impact creating our moon

the impacting planet would have to have a strong magnetic field passing directly through the global ocean plane where salt water would spark electricity maintaining it to this day

the solar systems star would have an affinity to iron two magnetic fields creating the dynamo
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #35 on: 21/05/2015 13:59:06 »
Consciousness, self-awareness, sentience are evolved attributes had by very few forms of life in earth’s ecosystem,

Would you care to define those attributes and justify yor assertion? 
 

Online jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
  • Thanked: 52 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #36 on: 23/05/2015 13:16:38 »
If you say 'walkies' to my dog he knows exactly what I mean. We often underestimate the intelligence of animals. However, would you describe a virus as being alive. That is a difficult one. It is more like a nano machine than a living organism. The problem of describing life and especially consciousness is that we are part of the system we attempt to describe and so subjectivity is hard to avoid. It is much better to concentrate on observational evidence. Otherwise arguments quickly become circular. By all means pursue your theory, just don't expect empirical evidence.
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #37 on: 24/05/2015 01:32:07 »
However rare or ubiquitous host species for life may actually be in this universe, they nonetheless likely emerge via countless varied means and circumstances throughout this universe or throughout existence. Most can never be imagined by us. The implementation of host species in any particular environment in this universe is only one component of a much larger, grander implementation, that of individuality. We have become too accustomed to, and somewhat tunnel visioned in, our understanding of life as being only the classical functional chemistry of the physical hosts that emerge here and there on this planet or in this universe. Individuality however is the original, the indigenous component of life. Like snowflakes, living hosts transiently come and go as they assume forms too varied and randomly influenced to predict or to repeat. With humankind being the very visual species that we are, we are once again confounded by the visible and captivating facade of life that reflects visible light, namely the physical, electromagnetically congealed component of the living individual, the species. The ongoing cognitive immaturity of humankind is engendered by this limited or flawed understanding of life. 

The only life on Earth is the living cell. The lesser point being submitted for your collective consideration is that such attributes as consciousness, self-awareness, sentience, intelligence etc.,  concepts already defined by others, are emergent skills or capabilities arbitrarily ascribed by observers  to particular emerged composite hosts (with EC) and therefore cannot be fundamental to natures’ basic implementation of life. Currently and for billions of years on earth  %99.99… of living hosts for life were and continue to be either single cell individuals or non-emerged (no EC) collections thereof. To truly understand what life is and the mobility of its fundamental component; individuality, and the natural principles that govern and influence its instantiation, we need consider only the single living cell. Viewed as an individual, a property traditionally ascribed only to human beings, the single living cell forces us to come to conclusions we never would with our usual limited perspective.

The first person position-of-view we refer to as individuality (Life) in this universe has emerged from a very basic natural phenomenon, namely natural quantum entanglement, a property of a naturally occurring molecule. Clearly like all other phenomenon or processes or reactions involving groups of atoms and molecules these can also be categorized as being chemical in nature. Natural entanglement is the basis for individuality. When one is misguided into thinking that life is only the physical component of this natural entangled relationship a great amount of confusion and misconception will be the inevitable outcome. The first casualty is the dismissal of the mobility of individuality in this universe. As is usually the case we can live just fine with all of our misconceptions as life makes few demands on the intellectual awareness of its tenants. However as we all know advancement requires enlightenment and the time for our further enlightenment in this regard grows near.
« Last Edit: 24/05/2015 01:35:02 by tonylang »
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #38 on: 02/06/2015 17:44:57 »
Since ancient times humankind has felt endeared by certain properties, skills, or talents observed in the living forms all around us. Properties which are misconstrued to be fundamental identifiers of life and of all living beings, properties such as mobility, voice, speech, sight, memory, and biology as we know it.


The reason Thomas Edison could so enthrall spectators with his newly designed speaking device, which he dubbed the phonograph, is due to humankinds hitherto engrained, evolved or learned, and largely subconscious understanding that a voice for example, is the sound of a living beings soul. Although consciously many people knew better, nevertheless it wasn’t until they were able to actually witness the spectacle of a clearly inanimate device producing a voice did the rewiring of people’s minds and the accompanying enlightenment take place. So it was with self locomotion or mobility of inanimate objects which also took some getting used to by our not so distant ancestors, as did light detection describable as sight, so to with the introduction of retrievable memory and such surprising spectacles exhibited by inanimate non biological devices.


Then there is life. Today we have a much more detailed description of biology and its chemistry than did our forbearers. Nonetheless, we perhaps more than ever, continue to see nature’s implementation of life as we did those other skills, as a feature indigenous to and expressible only by the biological forms we currently see around us. With the exception of life, it is only the encroachment of our synthetic, non-biological technologies upon these formerly cherished skills and talents that has helped us to see nature’s true design. In so doing we now realize that these functions are not exclusively properties of living beings or of biology but rather examples of utilization and manipulation of more basic properties of nature such as temperature and pressure, light, chemical, electromotive, and ponderomotive forces, friction, entanglement etc..


However, where life is concerned, and taking no example from the past, we continue to cling to the misconception that life is not a skill or talent comparable to speech or memory, a property which similarly evolved here on earth in biological form. Instead we define life by the observed biology and chemistry of the forms we see around us. This is akin to defining speech, communication, memory or vision by the description of your eyes, or larynx or neurons and their chemistry, or by the design of Edison’s phonograph, or by the intricate electrical designs of the cell phone. Life too is an evolved capability with a natural implementation abstracted from any particular biology or chemistry we may see around us. In nature life has a fundamental implementation based on natural entanglement via a molecule that may have existed in nature long before life emerged, a molecule like so many others utilized by the cell to exceptional effect, the entanglement molecule. A molecule that may also be utilized in synthetic, perhaps non-biological, forms to create an independent genesis of life.


No matter how detailed or convincing the illusion of life may become in its implementation, for example in an android or computer or even in a biological entity, despite what your eyes may urge you to believe, each continues to be a non-living entity absent natures fundamental mechanism of life. An essential mechanism provided via natural entanglement between the properly implemented entanglement molecules within living cells located in this space-time with metamatter in Hilbert-space which together produce each unique living individual’s position-of-view (POV) and lifeID. This is the essential mechanism that permits any viable form to host an individual like yourself or your pet otter anywhere in our space-time. It is how you are where you are right now. It is the natural anti-entropic mechanism that permits any viable planet or species to host your life. By this hypothesized definition even the most convincingly implemented appearance and behavior of an entity not naturally entangled in this way will continue to be an inanimate entity. In contrast, a hand held brick such as a calculator instantiated by natural entanglement to establish a POV, despite all appearances, this unconvincing brick would in fact be a living being.


The day will shortly arrive when we are confronted as we previously have been, with a new implementation of entities that meet all of the aesthetic and behavioral misconceptions we now harbor about life, or alternatively ones that show no traditional evidence of life what so ever, absent an understanding of the true determinant of life natural entanglement, we will be ill prepared to tell the difference.
 
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #39 on: 03/06/2015 23:20:50 »
Life is an abstract quality said to be possessed by all those things that we consider to be alive. Not much of a definition since the criteria of "alive" are a bit fluid, but generally we are looking for a bounded entity the transpires and has some tendency to optimise its transpiration by responding or adapting to small changes in its environment.

There is no actual entity called "life", nor its it transferable between entities. It has no existence outside of the minds of the people who talk about it. End of mystery.   
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #40 on: 04/06/2015 06:03:40 »
It is crucial to understand species and species development and evolution. However absent the comprehension of the true role of these structures one misses the reality of life in this universe.

The limited perspective of life we now embrace is akin to a distant future paleontologist eons after life has left the earth attempting to explain how uncovered vehicular artifacts could have operated all over the earth without first realizing the existence of human beings as a fundamental component of vehicular operation. Our, perhaps non-biological, dirt digger could deduce all manner of insights about the discovered operation of the cars and, aircraft parts and their operation but unable or unwilling to comprehend the existence of a naturally implemented intelligent species of the kind they have never imagined much less seen. The mystery for them would be as untenable as life presently is to us. The missing component in biology today is you.

The Monogamy of Entanglement is the fundamental scientific principle of nature which implements each instance of life (i.e. you) by natural entanglement in any viable habitat. It is the property of nature in this universe that makes individuality possible and provides the singleton, non-locality and non-relativistic characteristics of instantiation via natural entanglement.
« Last Edit: 04/06/2015 22:28:42 by tonylang »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #41 on: 05/06/2015 09:03:40 »
It is crucial to understand species and species development and evolution.

Bad starting point. "Species" is an arbitrary label we attach to apparent cardinal points in a continuum. Evolution is the result of an entirely random process with a lot of failures, even more insignificant variations, and a very few significant ones, modulated by environment.

No mystery, therefore no requirement for any new molecules or hitherto undiscovered processes.
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #42 on: 06/06/2015 20:19:09 »
Heisenberg : “The history of physics is not only a sequence of experimental discoveries and observations, followed by their mathematical description; it is also a history of concepts. For an understanding of the phenomena the first condition is the introduction of adequate concepts. Only with the help of correct concepts can we really know what has been observed.”

The corner that many well intentioned practitioners of science become hopelessly jammed in is the corner where the pages of the textbook meet. The equations and bits of understanding that we gather need context. Practitioners of science should choose a topic or phenomenon of nature that interest them and with their best scientific understanding, and logic and powers of rational deduction, and most importantly a steely objectivity, set out to conceive of how nature may implement that phenomena.

Before Darwin any suggestion that life had anything to do with cells and undiscovered molecules (DNA/RNA) in the cell which dictated most of what you are would have been scientific, what’s the word ‘woo’. Perhaps we are a bit more enlightened today. Unfortunately today it continues to be just as difficult to see nature form here as it ever has been in the past. I came to realize that at least where life is concerned we continue to be steeped in ignorance, mysticism, ideology, and denial despite the pivotally important course correction we acquired from Darwin’s insights. I came to see that any individual’s experience of life, of being, is as much part of nature as your species is and one is necessarily abstracted from the other.

You are not your cells or molecules or your atoms, in fact you shouldn't even call them yours. I came to see that the only life that exists is the living cell in all of its forms and that the natural processes that implement life are the same for the cell as it is for bacteria as it is for a fruit fly as for a human being. It is folly for us to think we could only experience life in this very temporary, randomly emerged bipedal primate form. Further, your cells and molecules come and go continuously over the course of your lifetime but nonetheless you remain you. Then there are the other trillions of living individuals in million of different forms all around us coming into being and going out of life continuously. I realized that the only form we need consider in this regard is the single living cell. The answers that are true for the cell are the answers that apply to all life. Further, you and I and your pet octopus and every living cell are instances of life, each a temporary instantiation of some very natural, empirically definable phenomena of nature. This instantiating phenomenon must have the non-relativistic reach to establish individual life (you), biological or perhaps otherwise, on any planet orbiting any star or indeed in any viable environment in the cosmos or in existence where viable hosts may emerge. It is a tragic mistake to feel that this describes something that could not possibly be natural but must be supernatural. While, as usual, nature’s genius is a practical and ubiquitous, even if a bit unfamiliar implementation. There is a phenomenon known to science for some time that meets all of these requirements: Quantum Entanglement (QE). Einstein called it spooky action at a distance. Today we play with it in the lab as a mere tech curiosity. It is the most likely candidate for the life-force.

Upon understanding this we would have turned the page in the book of life that Darwin began and the eventual effect upon global enlightenment and religions everywhere would be profound. Imagine for the first time you could tell your young children generally, or eventually, specifically how the life cycle works minus the mysticism and ideology because at that point, it would just be science.
« Last Edit: 06/06/2015 20:22:14 by tonylang »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #43 on: 07/06/2015 00:42:26 »
Never mind Darwin (cells and molecules predated him by a long way), but what about William of Occam?

I think you need more than mere assertion to get anyone to subscribe to your theory.
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #44 on: 08/06/2015 02:05:17 »
It isn't my intention to change anyone’s mind, but rather to simply expose open minded readers to a new and practical way of thinking about a very old, perhaps the most personal of all ideas known to humankind, the recognition of a unique and scientifically plausible description of how nature governs not only species, but the individual, you. There is a very good chance, as is often the case with such invasive ideas about nature, that I and everyone who reads this post would be long gone before either the capability or the courage to honestly prove or disprove the instantiation of life hypothesis is achieved. However, every first step is worth taking.
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #45 on: 11/06/2015 02:56:19 »
The true measure of any species’ cognitive maturity is engendered by the accuracy of what it knows or believes it knows about its own living condition.

For decades it has been understood by modern science that far reaching relocation and travel within this universe is fundamentally and practically prohibited by natural mechanisms, fantasies to the contrary notwithstanding. As is often the case however, nature presents the solution to the problems it creates. Placement and relocation of the individual within this universe is a mechanism that must have been in place long before the evolution of living biological hosts like the cell.


Natures’ means of populating this universe, not only with naturally evolved biological forms, but also with naturally instantiated individual POV’s, is likely the only answer to Humankinds' dreams of far flung interstellar or intergalactic relocation. Once we master the elements of reinstantiation of the individual we will see that our bodies are not required for relocation of the individual within this universe. True to natures design the host body is always left behind. Relocating only the individuals’ position-of-view is the only viable means of moving through a vast universe permeated by a Higgs field. Controlling the instantiation of life will permit us a degree of influence and self determinism we do not have when nature handles ones instantiation.


In theory, with the proper understanding and technologies, one could instantly, selectively reinstantiate to available preferred hosts in any viable ecosystem, located anywhere in this universe. It is preferable if not likely that this would one day become a round trip endeavor, but until then it would serve as a means of assuring ones continued participation in the human experience on or near Earth. Also, although controlled instantiation may not preserve the individual’s endearing qualities such as memories, personality, or behavior it does however offer some degree of control over one’s prospects for life which some may regard to be better than none at all. Any advanced species that share this universe with us will no doubt already understand this.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #46 on: 11/06/2015 13:17:51 »
   As I see it the universe oscillates from zero to infinity. Since man exists today here, man most likely exists all over the universe in millions of similar planet Earths. When the universe erases, the memory of man will still exist in coexisting higher universe of pure photonic energy. This is the spiritual dimension. Therefore man will always come back upon millions of Earths for all time. You will return over and over again to relive many different lives and sometimes the exact same life but the probability of exactly the same life is really zero but it will happen. You will certainly live many different lives forever. In effect each person will never die but merely sleep for long periods of time.
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #47 on: 12/06/2015 14:36:12 »
Many years ago as I began my cognitive journey to truly comprehend these phenomena we call life, being, and individuality, I considered many ideas, some that sound very much like what you are suggesting. It soon became clear to me that it was essential for me to begin with a clean slate and a steely objectivity accompanied by fundamental scientific principles. I needed to dismiss most of the prefabricated ideas popular in the world today and historically. Ideas that are mostly self-serving, agenda based narratives. I came to realize that life and individuality must not be defined by any particular living form, including the human form. It occurred to me that the prevailing tendency to define life in terms of the human form in particular is quite obvious, being that we are human. Why not then the jellyfish or the protozoa the seagull or the single cell? I realized that all forms of life are transient and also that the over extrapolated ideas which suggest infinite anything are implausible. This human form that we are understandably preoccupied by has not been here for but an instant of Earths’ biological record and will certainly cease to exist either entirely or as we know it at some finite point in the future.  Even if another form emerged anywhere which resembles humankind, by what measure could one explicitly conclude that this other emerged species is one and the same? Further, would it matter? In fact is any individual form explicitly one and the same with any other individual form, even within the same species? Our definition of species is somewhat amorphous and self serving.

However there is another perspective that for me makes much more sense, that of individuality. It is unfamiliar I know for most to speak of individuality from an empirical tangible perspective separate and distinct from ones visible form but that should present no obstacle for the nimble minded among you.  Individuality is the aspect of life that is far more interesting and eventually we will find is just as natural, real, mobile, quantifiable and open to scientific inquiry as is ones genetics. Nature didn’t only establish a mechanism to produce a physical form anchored in this space-time; it went the extra mile and also produced a mechanism to establish individuality by way of that form. That is to give a viable physical form a position-of-view (POV) by natural entanglement, this mechanism by which a POV may be established is nature’s true innovation. These mechanisms (natural laws) necessarily existed long before viable hosts for life emerged in this universe able to instantiate and reinstantiate individuality and life wherever viable host may emerge.  These laws exist even in the complete absence of any viable hosts for life in any given universe. You are not your physical form or any of its talents, skills or capabilities. You are as are every other living entity on or off of this planet, a very real aspect of nature that requires no mysticism or super-natural manifestations.  Natural entanglement is an entity that existed before this space-time we call the universe congealed from the underlying metaverse and will likely exist long after this universe becomes non-viable for life as we know it. The ultimate demise of this universe will not matter because natural entanglement is capable of hosting individuality anywhere in existence and through any viable form including ones you could scarcely imagine.

You are likely correct regarding individuality being eternal but not, I think, because one is infinitely simultaneously instantiated (living) throughout existence. The monogamy of entanglement prohibits this. The monogamy of entanglement enforces a singleton instance of each individual. To reinstantiate one must first disentangle, also known as death. Reinstantiation is as you pointed out inevitable and with time disentangled being no factor to the individual’s experience of life; one will consequently only know life while entangled. Nonetheless there are factors, details and influences to the reinstantiation of individuality as there are to the genetic science and biology of its physical component. The instantiation hypothesis describes cellular entanglement with a form of matter akin to dark-matter called metamatter because entanglement is known to be at least a binary phenomenon (involving two or more entities) also the mobility of individuality requires access to all points in existence simultaneously and instantaneously because hosts may emerge anywhere. Metamatter emerged from these requirements and is theorized to have an influence on the cell with which it is entangled. This entanglement relationship is likely a form of extra-universal cloud storage not for ones lifelong memories and aspirations and personality but rather is more likely an exchange of fundamental cellular state information likely perishable with time which could in some way govern or influence ones instantiation prospects and cellular evolution. The study of the instantiation of individuality will ultimately spur a new scientific understanding of our true place in nature.
« Last Edit: 12/06/2015 20:04:47 by tonylang »
 

Offline tonylang

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #48 on: 24/06/2015 18:16:50 »
Species Loyalty: Why should Mr. Zebra or any living individual seek to preserve its current species?


Every living entity possesses an entangled position-of-view. This axiom emerges from an understanding that nature must have only one implementation for life no matter what that entities visible appearance or structure or placement in space-time may be. This may eventually prove to be true only for earths’ particular genesis of life, but such an amendment would need to await our discovery of another unique genesis of life which demonstrates a non entanglement based implementation. Until then it remains prudent to assume that this natural entanglement is pervasive throughout nature. To the outside world each instantiation of any individual is a different unique instance of life, however to the individual, ones’ first person position of view is a singular and ongoing phenomenon of experience or the lack thereof, regardless of form or location of ones host. Persistent, retrievable memory spanning multiple instantiations is likely to be a very rare occurrence in living hosts. Nonetheless, nature provides a limited storage reserve of anti-entropic cellular state information imprinted in metamatter during the course of each instantiation, each lifetime. This information is accessible to any emerged hosts for life which utilizes natural entanglement to metamatter to instantiate a living being. It is hypothesized that the genesis of life in any ecosystem is bootstrapped by this universal cloud-storage reserve of anti-entropic cellular state information, and is made accessible by the entanglement molecule in a manner metaphorically similar to how a transceiver (ham-radio) may make information accessible to someone lost in the middle of a remote expansive desert. It is probable that the longer an individual’s lifespan the greater the influence of this stored imprint upon ones reinstantiation prospects is likely to be.


This may be the basis, the justification for species loyalty. Premise; is there any reason for any individual during any given instance of life to be loyal to ones current species besides a conscious immediate circumstantial need to survive? Many species demonstrate some partiality to their current species or host form. Why is this the case? Given that without the instantiation hypothesis most believe with varying degrees of certainty that ones’ current being will eventually cease to exist and this will be an eternal condition. However, the instantiation hypothesis mandates that there is a certainty of continued life, but not a certainty of form. Further, the instantiation hypothesis describes a mechanism which may influence ones reinstantiation prospects whereby the amount of imprinted familial metamatter in existence (entangled by family members with similar cellular DNA) positively biases ones prospects of reinstantiating into ones recent family line and thereby into ones recent species. How so? Cellular Natural entanglement is facilitated by any metamatter which is more similarly imprinted to the cellular state of the host cell(s) seeking entanglement. This is essentially a tuning relationship. Think of tuning a transistor radio to a specific electromagnetic frequency to receive a specific radio station which is broadcasting at that same frequency. Likewise a cells’ internal state which is largely dictated by its DNA and immediate circumstances is essentially a tuned entity.


So too is metamatter which has been imprinted over the course of a lifetime by cells of similar DNA and entanglement frequency (QEF). Compatible hosts and metamatter will therefore become more likely to engage in a natural entanglement relationship. Stem-metamatter is essentially un-imprinted metamatter and will therefore display no predisposition, or bias to entangle any specific host. In other words stem-metamatter will entangle any available viable host regardless of its form. If an individual’s metamatter is permitted to revert to a stem condition this suggests that this individual which has few or no compatible hosts in existence in the form of offspring or familial relations therefore has a statistically smaller probability of entangling a host from its former family line and an increasing probability of eventually (over time) entangling non-familial hosts in its former species. Further, with longer spans of time spent unentangled (dead, uninstantiated, not alive), this would increase the probability of entangling a host increasingly dissimilar to one’s previous host.


This natural implementation sheds some light on the demonstrated motivation of living individuals throughout earths ecosystem to procreate often at the expense of all else. Why should Mr. Zebra seek to preserve its current species? He isn’t really; Mr. Zebras’ DNA is in fact seeking to increase its chances of entangling similar metamatter by spreading copies of itself far and wide and in so doing it increases the individual’s, Mr. Zebras’ chances of reinstantiating into its current form. Any individual zebra or lion or ameba or human tends to subconsciously exercise this behavior even if it means eliminating any or most of its current species. On occasion this drive is seen to be partial to siblings and such but is largely self-serving. Seen from the outside, and in the absence of the understanding provided by the instantiation of life hypothesis, this behavior appears to be some sort of social loyalty of Mr. Zebra to zebras as a species, and is often described by a situational narrative or cognitive dedication to family and so forth. The truth is a more fundamental reality of natural cause and effect.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4698
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #49 on: 28/06/2015 00:38:36 »
Species Loyalty: Why should Mr. Zebra or any living individual seek to preserve its current species?

Wrong forum. Science is about how, not why. But I'll happily answer "how".

Zebras, humans, fish, all enjoy sexual intercourse (I've never quite understood fish, but they certainly seem to pursue one another with gusto when in season). Sexual intercourse often produces offspring of the same species, so the preservation of species, and indeed the evolution of species, derives from the voluntary and pleasurable actions of species. It's a consequence, not an objective. 

We can delve a little deeper by considering plants rather than animals. There's clearly less voluntary action involved but Darwin gives us a helpful hint: those that didn't produce pollen and seeds, died out within a generation, whilst those that did, populated the planet in the absence of such competition.

The question arises as to why zebras only mate with zebras, and cherry trees with cherry trees. If your "metamatter" were the driving force we would expect to see a lot more cherry-zebras if there was only one kind of metamatter. So there must be at least as many kinds of metamatter as there are non-interfertile species in the universe. Which would be fine if it were not for the fact that species seem to evolve and diverge by wholly explicable variations in their DNA. Occam's razor says we don't need to postulate any other mechanism or entity, and common sense says that if metamatter is species-specific, it must be evolving too. Somehow I think the precise parallel and synchronous evolution of some hitherto-undetected entity that we don't actually need to explain our observations, is a postulate too far. 
« Last Edit: 28/06/2015 00:40:13 by alancalverd »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« Reply #49 on: 28/06/2015 00:38:36 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums