Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: tonylang on 10/03/2015 20:51:10

Title: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 10/03/2015 20:51:10
Please offer any scientifically accepted, or even plausible, concepts that may addresses this very realistic scenario:

Axiom is a proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follows from it.

Axiom: Life in this universe is not a one-off occurrence.

Scenario:

Earth is gone. Complements of some natural occurrence, you name it, perhaps a rouge primordial black hole that happens to be passing through our solar system which then sends the earth into direct collision with Jupiter. Or perhaps there is a giga-solar flare which perturbs earth’s orbit sending it careening into the sun. Result? All that you and I and your pet salamander were, every cell and every DNA molecule, every atom that was on or in the earth is now ionized nuclear fuel within the sun. The Darwinian evolved chemistry and biology that many fall back upon to describe life, particularly human life, on earth has ceased to exist in this solar system along with its thermodynamically described, Gibbs-free energy processes once used to represent the entirety of earth life.

Additionally, imagine if you will that there is life elsewhere in this universe. Let us imagine there exists at least one other evolved ecosystem (ECO-2) capable of hosting Darwinian life. Different from earth but governed by the same laws of physics and biology and thermodynamic processes that manifested earth’s ecology. This planet orbiting a viable star may be located anywhere in this universe since the laws of physics are expected to be consistently applied throughout. Also for this anecdote let us say that this other bastion of life is some 10 billion light years from earth’s sun. A distance so vast it would take much longer than the age of the big-bang to relativistically travel that distance, assuming of course there were any classically defined remnants of one’s biology left to make the journey.

Like earth ECO-2 has been around for awhile and hosts its own set of Darwinian evolved biological forms likely different from anything that existed on earth. Also, for the comfort of some, let us assume one other unessential embellishment; let us say that ECO-2 also hosts intelligent forms of life (Yes with personalities). Different from human beings but similar to us in that they are sentient, self aware, intelligent, and have a handle on science and technology as did we. On second thought let us not assume intelligent life. There is only wild life in ECO-2. :0)

Regardless, the question becomes; could you or I or any individual formerly hosted by earths ecology ever find oneself a part of ECO-2’s ecology? Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2 just as we were born on earth to species indigenous to earth’s ecology? If one adheres to the classically understood, Gibbs-free energy etc. thermodynamically describable, relativistically constrained mechanisms to explain life writ large then you are forced to say no, (please correct me if not so), and in so doing you would necessarily ignore most of nature. Because in that view, clearly some aspect of what biologically, thermodynamically, chemically, defined ones singular existence must relativistically travel to bridge the unbridgeable distance between your last physical location, earth’s solar system, and ECO-2’s.



 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 31/03/2015 13:57:31
The following is one plausible hypothesis for a natural mechanism that likely describes the way life populates this universe with living individuals; "The Instantiation Of Life By Natural Entanglement"

This topic presents, perhaps for the first time, a practical implementation for the natural processes that govern the instantiation of the individual as a being distinct from the evolution of that beings current species. It will introduce you to;

• Instantiation of the individual: The establishment of your Life.
• Your Position-Of-View (POV): That component of your being which resides in this universe.
• The Metaverse: The only real verse, and that from which the universe emerges.
• Your LifeID: That component of your being which resides outside of this universe, in the metaverse.
• The Quantum Entanglement Spectrum (QE): The Life Spectrum.
• Your Quantum Entanglement Frequency (QEF): The real and only immutable, you.
• The Cell: A biological QE circuit, the critical component in instantiating all life as we know it.
• The Entanglement Cells; Cells responsible for heterodyning the QEF in complex hosts and establishing the LifeID.
• Metamatter: An undiscovered but very real form of matter critical in instantiating and in the evolution of all life. Think dark matter without gravity.
• Entanglement Molecules; Molecules in every living cell which establish the QE connection with metamatter to create all life.


The hypothesis in summary: The most fundamental element of life is a molecule called, if you will, the Entanglement Molecule (EM). This molecule has the unique property of naturally establishing a quantum entanglement connection to a form of matter called metamatter, life-matter if you will. Think dark matter but expressing quantum entanglement (the life-force) in place of the force of gravitation. Metamatter like other natural entities exists outside of our space-time and is not subject to locality or relativistic constraints. Together these entanglement molecules and metamatter are the two endpoints of each isolated, naturally occurring quantum entanglement connection contained within every living cell that has ever existed. An entanglement molecule once arranged from its constituent atoms, not unlike the ferrite magnet in a transistor radio, is instantly sensitive to available, uninstantiated quantum entanglement frequencies (QEF) upon which to entangle available metamatter.


Such isolated pairings existed on Earth for eons, and in this universe, for even longer before the naturally occurring circumstances arose on Earth and perhaps elsewhere, to provide a ring of molecules that could be described as an early cell wall. Not all entanglement molecules were likely to encounter a cell wall but those that did, enclosed by this barrier, obtained the benefit of an extra level of protection that allowed them to develop beyond the typical. This basic entanglement relationship is the most fundamental manifestation of life. It establishes the position-of-view (POV to be discussed in this volume). Over time other types of molecules joined with these proto-cells sometimes to their mutual benefit sometimes not. Those that added no benefit or diminished the proto-cells survival prospects would not survive. The entanglement connection gave surviving proto-cells something very special. It gave the otherwise inanimate molecular components on the inside of this early cell a form of intra-cellular communication. That is, the ability to interact at a distance, but more critically at that point, the quantum entanglement connection gave the proto-cell the capacity to share or imprint internal cellular state information into its entangled metamatter. Metamatter because of its extra dimensional, non-locality and non-relativistic nature acts as a kind of cloud-storage accessible instantaneously from any location in this universe and in any other as well.


This universal cloud storage is the critical factor required to get evolution started and is what makes being possible anywhere in this universe. At that point evolution existed only via random environmental contact or interactions between proto-cells and other structures in the primordial environment of early Earth. Thus, the cell became nature’s biological entanglement circuit. Each such entanglement pairing constitutes an instantiation of life whether on Earth, in this universe, or anywhere in existence. Life could now be hosted by any viable formation of cell(s) that may emerge anywhere in existence. Ones instantiation is established at one specific quantum entanglement frequency (QEF), a narrow frequency band in the infinity of possibilities on the quantum entanglement spectrum. A quantum entanglement frequency that is unique in all existence to each life and to no other, but only while that QE connection persists. This yet to be determined property, perhaps frequency, on the quantum entanglement spectrum is the singular property in nature that defines each individual being. All other components of the instantiation process may change or be exchanged but it is the QEF that positions you as the central and only target of your instantiation, of your life, and not someone else’s. Change or retune ones QEF enough and you change the being, the individual. You are your quantum entanglement frequency. You are not your cells or your metamatter.


It is very likely that the QE spectrum predated even the big bang. Your QEF is the immutable, the indestructible you. When cells on any given planet around any given star anywhere in existence entangles metamatter at your QEF that is where you will instantiate. That is where you will be, a place like that is where you are right now. A place like that is where you are likely to have been many times before your current instantiation. Places like that are where you will inevitably reinstantiate many more times in your future. This is instantiation, this is life. You and I, and your pet otter, every insect, every cell and every organization of cells all life anywhere in existence instantiates by this mechanism. While each cell entangles at a unique QEF a few specialized cells in complex organisms called entanglement cells (EC) are able to heterodyne or combine their QEF to establish and entangle at a different unique QEF thus instantiating the emerged individual, you.


The composite quantum entanglement frequency together with the metamatter it entangles is called the lifeID. No memories or behavior of the host body is carried or transferred by the lifeID. In nature such properties are electromagnetic manifestations of the host species or vessel only. The closest cultural meme to the lifeID come via religions throughout human history having referred to this, using one word or another, as the soul. Once any quantum entanglement connection is terminated, by sufficiently disrupting the cellular component (inducing death of the host vessel), the previously entangled metamatter becomes available for entanglement by other cells. However this particular metamatter has been imprinted to some extent by its previous entanglement. Each generation of entanglement, each instantiation, each life, imprints information, from both the cell and QEF, to its entangled metamatter. The degree of this imprinting is yet to be determined. This time dependant, perishable imprinting of cellular state in metamatter becomes available to future cells that entangle this metamatter while simultaneously limiting its entanglement opportunities to cells of matching state. The passage of time decays the imprint left on metamatter causing a return to a state best described as stem-metamatter (to be discussed later in this volume). This transfer of cellular state information may impact cellular behavior and/or development and to the extent that this imprinted information manifests an advantage for the cell, may provide a survival benefit. This is the evolutionary mechanism used by early life that predated the development of the DNA/RNA molecules. With QE communication the proto-cell became the laboratory of evolutionary innovation we see today from which emerged a great many useful cellular structures and processes, but most pivotally, a clear benefit to augment the cloud storage mechanism of metamatter with a more local, more expandable and flexible information storage mechanism which became RNA and eventually DNA. This was the birth of the modern living cell. Much is yet to be learned but the implications of this process are vast and pervasive.


Implications of the hypothesis; The degree to which metamatter imprints on its host cell and unique QEF will determine after deinstantiation (death) the likelihood that your imprinted metamatter will, for a time, reject entanglement opportunities from dissimilar host cells (of even your same or similar species) in favor of entanglement with cells that contain your familial DNA which are more compatible with its imprinting, thereby increasing the probability of reinstantiating you in your former family line or if less finely imprinted, to any random line in your previous species, or if less finely tuned still, to another species entirely. Also when we discover the entanglement molecule in nature and in the cell, just as we eventually discovered the DNA molecule in the cell decades after Darwin presented his theory of evolution by natural selection, likewise this may allow us to develop technologies capable of detecting and tracking each individuals unique QEF in this life or across multiple instantiations. This alone will change the world, at the very least it will change the way we write our wills. As for practical implementations, discovering and using metamatter could change everything. Metamatter satellites would be very different yet similar to regular orbital satellites even though they will reside outside of our space-time they'll permit instantaneous communication with any point in the cosmos. This will forever alter the human relationship not just to each other, but to all living creatures biological or otherwise. Also for the first time in human history we could begin to take practical actions in life that would affect our reinstantiation prospects into our next life, thereby tailoring your next instantiation ahead of time, minus the mysticism and ideology.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 01/04/2015 19:20:34
Quote
could you or I or any individual formerly hosted by earths ecology ever find oneself a part of ECO-2’s ecology? Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2 just as we were born on earth to species indigenous to earth’s ecology?

It all depends on what you mean by the question!

If you mean "could I be born or wake up spontaneously on another planet and know that I was once on earth" the answer is probably not, since we have very little evidence if any of the survival of memory after death. There are a few moderately strong anecdotes of reincarnation but always in another human body, and AFAIK all from within a culture that holds reincarnation as axiomatic anyway.

If you are talking more generally to include the possibility of an entirely alien species having analogous senses and intellectual properties to ourselves, the answer is almost certainly yes.

Before delving into your later hypotheses, you might care to define "life" for the purpose of this argument. As far as I can see, in terms of the cosmos a selfreplicating molecule is a pretty trivial bit of chemistry that could occur anywhere that water exists as a liquid (it's the hydrogen bond that does it!), and no new hypotheses are required.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 03/04/2015 13:54:15
Thanks for the inquiry…

The association of ones being with ones form is a powerful and deeply ingrained aspect of our identity that will pose the greatest barrier to human understanding of the true nature of our circumstances. Also, nature does not cater to human sensibilities. We may count on the fact that natures implementation of life in this universe is a process based on natural laws of cause and effect. Therefore, a steely objectivity on our part is required to discover the reality of it.

As I stated: “...naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2 just as we were born on earth to species indigenous to earth’s ecology...”

We were not born here on Earth with neural memories of activities that may have occurred before life on earth, likewise on ECO-2. In fact, for you or I, Earth may be ECO-2, or for all we know eco-ten million.

Evolution and biology has always described life without having to define life. However, the instantiation hypothesis uniquely suggests that life is in fact individuality. We confuse biology, as we know it, with the individual as we currently have no examples to the contrary (i.e. a non-biological individual). In nature each individual life is one current instance of some uniquely quantifiable property of nature. Whatever natural mechanism locates and instantiates the individual operates similarly upon all life throughout this universe. Therefore in nature every cell is as alive as any otter, mosquito, human, or sperm whale. After all, the living cell is in fact the only life on Earth. By this definition emergent properties of the host such as neural memories, and personality, and behavior, consciousness, intelligence etc., are in nature all irrelevant to lifes’ implementation and also irrelevant to individuality and being.

In nature individuality and life in any form is the establishment within this universe of a position-of-view (POV). The POV is an instance of the individual. The POV determines ones physical placement in this space-time. You are currently instantiated to your host (body) which happens to be on this planet but could obviously be in any other viable ecosystem in this universe. Instantiation is a natural mechanism that can eventually be measured and quantified. Ones POV is a unique singleton solution of state via the natural quantum entanglement established between two entities; the predicted naturally occurring entanglement molecule (EM) within every viable host (i.e. the living cell) with metamatter, a yet to be discovered form of non-relativistic matter which must exist in Hilbert-space. Metamatter is as necessary to life as dark-matter is to galaxy formation.

Metamatter is entangled to every living cell at a unique value of some property (i.e. frequency) of the entanglement spectrum (QEF). This QE tuning, if you will, is what implements each being in this universe or perhaps in any other. Your composite QEF, heterodyned by your entanglement cells, is the immutable you, a natural phenomena which likely predated even the big bang. You are not your body you are your quantum entanglement frequency. Any viable host anywhere, evolved or otherwise, that naturally entangles metamatter at your QEF will establish your position-of-view, your presence, your target if you will. That individual will be you every bit as you are you at this moment, sensory capabilities or lack thereof notwithstanding.

Why is this necessary? As outlined in the main post, no classical, Higgs constrained biological implementation or chemistry or thermodynamic process could account for the mobility of individuality (you) throughout this vast universe. Many therefore default to the idea that there is no natural mobility of the individual; ergo individuality is a one-off phenomenon. This is a scientifically and logically inconsistent position. Humankinds’ current confusion of individuality (being) with form (species) has led us to confuse the biology and chemistry of our form with our individuality. Individuality is our placement in space-time. The mechanism outlined in the instantiation hypothesis describes a species independent, form agnostic (i.e. biological vs. non-biological) scientifically plausible mechanism able to describe each instance of individuality, its reinstantiation and its placement within this space-time. This naturally implemented mechanism describes not only multi-cellular instantiation but necessarily that of every cell on this planet composing any multi-cellular host and also any non-biological form of life that we may encounter.     
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 03/04/2015 15:01:33

Why is this necessary? As outlined in the main post, no classical, Higgs constrained biological implementation or chemistry or thermodynamic process could account for the mobility of individuality (you) throughout this vast universe.


On the contrary. You haven't proved or demonstrated the existence of "mobility of individuality" at any level, let alone throughout the universe. Science begins with an observation;  philosophy, politics and religion begin with an assertion, which is why they are demeaning to the intellect and unworthy of discussion in this forum.

Quote
.....individuality is a one-off phenomenon. This is a scientifically and logically inconsistent position.

No, it's a tautology!

As for the population of the universe with living things, it appears to be a rare but entirely inevitable consequence of carbon chemistry, and potentially other chemical processes such as selfreplicating silicone chains. Ther doesn't appear to be a need for any undiscovered forces or unknown properties.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 03/04/2015 23:46:29
Axiom: A proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follows from it.

The instantiation of life hypothesis is a plausible hypothesis for the axiom; Individuality exists and it is naturally mobile in this universe.

I don’t believe that proof of individuality needs to be presented since two individuals are at this moment having this conversation. Unless you are actually a rather convincing computer program, in which case there maybe only one individual having this conversation. Also, given the current state of scientific understanding the only exhibit of evidence for individuality that can be offered to you, is you. So it falls upon each of us to decide if oneself is an individual or not. Further, each instance of life, to any other instance of life, is only an extrapolation or an assumption of individuality currently based upon appearance and behavior. The affirmation of ones own individuality, at least for most reasonable minded individuals can be accounted for. If we agree to the axiom that you and perhaps I as well as every other discernibly living entity is an individual instance of life then this conversation as challenging as it may be toward strongly held beliefs or ideologies, may proceed.

Not everyone can entertain a new, and different and rather invasive existential concept when it is first introduced. In 1859 not many could give the idea of evolution by natural selection, for example, a fair thought particularly not in public. However in 2015, I would like to think we have progressed a bit since then. I will proceed on the assumption that we have. I realize the concept of instantiation of life sounds very familiar, as it should. The historical nature of human understanding has never emerged from a lack of intellect but from a deficit of information. So it should come as no great surprise if our ancestor’s beliefs may not have been completely wrong and science today may not be completely right. Scientific information has never been handed down to us from some superior source, it is and always has been people willing to reinterpret “evidence” many had seen before but seen much differently.

The justification for due consideration of the mobility of individuality is clear. Either one assumes there is no such thing as individuality, one may then elect to opt out of this thread. Or one assumes that you, and possibly all apparently living entities are individualized instances of life, but whose first-person existence is defined exclusively by ones classically described biology and will therefore empirically cease to exist for eternity, both prior and future, along with that form. This perspective violates many fundamental scientific and logical principles.  Or you are at least open to consider the possibility that nature is sufficiently deep, varied and functional to not only originate instances of individual beings in any viable form but also allows for the placement and reinstantiation of any individual in space-time in a form and species agnostic implementation of natural law. Of course each of these perspectives are as much an unsubstantiated view as is the other. If one doesn't see that then you may be hopelessly religious or ideological.  Nonetheless, as persons of science the possibility that some or any of what the instantiation hypothesis suggests must be on some level tantalizing.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 04/04/2015 08:14:23
Surely individuality and universality are antonymous?

You have proposed several axioms from which you have derived a consequence that you can't substantiate with evidence, and indeed seems selfcontradictory. That's religion, not science.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Colin2B on 05/04/2015 23:27:25
Tony, this should be in New Theories. Much of it seems to be a re posting of an earlier post of yours.
You do not seem to be inviting comments on the title question!

Please offer any scientifically accepted, or even plausible, concepts that may addresses this very realistic scenario:
That would be difficult as the scenarios and conclusions do not have a clear scientific basis and contain logical inconsistencies.

Axiom is a proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follows from it.

Axiom: Life in this universe is not a one-off occurrence.

The scenario and conclusion you offer are not consequential on your axiom.

If one adheres to the classically understood, Gibbs-free energy etc. thermodynamically describable, relativistically constrained mechanisms to explain life writ large then you are forced to say no, (please correct me if not so), and in so doing you would necessarily ignore most of nature.
This makes assumptions about the beliefs of the reader and contains illogical conclusions

Because in that view, clearly some aspect of what biologically, thermodynamically, chemically, defined ones singular existence must relativistically travel to bridge the unbridgeable distance between your last physical location, earth’s solar system, and ECO-2’s.
Your conclusion does not follow from any information you have presented. The statement "....must relativistically travel......" is illogical.

The following is one plausible hypothesis for a natural mechanism that likely describes the way life populates this universe with living individuals; "The Instantiation Of Life By Natural Entanglement"

This is not a plausible hypothesis based on evidence. You use terms which have specific meanings on a science forum, but your use of these terms does not provide a coherent argument.
You make a number of statements which you cannot justify eg the existence of a Metamatter, entanglement molecule, "Such isolated pairings existed on Earth for eons, and in this universe" These weaken, rather than strengthen, your proposition.

This is more appropriate to a religious or philosophical forum than a science one.

Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 07/04/2015 17:04:17
This thread is based on a post that solicits ideas for a very real natural question that is not historically considered by science but which I suggest can, and should, and eventually must be. I have offered one scientifically plausible idea on this topic in the form of a hypothesis, and I clearly welcome all others. I expect that most ideas will take the form of a well considered hypothesis as well, or the form of some rational as to why the various proposed ideas may be implausible. Certainly some will feel the question itself shouldn't be addressed but that should be taken as one of many opinions. The scenario regarding the instantiation of the individual in this universe is clearly a realistic one and the implications only seem philosophical because most may have never before considered them from the viewpoint of a practical implementation of natural law. Akin to asking prior to 1859; how might species be implemented in nature? This is exactly what I am encouraging to be asked of the individual, you. Clearly if the various ideas were proven they would not be plausible hypothesis.

“This is not a plausible hypothesis based on evidence.”
The evidence that this tread speaks to is the possibility that each of the trillions of life forms in Earths ecosystem are each recurring instances of individual life. If so what is its natural implementation, if not so then explain empirically why not.


"Such isolated pairings existed on Earth for eons, and in this universe, for even longer"
Please clarify your issue with this: It suggests the proposed entanglement molecule was likely around even before the Earth formed. Also the instantiation hypothesis predicts the existence of certain entities as all good hypothesis may. These permit the idea to eventually be tested.


 "The statement "....must relativistically travel......" is illogical."
Relativistic travel describes the movement in space-time of Higgs affected entities as outlined by the theories of relativity. The point is that all classically defined facets of one’s biology currently thought to describe the individual (DNA/RNA etc.), will become non-existent in the scenario, or if not, they will be constrained to travel well below the speed of light, therefore could not act as the natural distributive mechanism to implement a new instance of the individual to other distant life hosting ecosystems. This does not only refer to the distribution of species from ones former ecosystem but rather how nature establishes a new instance of the individual, you, hosted by available indigenous species elsewhere independent of distance and time to destination, ergo the non-relativistic instantiation of individualized life in this space-time. 

"The scenario and conclusion you offer are not consequential on your axiom."
Please clarify your opinion on this item.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 07/04/2015 19:02:50
You are up against a major problem here: Occam's Razor.

There being no apparent need or evidence for an "entanglement molecule", and it being apparent that life is a consequence of the properties of carbon compounds and the hydrogen bond, you are starting from an unnecessary premise.

The labile nature of DNA pretty much guarantees evolution - it is most unlikely that any daughter cell will be an exact copy of its parents, and those that are significantly different but viable will define a new or evolving entity.

It is true that we don't know exactly how or when anything we would describe as living first appeared on this planet, or whether anything similar has happened elsewhere. But the question is no more important than what time the previous bus left, or whether they have buses in Ulan Bator: the important fact is that we are on a bus in London and we have every reason to expect that the service will continue, even though this bus looks quite different from those that ran a hundred years ago.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 13/04/2015 17:10:54
As reading the summary of the Instantiation hypothesis would reveal, no aspect of the modern scientific understanding of biology or its chemical properties is being challenged. The challenge being posed is to the misconception that in nature species (biology) is the individual. The cell and the verifiable aspects of its biological evolution are as science currently describes them. The instantiation hypothesis begins where the modern scientific narrative admittedly, voluntarily abstains and traditionally religions are permitted to fill what is arguably the most important of all voids, and likely the only void any living being may actually care most about. That is, the natural mechanisms governing the instantiation of life. It is for this reason that humankind has fought and prayed for a time far longer than science itself has existed. It is much overdue for the narrative to be extended not by mysticism or ideological entrenchment but by well reasoned, steely objective thought followed by measurement, because clearly not just some, but all of nature is ultimately science.


The instantiation hypothesis suggests that each life is an instance of a specific individual. Also, the natural process that instantiates an individual to that host (i.e. species) is independent of the specific biology, chemistry (i.e. carbon, silicon etc.) or technological principles upon which such forms may be evolved, implemented or depend for function or for its local evolution. Therefore, any individual may instantiate (live) in any viable form in any viable environment in this universe. Ergo Earth is not special.


1-   Individual life (you) is species independent.
2-   The natural process that places you or any living being in the life they currently live is not dependent upon any particular chemistry, biology, species or form, evolved or otherwise. Just as for example, memory, or intelligence does not depend upon any particular brand or type of technology for its implementation.  That is to say, memory is abstracted from its implementation. So to in nature is the individual life abstracted from any specific implementation of its host form, or species.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 14/04/2015 11:24:50


1-   Individual life (you) is species independent.

Life is a phenomenon. Species is a construct. Why make it more complicated (unless you are a priest or  philosopher, in which case your living depends on making the obvious complicated)?
 
Quote
2-   The natural process that places you or any living being in the life they currently live is not dependent upon any particular chemistry, biology, species or form, evolved or otherwise.
Crap! Living things have a very narrow tolerance of physics and chemistry. I can't live in a deep ocean fumarole, and the shrimps and worms that live there won't last long in England, never mind the Arctic.
 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Teakhat on 14/04/2015 11:29:32
I would say, yes. But I am also qualifying that with "life like us". If there is life just like us...either we are the progenitors...or they are. But since we do have a demonstrable record of evolutionary hominids...I'd say Earth is "home"...and any other life similar to us...is from here, originally. This presents a lot of ethics to sort out....
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 15/04/2015 23:53:50
Some responses to this topic reveal just how erroneously entrenched with our physical form is our sense of individual being. Once again our eyes deceive us.
The instantiation hypothesis describes; In nature any individual, may naturally entangle any available host species wherever such viable hosts for life may emerge. Ignoring for one moment humankinds’ classifications of species, every living being like yourself is yet another individual, albeit in a form different from your own, however significant or insignificant that difference may be. The irrevocable extinction of viable forms in nature implies that individual life is not dependent upon any particular form to instantiate, to live.

So too will be the case when ones current host dissipates. Natures’ implementation of life does not require, or depend upon, nor is it defined by earths’ chemistry or biology, whether unique or common in this universe. The instantiation hypothesis predicts that one can be certain that life may be otherwise implemented by the host agnostic process of natural entanglement. Reinstantiation of the individual mandates that your unique entanglement frequency will inevitably, naturally entangle again as it has before, allowing you to live in any viable form available. Classically speaking, ones parents are only the parents of your form, your host body. Likewise species indigenous to some other ecosystem on some other planet orbiting some other star in this universe may play host to you. Hosts perhaps based on entirely different chemistry, even ones we may today be reluctant to recognize as biology, but which will serve in a similar capacity to entangle your QEF and thereby host a singleton instance of your life. You will be in that life every bit as alive and as committed to that being as you are to this one, at this moment, sensory capabilities notwithstanding.

Clearly distances vast as they are prone to be between emerged ecosystems in this universe would pose an existential obstacle to reinstantiation of the individual for any classically understood components of biology and chemistry; however, natural entanglement describes a process that is naturally superfluous to such limitations. Such is the metaphorical genius of nature. Hence, the process continues as it has, however significant the differences may be between your current form and your next, however significant the distance between ones’ current placement in this space-time and other indigenous emerged ecosystems in this universe.

To itemize the concepts being proposed;

1-   In nature, whatever the design of ones' current host, you are not present solely as a result of it or its biology, technology or its chemistry.
2-   Ones’ being ones’ individuality is in fact a position-of-view (POV) which is independent of ones’ form.
3-   A POV is a naturally occurring solution of state established between this space-time and Hilbert-space, a space from which this universe emerges.
4-   The hypothesized entanglement molecules (EM) exist entirely within this universes’ space-time while metamatter exists entirely within Hilbert-space.
5-   The POV is the result of the naturally occurring sharing of state called natural quantum entanglement (QE) which temporarily exists between these two entities.
6-   At some point in earth’s history these naturally occurring entanglement molecules joined with other structures to form the proto-cell, the progenitor to the modern cell.
7-   This temporary QE connection between these two very different entities is established at some unique property or aspect of the entanglement spectrum perhaps frequency (QEF) at some value or finite band that is unique to each individual.
8-   While this QE connection persists, the individual cell lives.
9-   Every living cell maintains its own natural entanglement connection to Hilbert-space via its EM contained within the cell.
10-   In multi-cellular hosts, like beavers and human beings, the emerged individuals’ QE connection is maintained by specialized cells called entanglement cells which combine their individual unique QEF to establish a new entanglement with metamatter in Hilbert-space unique to the emerged individual, you.
11-   While ones’ heterodyned QE connection persists, you live.
12-   The POV brings no experience or memories, but only that which may have an experience. Ones’ target for experience if you will.
13-   The POV mathematically speaking is effectively a unique solution of state for the quantum state functions (Hamiltonians) of the surrounding environment.
14-   Ones’ POV solution effectively collapses the surrounding environments quantum state to render the reality that the individual may experience with whatever senses are afforded to them by their current physical form. Whether one instantiates in the form of a single cell or a millipede, a sperm-whale or a human being.
15-   Every individual life in this universe instantiates and reinstantiates by this mechanism.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 16/04/2015 00:10:22
A fundamental distinction between science and poetry is in the poet's concretisation or reification of an abstract quality. Life is a quality possessed by objects, not an object in itself. There is no evidence that life has any qualities or capabilities since it has no actual existence, nor is such existence necessary to explain any observed phenomenon.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 16/04/2015 14:33:55
Testable Element(s) of the Hypothesis:

One initial approach would be to seek evidence for, or against some fundamental aspect of the working hypothesis: Test for the existence, or lack thereof, of the proposed entanglement cells (EC) that establish and maintain life via the QE connection in complex hosts: Termination of the host's EC's and no other cells, should result in the termination of the subject.

Premise: Can death be induced without damage? Can an otherwise healthy living subject be terminated with empirically no physical damage contributable to the subject’s termination, Barring any limitations of technical proficiency or of equipment in analyzing and identifying the root cause of the subject’s death.

Axiom: There exists some absolute minimum number of cells that may be terminated in any complex organism whereby such cells may be scientifically established to be the root and only cause of death of the subject organism with no pre-mortem adverse effects to other cells in the subject. Cells that meet these criteria are candidates for the theorized entanglement cells and the collection has a high probability of including some or all of the subject’s proposed entanglement cells.

Practical Test: Perform controlled experiments using approved subjects, i.e. fruit flies, to terminate the minimal number of cells per specimen to conclusively induce death of the test subject. Carefully repeat and document the number and location of target cells per subject for each scientifically substantiated successful sample. Repeatability per species is mandatory as the specifics may vary from species to species or subject to subject. In qualifying samples the cells that are the root cause of death must be gradually minimized and physically isolated. Cellular damage must be limited to only the target cells for a duration beginning at the time of the target cells death up to and including the time of confirmed subject death. In other words, for a successful trial no cells in the subject other than the target cells may be adversely physically affected pre-mortem.
 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 24/04/2015 20:22:50
The classical ideas of thermodynamic entropy although essential in many practical technological applications, cease to exist at and below the atomic level. So attempting to describe the existence of life in these terms requires some implausible assumptions. Firstly one must accept that in nature individual life (you) is only defined at the cellular level where DNA is functionally implemented. In other words one must believe that nature does not have a mechanism or basis for distinguishing individual life once that individuals DNA has dissipated. This suggests that you and I and all instances of life begin and end with ones cellular DNA. This is logically and empirically inconsistent.

There are examples of living individuals with identical DNA, twins who are clearly not the same individual even when they are physically connected as are Siamese twins. More pointedly however, If any one or all of your trillions of cells were responsible for uniquely defining and distinguishing you from any other living being then separating even a single cell from your holistic body would cause you to lose your current identity (become someone else) or else terminate you as a living individual. However since all life in our ecosystem loses, replaces, transforms and exchanges our entire body mass daily over the course of a few short years, this also invalidates this belief.

Thirdly, this untenable notion violates the principle of re-occurrence of natural phenomena which states that for any natural phenomena to occur there must exist natural mechanisms which by their existence will also permit that phenomena to reoccur given appropriate circumstance. In other words whatever caused the big-bang can cause other big-bangs. Whatever causes nova and super-nova can cause other instances of both. Whatever caused and permits life here can and probably has caused life elsewhere. Further, whatever caused you can cause you again. The universal basis for this postulate of consistency in the laws of nature is the observed consistency of the fine structure constant in this universe.

Any individual life that can occur can reoccur. This last point mandates that you do not end with your DNA/RNA or with your thermodynamic, entropic biology. That nature must indeed have mechanisms known or unknown which serves to define or instantiate you from all other existing or possible instances of life, and such a mechanism must be an essentially immutable and reoccurring property of either this universe or of nature. This feature necessarily exists below the cellular and molecular level into the quantum realm.
 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 25/04/2015 00:43:29
In other words whatever caused the big-bang can cause other big-bangs.

Not if the laws of physics were determined by the big bang itself.

Quote
That nature must indeed have mechanisms known or unknown which serves to define or instantiate you from all other existing or possible instances of life, and such a mechanism must be an essentially immutable and reoccurring property of either this universe or of nature.


Tell that to a clone - either a human twin or a potato will do.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 27/04/2015 21:59:50
Posted by: alancalverd
« on: 25/04/2015 00:43:29 »
"Tell that to a clone - either a human twin or a potato will do."


The point of these ideas is precisely that most of the properties of the host forms (i.e. potatoes or twins) such as; clone or not-clone, single-cellular or multi-cellular, evolved or not, biological or technological are inconsequential features to the instantiation of individual life in this universe.

Each living being is hypothesized to be an available viable host (of one or more cells like you or me or a potato or a single cell) that is naturally entangled at a specific property (QEF) of the entanglement spectrum with metamatter in Hilbert-space. Any host that evolves or is manufactured anywhere in this universe which properly implements natural entanglement will be a living being.

Each cell in your potato and also in any living entity does this. However, not all multi-cellular hosts evolve entanglement cells responsible for heterodyning their own QEF to establish a unique lifeID and position-of-view (POV). So a potato may have no lifeID or accompanying POV. Although determining which living entities do and which do not possess these features requires more advanced understanding and detection technologies based on these principles.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 27/04/2015 23:53:52
So, as this is a science forum, make a prediction based on your hypothesis and tell us how to test it.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 28/04/2015 02:59:27
« Reply #15 on: 16/04/2015 14:33:55 »
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: PmbPhy on 28/04/2015 07:32:38
So, as this is a science forum, make a prediction based on your hypothesis and tell us how to test it.
Now that you mention it, I've never seen anybody do anything like that.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Colin2B on 28/04/2015 14:44:55
So, as this is a science forum, make a prediction based on your hypothesis and tell us how to test it.
Now that you mention it, I've never seen anybody do anything like that.

Me neither, there are a number of threads in New Theories where proof, or further detail (non word spaghetti detail that is) is avoided.

Even the test suggested by the OP won't provide proof of entanglement, just that killing some cells will kill you!
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 29/04/2015 22:46:26
The proposed test depends on the ability to "terminate" cells without damaging them. I rather think this deserves a little amplification - what on earth does "terminate without damage" mean, what would you use to do it, and how would you know you had done it?
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 05/05/2015 14:03:26

I believe you misunderstood the description. The endeavor is to identify and locate the subjects’ hypothesized entanglement cells  via a systematic decremental process of targeted termination of candidate cells within the test subject (i.e. fruit flies),  and thereby to finally terminate a healthy subject by destroying only the subjects’ entanglement cells, while inflicting no damage to the hosts’ non-EC cells, ergo death without damage.

Today all death known to modern science is eventually forensically caused by cellular damage to structures singularly or collectively vital to the host form. Such damage can invariably be determined to sufficiently disrupt conditions required for proper host function thereby resulting in the termination of the emerged individual, death. The instantiation hypothesis describes death as the disentanglement between ones entanglement cells (EC) with metamatter. This results in the loss of the individual’s position-of-view (POV). Today we see only the physical symptoms of the damage to the host and we quite adequately associate these conditions with the termination of the individual. This is fine for all that we currently do. However this is not the complete description of life in this universe.

If indeed it is the sole function of the hosts’ EC to maintain life of the emerged individual and if it falls upon all other cells of the host only to maintain the environmental, internal and or external conditions for the individual’s continued function then a few interesting insights may be posed.

1-   Theoretically, terminating only an individual’s EC cells while leaving non-EC cells unaffected will result in the termination of the emerged individual while producing no damage to any system of the host, ergo death without damage.
2-   Further, effectively transplanting an individual’s EC to another viable host will result in a successful exchange of an individual’s host form.
3-   Identifying and isolating the EC will certainly aid in the identification of the hypothesized entanglement molecules.
4-   Studying the entanglement molecule could lead to untold developments and technologies.

Some creatures on earth are evolved to terminate even healthy cells once other vital cells undergo necrosis, this is usually done by the release of a chemical death signal that moves through the rest of the healthy portions of the host and cause them to terminate. For creatures that do not possess this self-destruct feature, once the emerged being dies healthy or undamaged cells of the host may continue to live on. These occurrences suggest that the emerged individual is only linked to its other, non-EC, cells of the host by a dependency or reliance upon them to maintain vital conditions for continued life. Conditions such as the need for energy, and temperature and pressure and vital chemicals that may be required by the systems of the host form for continued function. Therefore, the function of every host for life is singularly dedicated to maintaining the internal and perhaps also the external environment for continued entanglement by the hosts EC thus maintaining the individuals POV.  The POV being the composite QEF established and maintained by those same EC.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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?
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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. 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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).
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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.

 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.   
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: poleflux 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
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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? 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: jeffreyH 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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.   
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: jerrygg38 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang 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.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd 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. 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: PmbPhy on 28/06/2015 07:17:37
Quote from: alancalverd
Wrong forum. Science is about how, not why. But I'll happily answer "how".
I disagree for the same reasons I have several times in the past. While I don't believe that physics has a set procedure for answering "why" questions, that can't be taken to mean that it's not the goal of science to do so. E.g. In the opinion of Mendel Sachs, from Concepts of Modern Physics: The Haifa Lectures page 4
Quote
Though some scientists believe that the descriptive level of science is al that there is to know, that is, they believe that scientists should only ask 'what' questions, I believe that the explanatory level that follows the descriptive level is the actual goal of science - the answers to the 'why' questions.
Alan Lightman made a remark when he wrote the foreword to Alan Guth's book The Inflationary Universe noting that Guth was seeking to answer a 'why' question which then led him to the Inflationary Universe model. On the first page of the foreword Lightman wrote
Quote
In the 1970’s, the study of cosmology went through a major conceptual change. Prior to this time, modern cosmologists asked such questions as: What is the composition of galaxies and where are they located in space? How rapidly is the universe expanding? What is the average density of matter in the cosmos? After this time, in the “new cosmology,” cosmologists began seriously asking questions like: Why does matter exist at all, and where did it come from? Why is the universe as homogeneous as it is over such vast distances? Why is the cosmic density of matter such that the energy expansion of the universe is almost exactly balanced by its energy of gravitational attraction? In other words, the nature of the questions changed. The questions became more fundamental. “Why?” was added to “What?” and “How?” and “Where?”. Alan Guth was one of the young pioneers of the new cosmology, asking the Whys, and his Inflationary Universe theory provided many answers.

There have been times when I've asked myself Why does ...? and in some cases go answers. An important one that readily comes to mind is the "why" question Why does E = mc2? Before I got an answer it was always impressed on me by others that this question can't be answered when in fact I found that it could, and I did. It's too complicated to post in a thread and I don't like  posting new theories in physics forums myself. Therefore when I write it up I'll post a link to it. That will take some time because its a low priority for me.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 28/06/2015 09:09:32
Bit of a diversion here, but as the Michelin Guides say, worth it!

"Why" implies a search for purpose. This further implies control by a sentient being with a sense of time and mortality (otherwise why do it now? It is bound to happen eventually!) and produces anthropomorphic statements like "the electron chooses the path of least action to the anode"  when we mean "is constrained to..."

"Why" is kinda fun for teaching primary school, but at some point we need to grow up and realise that the universe taken as a whole is entirely mechanistic, with no evidence of gods or entanglement molecules* floating about to direct the processes of chemistry and physics.

In the worst case, you can fall into a trap of selfdelusion like our friend jccc who starts with a model and asks why the universe doesn't behave like his model predicts. Far better to start from the observation that the hydrogen atom is stable, or that E = mc2 balances your equations, and use that to generate a model that explains and predicts how other stuff works.


*OK, not so much a diversion as a pretty route.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: jccc on 28/06/2015 09:33:26
you can fall into a trap of selfdelusion like our friend jccc who starts with a model and asks why the universe doesn't behave like his model predicts.

my model says the space is infinite, time is infinity, there is only 1 force that rules the universe.

i never started a model and ask why the universe doesn't behave like my model predicts.

can you prove me wrong?

good morning!
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: PmbPhy on 28/06/2015 12:50:13
Quote from: alancalverd
"Why" implies a search for purpose.
Perhaps in your mind but not in the minds of the physicists who ask those kinds of questions. E.g. I was never asking about any purpose when I was asking "why" E = mc^2. People don't ask about any purpose when they ask "Why is the sky blue?" and Guth didn't wonder about any purpose when he asked "why" the uniform was so homogeneous.

Quote from: alancalverd
This further implies control by a sentient being with a sense of time and mortality ..
Not at all. How did you ever arrive at such a conclusion by what Lightman and Sachs wrote?
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 29/06/2015 15:44:08
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".


Upon reading, and with reasonable comprehension, of the above post it should at least become clear, whether one agrees with the ideas or not, that what is being proposed is a natural, purely cause and effect, ultimately testable description for observations which have gone either unexplained or described by less plausible means, invocations of gods and spirits etc. not required. I recognize that this hypothesis treads on observational territory which has long been addressed by religious narratives as were ideas concerning the living form before 1859 (On the Origin of Species) and the ensuing genetic revolution.

As I mentioned in another post it soon became clear to me that it was essential to begin consideration of these concepts 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. To be clear this does not suggest an avoidance of any particular result. If my best considered, rational, logical, objective conclusions lead to a man with a crown of thorns, on a cross impaled and dying, then so be it. Further, if the instantiation hypothesis in its current form is reminiscent of any of countless ideas of resurrection or reincarnation or such, then so be it.

The historical nature of human understanding has never emerged from a lack of intellect but from a deficit of information. So it should come as no great surprise if our ancestor’s beliefs may not have been completely wrong and science today may not be completely right.  Instead the reality we live and experience is a stunningly flexible and amazing hybrid implementation of nature which ironically incorporates necessary elements of several schools of thought. This hybrid implementation makes life possible; it makes you possible anywhere in existence. Such a truth would be embraced by few in their current instantiation but would be embraced more readily by those same individuals in their future instantiations. Progress by reinstantiation, today we call it mortality, has been one of the primary vehicles of progress for humankind since the beginning of human history.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 04/07/2015 13:54:37
In the presence of ignorance questions of “How” and “Why” both go unanswered and both questions are as untethered kites fluttering arbitrarily in the wind, each open to all manner of mystical, fanciful or ill conceived musings or agenda inspired narratives. When the question as to how any observation is as it appears becomes finally resolved so is the why of it. Not until the question of how is answered does the question of why become tethered, understood and explained. Why and how is the sky blue?… Why and how does the apple fall? How and why are babies made? How and why are you here? The real question asked (or denied) by each living individual, consciously or not, is; what about me?

We often misrepresent this as what about my species? But this latter question is a miscomprehension of the reality of life in this universe. You see taking your current species with you is a nonstarter in a vast expanding universe permeated by a Higgs field. We have always entertained the notion that we can take our form with us since we are a somewhat mobile species. We have legs, we are able to travel. So it is that we attempt to travel as far and as wide as we are able to cajole the resources of nature we find around us into facilitating our journey from our origins. So it is an understandable and noble endeavor that we explore the limits of feasibility of our locomotion through space-time to the extent that the laws of nature may allow. But make no mistake; this universe is an individualized universe. This is a universe in which mobility of the individual component of life is implemented not the mobility of its’ host form.  So it is that the question; “What about Me” goes misunderstood as we misrepresent our being with our form.

Charles Darwin cast the first tether of understanding for the ideas surrounding hosts for life on earth, species. Many have been, and are convinced that it is the only tether of explanation needed to answer the question of “How” is the individual implemented in this universe. However, many aspects of nature suggest that Darwins ideas are only part of the reality of life in this universe. Once again we have been placated by notions which either misrepresent the reality of life, or as is the case today, only exposes a part of its true implementation in this universe. The instantiation of life hypothesis offers a description for the missing tether of understanding.

The instantiation hypothesis suggests that natural entanglement places no restrictions or limitations on the form or general function of potential host. It is the local environment which dictates such stresses and thereby shape and define the forms that emerge. Ergo “cherry-zebras” if they can emerge in any given environment, are welcome. Natural entanglement permits individuality to occur anywhere viable host may emerge.  The primary point being submitted for your collective consideration is; Form vs being is not a chicken or the egg question, rather it is a statement of clarification that a universe may be a living universe even in the absence of any living forms or hosts so long as such a universe possesses the basic implementation for individualized being via natural entanglement. Conditions which prohibit the formation of living hosts may predominate in a universe for too long a time for hosts to emerge or a universe may exist for too short a time for such hosts to emerge yet such a universe may have the natural framework for an individualized position-of-view. Of course one without the other, for all practical purposes, is inconsequential. Nonetheless, for understanding the true nature of life it is fundamental to realize this structure in nature.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 13/07/2015 13:15:55
The monogamy of entanglement is the law of nature that isolates an entangled state from intrusion by non participant, non indoctrinated entities. So how is it that the organelles in any given cell manage to share a common entangled state to the exclusion of other entities that may violate the cells wall? Isn’t the law of monogamy being violated? No, the law of monogamy isn’t being violated anymore than the law of gravity is being violated when we construct and fly 100 ton airliners carrying hundreds of passengers thru the atmosphere. As is always the case the laws of nature are never violated only manipulated and utilized to achieve a desired behavior. So it is in the living cell. To understand the living cells utilization of a common entangled state think of a cruise ship at sea, it either has an onboard wireless communications transceiver (ham-radio etc.) or it doesn’t. A ship with such a device may allow its hundreds of crew members each in possession of their own hand units (talkies) to communicate with one another but also it permits the ship as an entity to communicate and share its state information with the cloud that is the outside world. In this scenario the crew shares a common channel of communication which is isolated from intrusion by some common degree-of-freedom defined by some uniquely quantifiable aspect of the electromagnetic spectrum. Usually that property is electromagnetic frequency modulation combined with a layer of encryption derived from a private encryption key for added security.


In the lab today we understand the promise of entanglement as a security encryption protocol primarily because of its monogamistic properties. We see that we may use the public and private key approach for encrypting and decrypting information securely. Likewise the cell utilizes a sort of private encryption key process to indoctrinate new entities manufactured within the cell from the cells own DNA to become participants, new organelles within the cell. This private key bestows upon newly minted entities a common shared degree-of-freedom defined by this individual cells’ specific quantum entanglement frequency (QEF). The QEF is a uniquely quantifiable aspect of the quantum entanglement spectrum. It is exposed only via the cells entanglement molecules which at this stage in evolution of earth-life have likely been fully incorporated within the molecular structure of the cell’s DNA.

It is through the utilization of the cells entanglement molecules that the individuals unique QEF is made available as a private key for the indoctrination of new cellular organelles. In our cruise ship analogy, consider a responsible crew member is tasked to program secure hand units (talkies) with the ships unique frequency and encryption key and then to distribute those units to each new member of the crew. This enables each new arrival to become a participating member of the ships staff thereby animating the ship as a self contained living organism. In the living cell it is hypothesized that a similar activity is undertaken when a ribosome manufactures a new protein line from its’ RNA and DNA within the cell’s nucleus. All new organelles are imbued with a common aspect of the entanglement spectrum. This property is exposed by the entanglement molecule within the cells’ DNA and permits the otherwise inanimate organelle to utilize the cellular natural entanglement connection to metamatter. In so doing the organelle is not entangled but like the crew members on the ship is in communion on some level with other cellular entities and also able to shares cellular state information with the universal cloud-storage of metamatter accessible by other naturally entangled host anywhere in this universe. No doubt today in the modern living cell this is a complicated process to describe and document but it is nonetheless recognizable through this analogy.  This describes the natural implementation that is the predominant difference between a living entity and a non living one and the instantiation of the individual by natural entanglement.   
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Ethos_ on 13/07/2015 14:23:47


"Why" is kinda fun for teaching primary school, but at some point we need to grow up and realise that the universe taken as a whole is entirely mechanistic, with no evidence of gods or entanglement molecules* floating about to direct the processes of chemistry and physics.


Webster's does assign to the word "why" the notion of "reason or purpose". However, for many of us, this word simply asks for an explanation that leads to the understanding of a physical occurrence.

Nevertheless, I do understand the point you've made about a few members here using the word "why" in a philosophical or religious sense. But in those cases, it becomes evident very quickly that they are trying to assign a purpose to the use of this word. However, for those of us that are interested in the reality of the physics involved, the word is simply asking for an explanation about the physical events revolving around the phenomenon.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 14/07/2015 00:44:17
The problem with allowing "why" questions is that they tend to lead to anthropomorphic explanations ("the electron wants to...") which can mislead people into thinking that classical mechanics can be applied at all levels of analysis, or that nature must obey laws.

Fact is that QM describes what is, and how things evolve, with no overarching reason, and physical "laws" are no more than convenient mathematical descriptions of apparently universal phenomena.   
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Ethos_ on 14/07/2015 02:59:00
The problem with allowing "why" questions is that they tend to lead to anthropomorphic explanations ("the electron wants to...") which can mislead people into thinking that classical mechanics can be applied at all levels of analysis, or that nature must obey laws.
I find myself agreeing with you on every point except one alan. While it's true that those predisposed to the anthropomorphic "religious" point of view, will tend to explain events by invoking the supernatural, I find it inconsistent with the typical researcher to not ask "why?". Research is BTW, initiated because an unanswered "question" has been asked or at least entered the consciousness of the researcher. I nevertheless concede to the danger you have warned us about and the misdirection it can often produce if the supernatural is allowed to enter the equation.

Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 14/07/2015 15:07:16
In the context of the most recent posts, an interesting"why" for cosmologists would be, "why are all Type One A supernovae so uniform?"

Another "why" thought to think over would be why cellular organelles so intricate that (when one penetrates to the "nano" scale) their complexity is so great that it defies the imagination as to how they could have arisen, using familiar quantum scale theories of energy and biological systems.

I espouse an aether view of cosmic systems (as distinguished from earthbound quantum-scale energy systems, as we perceive them). -I submit that biological systems arose in cosmic settings  in which there were super-intense energy levels, derived from transient magnetic entrainments in the early cosmos, inducing super-fluxes in etherically-super-refined physical systems. -When a self-reproducing sub-system finally emerged from the fluxes, physical life could begin. A key set of amino acids was probably among the life-producing ingredients.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Ethos_ on 14/07/2015 15:50:47
In the context of the most recent posts, an interesting"why" for cosmologists would be, "why are all Type One A supernovae so uniform?"

Another "why" thought to think over would be why cellular organelles so intricate that (when one penetrates to the "nano" scale) their complexity is so great that it defies the imagination as to how they could have arisen, using familiar quantum scale theories of energy and biological systems.
These are examples of questions where the word "why" can accurately be used. However, I think the point some are making here is that the word "how" can easily be substituted in it's place. In my opinion, either one would be appropriate, that is unless, one chooses to associate the anthropomorphic with the word "why".
Quote from: MichaelMD
I espouse an aether view of cosmic systems
I doubt you will receive much support for that view my friend. Aether theories have, for a long time now, been found to be lacking credible evidence.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 14/07/2015 16:11:14
In the context of the most recent posts, an interesting"why" for cosmologists would be, "why are all Type One A supernovae so uniform?"
Presumably because the laws of physics are universal.

Quote
Another "why" thought to think over would be why cellular organelles so intricate that (when one penetrates to the "nano" scale) their complexity is so great that it defies the imagination as to how they could have arisen, using familiar quantum scale theories of energy and biological systems.
Again, it's a "how". The "why" only arises because your imagination is more limited than the potential implications of chemistry. I'm often led to the conclusion that "why" is a reflection of human vanity, and actually means "because I don't understand it, it can't be true". Hence religion and other absurdities.

Quote
I espouse an aether view of cosmic systems (as distinguished from earthbound quantum-scale energy systems, as we perceive them). -I submit that biological systems arose in cosmic settings  in which there were super-intense energy levels, derived from transient magnetic entrainments in the early cosmos, inducing super-fluxes in etherically-super-refined physical systems. -When a self-reproducing sub-system finally emerged from the fluxes, physical life could begin. A key set of amino acids was probably among the life-producing ingredients.
An explanation of "how" would be appreciated, along with an estimate of the resulting density and distribution of biological systems in the universe. For the time being, the presence of liquid water and a few simple carbon compounds seems crucial. 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 14/07/2015 21:43:35
The monogamy of entanglement enforces the integrity and isolation of an existing entangled state such as the hypothesized position-of-view (POV). It is in fact nature’s last line of defense against infiltration upon any entangled state. This effect can essentially be thought of as a self-destruct mechanism. The concept of defense by self destruction appears at times in implementations both technological and natural. In human affairs when vital information needs to be isolated or otherwise protected from infiltration at any cost we wire the asset for destruction with explosives or such. In nature the integrity of a law of conservation is often when such an effect is observed. In the case of an entangled state it is indeed when the conservation of information, one of nature’s fundamental laws, is threatened with violation is when the asset, the entangled relationship, forfeit. If one wired an asset to explode upon infiltration or upon specific violation then one would also need to broadcast this fact to interested parties for it to be an effective deterrent. Alternatively, one would need to erect obstacles of a defensive, offensive, and perhaps cognitive nature to actively keep out unwanted intrusions upon the protected asset. This is exactly what living hosts (species) are.
 
 This evolutionary arms race to protect the individuals’ vital asset the POV began with a simple cell wall in the early proto-cell. This cell wall may be metaphorically compared to the posts of timber erected by early peoples that settled in a new land. They often erected a defensive barrier to keep out environmental threats and also to protect vital assets on the inside of the encampment. Today these walls have grown and evolved substantially both in nations and in the living cell. In the living cell and in any other host all systems are evolved to support in the protection of the POV the entangled state maintained by the entanglement molecules within the single cell. In complex (multi-cellular) hosts the POV is the entangled state maintained specifically by the entanglement cells (EC) which must be protected from intrusion or infiltration while sacrificing many other non-EC cells in due course.
 
 Another apt metaphor for this idea is the starship enterprise on the popular iconic TV show star trek. Though the enterprise bristles with offensive as well as defensive and cognitive systems, both living and non-living, the last line of protection is to isolate or protect the information content inherent in the enterprise from infiltration. This is accomplished similarly by annihilating the ship. So it is that the well known self-destruct system of the enterprise is ushered into service at the last possible moment. Likewise the monogamy of entanglement as previously stated is nature’s last line of defense of the law of conservation of information in this universe. Make no mistake this is purely a cause and effect mechanism of natural law. Quantum coherence and its monogamistic properties are observations made in the laboratory and are given labels, names. No one should suggest at this juncture to know the fundamental underlying implementation in nature of these phenomena. However, plausible well considered hypothesis are welcome.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 15/07/2015 10:06:20
You are now asserting purpose in nature. But since purpose is an emergent property of transient, sentient beings, i.e. the creatures of nature, this is a circular argument and requires a redefinition of nature as something other than "what happens in the observable universe".

Your definition of nature would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 15/07/2015 17:21:27
In alluding to how my aether-overview could address a couple of theoretic areas, including the possible origin of biological life, I left out why I consider an aether a viable concept, despite the position of Science that an aether doesn't exist.

The old concept of a universal underlying aether medium which transmits forces was discarded after the Michelson-Morley Experiment (MMX) of 1887 reportedly indicated the absence of an aether. -However, I submit, the MMX used a faulty theoretic criterion as its basic premise. -In the MMX, it was assumed (I believe falsely) that any kind of aether would have to behave inertially with respect to earth's movements through it, producing a dragging "wind" effect which should be detectable, using the optical refractive measurements in the MMX. -However, if an aether was non-inertial, the key theoretic assumption used to dismiss the aether would not apply, the MMX would be cosmologically irrelevant, and its dismissal by physics, which continues to this day, would be in error.

In my aether model, the aether originated in space, which in the beginning, before the first appearance of forces, was self-compatible, such that point-localities oscillated reciprocally and symmetrically, until oscillatory fatigue induced a pair of adjacent "points" to fall together curvilinearly, in "Yin and Yang" fashion, which broke the perfect symmetry of original space, leading to a vibrationally (as derived from the oscillational) energic aether. (Oscillatory fatigue is known to occur in metals, but since metallic oscillatory fatigue is a quantum process, it cannot be definitively correlated with oscillatory fatigue in first-cause space.)

Once aggregative forces from such an aether led to larger "particle capacities," then to atoms, then to aggregational bodies in space, the elemental underlying aether framework would function in an energically-contiguous fashion, such that a body's surface would be in constant vibrational interactive resonance with identical elemental aether units in space. -The aether in space would thus be non-inertial with respect to the body (such as earth), because the aetheric resonances between a body and the aether of space would resonationally tend to "follow" the body as it moves through space.

Such "auric" elemental aetheric forces would also serve to mediate such cosmic effects as gravity, light, and other effects. We are unable to detect the aether, so we cannot appreciate the various magnetic and gravitational auric forces at work.

So-called quantum entanglement just represents radiated packets of aetheric energy, which have the same vibratory pattern. Elemental aether units are the only actual participants in this phenomenon, with the quantum units walled-off kinetically, like cool arms of an underlying quiet purring aether mechanism, which can turn itself on and off by itself, any time.   

 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Ethos_ on 15/07/2015 18:46:16
We are unable to detect the aether, so we cannot appreciate the various magnetic and gravitational auric forces at work.

And this is the reason aether theories are unacceptable, without evidence, such theories will remain unscientific.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: jeffreyH on 16/07/2015 01:03:08
An Aether theory that simply has the Aether moving in concert with celestial bodies serves no purpose. There are thought to be constant vacuum fluctuations that send ripples of short lifetime virtual particles through space. These do move but not necessarily in concert with mass. This is not an Aether. Why on earth does this theme keep cropping up? It may well be easier to resurrect this than learn the physics that is in use today. To work through the history of the developments in physics is fascinating. Once you appreciate how one discovery led to another it all starts to make sense. It amazes me just how correct the theorists were without the experimental evidence to validate the postulates. Many were later vindicated by experimental results. You cannot skip the journey through the history of physics and hope to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 16/07/2015 13:55:01
JeffreyH,

I don't claim my Model of the Aether compares, empirical-evidence-wise, with the standard model of physics. The latter is based on empirical evidence obtained in our earthbound setting, where quantum forces are what mediate our observational evidence.

In my Model, quantum forces just represent a spin-vector type of energy which, in our setting, is superimposed upon  underlying aetheric vibrational forces which are what originated the cosmic forces in space. -Our everyday perceptions prejudice us to think scientifically, also, in terms of our quantally-mediated world, where "quantum-scale forces are the elemental forces and are all there is."

I gather we're all supposed to just keep waiting for quantum physics to find the answers to questions like the nature of gravitation, Time, quantum entanglement, and so on.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 16/07/2015 15:45:58
Setting aside my wonder at the difference between vibrational and oscillatory forces, and my concern that you equate force to energy, what does your aetheric theory predict, that is not correctly predicted by any other theory?
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Ethos_ on 17/07/2015 01:20:36
-Our everyday perceptions prejudice us to think scientifically,
So just how ought we to think if not scientifically? Turning from the scientific method leaves us with little more than; Myth, Philosophy, Anthropomorphism, and Intuition. All of which may or may not lead to new thought, but without evidence no real progress in our understanding of reality can be achieved. It's called "spinning your wheels", as in getting nowhere rapidly.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 18/07/2015 14:53:51
Setting aside my wonder at the difference between vibrational and oscillatory forces, and my concern that you equate force to energy, what does your aetheric theory predict, that is not correctly predicted by any other theory?

The concept of "oscillation" I work with is of a process involving oscillating entities, a non-directional (thus non-energic) process, symmetrical in all possible directions, and reciprocal with respect to other like-entities (in my case, "entities" would refer to point-localities of original space.)
In my Origins Model, a symmetrical oscillational process in space transitioned, due to oscillational fatigue of certain "Yin and Yang" point-pairs, to a directional vibrational process. The vibrational process can be thought of as analogous to the point-localities having "nodes," as their vibrations extend outwardly in certain directions, so that loose connections (not "fixed" connections) occur between the elemental etheric "points." -In the overall context of non-energic space. the appearance of such resonational forces then would have tended to form transient magnetic entrainments of elemental etheric units, which in turn produced energic foci, producing larger "particle capacity" units, and eventually, atoms.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 18/07/2015 15:01:32
Setting aside my wonder at the difference between vibrational and oscillatory forces, and my concern that you equate force to energy, what does your aetheric theory predict, that is not correctly predicted by any other theory?

alancalverd,

As to whether my aether model could lead to predicted, or objective, evidence, I do have a potential test for that. (The test would be based on information obtained from an obscure source, derived by code breaking.) The test would involve generating a selectively aetheric force field, and measuring densities of materials inside the test system for a predicted decrease in density. -Such an effect on density does not occur with known forms of energy. -However, this test would be expensive to conduct, and I lack the funds to do it, myself.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 26/07/2015 16:35:49
Having read very little science fiction, I would be grateful to know what a "force field" is. Apart, that is, from "the answer to everything".
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 26/07/2015 17:21:53
The term "force field" has been used in alternative physics to refer to the concept of motivating UFO craft by first energizing them, using a super-intense energy field that has been generated technologically. -In correlating this concept with my theory of the aether, such a field would comprise aetheric-scale forces, but in a technologically greatly-magnified strength (which confers to such craft their ability to traverse cosmic distances unattainable via our inertial methods of propulsion in space). It is a "force" field because its strength is over and above the natural aether forces that exist naturally all around us as "auric" forces. -Reviewing my model for the aether, at an elemental, basic, level, aether/auric forces are really what account for all energic phenomena, with manifested differences observed (at our quantum level of observation) such as light, gravitation, magnetism, spontaneous human combustion, "quantum entanglement," and others. At the basic elemental aether level, the differences between them are only due to variations in the vibratory patterns of radiated packets of aetheric energy. -Of course, when the aether forces are manifested in our earthly quantum systems, those manifestations appear vastly different from each other, misleading us as to their true basic origin.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 01/08/2015 01:16:45
The entanglement spectrum is part of nature. It is known to exist by modern science. It is being harnessed for use in technologies which may become available to you and I in the near future. However, long before that, perhaps even before the big-bang, nature has ‘used’ entanglement for, among other things, the implementation of individuality in living entities.
 
Think of it this way…Essentially, you have or own a part of the QE spectrum. This part, your QEF is all yours and it will always belong to you. Don’t panic this is not a mystical statement; it is a scientifically plausible premise. It is as if your individuality was defined by a unique band of FM-frequency on the electromagnetic spectrum (EMF). Any host (radio) that tuned in your EMF would instantiate you, that is to say, establish your being your position-of-view (POV) your presence as a solution of state in this space-time. Thereby tethering you to this particular host (radio/body). Dispense with any notion of personality, or behavior or memories or such of past instantiations (lives). These all extinguished along with any former hosts you may have had. The Monogamy of Entanglement is the property of the QE spectrum which maintains individuality. For interested readers I recommend that you research the general concept of; Monogamy of Entanglement;

http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0310037
http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1867
 
 
In nature it is the QE spectrum that assumes this role. Your QEF is an aspect or degree-of-freedom of the QE spectrum (similar to frequency) and is relativistically unconstrained (does not need comets or spacecraft to lumber through space-time) and implements your individuality in any viable form that emerges anywhere in this universe. This is essentially a form of coherent state information transference or natural teleportation see the links below for these general concepts.
 
http://www.nature.co...ature14246.html
http://arxiv.org/ftp...9/1409.7769.pdf
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 06/08/2015 21:55:33

The hypothesized entanglement molecule, a primordial arrangement of atoms, naturally establishes a shared information state with a form of matter hypothesized to exist outside of our space-time in Hilbert-space. Today it is suspected that gravity is as weak as observed in our space-time because it too exists partially or mostly outside of our space-time. However, gravity like all known standard-model forces is governed and constrained by the laws of relativity and their effects are therefore limited at or below the speed of light in this space-time. Therefore, changes in the suns’ gravitational influence for example, take 8 minutes to reach the earth just as does the suns’ light. The only phenomenon known to science which demonstrates behavior which essentially subverts the current laws of relativity is entanglement, a type of quantum coherence. Natural entanglement is quantum entanglement implemented by natural structures like the Fenna-Matthews-Olson  (FMO) complex or by the hypothesized entanglement molecule and is utilized in nature to great effect. Life is one such effect. 

So what might be the origins and structure of the entanglement molecule? For starters it is most likely to be one of a finite number of known interstellar molecules. These are molecules formed from stellar or interstellar processes rather than in ecosystems.  There is a good chance that whatever the structure of the entanglement molecule may have been prior to the emergence of life on earth it may since have been transformed here on Earth to be incorporated into cellular structures such as in the DNA molecule or in the FMO complex. Much of the DNA molecule remains unknown to modern science and is sometimes referred to as DNA dark-matter. This suggests that, like interstellar dark-matter, DNA dark-matter is also undefined. Nonetheless, this significant unknown portion of the molecule most influential to earth-life must be of primary interest in the search for the entanglement molecule; But what to look for? For guidance I tend to begin my scrutiny with the structure of the 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, cross referenced with types of known primordial molecules. Today, in our quest for life, we tend to search only for molecules which support our current understanding of the implementation of life in this universe, which are molecules which comprise the biological structures we can readily identify, this is of course as it must be. However, there may be a more effective approach.

This alternate approach requires an understanding of the instantiation of life by natural entanglement and the subsequent development of technologies based on its principles such as a conceptual entanglement telescope. Such a telescope would reveal areas of dense natural entanglement present in living entities throughout this universe in a manner similar to the way non-optical telescopes illuminate matter. Properly designed QE detectors when exposed to the open sky will permit us to see life throughout the universe as bright star-like spots of complexity. Each such spot reveals, not the density of matter at those locations, but rather the immensely concentrated density of information complexity present in living entities at those locations, complexity which exists in much greater density in living entities than in non-living ones.  In nature how does the influence and density of informational complexity encoded in living entities compare to that of inanimate matter?

Our most powerful computing systems programmed with our best models running non-stop for months can barley model the folding of a basic protein. Step that concept up to the full expression of a complex protein not to mention the Ribosome which is the tiny factory that builds proteins in living organisms, step that up all the way to modeling a living bacteria etc. This informational concentration of DNA and its systems, regardless of how we define them, is potent to the mathematics and therefore to the state of nature and each instance is a multiplier of this mathematical potency. Each instance is each DNA strand in each cell that has ever been created in the four plus billion years that DNA has existed on Earth. Put in these terms you can begin to appreciate how earth life has contributed to nature as a very potent mathematical factory contributing to balancing the existential formula.

On the other hand, we are much more capable of modeling a star like our Sun or even a black hole which we all know are both physically much larger than a DNA molecule or a Ribosome or your cat. As I'm sure you can see size doesn't matter in this regard. Likewise complexity can be deceptive to the human eye but is well defined in mathematical terms. The reason we are more able to model a Star is because the processes that implement a star and inanimate entities in general, are far simpler in mathematical and informational complexity than those that define a protein to a bacteria. Modeling a star is only a few orders of magnitude more difficult than simulating the aerodynamics and thermodynamics of the Space shuttle. Simulating even single bacteria is far, far more complex.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 15/08/2015 16:41:48
The theory of instantiation by natural entanglement proposes that all that you are experiencing at this moment including the body you’re in, and the reality you see as this universe, is a real-time rendering of a set of quantum wave functions of state (Hamiltonians) or qsf’s. These qsf’s comprise the metaverse if you will or Hilbert space if you won’t. They manifest a potential reality which for you, as an emerged composite being, would remain unresolved and inaccessible if not for your position-of-view (POV) produced and maintained by the entanglement molecules contained within a very special group of cells in your host form called the entanglement cells (EC). All living cells in or out of your body establish an entangled state with a form of matter called metamatter. However, most of your cells do not directly establish your emerged QE connection, your POV. It is only the EC’s that have evolved the specialization to heterodyne or combine their individual entangled state into a new unique composite entangled state to establish your individual LifeID at your unique QEF sufficiently different from that of your other cells. Together these elements establish your position-of-view (POV). The POV is the mathematical representation of the emerged individual. Each individual POV, regardless of the form taken by its host vessel, effectively provides a unique solution (practical and mathematical) which resolves, and collapses the surrounding ocean of qsf’s (Hamiltonians) that is nature, into that individuals’ reality. This collapse of quantum states into what we call reality is centered upon the individuals POV and manifests an individualized rendering of nature. Each individual rendering had by every truly living entity is similarly collapsed by those other POV’s. These realities are very similar at least for compatible POV’s such as those on earth and perhaps those that may be found throughout this universe.
 
Although not easy it is not impossible to detect differences between POV renderings as seen in individual observations of subtle quantum experiments (Double slit, weak-measurement etc.). Differences between individual POV’s and their resulting rendering of nature may have mostly to do with the cells that host the entanglement connection being that the QE spectrum upon which the POV is established is expected to be a significantly constant universal phenomenon. This is like saying that the audio experience produced by a radio set is primarily dependant upon the design and technology of the radio set given the same broadcast signal. In this metaphor ones’ natural entangled state is akin to the broadcast signal and your host form is the radio set. There may be many types of forms of radio sets and species but the fundamental natural implementation of both implementations, the natural entanglement spectrum and the electromagnetic spectrum, is universal.

One possible factor that may plausibly contribute to differences in POV rendering is likely to be the type of matter that comprise the host cells, or their equivalent, that is to say; normal matter as we know it versus some other form of (non-standard model) matter akin to dark-matter. Another factor is likely to be the unique degrees-of-freedom that may be indigenous to such exotic forms of matter may prove to be dominant in the description of the emerged POV’s wave functions (Hamiltonian) and interaction with nature. Liken the concept of a separate POV (which is not possible) to a CPU not yet connected to a motherboard, it is pure potential. Your position-of-view POV itself is not corporeal like a CPU but is instead essentially a standing quantum wave produced and maintained by your EC. The POV is the mathematical representation of the LifeID and both interferes and interacts and collapses natures own wave functions (Hamiltonians) which are the local superposition state of your environment (i.e. the cat is both dead and alive.) into the corporeal or particulate form your senses detect as your reality.

Ones senses, such as they’re configured in your particular host form, performs an entirely different task of rendering signals electromagnetically as telemetry gathered from this collapsed reality to form what we call experiences. Make no mistake, your position-of-view is not involved with such experiences but only serves to persist your placement as a solution of state in space-time. The collapse of the environments superposition state we call reality may not be solely or even largely performed by the living POV (arguably the electron plays a significant role in pre-rendering nature.) but nonetheless manifests the tangible physical position such experiences derives from. This is hypothesized to be the natural mechanism of ‘Being’ for every individual life-form that is implemented throughout this universe and indeed perhaps throughout existence. This is the root of the experience, or lack thereof, of life.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 17/08/2015 08:23:33
So all that stuff about sex and organic chemistry was wrong, and we spontaneously erupt from resolving hamiltonians?  Seems like a very complicated answer to a very simple question, but it does align with various bizarre notions of predestination.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 17/08/2015 14:09:28
I know it is challenging for some to fathom initially but no aspect of the modern scientific understanding of earths biology or its chemical properties is being challenged. Living hosts may emerge in many different ways and your host (body) is not you. You are only temporarily and naturally tethered to your body. The cell and the verifiable aspects of its biological evolution are as science currently describes them. The instantiation hypothesis begins where the modern scientific narrative admittedly, voluntarily abstains and traditionally religions are permitted to fill what is arguably the most important of all voids, and likely the only void any living being may actually care most about. That is, the natural mechanisms governing the instantiation of life. It is for this reason that humankind has fought and prayed for a time far longer than science itself has existed. It is much overdue for the narrative to be extended not by mysticism or ideological entrenchment but by well reasoned, steely objective thought, because clearly not just some, but all of nature is ultimately science.

The instantiation hypothesis suggests that each life is an instance of a specific individual. Also, the natural process that instantiates an individual to that host (i.e. species) is independent of the specific biology, chemistry (i.e. carbon, silicon etc.) or technological principles upon which such forms may be evolved, implemented or depend for function or for its local evolution. Therefore, any individual may instantiate (live) in any viable form in any viable environment in ths universe. Ergo Earth is not special.




1-   Individual life (you) is species independent.
2-   The natural process that places you or any living being in the life they currently live is not dependent upon any particular chemistry, biology, species or form, evolved or otherwise. Just as for example, memory, or intelligence does not depend upon any particular brand or type of technology for its implementation.  That is to say, memory is abstracted from its implementation. So to in nature is the individual life abstracted from any specific implementation of its host form, or species.
 

The belief that you are your body stems from a lack of an alternative perspective and supporting evidence as well as from tradition also from the powerful visual perspective imposed by sight and a prominent physical from. It is as much a misperception as was humankinds’ long held belief in the Earth centric universe, likewise it is a very convincing visual misconception only made more so by the advent of biology and genetic science which describe the evolution and development of the physical forms presently on earth. This misconception is further compounded by the very illogical belief held even by educated individuals that the function and operation of the brain defines ones individuality in nature. Clearly this last point cannot be so since most life forms on earth do not have a brain and are not even multi-cellular. 
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: alancalverd on 17/08/2015 15:18:41
2-   The natural process that places you or any living being in the life they currently live is not dependent upon any particular chemistry, biology, species or form, evolved or otherwise. Just as for example, memory, or intelligence does not depend upon any particular brand or type of technology for its implementation.

I think it unwise to predicate any scientific argument on an irrelevant nonsequitur. "Just as" requiires a lot more explanation!
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 18/08/2015 05:53:08
2-   The natural process that places you or any living being in the life they currently live is not dependent upon any particular chemistry, biology, species or form, evolved or otherwise. Just as for example, memory, or intelligence does not depend upon any particular brand or type of technology for its implementation.

... "Just as" requiires a lot more explanation!

Exactly, and the ILNE hypothesis offers one such plausible explanation.

Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 29/10/2015 01:48:31
Today the world generally unites in a communal pride in the seminal achievement of Neil Armstrong as the first among humankind to set foot on a cosmological body other than the Earth. In this achievement we acknowledge the triumph of the human spirit and intellect to measure, understand, manipulate and control the laws of nature to implement a mobility of the living form through space-time unlike any that had previously been achieved. Humankind as a species like many other hosts for life in earth’s ecosystem has evolved a basic mobility of individuality implemented via our host forms functions and structures. This local mobility is evolved for movement through direct contact with the environment. Legs, wings, fins are some of the means by which the physical mobility of the living individual is achieved by species on earth. Additionally, humankind has realized great utility in further extending this basic capability with technology. Thus the mobility of individuality on human scales has been enhanced by wheels, airframes, engines and rockets. Our thoughts often do not extend or associate this mobility of our physical form with either the local or universal mobility of our position-of-view, that is the mobility of our individuality. We have a very limited scope of extrapolating many of the implementations around us, natural or otherwise, even those that we conceive and develop ourselves, to a context greater than our immediate utility and practical concerns. However with the accomplishments of NASA’s Apollo mission’s humankind has extended its reach beyond our usual scope and in so doing has opened a new realm of mobility of individuality that must be addressed and understood. Not only in technological terms but also for what the movement and relocation of Neil’s position-of-view (POV) to the Moon’s surface says to us as individuals about our living circumstances in this universe.


We take as a foregone conclusion that life can exist anywhere in this universe so long as the resources needed to sustain it are present. This is a very complacent assumption despite the likelihood that it may very well be so. It is not too surprising that we make this assumption; after all, there are no examples to the contrary in any Earth or near Earth environment. In fact one of the underlying tenants of our present day scientific method, as implied by current measurements of the fine structure constant states that the laws of physics are upheld everywhere in this universe. This consistency offers a reasonably good basis for our certainty. Nonetheless life can be quite complicated and has many requirements and influences that are well understood, yet perhaps there are other factors critical to life yet to be discovered. We know most Earth life depends on proper sustenance (energy), water, oxygen, temperature and pressure levels to be maintained at least in the near term. We also have a longer term need for gravity or an equivalent force. Nevertheless life as we know it may yet have some undiscovered intrinsic dependency on properties in or near the area around Earth or around the Sun. Mission planners acknowledged this possibility when they sent the first ever Earth life into space on board a captured V-2 rocket on February 20, 1947. These original astronauts were a group of fruit flies, insects being as good a representation of Earth life as any other. This first volley into the unknown environment outside the Earth’s atmosphere was extremely dangerous. Not just in terms of the technological or known dangers inherent to extraterrestrial space due to its lack of the known required resources mentioned earlier but primarily because space could have proven to be fundamentally incompatible with a living entitys' instantiation, its being. So how do we know for near certain that Earth life can exist anywhere in this universe?

Interestingly the best evidence to date for the universal mobility of individuality presented itself when Neil Armstrong pressed his boot into the soft silt of the moon’s surface. Neil Armstrong’s’ surviving his “giant leap for mankind” suggests that life as we know it is not utterly dependent on any resource intrinsic or unique to the Earth, or the very local space-time around it. For example we could have evolved with a dependence on Earth’s unique magnetic field configuration, or on Earth’s specific gravitational field intensity, or some other completely unknown and unrecognized property of either Earth itself or the space near to the Earth. If this was indeed the case the crew of Apollo 11, and the fruit flies before them, could have tragically deinstantiated, ceased to live once they passed some threshold or boundary somewhere between the Earth’s surface and the moon’s surface. Perhaps once the spacecraft passed some critical flux level in Earth’s magnetic field, or once the Earth’s gravitational field density dropped below some essential level. Each of the unsuspecting astronauts, human or fruit fly could have simply extinguished immediately or gradually like light bulbs whose electric current had been turned off.  Perhaps their molecular bonds could have just dissipated due to some unknown property of space. There may yet remain some irreproducible property of our sun unknown to us that is critical to sustaining Earth life. After all Earth life has never been tested beyond the suns Helios-spheres. Presumably, each of these needs could ultimately be overcome and provided for by technology. 

Nonetheless the amazingly profound statement suggested by Neil Armstrong surviving his first step on the moon isn’t just that we can overcome the technological hurdles of space travel, but rather that nature in this universe permits individuality to exist elsewhere and likely everywhere; that not only the physical form, but the individuals first person position-of-view that is ones being ones natural entanglement ones instantiation is indeed mobile in this universe and perhaps throughout nature. Neil Armstrong’s giant step for mankind suggests that the individual POV can exist not just where it was instantiated, where it entangled its host form, but quite likely anywhere in this universe due to the unrestricted instantaneous universal ubiquity of natural entanglement. On the other hand, the irreversibility of extinction and evolution together with relativistic constraints mandate that the individual cannot be instantiated or rendered universally mobile by the physical forms made of local collections of atoms in this universe, because unlike NASA nature does not use spacecraft for the mobility of the individual.


Comprehending the reality of one’s living circumstances begins with the realization that Neal Armstrong’s first step on the surface of the moon, or perhaps Yuri Gagarins’ first orbit around the earth or that the intrepid voyage of those first insects, demonstrated that the mobility of individuality exists in this universe. Mobility not defined by locomotion or travel of your current host form but by a fundamental property of nature with degrees of freedom much greater than that of matter. Realize that the instantiation of any individual, ones position-of-view, may be hosted anywhere in space-time by any viable environment which happens to emerge naturally or artificially on any planet orbiting any star. This convenient environment also includes the living hosts we refer to as species. The obstacles presented by travel involve movement of the matter based components of the instantiated individual through expanses of space-time small or large. Nature in its implementation of life circumvents this issue by implementing only the mobility of the POV, the component of the individual which is temporarily instantiated by natural entanglement to a locally available form. Ergo in nature the physical host, the species is always left behind.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 27/01/2016 02:33:48
Presumably there is a first time for everything. Consider then this earths first life, that is to say, the first time you or I or any individual is instantiated as a living being in any ecosystem, perhaps in this ecosystem, Earths’ ecosystem. This may seem like a strange notion to consider but realize that no matter what your current belief system one cannot deny there has to have been a first instantiation for each individual even if you think this life is that first time, the only time, the last time you will live. Further, let us call this first ever host of life in earths ecosystem and perhaps first in this universe Cell-1. What individual was hosted by Cell-1? Who was it that came into being so many billions of years ago entangled by this first living host here on earth? Was it me ? was it you?  Was it someone we now know? A single cell being in nature as much a living being as any other, how then could we identify this or any individual position-of-view including ones own? Since the natural process that populates this universe with living beings is as all natural processes are, ubiquitous, prolific and may repeat whenever wherever conditions are favorable, this first individual may very well be among the living today. If you are having trouble comprehending this notion it is likely because you are thinking of individuality from a second or third person perspective, the visible tangible behavioral perspective. Instead consider individuality from ones own first person position-of-view. As with you or I, the form that any living being instantiates does not change the fundamental nature of ones position of view which is presence not experience. It is only ones form, placement and time in this universe that vary. Make no mistake the POV is not to be  confused with a point of view which if had by a given species or host is a function of that particular host and is nothing more than the skills manifested by that particular entangled form. Skills manifested perhaps by cognition of a complex brain and/or nervous system, or a lack thereof.

A unique position-of-view is what defines the individual regardless of form. It is very difficult for hosts such as humankind to imagine the being of other life forms. So how does one imagine a beings POV even ones own? It isn't easy, particularly since there has never been anything one could do to change ones instantiated form, apart that is from terminating ones own life. Even then, with no natural persistent memory of ones past instantiations it is very difficult to comprehend this natural implementation. However one first step may be to realize the natural  entangled mechanism of life and then to develop technologies for the detection of the living POV and to record individual inter-longevous histories.

If in fact the first host ever to exist in this universe had entangled your QEF, in nature, you would have been every bit as alive then as you ever were in any subsequently instantiated host including ones current form. When we ask what individual was cell-1? What is it that is being identified if not cell-1's host form, its body the cell and its functions and skills? The ILNE hypothesis suggests it is ones unique value of some quantifiable degree-of-freedom of the entanglement spectrum the QEF, call it QEF-1 if you will. Whatever the actual value that QEF-1 turns out to be for an individual, lets say cell-1 for example, that unique value of the QE spectrum will always instantiate cell-1's POV its position-of-view, POV-1. no matter where, when or what the design, biology or technology of the available host. Long after that first host had decayed back into the anonymous atoms that had first contributed to its form its QEF,  QEF-1 has likely reinstantiated on countless other occasions since then. With each instantiation, in each life, QEF-1 by entangling matter to metamatter brought the same first person position-of-view into this universe, POV-1, by providing a place and a time to something that otherwise has neither. No second person perspective would recognize the individual that is POV-1 from the outside, in fact as with current earth-life there is often no means by which any individual could recognize itself as a recurring entity. Particularly if it were a single cell. However, perhaps if billions of such individual POV'S came to entangle highly evolved hosts possessing sufficiently high intelligence and perhaps if a critical mass of such individuals were to become enlightened, no doubt kicking and screaming every step of the way, to the reality of their living circumstances to  develop technologies adequate to the task of analyzing and detecting  the entanglement spectrum and the standing entanglement wave it manifests in living beings, such a species could one day measure, quantify, and identify the unique living POV of the individual no matter ones physical form. With the identification and comprehension of naturally invasive ideas often comes an ever increasing level of control. In this case it is control over the instantiation of ones own being, which is ones’ form, placement, and time in this universe.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 14/02/2016 01:14:54
Nature cannot be assigned the property of purpose. Nature doesn’t implement individuality in the manner in which a cognitive species such as a human might. However the ubiquitous natural universal process of instantiating a living being in any given environment ought to be quantifiable and understandable and may be described in terms of natural cause and effect. So how does the natural process of instantiating a living being resolve which QEF, who’s QEF  is entangled to cell-1? Whose first person position-of-view, whose being, exists first, second, third etc. Clearly life doesn’t seem to us to be sequential but how can we know for certain?
 
As a thought experiment, consider that Earths’ hypothetical Cell-1 undergoes mitosis and creates a cell-2. According to the ILNE (LINE) hypothesis both must  necessarily entangle stem-metamatter since at that time there can be no metamatter in existence which was imprinted by host species from Earths' virgin ecosystem as there would as yet have been no deinstantiation (Decoherence of an emerged individual), no death. Death is necessary to provide disentangled imprinted metamatter for future generations of life in any ecosystem. Further if cell-2 later divides to create a new cell; cell-3 before cell-1 dies then cell-3 will, as did its two living relatives, also entangle any viable host to stem-metamatter to instantiate yet another original POV never before instantiated in this or perhaps any ecosystem in this universe. Why? Because Cell-1, if it is anything like a modern cell, likely has a mechanism like DNA to transfer its hosts' design information physically generationally and so each host offspring, each relative, be it familial, spicial, or ecological, imprints upon metamatter with a diverging degree of similarity. All of this coherent cellular and QEF state information stored in metamatter attracts future generations of genetically similar hosts to entangle this metamatter. Presumably as is usually the case the individual is unaware of any of this as are even complex species such as present day human beings.
   
Alternatively, consider if cell-1 instead had disentangled, died before cell-2 divided to produce cell-3, then the LINE hypothesis suggests that this newly minted host (cell 3, grandchild of cell-1) would be more likely to reinstantiate its bygone relatives' QEF  (QEF-1). Host cell-1 and 3 are in this scenario generationally, physically related due to their common DNA,  and cell-1 over the course of its lifetime has imprinted metamatter, as do all living entities, with information from both their  physical component (DNA etc.) and also from its’ unique entangled degrees-of-freedom (QEF-1). The QEF is not part of the cell nor is it an aspect of metamatter it is of the entanglement spectrum. The entanglement spectrum exists as a distinct implementation of nature with properties, characteristics and degrees-of-freedom which define it as such, not unlike the electromagnetic spectrum. These three elements of nature operate in concert to make individuality and life possible and mobile (teleportable) in this universe.

QEF-1 now uninstantiated and unentangled, mediated by the monogamistic rules of quantum coherent interaction becomes available universally for future instantiation with viable hosts. So cell-3 (grandchild of deceased cell-1) with DNA more compatible with deceased cell-1's existing residual metamatter imprint than not, will more readily attract or enter into an entangled state at cell-1’s QEF-1 and its existing recently disentangled metamatter in liew of widely available stem-metamatter.  So the individual, the POV  that instantiated previously to host cell-1 is now reinstantiated to its own offspring host cell-3. The possibility of familial reinstantiation is likely highly dependent upon the actual resolution of the theorized imprinting upon metamatter by the living cell. For familial reinstantiation ones fidelity of teleportation may need to be above some pivotal value (i.e. .75  or greater above the classical limit), any lower and only species and inter-species entanglement may become likely.

Nonetheless, Cell-3 the individual the world sees as the grandchild of deceased cell-1 could once again host POV-1. Such is the nature of life. It is only when there are no compatible imprinted and simultaneously disentangled metamatter  and compatible hosts available that a newly emerged host will entangle stem-metamatter to establish an original (to this ECO system) position-of-view. In nature the laws of conservation mandate that every interaction has an effect and induces a change in its participants. Whether or not we can sense, measure or understand the interaction or the effect it produces. On human scales the gentlest touch transfers heat, induces friction, deformation etc. Electromagnetism changes the atoms and electrons it interacts with or there would be no electronics. A subatomic particle entangled with another or with others interact regardless of distance or time (even when in different temporal frames of reference). By this natural mechanism metamatter, ones non-corporeal life-matter if you will, is changed as it entangles with your cells over the course of each lifetime.

By this process individuality emerges in otherwise inanimate matter and gives rise to a living being that has either never lived in this ecosystem before or may have never lived in this universe previously,  The implications for individuals currently instantiated on Earth, as in  any viable ecosystem, are that ones future place (reinstantiation) in this eco-system is all but guaranteed barring some global scale catastrophe which erases all life on earth leaving only the possibility of reinstantiation elsewhere, barring such a catastrophe the entire DNA pool of earth-life  will attract your QEF to available metamatter to host you once again
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Kenyonm on 19/02/2016 20:53:18
Are we alone in the universe? I'm sure you would all agree that it would take 100 years to reach a star 100 light years away in a spaceship travelling at just below light speed. Now imagine a civilisation 400,000 years further on in science ahead of us. They would look at us as we look at the stone age people. They would also see we are at war with two religions that cannot live together. They would not bother to land on earth as they would see we would cause damage to their single religion or standards of behaviour. They would have computers linked directly to their brains and know everything that their civilation knows. So they would know also that we couldn't teach them anything. So they would see no need to land here. The way they communicate would look as radio the same level of communication as using homing pigeons. They also would not want us to be able to read their signals as we can't be trusted to behave correctly as we are locked in a absurd war. In summary, with the vast number of star systems in the universe the chances of us being alone in it is the same as none of us not being able to quote pi to 300 dp
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 03/04/2016 13:33:58
How does a living being with the capacity to do so begin to determine ones future prospects for life after death? The LINE hypothesis suggests it is via the determination of ones’ fidelity of teleportation (FT), a little understood but very real property of quantum information transference which is one metric that governs the instantiation of a living individual. It is the mechanism which the LINE hypothesis describes as the natural process that distributes individuality throughout this universe and likely throughout nature. Estimates of one’s FT is perhaps the value most important to any living being capable of fathoming its importance, no doubt followed closely by the value of ones QEF.

The FT value describes the accumulated probabilities that will influence an individuals’ next instantiation. There are always going to be uncertainties involved in determining  ones reinstantiation prospects but generally some of these influences can reasonably be assumed to be constant. Factors such as the assumed persistence of conditions for life within earths ecosystem, and thereby the likelihood of the continuation of ones current species, ones DNA line. Extinction being a fundamental aspect of host evolution is an eventuality that may be generally deferred for such a consideration. Factors such as the proliferation and similarity of ones’ existing familial DNA as well as lifespan species and near-species population, also volume and resolution of imprinted metamatter may all be more dynamic factors relevant to ones FT value and reinstantiation prospects. Ones prospects for reinstantiation describes what host form, or species an individual might entangle in ones next life. Where one entangles that form depends entirely on where such compatible hosts are located in this universe.

Each currently living individual has more likely than not undergone numerous instantiations and lived many lives, many presumably may have entangled hosts right here on earth. Earth being the only known ecosystem with hosts for life that are compatible with your current indigenous earth form, whatever that form may be. Some day the Moon or Mars may become seeded, non-original bastions for earth life. This makes Earth a factory of imprinted metamatter and therefore a powerful attractor, if not the only existing attractor, for the reinstantiation of any being currently alive on Earth. Given that ones metamatter imprint is expected to lose its resolution over time spent uninstantiated, compatibility with hosts that emerge in extraterrestrial ecosystems becomes increasingly possible over time. Other ecosystems that emerged on other planets or in other viable environments in nature will host living forms with different indigenous designs, however the one common mechanism for life is the entanglement molecule, responsible for the QE connection to and the imprinting of that unique design upon metamatter.

Familial reinstantiation may be most desirable to the individual, whether consciously by enlightened consideration or only subconsciously by genetic evolution, but may nonetheless be a very high bar to expect of a pervasive universal natural process such as natural entanglement. Even if, in nature, familial reinstantiation is possible the frequency of it actually occurring may be quite low, or tenuous absent synthetic intervention. Factors competing for influence of  the reinstantiation process are in nature likely to be quite aggressive and disruptive to the delicate resolution required for predictable, forecastable familial DNA entanglement. More frequent in nature may be the occurrence of species and near species reinstantiations. Particularly for species with many large populations of close genetic variations simultaneously in existence such as beetles, finches, or cichlids. Further, in natural settings, distance although irrelevant to the coherent information teleportation of natural entanglement, remains a very real obstacle  to genetic proliferation across space-time. After all in the entire history of earth life the number of viable hosts that have left Earths ecosystem are negligible at best. Most may never even have left their landmass or lake of origin. Hence the LINE hypothesis predicts the probability of reinstantiating in ones current planetary ecosystem to be quite high due to the localization of corporeal genetic material that is similar to ones existing imprinted metamatter. It is obviously possible for ones QEF to entangle hosts indigenous to other original ecosystems in this universe but the probabilities involved with such stem-metamatter instantiations are comparatively very low, very unlikely, requiring the passage of relatively long spans of time. Of course to the individual any span of time uninstantiated is inconsequential since the uninstantiated individual QEF is removed from space-time and devoid of experience.

The specific implications for human culture and survival of understanding the actual natural mechanism for the mobility of individuality in this universe is unpredictable but will be profound. Humankind up to now has essentially suffered from a form of existential dislocation syndrome. The result of appearing in a place for a time with the capacity to comprehend ones own existence but with a deficit of ideas and information adequate for realizing the natural mechanism governing ones presence, ones being, ones position-of-view. This deficit fosters erroneous ideas of life, species, and self, leading to destructive and unfulfilling self-actualization schemes such as intolerant religions,  scientific over-extrapolation, bigotry, and speciesism which corrode social and ecological cohesion necessary for the survival of a species such as humankind.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 16/05/2016 18:15:14
The search for the entanglement cell (EC) will require the isolation and identification of critical regions of cells that may be refereed to as ‘Follicle regions’. Follicle regions in this context describes isolated diminutive groups of cells which when sufficiently disrupted appears to cause the termination of the subject in a manner difficult to distinguish from genuine EC termination. EC (Entanglement cells) being the most fundamental physical implementation of individuality of an emerged composite being, disruption of EC exclusively is hypothesized to result in disentanglement to metamatter which is deinstantiation, individual death.

Follicle regions may actually contain EC, or alternatively only cells whose function is critical to systemic function not unlike cells of the heart or liver only whose role is much less obvious. Determining which of these two possibilities is the case will require the investigation to focus on each follicle group of cells by a process of elimination to reduce the group to the barest minimum of effective follicle cells within the group and then to trace and definitively determine how those remaining follicle cells contribute to host termination.

For each follicle group this process should always lead either to the determination and identification of yet another indirect cause of death or to the discovery of the presence of genuine EC within the follicle group. These EC will be those, one or more cells which contribute only and exclusively to the observed subject termination. This process requires the discounting (not subjecting to disruption) of those cells which either cause intermediate damage to other host systems or do not directly cause host termination.
Subject termination due to EC candidate cells  within the follicle group must not result in any premortem cellular disruption (non-necrotic) physically or functionally to any region outside of the follicle group. Ergo, death without damage.

Approved subjects (flies, nematodes etc.) chosen for this process may need to be high fidelity clones in order to provide the required  consistent physical structure and predictable systemic cellular distribution. This is so the process of elimination may continue unabated with minimal loss of progress as subjects are terminated and new test subjects are needed to continue the investigation. Further, subjects may not need to be fully formed individuals but may be sufficiently developed living embryonic forms. Subjects viable for testing but not viable by current definitions, for independent growth.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: McQueen on 19/05/2016 12:16:55
I don’t think the point of the question “Are we alone in the Universe?” is as important as the fact that to all intents and  purposes we are alone in the Universe and manifestly seen to be alone. This raises the question as to “Why we are alone?”  We are light years away from the nearest star, and hundreds of light years away from the nearest star with a planetary system, in a Universe where nothing can move close to or near to the speed of light.  “What does it all mean?” “Is it a testing ground, from which we can graduate to a better life as the Bible seems to hint? ”  Or is it a place from which to be freed as Buddhism teaches. Or is it a place which, with belief in the right God, serves as a prelude to undiluted bliss as the Muslims believe? Or is  life with its ups and downs just a respite from something unthinkably arduous? Who can tell, all one can do is look around and learn from example and hope that it is good enough! What we can tell for sure if we possess even an inkling of intelligence, is that it doesn't end here!
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 20/05/2016 16:21:40
To the environment a living host entangled at one QEF is identical to that same host entangled at any different QEF. There is no classically detectable outward influence or behavior of the POV that can immediately effect ones surroundings which includes ones host. because the host, the species is a part of that local environment. No causal difference between one POV and another is available to the outside world, only to the individual is the difference rendered manifest by the isolation of individuality. It is only the isolation of individual instantiation and also of experience centered upon ones position-of view that affords a clear distinction of self, being, and individuality via the acquired skill of self-awareness in each being capable to fathoming the distinction. The isolation imposed upon the individual POV by a protective composite, and often disconnected host, is a solitary condition which the instantiated being strives to overcome. This is widely achieved through communication in all of its forms which includes mobility. From the single living cell to bacteria to vegetation to human beings, genetically all strive to break the isolation imposed by this fundamental living condition of life. This journey out of the isolation of the basic natural entangled state of life  not only began, but continues with the living cell in all of its forms and has evolved to become the prolific, diverse eco-system we see today.

Communication requires the development, usually via  evolution, of structures and functions that augment the basic implementation by which natural entanglement is hosted. Evolution no doubt favors the group, which also benefits from communication. This is not to suggest that the perception of individuality cannot be clouded perhaps by intimately integrated communication systems of both a technological and biological nature. Such augmentation could fade the experiential distinction between self and others. Even so, make no mistake, there can be no classical infiltration of the individual POV as there are strict natural monogamistic laws of quantum coherent interaction that guarantees the isolation (or forfeit) of the individual entangled state that is the position-of-view.

Most often the information of self which is acquired during a lifetime is dissipated from the individual upon deinstantiation. Some information of ones past instantiations may persist in the memories of other instantiated beings for a time or within indelable works or, in the archival repositories of advanced societies. However, currently with no means by which any reinstantiated QEF can be identified, for now, the anonymity of the reinstantiated individual remains assured. It would require the development, evolutionary or technological, of persistent personal individual inter-longevous memory or the societal archiving of such information, coupled with the capability to identify and distinguish the unique individual QEF to then inform reinstantiated individuals of their past histories. Also with this capability would emerge the even more profound capability to influence ones future instantiations by manipulating aspects of ones’ fidelity of teleportation (FT), and further, to eventually develop controlled universal travel via targeted reinstantiation as advanced enlightened species in this universe already would. In so doing a threshold would have been crossed in the maturity of a species as the accompanying enlightenment transforms life as we know it.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 14/06/2016 02:59:00
Probing for the entanglement cell (EC) does not require physical contact with candidate cells. To the contrary, the astute investigator will quickly realize that the less physically disruptive the probing mechanism the more progress will result from the exercise. Since the task at hand is not to disrupt any cellular internal function which could kill the cell but rather to disrupt only the heterodyning mechanism by which the EC  maintain the emerged individual POV. The means of disrupting EC heterodyning are potentially numerous as the monogamy of this delicate state are unforgiving. Infiltration or only identification of the entangled state may occur by the use of appropriate entanglement witnesses such as properly tailored photonic, electronic or other non physical mechanisms. Of course there is a chance that every cell is an EC. This would require a slight modification of the predictions of the theory as in such a case the heterodyned state would be far more robust than currently predicted. This is because the entangled state of emerged POV would need to survive massive changes in cell participation as cells of the holistic host are perpetually transient.

Depending on the relative orientation and positioning of EC relative to other EC the probe will need to target individual candidate cells or very diminutive groups of the same. This is because it is possible that EC may have developed in close proximity or even in direct contact with each other during the gestation period of initial conception and engaged their heterodyning of their individual QEF to establish the emerged QEF and then later physically drift apart as the billions of new non-EC cells develop as the subject grows. Or alternatively the heterodyned EC may in all or some species remain in direct physical contact with other EC to maintain the heterodyning function required for emerged individuality to persist.  Therefore the probe may need to be focused down to within the diameter of a single cell and be as noninvasive as possible yet highly maneuverable as to scan many cellular diameters in rapid succession.

Given all of these requirements the inventive investigator may imagine a probe not dissimilar from the polarized blue or UV laser found in a blu-ray disc player and research labs around the world as a good foundation upon which to fashion the probe for this endeavor.  The LINE hypothesis suggests that sufficient disruption of the heterodyned state of EC will deinstantiate the emerged individual even while the non-EC or even the actual EC cells remain instantiated alive as individual, functional cells. But with all cells of the host remaining fully functional, how is the deinstantiation of the emerged individual determined? There is expected to be a time lapse between POV termination and the first signs of  the shutting down of cellular function associated with postmortem necrosis of the host body. But the more immediate symptom of deinstantiation may be an alteration in species or subject specific nervous system and brain functions. Each of such symptoms may be used separately or together to identify POV termination of the subject.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 15/07/2016 13:11:07
https://s31.postimg.org/q8yz2g9jv/Resizeof_Lineconnecttoperson4a.jpg

Within this space-time we are all too familiar with aspects of matter which are exclusionary in nature, that is, properties which enforce a singleton behavior to the way all matter based entities occupy this space-time. In short no two objects can occupy the same space at the same time. When you plug a video cable into a video port on the back of your PC that port becomes occupied and cannot be re-occupied until you remove the current connection freeing the port, freeing the space-time it occupies for future connections. This behavior is taken for granted by our interpretation of reality. Even in circumstances that may seem to defy this behavior it doesn’t. For example two glasses of water poured into a vase may seem to occupy the same space at the same time but make no mistake even the molecules and atoms that compose this and every other fluid jostle each other and also any pollen grains in their midst for a singleton position in space-time. A thorough description of this behavior served  Albert Einstein well when it earned him a Nobel Prize in 1921 for his paper on Brownian Motion.

Such exclusionary behavior exists throughout nature in many different implementations and yet, not in others. For example electromagnetism is famously nonexclusive in sharing or exposing its quantifiable degrees-of-freedom such as frequency, wavelength, polarization, intensity etc.. Otherwise we would all have to take turns enjoying our favorite stations on our fancy TV and radio sets. Electromagnetism travels outward from its source in waves and is constrained by the Higgs field to travel at or below the speed of light yet its DOF’s and the valuable information encoded therein simultaneously pervade the propagating waveform as it travels through space-time. Like all thing s in nature the specific magnitudes of these properties imprinted on the waveform immediately begin to circum to the laws of nature so distance or weather  may become may effect reception of you TV signal. Likewise the aspect of instantiation of the individual life responsible for the mobility of individuality in this space-time share exclusionary features that are similar to matter even if in an unfamiliar implementation. Ones QE connection (the LINE’s in the depiction) to metamatter in Hilbert-space (the white area in the depiction) is similarly exclusionary in its behavior as it entangles your living host form wherever viable forms emerges in this universe (the cosmic disc in the depiction) . Each LINE is a unique value among the infinite possibilities of the DOF’s of the entanglement spectrum (a property of  Hilbert-space). One of these LINE’s belong to you, it always has and it likely always will, at least as long as Hilbert-space exists as it currently does.

Via natural entanglement ones LINE may non-relativistically connect any viable host in this universe with  any metamatter in Hilbert-space (little circle at the ends in the depiction). And like matter or the cable on the back of your PC cannot be shared but must be terminated before a new entanglement a new instantiation a new life is established. This is the monogamistic, singleton or exclusionary nature of life. It is why one must die to instantiate anew. Which particles of  metamatter or of matter are involved or their location in this universe is completely inconsequential as both are completely transient, which is what makes it so ridiculous to think matter is what defines ones individuality. Any matter and any metamatter will do just fine. Of course what any species may care most about is its form at least at first. So what influences may be brought to bear on this implementation to offer beings like us some semblance of control over our own instantiations? Ones entangled metamatter in Hilbert-space and matter in this universe is nonspecific and are currently biased toward a specific QEF only by circumstances that are quite arbitrary  in nature.  Nonetheless are governed and mediated by the rules of monogamy of entanglement and also by whatever influences happen to arise that might affect ones Fidelity of teleportation (FT) and metamatter imprint.

This mutual tuning of the Alice and Bob components of individuality is the only means by which any possible control may be exacted. Though the entanglement spectrum must have existed for time untold even before the big-bang, this bias of stem-metamatter began when entanglement molecules first joined with other matter structures to form the first viable hosts for life. Ever since them eco-systems in this universe and their evolved living hosts has essentially tuned metamatter by storing information into this bootstrapping cloud-storage repository of nature. This began the propensity at first of eco-systems to become obtuse attractors of metamatter that has been imprinted by these first generations of QEF’s entangled to hosts which evolved and still exist within its unique habitat for life.  This describes the beginning of the process which tunes the individual  FT. With time this process becomes or evolves to be progressively more finely tuned to individual LINE’s or QEF’s. Theoretically eventually this bias may evolve or may be manipulated to favor even specific familial DNA traits as metamatter becomes more finely imprinted. This begs the question; Can other eco-systems be targeted for specific individual instantiation by synthetically detuning or retuning ones imprinted metamatter to another ecosystems unique evolutionary signature genetic or otherwise?
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: Alan McDougall on 16/07/2016 07:26:14
I would say yes that the only life in our vast universe exist on earth, for a reason that I will not bring up here

Alan
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 21/07/2016 18:47:47
An  understanding of ones’ living circumstances in this universe remains equally important even if there are actually no other life hosting environments other than the Earth. This is because regardless of ones current location in this space-time the mobility of individuality described by the LINE hypothesis also describes how one instantiates not only throughout this universe, but also within ones current local environment which is just as interesting and important as knowledge of life elsewhere. We too often expend our concerns on finding extraterrestrial life in lieu of understanding the natural implementation by which nature populates this universe with living individuals. This latter point does not negate the importance of seeking other life in this universe, quite to the contrary. However, it may alleviate the concern caused by never actually finding such life which is highly probable in a universe as vast as, and having the laws of physics of, this universe. The laws of physics that placed you in the eco-system in which you currently live  didn’t do so because there are fundamental laws of nature that are exclusive and unique to this planet, solar system or even galaxy. The fundamental laws of nature are expected to operate equally at every point in this space-time, thus all phenomena are also possible at every point in this universe including the phenomena that is you. It is only the circumstantial probabilities of state that vary from point to point and moment to moment that determine local outcomes. Hence, life and individuality are circumstantially  possible everywhere in this space-time. More profoundly, we know without question that life and individuality is a fact and the principle of natural reoccurrence guarantees that anything that has occurred can reoccur.


Viewed in this light concerns about the eventual expiration of the sun or the end of this universe when considered through the prism of the LINE hypothesis takes on a decidedly reduced urgency. As we realize that even as you read these words countless ecosystems, stars, galaxies and perhaps even universes have come and gone in the eternal history of nature prior. So too has countless instances of individual life, some even your own. Yet here you are alive with precious little memory or consideration of the vast history of both nature and you that came before, and so it shall be again. With this enlightenment the urgency of the fate of specific conditions and objects or collections thereof, small or large, becomes somewhat less significant as we realize our true place in the permanent structure of nature and that although all stars die and this universes may eventually become non-viable for life the immutability of the quantum entanglement spectrum and its underpinnings is fundamental in nature and the mobility of individuality ultimately sacrosanct.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 18/08/2016 16:49:44
In this endeavor we call science you will find, I think, there is no stranger beast than Nature herself. Contrary to the suggestion of the Anthropic Principle, this universe is not as astronomers observe it simply because astronomers exist, or because they are here to measure it. Rather, astronomers can and will exist anywhere in nature where circumstances and conditions are right for life and for astronomers. Earth’s solar system is just one such place. The distinction between these two points is not at all trivial. In fact it is profound. Because the latter point supports one particular conclusion as posed by the LINE hypotheses that is the mobility of individuality. It is only local circumstances which determine a habitats viability for individual life. By this definition any ‘Here’ in this universe could host individual life.


Given all of these alternative locations for being, a better question for the individual may be; Then why here? Here being this star this planet this body, this cell. If neither place nor form persists the individual, then what does? If you are having difficulty fathoming this notion keep in mind that as you read these words you are yourself on a planet orbiting a star which together are both traveling through space-time at approx. 225 km/sec. So if you think it is some particular space-time location that has defined your presence, your being then the earth’s and your location is changing every second. If it is the atoms and molecules on and in the earth that you believe tether you to your form on this spherical rocket-ship through the cosmos, think again, the atoms and molecules of the earth and your body owe no allegiance to me or thee.


If location, which includes the space within all of the atoms of the Sun, the Earth, and your body and their relative location in space-time, is purely circumstantial then the inescapable conclusion favors that the mechanism which places any living individual where they are, when they are, must operate throughout existence. You live here because you are entangled here. Entangled to a temporary corporeal physical host which happened to emerge from local material in an ever changing location in nature that is no more special than anywhere else. Make no mistake this is not a conclusion which in any way diminishes how wondrous and rare the processes by which living hosts have emerged on this planet. Rather, it is an acknowledgement that similarly wondrous processes can occur throughout this or in other universe where circumstances happen to be right and there you may be as alive as you are here at this moment only necessarily, superficially, differently.


Further, these superficial differences won’t matter as they don’t now matter. Any astronomer any living being inhabits nature by the laws of instantiation. You will be, you can live, anywhere circumstances are right. Regardless of how one makes the journey, whether one manages to take ones current entangled form along on board a spacecraft or if by reinstantiation by natural entanglement. The mobility of individuality in this universe is replete with opportunities for life and experience. Placing restrictions on what’s ‘right’ for life as we currently do today in biology and life sciences is missing the natural implementation of life and individuality. Genetics describes living hosts Earth-style. The LINE hypotheses describes natural entanglement as the host form agnostic mobility of individuality, of you, throughout nature.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 29/09/2016 17:35:27
The realization of the science which describes the mobility of individuality in this universe, of the kind suggested by the LINE hypothesis, adds yet another layer of ethical concern to the already ethically laden endeavors of modern day genetics. That is, the manipulation of existing, and the proposed resurrection of bygone species. Naturally evolved hosts, even those that were bread by us, are generally of sound evolutionary foundation. Humans, dogs, cats, pigeons, bacteria are made viable by natural selection even when deliberately bread by humankind. However, with the advent of genuine genetic manipulation of the sort made possible by the discovery of the Crisper CAS9 gene comes a new level of divergence or even a complete disassociation from the process of natural evolutionary selection.


Further, in the presence of complete ignorance regarding the implementation by which nature distributes individuality in living beings throughout this universe these concerns today give rise only to relatively moderate levels of controversy and discussion. We consider the question of should we manipulate and create new species from a naively disassociated perspective which just barely rises to the level of personal concern. We may consider our distress in eating a genetically modified cow or chicken or feel some displeasure in seeing an unfamiliar host resulting from the more esoteric or misguided attempts at genetic manipulation or perhaps we worry about creating a species that could threaten our current life in some manner. This is largely because we do not see how we may one day be the direct recipient of a synthetically manipulated host.


Most of humankind are prone to accept established ideas which we were thought or exposed to early in ones current instantiation. Most are ideas which were last exposed to the bright light of cognizant consideration many hundreds or even thousands of years ago. Careful rules of non-questioning tradition and the hierarchical consideration of new ideas have been erected to protect the status quo from the corrosive influence caused by the acquisition of factual scientific information over time. Ironically even specific scientific ideas regarding the possible nature of individuality is guilty of this protectionism. Or perhaps its not at all deliberate but a natural evolutionary implementation meant to protect the self-aware mind, We may be largely ignorant by evolutionary design. A form of mental protection akin to the shell of an egg for the conscious intelligent self-aware mind. Perhaps some things are best left unknown.


Nonetheless, the time to break through the shell of ignorance is upon us. Shortly it will become increasingly difficult to ignore the mechanism by which individuality is distributed throughout nature. With the discovery of thousands of planets all evolved similarly to earth but with different specific circumstances questions will arise in the scientifically alert nimble minds that are proliferating in today’s dynamic information culture. Questions like; What is the mechanism that places me here to experience life from this body which is a part of this particular planet as opposed to some other? Why are you in that body and not me and on this planet or on some other planet? These questions can be posed from the perspective of each of trillions of living beings alive on or off the Earth at any given moment in time. In dealing with these questions one is almost certainly either in scientific denial or you cling to some religious narrative. You see science doesn’t try to explain these questions because for most of its history there was insufficient information to address them. This is no longer quite the case. We know of the mechanisms and are beginning to develop the principles for understanding how nature universally mediates the mobility of individuality.


Realize that the collection of species that exist on earth or on any viable planet at any time is the repository of living hosts from which nature will probabilistically naturally entangle a viable form to host ones next instantiation. This combined with the realization that there is a universal phenomenon mediated by the quantifying quantum measure described by ones unique QEF and fidelity of teleportation is what will define your existence in nature for perpetuity. As we are discovering more often than not, just about anything in nature is susceptible to some level of manipulation and with such influence is born control.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 17/10/2016 14:40:19
IMAGE CREDIT: UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/05/04/human-embryos-kept-alive-in-lab-for-unprecedented-13-days-so-sci/


By the 11th day of gestation of a human embryo, for example, being no bigger than the head of a pin yet it contains many hundred cells every one of them a living individual in nature. Among these cells, early in the formation of a new life, are the LINE hypothesized Entanglement Cells (EC), some of which are likely visible in this photograph. Entanglement cells are very special cells which together heterodyne their own unique individual entangled states to manifest a new state established at a unique QEF,  your QEF.  This instantiation manifests a new life, a new emerged LifeID, your position-of-view (POV), not unlike their own but at a different unique quantifiable value of the entangled degrees-of-freedom (QEF’s) of the immutable entanglement spectrum. This is approximately the stage in gestation of a viable host where instantiation occurs, the point at which you the individual, become tethered to this particular growing host form and not to some other.


Why you? In this there can be no; Why, only; How. Via a combination of natural circumstances, some predicted by the LINE hypothesis, this particular host has heterodyned at your QEF. This occurs whether the form be  human, or any other viable living form that happens to exist in any temporary, no doubt extinction laden eco-system. The Earth is but one such habitat. This is but one instance of countless such processes of instantiation by natural entanglement that occur second by second throughout existence. By this process the mobility of individuality is made possible in a vast Higgs universe, together with the  non-locality of metamatter and the non-relativistic reach of the entanglement spectrum. These features make individuality and life possible on Erath and  anywhere, wherever viable forms happen to emerge, in that place a new instance of life is established whether single or multi-cellular. Empirically proving or disproving the existence and theorized function of the EC and identifying the ubiquitous entanglement molecule which makes this all possible will be greatly facilitated by using subjects that are at this early pivotal stage of development.


This initial two week stage in human gestation, for example, marks the point where the embryo may form one or more hosts (i.e. twins etc.). Also at this stage the characteristic central structure of the host form begins to emerge. It is very likely that the EC are present but have not yet heterodyned at this juncture. At this stage the embryo remains a collection of distinct individual cells each with a specific, or soon to be determined mission. Once the EC combine their individual entangled states to establish the one or more new emerged entangled states and the POV’s define therein, an equal number of new instances of individuality come into existence perhaps for the first time, or perhaps not for the first time. The one certainty in this process is that this particular host has never before existed and never will again.   


Further, we may inquire; at what stage in its evolution does an emerged species gain its EC and go from being a colony of individual cells , to become an emerged form hosting a position-of-view with a unique emerged QEF? To understand this It would help to seek living forms representative of  each evolutionary stage of development. Species that straddle the evolutionary line between a colony of living individual cells and an emerged living being with a POV distinct from its other non-EC’s. Such species no doubt exist but are not easily categorized. For some reason evolution seems to favor full emergence once a colony develops the EC, like a switch being flipped. This is not to suggest that such recently emerged species would immediately possess highly integrated systems like a central nervous system which links its disparate regions of specialization. Such complex features would take time to evolve but the QE connection to metamatter had by all living forms requires no such embellishments.


Also, how might a species respond evolutionarily to developing a newly established POV as compared to being a colony of living individuals? This would be a truly fascinating study to undertake. The LINE hypothesis suggests that imprinted metamatter influences evolution throughout this universe in ways that should not be underestimated and may very well play a crucial role in disseminating this amazing capability to eco-systems separated by distances that are otherwise physically unbridgeable. Thus, like all other features of the cell, the capability to combine the natural entangled  state first evolves in cells which then further specialize. Thereby passing on their newly acquired talents to offspring. Together these new EC perform the initial combination of their individual QE connection to establish the new emerged individuals position-of-view thereby marking the emergence of a new host form for emerged individual life, a new species.


From an evolutionary standpoint, one may be tempted to expect a dramatic transformation to accompany  the transition from the collection to the emerged host, but this is unlikely to be the case. More probable is a slow evolution out of the  hitherto normal behavior of that particular colony as new possibilities slowly take hold of its evolutionary trajectory. Thus the cloud-storage repository of newly entangled metamatter further shapes the destiny of a new species. The science which describes POV evolution will, like all aspects of living biology, be deep and complex in its own right. The evolution of a species has many influences and likely goes step-wise with the evolution of its POV as both number and complexity of EC may evolve over time.


So if you, whatever your species, are impressed and proud of the evolved capabilities of your living form, it is well and good that you should be, but also realize that none of those known features can be considered to be more impressive than the feature of natural entanglement heterodyning evolved in the EC. This remarkable feature permits nothing less than the establishment of complex emerged beings, like you, in this universe. If not for this amazing feature of the cell only individual cells and colonies thereof would populate the Earth. This is not to suggest what forms such colonies might take, but the distinction between a colony of individual cells and an emerged being such as a human or a millipede or a finch is significant and important. Today science defines no clear basis for such a distinction, the LINE hypothesis does.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 28/12/2016 13:00:46
The ability to realize beyond ones species is a hard earned capability. Would an ant, an earth species naturally equal to any other, consider importance, if it could, beyond the concerns of the nest? Could a bee realize concerns beyond the interests of the hive and if they could what might they ponder? In what do we, as equal tenants of life, find importance beyond our own immediate concerns, being perhaps the only species in the history of earth-life with the capability to entertain such considerations? What aspect of nature might all life share commonly with immediate local urgency beyond all of the interests of their respective cultures regardless of their location in space-time? Human religion has long invented such a universally shared entity in the form of various Gods. A god by its very description is considered to be a common cause a shared universal concern of all life and of every individual.  That which transcends place as well as time. However, might there be a somewhat less mystical more empirical natural implementation which fits this description of common cause for life and individuality regardless of which star or planet or perhaps universe one may live?


Of local interest for individuals on earth may be concern for the state of earths ecology as a viable habitat to sustain ones current host form, ones species. Also the stability and trajectory of the sun and indeed all matters relevant to our common star. Also our common planets’ fate would certainly top such a thoughtful list. Excluded may be internal strife and politics and such for such cultural local distractions are not often shared by other forms, at least prior to humankind. Testament to this is the fact that when any human, for example, is confronted with the inconvenience of say a thriving bee hive or ants nest or termite mound in ones vicinity no consideration is ever given to which individuals  therein are deserving of benevolent consideration or are right minded. Nor is any consideration given by us to which termites can be considered above the fray, which individuals are good or bad hearted among its kind. No, we simply torch the entire culture. This is perhaps as it will be in all such encounters.


Nonetheless, The LINE hypothesis suggests that there may yet exist universally immutable natural implementations, not unlike a common atmosphere or shared star or habitat. Natural implementations seen or unseen which may be of common importance to all living individuals regardless of form or location in this universe or indeed in existence. Such aspects of nature would be of common importance to individuality everywhere? For example, what might  earth species hold in common regard with say indigenous mars-life if it existed? Perhaps matters concerning the condition and fate of the Sun since  the survival of both depend on the state of our common star. Not on each list may be concerns for the state of the others eco-system since we are not affected by conditions on the surface of mars or Venus or any other planet. Also present on such a list may be the goings on in the asteroid belt and ort cloud as both could affect all life within their reach. Further, if we consider this same conundrum from the perspective of species separated by the vastness of interstellar space sharing no classically described resources or structures in common dependence what else then might there be to include on such a list? Perhaps the ultimate fate of the universe itself is about all that meets with our traditional misconceptions about life and individuality.


This suggests that the internal goings on of any species is irrelevant to nature writ large. So then might there be something more? Could there exist in nature considerations of greater and common relevance and dependence? Is there  a common list of concerns and implementations that can be made by  members of any species no matter where they may be located in this or perhaps any universe no matter their form or local culture or circumstances ? A list of actual, no doubt natural, structures and considerations whatever their description whose existence or state will ultimately matter simultaneously indelibly to all life to every living being. What ideas or entities or phenomena might such a perennial list detail?


The entanglement spectrum and the imprinting of cellular state information upon metamatter described by the LINE hypothesis during the instantiation period,  the lifetime of any individual QEF is such a common cause. This information transfer may be compared to the formatting of a computer hard-drive by its electronic circuitry. In this analogy metamatter is akin to the unformatted ferrite coating of the HD disc surface.  During the course of every lifetime the cell, natures entanglement circuit, writes or imprints  information via its entanglement molecules to entangled metamatter. This information transferred to the universal repository of metamatter is essentially evolutionary formatting via natural entanglement and occurs during the course of each lifetime by every living hosts specific DNA and entangled degrees of freedom (QEF). As the ferrite particles of a HD are altered or formatted by the computers programmed circuitry via electromagnetism so too is matamatter by the host and its LifeID via the entanglement spectrum.   As any individual POV establishes  yet another place and time in any universe this conservation of information transfer or imprinting upon meta matter occurs and in so doing this universal cloud storage repository of state information stored in metamatter becomes the major driver behind evolution and the emergence of initial  or existing host forms throughout nature. Neither distance nor time nor the persistence of any particular matter structure be it species, planet, star, galaxy or perhaps even universe is  essential for the continuation or proliferation  of this mechanism because the viability of such forms to host life are all that is required. These matter based components are one means by which a POV may be hosted but are not necessary for the instantiation of the individual thus are properly transient and temporary. The instantiation of life by natural entanglement occurs with equal persistence regardless of the location or proliferation of living hosts in the immensity of the cosmos. The only mechanism which possesses the natural description to implement such an amazing feat is a natural immutable universal quantum entanglement spectrum.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 26/03/2017 03:52:02
Why should any living being love or care for its offspring, or about its family, about ones species, for ones village and country, or about your eco-system and planet, or even your local Star? How does any individual assign concern to these locally interdependent physical forms? Any assignment of concern in this regard depends on ones species and culture. The sea tortoise lays her eggs in a carefully excavated hole on a particular beach then gently covers them over with sand then leaves them forever to the not often tender graces of circumstance. The bald eagle pairs with a mate for a time to prepare a nest for her eggs and together they care and rare their young to a viable state of readiness for its new life. Human beings have taken the raring of familial members to an extreme mostly as a cultural demand. With adequate enlightenment we begin to extend our concern to other members of our and other defined species and the communities they form and the environment which makes it all possible? All this occurs in the absence of any certainty about the true nature of one’s living circumstances.  How are we here? Where were we before? What or where comes next. For some, abject denial offers occasional respite from the unknown, however, eventually no human escapes the wonderment endemic to the conundrum of life. 


The layers of concern we manifest for the various structures that form our existence and upon which we depend for survival and well being at this emergent macroscopic level can be described as a sphere or bubble of concern. This bubble describes all of the cultural and instinctual notions which form an individual’s concerns for its surroundings. For humankind this bubble may be manifested by particularly rich narratives based on instinct, imagination, fear, ambition, perceptions, and as of relatively recently on empirical data. Each host form or species and the individuals instantiated therein may be circumstantially free to define its own unique bubble of concerns which describe the day to day trajectory of the individual’s current life.  The stresses intrinsic to being alive for any living being able to fathom such notions are significant and unavoidable. The bubble of concern comes from an evolved need to survive not just physically but also cognitively. Ones bubble of concern contributes to the definition of one’s living reality.
     
The evolution of experience which defines the sphere of concern in living hosts often fosters a progressive increase of sensitivity to the environment. Being overly sensitive or overly sensory in an entropic universe may not be the best condition for a living being. Humans have five major senses but this by no means defines a limit for viable hosts. We need not think about all which we cannot sense just as do other creatures that share this ecosystem with us. What of the world might a being with more than five senses glean? Are there host forms possessing sensory implementations that permit a being to sense the state or condition of its ecosystem perhaps as a kind of emotion? Or sense the presence of a POV, the presence of life itself? It is difficult to imagine what experiences there can be which you can't, however, the fundamental natural implementation of life in this universe, natural entanglement, which brings no experience of its own, does indeed accommodate an untold diversity of living forms and their emergent skills and accompanying spheres of concern limited only by the metaphorical imagination of nature herself.

However, Just beyond the proverbial skin of this sphere are the natural laws of cause and effect that determine when where and how any living being is located in space-time, ones position-of-view (POV). A POV, instantiated by natural entanglement, is the rigid framework which defines and drives the presence of individuality throughout this universe. With distance being no barrier to this teleportation channel, as living hosts emerge and evolve out of the isolation of initial living forms, biological or otherwise, and as living hosts evolve to permit survival of the entangled state and experience, these also define ones unique sphere of concern centered upon ones the POV, upon you. The POV is the naturally teleportable definition, the instantiation, the kernel, of one’s individuality in this universe.

This behavior of concern or caring, whether instinctual or cognitive, although mostly culturally defined at the emerged host level, fundamentally derives from the basic natural cause and effect implementation of life itself, an implementation about which most life on earth today is utterly unaware including humankind. The imprinting of metamatter caused by the instantiation by natural entanglement that defines you, the individual, your position-of-view, is the source of this perceived concern. For offspring of basic hosts, like a single cell that divides to create new cells, it is only the cause manifested from the imprinting or tuning of metamatter by similar genetic progeny that renders apparent attachment to offspring. For a cell or microbe it is nothing more than the evolved tendency of like to seek like.

Metamatter imprinted by a newly available host’s progeny enters more easily into an entangled state with that new host, thereby increasing the value or scalar magnitude of the individuals’ (QEF) fidelity of teleportation (FT) and thereby ones reinstantiation prospects with similar species. Species evolution simply selects for this similarity by genetic variation as it does for many other properties. It gives the species an evolutionary benefit via access to non-local cellular state information stored in more similarly imprinted metamatter. The drive to proliferate ones’ own similarly imprinted matamatter is advanced by spreading ones current genetics (DNA), however, genetics are local to ones current position in space-time.  Whereas the coherent state information stored in metamatter during the course of each lifetime, made accessible to living hosts throughout nature via ones uniquely defined natural teleportation channel, is one major driver of evolution throughout the cosmos even when the viability of local circumstances catastrophically cease to exist. Today most understand the drive to procreate only as the individual’s dedication to host offspring or to species. Seen from humankind’s evolved cognitive vantage point we narrate this effect as love and caring described by a lexicon of emotional terms, from these perceptions emerge community, religion, politics and culture.   
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 06/06/2017 20:25:36
   
In what order does the instantiation of life by natural entanglement select, and assign, any individual QEF to ones next host form, among the great diversity of genetic lineages on Earth, and perhaps elsewhere in this universe? As we live, we fixate on our current host species and its genetically related ancestry, and its future prospects, not realizing that one’s current defined species may be only one of many viable forms that have hosted your POV in past instantiations. In the short term, this diversity of lineages that has played host to you, to your position-of-view, may very well include a few different species and near-species. However, in the longer term history of earth-life, for any individual, ones host history may include a great many, often very different host forms. Further, Parents and ancestors are current and bygone individuals (QEF’s) that were also hosted by Earths tree of life.

The degrees-of-freedom (DOF), of the QE spectrum, and their implementation in the LINE process, may reveal underlying complexities which defines categories of QEF types which determines which host forms are able to instantiate certain QEF types. Ergo, not all QEF can immediately be hosted by all forms. A single cell may not be capable of hosting your QEF. Metaphorically speaking, as your FM radio cannot tune a TV signal. Not because your QEF is in any way dedicated specifically to the human form, but due to the underlying defining structure of the QE spectrum, and the underlying metaverse (Hilbert-space), and the topographies of their interface with this universe.  Such a determination will require invasive research to discover the truth of it. Because this is a nuanced, and not at all as simple a thing as it may at first seem.  Further, the LINE hypothesis suggests that QEF are described by the DOF’s of the QE spectrum, which are governed by nuances of the underlying metaverse. Consequentially, only a certain range of the entanglement spectrum may be exposed to any particular universe. Ergo, the QE spectrum may be essentially pre-filtered by overriding conditions, and circumstances, to expose this universe to only a certain band of QEF. That is, of potential individuals, which is then further filtered, or tuned, by more local circumstances described by ones fidelity of teleportation (FT), which instantiate these available QEF to compatible viable hosts. All of this contributes to the natural description of how you came to be what you are, where you are, and what comes next.


Like you, each ancestor, via their instantiated hosts, have participated in the local dissemination-of genetic information through various processes of procreation. More significantly, however, also by storing its cellular state to entangled metamatter over the course of each lifetime.  Ones ancestors are bygone lives of individual QEF’s that, like you, were temporarily instantiated to hosts that contributed genetically to  yours, in any given instance of life. However, more influentially, also by contributing to the universal repository of evolutionary information. This tuning influences ones FT value, and future prospects for reinstantiation. Each of those individual QEF’s are also on their own trajectory through the universal network of life. Via this mutual, cellular-QEF tuning of universal evolutionary information, individuals of ancestral QEF’s, could cross paths with your trajectory again. Realizing and comparing the DNA mediated tree of host forms on Earth, with the natural teleportation network that governs the assignment of individuality to those forms, will no doubt be a new and unfamiliar cognitive hurdle for humankind. If you feel evolution has been rough going, then buckle-up.



Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 11/08/2017 17:12:55
Ones’ gene pool defines a region on the Darwinian tree of earth-life. The LINE hypothesis suggests that this region encompasses all of those host forms which have contributed genetically to your current form, and also to the metamatter imprinted by those forms during each instantiation. During each lifetime imprinted metamatter defines, or tunes, the individuals' fidelity of teleportation (FT). Ones’ gene pool encompasses all hosts possessing similarly converging genetic underpinnings to your current host form, because you did not instantiate your current form entirely by random accident. Each individual QEF, alive in its current host, has earned its right to occupy that host.

A species may have wide and relatively secure genetic foundations and circumstances in its current ecosystem, or not. For example, the individuals in a newly founded Mars colony will clearly have no genetic roots in that habitat such as it is. Even if we terraform Mars with the nonbiological conditions need to sustain earth-life, air, water, temperature, pressure etc., the probability of a colonists'  position-of-view (POV) re-instantiating, being naturally born into this Mars ecosystem will be very low. However, if we managed to seed the newly established Mars ecosystem with earth-life, whether human or not, then this will slowly but progressively increase the chances, over time, of hosting similarly tuned individual LIFEID's to local hosts. 

The FT of any host for life within one's gene pool is not reduced by travel, or relocation in space-time, because, the mechanism of instantiation, natural entanglement, is distance agnostic. Of course species as a group are defined by their population, and as reinstantiation is a statistical mechanism, not unlike a lottery, likewise each host which comes into existence, whether on earth or on Mars, like a lottery ticket, has some chance, in this case defined by its calculated FT, to host a particular LIFEID, even if that LIFEID was last instantiated, living, at a location whether inches, miles, millions of miles, billions of light years, or even universes away.

Ergo, if a new Mars colonist died on Mars, or even in the space between these, or indeed any, two habitats for life, that individuals FT remains unaffected by its location. That individuals LIFEID remains highly likely to re-instantiate, establish a new POV, on Earth simply because that is where the most opportunities for similar genetic natural entanglement for any indigenous earth-being currently exists in this universe. Ergo, genetic home, while it remains viable, always calls to the individual.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 12/08/2017 16:51:59
In the universal-ether model I work with, Life's beginnings would be traceable to a preceding (existing prior to our structured quantum/atomic world) unstructured "ether world" where ultrarefined elemental etheric energy-units were entraining, and fluxing, and forming "islands" of energy, so intense that "energy overdrive" conditions induced the formation of dynamically one-direction magnetic monopoles. These energies, which we can't even imagine from our world of quantum forces, would have been the type of ingredients necessary for life and sapience to originate.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: MichaelMD on 15/08/2017 15:01:31
In the above life-initiation scenario, of course other ingredients were necessary, such atoms as carbon, nitrogen, and certain other elements, and organic molecules, which would have to have also formed in a localized area of hyper-energy. -The basic idea of this theoretic model is that etheric energy would be so much more finely tuned than the quantum forces we know of, and its entrainment and confluence in a certain region could have formed a "soup" containing just about anything and everything. -But the key ingredient would have been the energy itself, and how it would have driven such a mix into producing the first life forms.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 09/09/2017 16:37:55
The LINE hypothesis suggests that there is no multiverse, however, there is a metaverse (aka Hilbert-space). In a metaverse, universes evolve by a process of Darwinian evolutionary natural selection, not unlike the evolutionary process we see in viable ecosystems for life in this universe. The universe or verse in which one finds one’s self is but one viable species of verse on this tree, or complex of verses, which has evolved to host individual life by its unique laws of physics. Many verses will not have this fortune of circumstance. A verse with no evolved mechanism by which to instantiate individual life may nonetheless inherit this capability from the evolutionary information imprinted in metamatter by other compatible verses which in turn inherited likewise from others. This is different from a multiverse in that, within the metaverse, verses may actually evolve, inherit, and in a sense compete, and even consume one another for existence, not unlike the way galaxies do, all on a time scale which makes the age of one's universe seem infinitesimal by comparison. Within the metaverse complex, the state or health if you will, of a verse is indicated by whether it is contracting or expanding and the rate of each. So where does the big bang fit in?

The metaverse is essentially an ecosystem where verses are the evolving species. However, resist the temptation to over extend this analogy with life as we know it. The goings on in the metaverse is governed by physics that are necessarily unfamiliar to the physics within any universe that it may produce. What we refer to as a big bang is but one of many metaverse phenomena which only hints at the goings on in this unfamiliar realm of nature. The appearance of the big bang to us as some kind of an explosion is as nondescript as the way a rain drop falling from the clouds may appear to a microbe caught therein, attempting to describe the hurricane, planet and solar system from which the drop emerged. In this, the microbe is just along for the ride. The degrees of freedom at work in the metaverse are far from fathomable by humankind.  This is not a limitation of intellectual capacity, but rather a limitation of the type of intellect that is possible in ones universe.


The unique laws of physics of different verses manifest not just fundamentally different types of host forms, but also their very own unique type of position of view (POV). This is due to the unique degrees of freedom and topographies which define a particular verse and its laws of physics. Further, as in our universe, all life in each unique verse can only instantiate that same unique type of POV to become the kernels, the seeds of evolution for any living individual hosted by that universe regardless of the specifics of the indigenous ecosystems therein. Each viable verse is a different realm for instantiation and produces living individuals which can evolve to fathom its own living circumstances in that verse as humankind may in this universe while finding the nature of other verses impenetrable. You see, intellect is but one tier of an inverted pyramid of capability which evolves from the seed that is the instantiated POV. However, in the rich pallet of possibilities for life described by the metaverse, there are no doubt verses which evolve living beings which can transcend some of these limitations. This may ultimately prove to be such a verse.


A Metaverse by its hypothesized nature permits universes like ours to evolve with uniquely tuned degrees of freedom that seem too specific to be randomly emerged, this is because they are not, they are evolved. Like species verses do not lose evolutionary information like inanimate entities do. As in living beings, via the entanglement spectrum, each verse can store and inherit evolutionary information imprinted by its living tenants to metamatter. This imprinted cloud-storage repository of intra, and inter-universal evolutionary information mediated by natural laws of conservation of information, such as the monogamy of natural entanglement, not only guides the evolution of species, but also influences the evolution of verses to become finely tuned, unique habitats for life in the Darwinian complex of the metaverse.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 07/10/2017 21:58:18
Evolution, the mechanism by which ones ecology mediates living hosts, species, is an important tier of understanding for living beings to evolve to be able to comprehend within any viable ecosystem in this universe. However, although difficult to initially fathom, understanding species evolution is a distant runner-up to understanding the natural mechanism which mediates the mobility of one’s individuality that is ones position-of-view (POV). This is why the understanding offered by the LINE Hypothesis is the single most personally important idea that any living being will ever have the opportunity to consider, regardless of species or ecosystem in this or perhaps any universe.

Earths archeological and hard fossil record suggests that Earths ecology has produced no more than one species capable of assimilating and making use of this knowledge regarding the natural mechanism by which nature mediates individuality in this universe. This is not to suggest what untold secrets earth’s soft species history has produced, but of which no indelible imprints of its existence remain. Nonetheless, the importance of this knowledge is precisely because the intelligence and circumstances, indeed the opportunity necessary for any culture to gain the capability to assimilate and make use of this understanding is so rare. The evolved intelligence necessary for living individuals to comprehend their own natural implementation is one of the rarest and most pivotal evolutionary realizations in this universe for any ecosystem to develop, prove, and culturally accept. Mollusks can’t do it, ants can’t do it, only humankind currently has that incredibly rare and fleeting opportunity to comprehend, accept, and make use of this very real existence transcending knowledge. Further, the window of opportunity is not permanent and once gone, for humankind, it may be gone forever.

Currently, humankind is as are all other species in earth’s ecosystem, wild. We define wild-life as those host cultures that have not organized socially and culturally to reduce their dependence on the resources circumstantially provided by chance to some useful or perceived extent. However, this is a somewhat self-serving definition. In reality the true definition of wild-life is an ecosystems lack of a culture, consisting of any number of species, able to take deliberate control of individual instantiation into ones living circumstances. To continue, like all other species in its ecosystem to be arbitrarily reinstantiated by the probabilities of random chance which mediates when, where, and in what form one will live in your next instantiation, in your next life. Failure to have evolved sufficiently to reach this stage of development is the very definition of wild-life. Neither farming, nor art, or tool making or even genetic manipulation of living hosts alone moves an ecosystem across this life and existence altering threshold.   Make no mistake; this achievement is indeed an ecosystem-altering feature. Ideally, once fully acted upon, the lines between species take on an entirely different significance as any individual may live and experience life in whatever available forms they please for as long as they please. It all begins by discovering the entanglement cell and molecule. Of course, the details of this local implementation depend on culture as some cultures may elect to permit the existence of only engineered rather than evolved host forms and may elect to control which individual QEF’s are instantiated to those select hosts. The ability to transfer between forms, independent of distance in this universe, once achieved will blur the line of distinction that now exists in the human mind regarding life, individuality, and space-time.   

The importance of an idea like the LINE hypothesis stems from the fact that it marks the introduction to the understanding needed for living beings to escape the uncontrolled instantiation lottery of nature which confines living individuals within a particular ecosystem to untold lifetimes of arbitrary natural reinstantiations to randomly emerged host forms, (the true definition of wild-life). Such forms are incapable of assimilating and making use of such knowledge and therefore unable to assume deliberate control over the process that mediates the individuals living circumstances. In the nearly four billion years of earth-life, consider ones lifetimes as, and the existence of, a species such as humankind, despite all of its proud prior achievements, to be nothing more than a narrow window of opportunity within which instantiated individuals to this capable host form may understand, comprehend and act upon the true nature of life in this universe, to develop technology able to control when, where, and to what forms ones POV is instantiated, in essence to control your being. Further, consider what a tragedy it would be if a culture such as this forfeits this singular opportunity only to embrace the ignorance which defines the wild condition. Like every other endeavor into nature’s workings its ramifications and its morality and dangers will be clear and present, but may nonetheless be regarded as a necessary price to pay for this essential next step in the evolution of life on earth.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 14/11/2017 18:58:16
So, I have a position of view (POV), how then does my POV interact with my body? The LINE hypothesis suggests that in all living entities the hosting form has evolved to establish, maintain, and protect the delicate quantum state that is the position of view (POV) from intrusion, or specific violation. Failure of the host in this basic responsibility is the very definition of death. In this endeavor, the body and POV have coevolved to have the POV as the target, the kernel of certain host-specific processes and functions. In any given instance of life, these functions establish your presence and other evolved manifestations of the host, broadly describable as experiences. This interaction between the POV and the host form, sufficiently evolved, is the manifestation described in human cultures for generations, using one word or another, as the mind.


The mind is one tier of implementation above the actual instantiation of the POV. While the POV will exist in every living entity, even in the absence of evolved systems that may manifest a recognizable mind, a mind cannot exist in the absence of the POV. The mind is the interaction of the POV with the living form. The mind functions as an antenna, or a receiver for whatever workings, and telemetry, and other evolved manifestations the host, such as it is, is capable of producing. i.e.  memory, consciousness, self-awareness, intelligence, thought etc., or the lack thereof. The POV brings none of these features, but only that which may experience these features. The classically measurable implementation of the POV is as a standing quantum wave, established at the individual’s unique QEF, one’s own unique values of the degrees of freedom (DOF) of the QE spectrum. The POV is maintained by the entanglement molecules (EM) within all cells, and in emerged species by the entanglement cells (EC).  Further, the physical host establishes a very real bond with the POV. This POV-host bond (POVH) is not unlike the standing waves shared between the valence shells of atoms which establish and maintain covalent bonds that join molecules in this universe. It is the POVH bond which naturally provides the foundation of the mind upon which the individual’s first person sense of presence may evolve in all living beings, within you. 


The POV is implemented, in biological hosts, during gestation at the point where instantiation occurs in the growing host form by the EM and EC. However, in sufficiently evolved complex host forms, the mind is established when the nervous system (i.e. Brain) form the unique infrastructure which may interface with the POV. This interface of the nervous system with the POV also takes the form of a standing quantum wave maintained by other specialized cells of the host which maintains the coupling which describes the POVH bond between these two, critical natural implementations. This joining provides the antenna state which becomes the basis for experience we call the mind. This temporary, but crucial link lasts a lifetime and naturally manifests the collapsed reality as well as the possibility to evolve perception and experience for one living individual. Because the POVH bond is essentially a molecular bond, it also may be represented by a mathematical equation or Hamiltonian. This Hamiltonian has its roots based on the Schrödinger wave equation. This is the quantum mechanical equation that very powerfully represents the complex standing probability waves of electrons in shells around atomic nuclei observed in atoms and molecules. However, this similarity will have very definite limits because, unlike molecules, the interactions and DOF that produce the POV are not derived exclusively from interactions between standard-model entities, but between matter with metamatter. Metamatter is hypothesized to be a non-local particle that very weakly interacts in this space-time. Therefore, to formulate the proper wave equations for the POV, the DOF which permits the EM within living cells to share a coherent quantum channel with metamatter, will have to be well defined through intensive research. This research will begin with the discovery of the EC and the EM.




An apt analogy for the role of the POV within living hosts is to consider an individual in the middle of an atmospheric storm. A storm may take on many forms, and have a number of features such as winds, tornados, rain, snow, hail, lightening, thunder, clouds etc. all described by certain degrees of freedom, temperature, pressure, humidity, surface absorption and radiation coefficients etc. which inform varying storm intensities. As a storm circumstantially manifests, it may be given various categorizations, akin to species of storm, and may evolve to a form that may even be given a proper name, an identity.  Consider if we placed a living being, a human being for example, at the center of our imagined storm. This individual does not add to, and takes nothing away from the storms manifestations and activities. This individual does however bring, in the case of a human being, one individual’s singular perspective within the storm.  This individual has its own capabilities and functions which define it as such. Additionally, if this person has a communications device with an open channel, they may transfer information from within the storm to the outside world. This individual only very weakly interacts with the storm itself. This individual presents both a conduit and a target for information and experience from the storm, but in one direction only.


Likewise, the instantiated POV bonded to a living host form is metaphorically similar to this in that the POV brings no effect or affect of its own, but is essentially a teleportation channel bonded to a host, able to receive telemetry and imprint information manifested by its living host. This interaction, this POVH bond in human beings, for example, which receives telemetry manifested by the human brain centered upon the individual POV, is the very definition of the mind. The mind can be described as being composed of two primary components, the POV, and the rest. On earth, the rest may be anything from; not much at all, as in a single cell, to the complex workings of a fully functional complex nervous system and brain of the human host. Whether in a human, in an eagle, a mantis, or an octopus, the POVH bond is the bond that builds upon the standing wave of the POV which manifests the QE connection to metamatter in all life. Further, in sufficiently evolved forms, the POVH bond becomes the mind.  The description of the mind in various species is subject to cultural definition and perceptions, accurate or not, regarding a particular host forms observed behavior and nervous system function, or the lack thereof. However, to be accurate any definition of the mind must include the QE connection and POV as an essential prerequisite of individuality in any living presence in this space-time.         
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 11/12/2017 13:42:05
As you look into the eyes of your new born daughter and wonder; who are you? Who is in there? You, I expect, understand that every last atom that now, and will ever, compose her little body were each forged in a long expired star and has been here on earth, for example, for billions of years, and in this solar system for even longer. The rational part of your thoughts understands that the property which uniquely instantiates her, here, now, cannot be those same anonymous atoms or molecules. Evidence; if they did, that would demand that conjoined siblings, sharing the same host form, the same body, composed of the same group of atoms and molecules and DNA, are one individual. However, we know empirically, in as much as any scientific evidence has ever validated anything, that this is not so.

Conjoined siblings are in nature often two distinct, although not physically separate, individuals.  Not unlike two different isotopes  of water poured into the same vase may seem to become one entity. Nonetheless, at the deepest levels, in conjoined siblings, as in the vase of water, nature recognizes their distinction, their individuality. It is just a matter of understanding their fundamental natural, eventually scientifically describable implementation. Although conjoined twins may share the same DNA, and even the same host form and thereby any number of organs, including at times portions of the same brain, they nonetheless are two distinct instances of life. No matter based component or classically defined, local property of these anonymous atoms and molecules can assign this distinction. The LINE hypothesis suggests in such cases (i.e. conjoined twins) there are fundamentally two positions-of-view (POV’s) instantiated by two separate sets of entanglement cells which maintain two separate quantum coherent states at two unique QEF. Those QEF are, as is your daughters QEF, immutable and indestructible. All QEF are a permanent fixture of the metaverse (Hilbert-Space) currently hosted here on earth.

In conjoined siblings, the host form, the body, described and mediated by its local genetics, goes terribly wrong.  In this situation, DNA exposes its severe limitations as the possible mechanism by which individuality is instantiated in living beings. If ever there was evidence of a claim, in this regard conjoined siblings qualify. The unique degrees of freedom (DOF) of the entanglement spectrum, manifested by the hypothesized entanglement molecules contained within all cells and in the entanglement cells of every living host, is as abstracted from the existence of one’s DNA, and its anonymous atoms, molecules, and local evolutionary process, as is the tuning of a radio or TV channel abstracted from the anonymous polymers, rare earth molecules, manufacturing process, and general physical designs, of your radio or TV set.

It is hypothesized that upon the successful separation of conjoined siblings, if you were then so situated as to empirically compare, with both sufficient resolution and understanding, their DNA currently believed to define each siblings individuality,  you will discover no classically identifiable difference between the now separate host forms. Further, for a time the siblings will remain genetically 100% identical. This is because the body in the case of conjoined siblings as in all living beings does not establish individuality whether genetically diverse, or  identical down to the deepest reassesses of their DNA, therefore genetic sequence (ATCG etc.) must be empirically ruled out as the most fundamental defining feature of individuality.

The individual that is your daughter, or my daughter, indeed all life is instantiated in their respective habitats by virtue of natural laws and circumstances. You and her other parent donated local evolutionary genetic information, as does trillions of other hosts in and perhaps beyond earth’s ecosystem, to create a new living form of its kind evolved to host individual life. More significantly, your daughter donated her own uniquely tuned metamatter, tuned via her QEF’s lifetimes of past instantiations in earth’s ecosystem.  This enables the establishment of her unique natural teleportation channel. This is a shared coherent state established between metamatter with her gestating entanglement cells some 11 days into human gestation.

This natural entanglement is established at her unique QEF to establish her position of view (POV). This standing quantum wave once bonded to her new human host establishes a new POV-host bond (POVH). The POVH bond is the antenna state that establishes the mind of the individual that you will come to know as your daughter. With this POVH bond to a human form all things human become possible. However, her specific features, her capacities, depend entirely on the specifics of her particular growing host form. Not only her physicality, but her sentience, consciousness, self-awareness, cognition, creativity , joy, sorrow, or the lack there of, all will manifest from her new host form and its path through life. This occurred and can reoccur because reoccurrence is scientifically observed to be the way of nature in all things. It is only the collection of anonymous atoms and molecules that will necessarily establish a new façade as they come and go even now as you watch her grow into what is essentially a new form, an adult. Certainly a true joy to observe, but don’t let the visuals confuse your understanding, unless of course you want it to. The details of this implementation may be unfamiliar, nonetheless, like the deep details of genetic science today, such details don’t  now, nor have they ever required our understanding, or acceptance to nonetheless define individual life throughout this universe.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 02/01/2018 05:46:00
Where is everyone? As we probe the depths of the known universe with increasingly majestic instruments based upon the detection of electromagnetism, and as of very recently, gravity waves, it becomes increasingly apparent that the proliferation and distribution of living ecosystems in this universe is curiously low. Today we refer to this absence of detectable extraterrestrial living contact in the cosmos, as the great silence. What could account for this apparent barrenness in a universe known to host at least one prolific, remarkably diverse, extremely long lived habitat for individualized life?   

Historically, humankinds search for extraterrestrial life has been based upon a premise that may be false. We consider the prospects for life beyond the earth to be loosely based on the Drake equation (N = R * fp * ne * fl * fi * fc * L). This formula, conceived by Frank Drake in 1961, considers the quantity of possible extraterrestrial civilizations to be dependent upon a number of factors all of which considers only the presence and duration of classical matter based entities and conditions. However, nature has never proven to be as simplistic as humankind may first imagine. The LINE hypothesis suggests that individual life throughout this universe is instantiated and mediated by the entanglement spectrum and it is this pervasive non-local natural medium which ultimately determines the quantity of simultaneous living individuals that is possible in this universe.
 
The QE spectrum is hypothesized to naturally limit this universes capacity for life. Not unlike the electromagnetic spectrum which although also quantifiably infinite, is practically limited in its utility for  simultaneous useful unique channels by classical technological devices. However, for the QE spectrum and life in this universe, this is not only a limitation of biology or even of technology, but is a limitation imposed by the topography between this verse and the underlying metaverse which define this universes local QE spectrum. If life and individuality are indeed dependent upon unique singleton teleportation channels of the QE spectrum, hence, it is hypothesized that there exists a maximum number of simultaneous living individuals possible in this universe, regardless of location or host form. This capacity is described by this universes laws of physics to be some finite, potentially calculable population regardless of the number of viable habitats for life that may exist. This capacity for life is called the LINE Capacity (LC) and is the number of instantiations of individual life that may exist simultaneously in this universe.

 This living population represents not only the number of POV’s  had by emerged multi-cellular hosts like humans or whales or ants, but far more significantly,  includes the number of instantiations of fundamental hosts, such as individual cells, currently in existence whether composing such emerged hosts or not. On earth this is a large number. In nature, each count as one instance of individual life. At any one time a human host consists of perhaps 100 trillion cellular instantiations and over a lifetime, many more than that, plus one additional. That additional instantiation is you. Ones POV heterodyned by the entanglement cells (EC) is one of nature’s pinnacle evolved invocations in Earths ecosystem. It is hypothesized that once a verses living population exceeds its  LC, any additional viable ecosystems that emerge will only be perfectly habitable yet completely barren worlds, like so many well constructed houses with no one home.  Near the LC, for the emergence of life to take hold, such habitats will need to remain viable for the emergence of life for a time during which the QE spectrum simultaneously has available bandwidth viable for the instantiation of living individuals, i.e. cells, to entangle at unique uninstantiated degrees of freedom (DOF) of the entanglement spectrum. Thereby initiating  an indigenous genesis of life.


Further, as any universes living population approach its LC, any ecosystems therein actively hosting life will begin to experience increasingly higher mitosis, gestation, and birth mortality rates. This occurs as the existing living hosts, unbeknownst,  continue to procreate, to create new viable hosts for life which then fail to instantiate the crucial teleportation channel needed to establish the living individuals  position-of-view (POV). In circumstances where the universal living population remains near its LC, like an establishment approaching its fire occupancy limit, the life and death cycle of living beings throughout the universe becomes increasingly influential as it essentially consumes and liberates QE bandwidth universally. Like occupants entering and leaving an establishment, this flux of instantiation increasingly informs the availability of unique QEF to instantiate new living beings. It is highly probable in most evolved ecosystems still possessing a robust micro-biome, that this outage of life will be largely absorbed first in the vast mortality rates of diminutive host forms such as single cell life and colonies thereof. Hence, primarily by mere attrition, this outage may only rarely effect the heterodyned QEF of more complex emerged multi-cellular hosts (with EC) such as mammals, birds, fish or insects.


A universal LC potentially informs the local success rates of new life in wild ecosystems such as Earth.  Further, if the LC of this universe is near some integer factor of the current population of life on earth, or even if the LC is several million times that population, nonetheless, such a finite capacity for living beings combined with this universes unfathomable vastness probabilistically infers that humankind may never detect extraterrestrial life. At least not by classical means, because where the QE spectrum reigns, neither distance nor time holds sway. In light of this possible upper limit to the natural instantiation of individuality, it should come as no great surprise that this universe appears to be so devoid of extraterrestrial life. Ergo, it is not simply a consideration of matter or of the habitability of worlds that  dictate and mediate the proliferation of life in this universe. No wild ecosystem can know where its universes living population currently lies relative to its LC absent a deep command of the  principles described by the LINE hypothesis.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 05/02/2018 17:22:50
The Cambrian explosion is one of the great mysteries of evolutionary science today. It marks the sudden emergence of complex species from  a  significantly microbial ecosystem with little evidence of corresponding intermediate evolution in the fossil record. To shed light on this conundrum, we need to view the Cambrian through the prism of the LINE hypothesis to understand what effect does living have on the individuals prospects for life after death. This will be a central question for all sufficiently developed, intelligent, self-aware beings throughout nature. For human life on earth it is also the question that many religions have sought to address throughout human history, via one mythological narrative or another. Through their doctrines, such belief systems suggest what are the rules to live by which will influence whatever it is those myths determine will become ones destiny after  ones’ current life ends. These questions regarding living influences, as it turns out, are very good questions to ask. They, necessarily must have corresponding answers. Answers which can and must be founded in nature and accessible and describable by natural law and eventually by science, otherwise you couldn’t be alive. What natural, scientifically inclined basis can be used to make such determinations for ideas critical to science, yet long held close to the vest by religions throughout human history?   


The LINE hypothesis suggests that metamatter is imprinted via natural entanglement. This QE connection persists throughout the course of each individual’s lifetime, no matter ones living form. While instantiated to fundamental forms, such as hosts in earths micro-biome, such hosts necessarily imprint metamatter in low volumes, or densities, given that a microbe is composed of only a single cellular instantiation. This combined with the incredibly short life-cycle, and high reinstantiation rate of life in the micro-biome, given sufficient time, causes this low information throughput to accumulate, and aggregate to become immensely significant to evolution on earth. The information volume imprinted to metamatter by such fundamental forms is very low in content and therefore has a very low impact or influence on the individuals FT. As a result this renders such host forms very weakly tuned to the individuals’ QEF, and therefore for future instantiations,  renders the individual more open to arbitrary natural entanglement with a wide range of compatible hosts, ergo other microbes. On Earth prior to the Cambrian, with no forms of greater complexity available at that time, this condition persisted for billions of years.  Should it persist, this period in the evolution of life in any ecosystem, results in a vast accumulation of evolutionary potential which may result in an explosion of complexity. Such inflations in ecological complexity cannot be explained by bottom up, random mutation, and natural selection alone. Ergo, today the influence not considered in Darwinian evolutionary science, is the influence of the LINE process.


An apt analogy for how the LINE process may lead to an explosion of complex life is with the printing of information by a computer printer. Consider the natural teleportation channel that is the LINE hypothesized QE connection to metamatter, established by the entanglement molecule within each single cell, as being like one element on a computer print-head. Each cell possesses the information transfer capability of just one such element per cellular instantiation in any host form. So, if your form is composed of just one cell, you have one print element with which to imprint metamatter in your ‘name’, that is to imprint metamatter at your QEF. In this analogy the more print elements there are in a print-head (living host), the more information can be transferred to the sheet of paper (metamatter), and the larger ones information bandwidth. The 100 trillion cells of a human host imprints that many times more than an ameba, bacteria, or a protozoa. Each cell of your host, whether one or many, are imbued similarly with some common degree of freedom (DOF) of your unique QEF and is therefore able, to some degree, to imprint, or otherwise contribute, to metamatter on your behalf. This metamatter ultimately informs one individuals fidelity of teleportation (FT) and ones future prospects for reinstantiation.


In this analogy a microbe is metaphorically equivalent to one print element which imprints metamatter during a great many, very short life spans, due to the incredibly rapid life, mortality, and reinstantiation rate of the microbial world. In this way an individual’s QEF imprints small volumes of metamatter,  but very frequently, with information from many iterations of simple living forms repeated over epochs of ecological time. On earth, such forms dominated the planet for billions of years before more complex forms became possible. This  information stored in metamatter is theorized to influence the evolution of living hosts on earth and universally.  Eventually this  imprinting by fundamental living hosts became a huge volume of evolutionary information stored in this non-local universal repository. Together with local conditions and circumstances on the early earth, this lead to the emergence of the entanglement cell (EC). Once the entanglement cell came onto the scene, it brought with it the capability to heterodyne individual cellular QE connections to establish the earth’s first generations of secondary emerged QE connections to metamatter , the position-of-view (POV).  A heterodyned  POV establishes a secondary emerged individuality, you. With it, the evolution of vastly more complex host forms became possible. On earth, this essentially marked the emergence of life 2.0, if you will. The wide proliferation of the EC began the amazing period in earth history known as the Cambrian explosion.


During the Cambrian, the newly emerged EC together with instantaneous universal access to a vast volume of imprinted metamatter, drove the unification and specialization of many formerly distinct living forms into complex communities, marshaled by new organelles able to distribute common aspects of the POV to all cells of the holistic host form, to propel the formation of new complex species. These new species quickly evolved due to the new emerged secondary entangled state, and the interaction at a distance resulting from the sharing of common degrees of freedom of the POV which describes this natural teleportation channel to metamatter. This metamatter imbued with evolutionary information from earths billions of years of fundamental life, as well as information from other life hosting ecosystems in this universe, gave the Earths new species a sudden and tremendous boost in complexity not possible by random mutation and natural selection alone. Hence, the QE connection soon evolved not only  into the earth’s first POV’s, but eventually, into the earth’s first minds.


Further, individual QEF, having participated in countless instances of microbial life, hosted by Earths local ecosystem, and with FT’s by then highly  tuned by terrestrially imprinted metamatter, burgeoning to propel a great transition, that is the natural teleportation of those individuals from simpler forms to more complex forms, became eminent. This new innovation which permits the sharing of common degrees of freedom by all cells in an emerged complex host with EC,  bonded to one POV via the POVH bond, permits the organism to evolve in sudden and remarkable ways previously unattainable absent the EC. These more complex evolved forms will consist of increasingly larger numbers of fundamental hosts, such as cells. Each a metaphorical print element for metamatter and also, by virtue of an evolved protective host form, may live longer life spans for imprinting matamatter. This accelerates the imprinting of matamatter at the individuals unique QEF and further probabilistically tunes the individuals FT for compatibility with even more complex and compatible host forms, whether such forms were evolved, or engineered.  On Earth the human form, for example, may consist of 100 trillion individual instantiations and many more than that counting from the point of QEF instantiation in the womb, up until deinstantiation, death.



 The metamatter imprinted over the course of an increasingly longer lifespan, by any host, is potentially cumulatively significant to ones FT. For humankind this is not necessarily more so than the imprint made on metamatter by other, non-human, equally long lived host forms in earths ecosystem. In other words human beings may not be the undisputed champions of FT stability currently on earth. FT stability tuned by increasingly greater volumes of similarly imprinted metamatter describes the individuals chances of naturally entangling a particular host form, and perhaps of greater interest,  reinstantiating to ones current host form. So, if sperm whales, having perhaps 1000 times more cells than the average human, and living equally long life spans on average, will imprint, at least by volume, orders of magnitude more cellular state information to metamatter than humans. This says, at least on its face, that whales may be a more stable, and more forecastable host for reinstantiation than the human form. That is to say, an individual QEF instantiated to a whale, all things being equal, may be more likely to reinstantiate to that same form than a QEF instantiated to a human form would  likely be to reinstantiate to a human form in ones next life.


However, reality may not be quite this simple. What other aspects of one’s QEF, of one’s host form, and of its circumstances in life might there be that are imprinted to metamatter, which may influence ones FT? What properties of the cell are conserved via natural entanglement after death? Which degrees of freedom of the QE spectrum imbue this conservation of  local living information to the non-local, more permanent, more accessible universal medium of metamatter? For now, the LINE hypothesis suggests volume of imprinting per cell, per host, and lifespan, but what of the type, or the nature of information imprinted? What other factors might there be as we live life which may creep into ones metamatter and effect ones FT via a complex nervous system bonded to a unique teleportation channel that is the POV-host bond (POVH) which  constitutes the mind? Whether in a human or a whale, the answers to this question essentially form the basis for a new list of commandments. Not unlike the commandments of religions which purport to influence what comes next for the individual. The natural, empirical information which actually, naturally influences ones FT does likewise.  Species do undergo Darwinian type evolution, but it is also driven by natural entanglement and punctuated by the evolution of forms like the entanglement cell, the pivotal catalyst for the formation of complex hosts in this ecosystem. Due to the EC being a host form, the remains of which will never be found in any shale, the Cambrian appears to be a true mystery until viewed through the prism of the LINE hypothesis.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 15/03/2018 01:49:00
In this universe, the property, at either of its extremes, which most dominates human science and our understanding of nature, is matter density, hardware density if you will, and the subsequent gravitational influence it produces, and its associated electromagnetic fields and radiation. This is so from the most dense neutron stars and black holes to the least dense subatomic particles. However, if we possessed the tools which would permit us to also detect complexity,  software density if you will, distributed throughout this universe, our eyes would for the first time, be opened to a new and unimagined realm of reality which was there all along. This instrument would essentially be a new type of telescope whether or not we decided to convert the information it gathers into visible light at some juncture. This device would amount to a type of entanglement, or weak-measurement telescope; it would permit an observer to see the night sky dotted with bright sources of high software density perhaps represented as light intensity. Among the brightest may be sources not unlike the Earth itself, due to the Earth’s rich proliferation of life. Each of these bright points of light in the cosmos detected by such a device would not be a point only of gravitationally aggregated matter, but also, each is a point of accumulated natural complexity, such as life. Life may be among the densest forms of complexity in nature. If we could see life the way we see stars astronomy and cosmology would take on a whole new meaning. Fortunately for us, as matter density is exposed by the electromagnetic spectrum, The LINE hypothesis suggests that life also has its very own spectrum, the quantum entanglement spectrum.

This alternate approach will require an understanding of the principles described in the LINE hypothesis and the subsequent development of technologies based on its principles, such as the conceptual entanglement telescope. Such a telescope would reveal areas of dense natural entanglement present in living entities throughout this universe. This device will reveal life in the cosmos in a manner superficially similar to the way photon gathering (infrared, x-ray, gamma-ray etc.) telescopes expose optically hidden sources in the cosmos. The LINE hypothesis suggests that concentrations of metamatter complexity may occur as readily as concentrations of baryonic matter to create sources of dense informational complexity detectable as gradients of coherent quantum states across the night sky. Such sources are not defined by the local proximity of matter particles in this space-time,  but rather by those particles’ common entangled states with non-local metamatter. Such sources of complexity are dense informational software sources as opposed to the dense hardware sources which define planets, stars and galaxies. These sources of complexity will exist throughout this universe and while invisible to any photon gathering telescope, may be detected with telescopes outfitted with entanglement detectors. Entanglement detectors are weak-measurement devices capable of measuring the entangled degrees of freedom of matter particles entering the detector.

So, how would an entanglement telescope work? Entanglement molecules are hypothesized to be primordial interstellar particles, whether monatomic or not. They are hypothesized to naturally spontaneously cohere with non-local meta-matter. At the particle level, throughout these cosmos, this behavior also involves countless particles of regular matter which are similarly tuned due to their participation in the living hosts of bygone individuals. That is, they share a common state via their mutual residual coherence to meta-matter. In fact, many particles that are entangled, in or out of the laboratory, are likely mutually entangled via metamatter as opposed to being entangled directly to other matter particles as they are now considered to be. Yet the participants of matter in these entangled relationships may be any distance apart. Since meta-matter is non-local to our space-time, these mutually entangled matter particles may be either touching, or separated by billions of light years, yet share a coherent state.

The cosmos is awash with such entangled particles, particularly in and near habitats which host life. This is because some of the particles of matter, the dust, left from the cells of bygone hosts in any habitat for life may remain entangled to metamatter for a time after its participation in the living form has ended. Further, such particles may eventually become entangled to future cells elsewhere in these cosmos which entangle this same metamatter. Expose a properly designed and configured QE telescope to the open sky and, not unlike photons in an optical telescope, entering the QE detectors will be entangled particles which are each entangled participants with any and every object in the cosmos. If you are having trouble fathoming this notion, consider that contained within each breath you now take there are atoms and molecules that were breathed by most of the individuals, human or not, that has ever lived on Earth and perhaps even by individuals that have lived in ecosystems beyond Earth. There are no doubt civilizations throughout these cosmos that have realized such devices and may use them to routinely observe and study distant, wild ecosystems such as Earth.

Further, unlike light detection, these naturally entangled particles of matter entering the equipment need not have traveled from the sources at the other end of their shared quantum coherent states. In fact, the relationship these Alice’s have with their Bob’s are instantaneous, regardless of the void of the cosmos that separate them. It is an almost romantic implementation, is it not?  Once these entangled particles enter the equipment, and their degrees of freedom weakly measured, the information we would, in fact, be exposed to will be the immediate, the instantaneous state of their constituent particles that compose whatever object of interest was targeted, wherever it may be in this universe, and perhaps beyond. Such instruments will reveal the information states within the event horizon of black holes. Some may be participants in some unfamiliar living host, or in some inanimate object, because after you are done with your atoms and molecules, there is no telling where they may end up.   

The process of filtering out unwanted entangled particles in lieu of those imbued only with the specific parameters of interest amounts to a type of tuning, or focusing of the instrument. With proper tuning even particles carrying information from different temporal frames of reference may be detected. Most sources will be objects we couldn’t possibly detect classically, due to the fundamental latency of electromagnetism in this universe. This mechanism describes nothing more than a technological version of the LINE mechanism which implements life and the mobility of individuality, and also defines the POV in every living being, within you, throughout these cosmos. Such a device will permit the instantaneous, real-time detection of life and conditions throughout the cosmos. Gone will be our search for photons, and gravity waves carrying million or billion  year old information, or visits from extraterrestrial spacecraft. Humankind would be privy to the real time state of the cosmos and many of the answers we have always sought, and so much more.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 03/04/2018 19:18:07
So complete is the cognitive illusion of physical self, that each human being fully believes and accepts that they are defined by the prevailing cultural description of their current form, its assigned demographic description, and its ascribed history. This perception prevails by the complete ignorance of having previously been instantiated to an untold diversity of living host forms which describes ones’ actual instantiation history. In other words, you may necessarily have been, and subsequently acted the part of any living being in history, or none at all, mediated only by the laws of natural entanglement. What living forms would the book of our true naturally defined instantiation history describe? Metaphorically speaking, this is as if one personally adopted the history of the brand of car you now drive, say, Bentley, while being completely ignorant of the ancestral history of those vehicles owners. Who were those previous owners? Would, or should it matter? Should one relate to the car or to the owners? In life today, we behave as though we have always lived, and always will exist in some fashion,  in one's current species and family and assigned demographics for all of ones’ instances of life, or not at all. Ironically, this cognitive dissonance exists alongside widely accepted beliefs in religious narratives of ongoing existence or in the acceptance of a secular null hypothesis of the one-off occurrence of life. Both of which, at the very least, suggests that the individual has never previously been in the form they are now.

What would it take for a family of owners to own the same make and model of automobile (i.e. Bentley Mark-V) for many generations of that owner's current family? While we know that our current body, like our cars, have a finite existence, likewise in life, what would it take for an individual QEF (owner) to reinstantiate to the same demographic and family for say, 1000 years, (50 generations)? In the car analogy, it would require a very deliberate, synthetic initiative to acquire only Bentleys. An initiative which may forgo better economic opportunities (deals), or may induce financial difficulty, or perhaps forgo advancements in technology, or may ignore the tides of change in order to serve preference upon one make of automobile. For life, a different but no less a synthetic initiative would be required to implement such a focused reinstantiation history upon an individual QEF into the same demographic and family. In other words for the individual to reinstantiate to say a, human, German, female, within a family named Frank, for 50 consecutive lifetimes would be an improbable occurrence. But is it possible, and would one care to?


Upon our birth the culture we are born into urge, or otherwise indoctrinates, the individual to adopt the history of their host form and its demographic narrative as described by that culture. This becomes a cognitive dissonance carried by the individual often for the rest of ones’ life. Generally, this is referred to as ones‘ demographics of species, gender, race or class, and nationality etc.. Although you were almost certainly born less than 100 years or so ago, one is urged to adopt a history in which neither the individuals’ current host nor ones’ current instantiation likely participated. Furthermore, if it so happened that ones’ QEF was indeed instantiated during that history, there is currently no accounting for what form (demographic) nor what role that instance of the individuals QEF may have assumed in that participation. The cognitive dissonance exercised today is that the individual has and will, in some way, by some unspoken means, always be in the form we currently are. Presumably, not much convincing is required to assure the reader that this idea is utterly false, as each individual knows all too well on what date and perhaps time ones’ current life began, and that it will undoubtedly end within a few decades. Even if your accepted belief system leads you to believe that only nonexistence came before life, and will also be the case after ones current life ends, even this renders the idea of adopted historical narrative misguided. Further, if one's belief system leads you to accept some religious narrative that describes a state of individual existence before and after ones current life, no doubt based on some mystical foundation, still, ones participation in any adopted cultural historical narrative remains highly questionable.

Nonetheless, most live life as if they are an actor that has been handed a script at birth. This script describes, to varying degrees, the individuals’ expected, or observed role in society and this role may even be mandated or enforced within certain cultures. Of course, as far as one's species is concerned, this mandate is also enforced up to a point by nature, since, while you live, you are currently destined to remain instantiated to the form you currently have, at least while no option to change that form exists. Also, as far as nationality is concerned, one is born to an ecosystem and some location therein as a matter of pure circumstance while no option to mediate one's instantiation currently exists. So, in these, there is no choice. However, for the culturally contrived properties of demographic categorizations of a host forms physical traits called race and the running historical narratives assigned to those categorizations, in these, all seem to buy in to the false narrative that the current individual is in some fashion either responsible, or was a victim,  participant or assumed a certain role in that history. This illusion is so odd that it defies any rational explanation once unpacked. Only the sustained maintenance of a blind unthinking cognitive dissonance, or perhaps the lack of a plausible explanation of life, permits it to persist.


Consider that an individual today described, perhaps within American society, as a female age 29 of German descent named Frank. This description is informed by the genetics (DNA) of her current host form as described by its genealogical history on Earth. With no understanding or evidence to the contrary, society readily indoctrinates her socially and culturally with that history and with other individuals matching her demographic, for better or worst. How does this work exactly? We know for certain the date of lady Frank’s birth, her beginning of life 29 years ago. We can also say that she was not around, let us say; for the Germanic attacks on ancient Rome. Nor for WWI or WWII. Yet civilization enforces upon her some connection with this history, solely based on the history of her current host forms’ DNA. Some association is made, however weakly enforced, with lady Frank to each of those historical events and also with the entire history of all individuals born to viable hosts possessing German DNA. If it were true that society today either knew, or at the very least, strongly believed the principles of the LINE hypothesis, which describes a natural mechanism by which perpetual reinstantiation could occur and even possibly reoccur to the same familial (DNA) lines within species, then a case could be made, even if not proven, for one's possible role, ownership or participation in genealogically related historical events.

However, as it currently stands, no such understanding is widely accepted today. Therefore no basis in logic or reason currently exists for humankind's association of an individual with a historical narrative for which the individual may not even have existed on Earth. Or even if on Earth, one may not have been a participating species. Or within that history, one may not have been described at any point by the demographic to which one is currently being assigned. In the absence of the enlightenment and understanding imbued by the LINE hypothesis, individuals should only be associated with ones’ current behaviors and actions as ones participation in past events remain unlikely or at least in doubt. Further, as is widely the case today, ones acceptance of these socially assigned narratives as being ones defining litany of race, gender, history and culture and such, if you are so fortunate as to have a choice, consider carefully and feel free to adopt whatever culture makes you happy, but do so while leaving behind the baggage of a history you can only try to improve upon. Do so while doing no harm in the effort to make life better for all, now and for future instantiations, because currently, one can never know what host form circumstance will bestow upon you in your future. Recognize that life and individuality are naturally amorphous and ongoing processes of instantiation that is currently uncontrolled by humankind which renders each individual highly susceptible to arbitrary circumstances within current and future ecosystems. In other words, the conditions you foster for others in this life could be your own in another.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 17/06/2018 15:17:38
Dark Energy is one of the great enigmas of modern cosmology and physics today. To shed light on this piece of the cosmic puzzle we need to view existence through the prism of the LINE hypothesis .The multiverse hypothesis is a misrepresentation of the underlying procedural potential of the metaverse. Therefore, the multiverse is described as a vast number of simultaneously existing, pre-rendered realities or universes. Each usually imagined to exist within its’ own allocated vicinity or bubble. The multiverse hypothesis suggests that within any number of these bubble universes, you, or indeed any possible state, may or may not exist. The LINE hypothesis suggests that nature is far more frugal and elegant than this.


As a computer generated virtual environment emerge from this space-time, yet maps to no space or time within this universe, likewise, ones universe occupies no space or time as we perceive it within the metaverse from which all possible realities nonetheless emerge. In this behavior the metaverse can be compared to a computers’ CPU and its supporting electronics which concurrently embodies the potential for all of the virtual states which may be rendered therein. Virtual states which may also be experienced by a sufficiently implemented individual position of view (POV) instantiated perhaps by an individual such as the iconic game character Mario. In this CPU analogy there simultaneously exists the potential for finite yet unbounded virtual space, and also the potential to create all of the possible states, environments or simulations the programmer may imagine, as well as those possibilities the programmer can’t imagine, or none at all. Similarly, in nature, a living being is very much an instantiated character within a natural but procedurally rendered environment, one perhaps requiring no programmer as we may conceive it.

Living individuals are instantiated entities, not unlike Mario, inquiring of nature; how am I here? How large is my universe, and how is it structured? For example, as it would be for Mario, distance for us is very real regardless of its true nature within the metaverse. However, realize that for us, like Mario, distance, like all else within this universe, is nothing more than nature, procedurally, relativistically, individually, despite its very real consequences, rendering how many laps on the treadmill called space-time, a baryonic entity like us, or your pet rodent, or any particle or comet, or any star or galaxy, must tread to ‘reach’ any other rendered state (destination) within this universe. Distance is but a procedurally generated illusion of reality. So, speaking about the size of this universe at the big bang is to describe the universe when it was first instantiated. This is akin to Mario attempting to describe the size of his computerized virtual universe within the CPU when it was first turned on. Whatever the perceived ‘size’ that Mario’s universe appears or is calculated to be by him at any given moment, only higher dimensional beings like us can fathom its true implementation, an implementation which cannot be fathomed by Mario. Likewise for us, in this universe, all realities are circumstantially instantiated, or collapsed by solutions of state (SoS) which render the QWF’s that manifests ones universe. A POV is the SoS, the pebble tossed into the metaverse’ ocean of QWF’s, which, for a time, positions each instantiated individual, you, in that universe.


Consequently, rendering is reality. Rendering is change, from the smallest to the largest scales. Rendering is simultaneous and everywhere in nature. So, what is the engine which performs all of this rendering? Furthermore, does the amount, or volume, or other aspects of the information (SoS’s) within a universe impart a load or a drag on this natural rendering engine? Might this load at all times tax the universal rendering engine to mediate how fast entities within a universe may render or change? Does this load mediate how matter may maximally tread the treadmill we refer to as space and thereby effect ones’ local rendered rate of change we refer to as time? In essence might the total contents of a universe determine the maximum treadmill speed, that is the universal speed limit? Ergo the speed of light? Thereby, altering the rendering engines’ clock-speed, if you will? Nothing can travel through vaccum faster than light, whatever that speed may be. This is because the rendering engine is at all times loaded to its current rendering capacity by the current information content of that verse. As such, c= 299,792 km/s is directly related to the amount of information currently in this universe and also says something of the capacity of the rendering engine per unit of information therein. Hence, variations in the speed of light must be linked to the rate of any universal information loss or gain. Science dictates that there can be no loss of information. However, information can certainly be moved or transferred. Such a transfer describes the LINE hypothesized natural teleportation of information between all living entities in this universe to metamatter, but also, more influentially by black holes.


 If indeed the universal information load can be mediated by ongoing circumstances, then changes in the information content of this universe, something that appears to break the laws of physics of this universe, could potentially alter the load on the rendering engine which mediates the state of all information herein moment by moment, ergo; time. Thereby, potentially altering this universes cosmic speed limit, the speed of light. Observations of change in this universal latency in the rendering of reality could be made only if variations in the universal information load occurred at various stages of the universal expansion, and could be seen as variations in the otherwise normal expected Doppler shift of ancient light. Further, if such variations were only caused by a gradual reduction in the universal information load placed on the rendering engine over time, then the corresponding changes in the speed of light would appear as variations in the acceleration in universal expansion. Ergo dark-energy. Alan Guths’ inflation hypothesis is the low latency period of the universal expansion when the rendering engine was initially minimally taxed due to the low information load of the first instants of the big bang.

As information poured into the new expanding universe and as its interactions evolved in complexity, this increased the rendering load, in the form of more fundamental particles evolving into hydrogen protons and into other less fundamental particles and eventually atoms. All taxed the universal rendering engine and progressively lowers the maximum rendering speed, and with it the speed of light,  and also the apparent rate of universal expansion when measured by stellar spectroscopy. Not until  the universal formation of a critical mass of black holes and living entities which transfers information out of this universe into the metaverse from which it came, did the load on the rendering engine begin to diminish thereby lowering the universal latency and increasing the maximum rendering speed, the rate of change, and the speed of light.  That is, light travels faster as this universe transfers information to the metaverse. If it so happens that information could indeed be, not lost, but teleported or otherwise transferred from this universe  into the metaverse, information transferred in part via the imprinting of metamatter  by the LINE hypothesized natural entanglement of its’  living tenants, and to a greater extent via other natural structures such as black holes. These would constitute causes of a reduction in universal rendering load and would serve, over time and in sufficient magnitude, to mediate the maximum speed limit in this universe to produce an observable red-shift as the speed of light from distant objects change accordingly to produce the otherwise mysterious dark-energy acceleration profile observed in these cosmos. On its face, the universal loss of information may be expected to cause an apparent bluing of the Doppler shift in a star’s spectral lines.  The universal gain of information should produce a reding of that same spectrum, but this may be a more complicated effect than it first appears.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 03/07/2018 17:33:28

Gravitation is perhaps the most vexing enigma in the history of physics. It was long considered to be Newton’s attractive force between masses. Later, gravity came to be understood more accurately as Einstein’s curvature of space-time which guides matter toward the center of gravitation. However, the metaphor of a curvature of space-time doesn’t capture the more fundamental reality which governs this enigmatic phenomenon. In the ongoing description of gravity, there remain defining features yet unbeknownst. The LINE hypothesis suggests that gravity is the effect more fundamentally caused, at all scales, by the transfer of information from within this space-time into the metaverse. It is this localized information drain which produces the directed acceleration in matter currently described as the space-time curvature known as gravity. Einstein showed that gravitation to some useful degree of accuracy may be regarded as a curvature of the dimensions we refer to as space-time. The LINE hypothesis suggests that this description of gravity can be further refined as a stretching of space-time in the presence of certain degrees-of freedom (DOF) of matter (i.e. mass) which locally deforms other hidden dimensions.

These hidden dimensions, described as Planck-holes (PH), are undilated or curled-up in vacuum and therefore interact minimally. These lower dimensions, long predicted by string-theory, not only proliferate this universe but are a defining DOF of the fabric of space-time. PH causes space to behave as a porous membrane for information and for certain degrees-of-freedom indigenous to the metaverse. PH are the key to many features of this universe. For example, PH are the conduits which establish the flow of information into the metaverse which cumulatively produces the effect known as gravitation in this universe. PH are also the conduits which establish the quantum teleportation channels with the metaverse (Hilbert –space) that permit the coherent sharing of state information known as quantum entanglement. Furthermore, as the Higgs field imbues matter with mass, it is the Higgs field that is directly responsible for PH dilation and thereby, gravitation. Like a bullet shot through water, mass is imbued to certain configurations of particles by the Higgs field as it imparts a rendering latency upon all such entities. By this interaction, matter lingers in space-time and thereby affects the vacuum by dilating its PH and produces all of the effects that come with it. 

PH are Planck scale dimensions which act as drains or pours in the fabric of space-time. PH are the holes which may become sufficiently dilated by sufficiently high mass densities to produce a sufficiently high transfer of information into the metaverse, ergo; gravitation, which becomes capable of capturing light and thereby, causing a Planck hole to become a black hole.  Metaphorically, PH’s may be compared to the openings between the threads in fabrics. The effect of the presence of increasingly larger mass densities (or some other property of matter) upon the PH is to stretch or widen their teleportation bandwidth. This locally induced PH dilation proportionally increases the rate of information drain into the underlying metaverse.  This is what produces the effect of gravitation toward the center of mass. The cause of the nonlinear, stretched or curved, space-time around matter produced by PH dilation in the presence of mass and the information drain it produces is due to the affected space being rendered unable to translate a Higgs effected entities entire information budget linearly from one PH regime to another as it does in the undilated space of the vacuum. Hence, the transiting entities most vulnerable information states, often its momentum and position, is absorbed to produce a shift or movement in position to fill the information deficit. This is nothing more than the law of conservation of information at work. On the plank scale, this shift in position is always away from less dilated PH of the vacuum and toward regions of more dilated PH. This shift accumulates to produce the acceleration and trajectory adjustment referred to as gravitation. 

This information transfer occurs in this universe due to the porosity of the fabric of space-time. Further, this porosity is never zero and is affected by all Higgs constrained entities of non-zero mass density among others. At one extreme PH are stretched ‘open’ by high mass densities to become black holes, the gravitating abyssal cosmic torrents of information transfer from this universe into the metaverse. Similarly, at the other extreme, PH also produce the subtle but ultimately pivotal teleportation channels needed for the emergence of individuality. This permits a far more diminutive transfer of information to metamatter during the course of each lifetime. This occurs by the low mass density particles within the living cell called the entanglement molecule (EM). Within the realm between these two extremes lies the potential of gravitation to manifest planets, stars, solar systems, and galaxies. As a consequence, life must stay far clear of the region of influence of black holes which likely extends far beyond the event horizon. Not because of physical danger to the host form, but due to the entropic turbulence which may cause the destruction of the delicate information states imprinted upon metamatter. This delicate imprinting by the living form is required to maintain a stable FT which promote the prospects for reinstantiation of an individual’s QEF. Humankinds’ attempts to calculate information retention in black holes give rise to ideas such as the holographic principle. This amounts to an attempt, unbeknownst, to map our dimensions of space-time onto the metaverse. However, such ideas, although headed in the right direction, are as nondescript as would be attempts by Mario to map the dimensions of his virtual realm onto our universe. This is because, via the PH, information is not lost but transferred or teleported into the metaverse.

Particles of all kinds are congealed from information gained into this universe. Particles are formed by a combination of PH dilation during a period of universal latency appropriate for the creation of specific particles. The very low universal latency in the first instants of the big bang was initially inappropriate for the creation of PH and particles. Hence, the rendering speed during that very early period of the universal expansion, known as inflation, was too high for the formation of the known forces, energy, or matter. Not until the universal information load into the early universe reached a threshold, causing a rise in universal latency and a type of universal viscosity, and a slowing of the rendering speed, did the fabric of space-time coalesce and its defining features, among them the PH, formed to become functional conduits for the exchange of information with the metaverse able to produce particles, known or unknown, and the forces they carry.

We currently live in the very stable low universal latency epoch of the big bang event. The health of any verse is described by the stability of its information budget. That is the state of information loss and gain which describes the universal expansion or contraction. A healthy universe is one which, by this balance, maintains the physics necessary for the existence of instantiated POV, life. Physics will differ among verses but the health of any verse lies in its stability in maintaining its necessary information budget for individuality. Loss of information is the transfer of the information initially gained at the big bang, and since, back into the metaverse. This transfer is continuous and ongoing due to the natural formation of all manner of Higgs effected entities which describe various mass (or other property) densities which dilate the PH to various degrees ranging from the subtle to the extreme. The transfer of information back into the metaverse is not only the phenomenon which causes gravitation but is also the phenomenon which implements life.

As swirling water guides more water, and also any objects floating therein, into an open drain, so too on macroscopic and cosmic scales, does this flow of information produce the seemingly analogous effect of guiding mass toward the center of information teleportation into the metaverse. However, make no mistake, this effect is not at all equivalent to the familiar phenomenon seen in fluid dynamics but is a quantum informational manifestation born of the interaction of the metaverse with this space-time. In low mass particles and diminutive collections thereof, this information transfer is very weak and likewise so is its gravitation. PH dilation may be effected by properties other than mass; this is suggested by the observed effects of massless entities such as dark matter. The aberration seen as dark energy is due to the reduction of universal latency caused by the universal transfer of information over time and in sufficient magnitude, into the metaverse via the PH, ergo gravity. However, the effect of this information drain is not via its gravitation, but because it also produces an increase in the universal rendering speed which not only changes the speed of light, but more fundamentally, results in a measurable increase in the rendering of cosmic distances to give rise to the accelerated expansion of space-time, ergo Dark energy. What a wonderfully elegant chain of cause and effect does nature conjure.

So, how might one prove that the PH exists? Perhaps for the first time in the history of science, fundamental cosmological and physics questions may be answerable by a microbiological test. The discovery of the LINE hypothesized entanglement cell (EC) and entanglement molecule (EM) would present an initial basis for the description and function of the PH. The quantum teleportation channel which describes the instantiated POV which defines individuality in every living entity is made possible only given the existence and function of the PH as described by the LINE hypothesis. As the big bang is born from an immense infusion of information transferred into this space-time, so too is the ongoing evolution of this universe, its expansions, and its contractions, mediated by the ongoing information transfer by matter densities great and small throughout these cosmos. The current phase of universal evolution may be dominated largely by information being transferred out of this universe and into the metaverse. The viability or health, if you will, of any verse is characterized by the stability of its information budget to essentially maintain a universal ecosystem of information and manifestations thereof for the continued evolution of life.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 02/08/2018 20:25:46
To better understand dark matter; conceptually remove from the Earth or any living planet, its total biomass consisting of every living cell within that ecosystem. Then virtually have that biomass suspended as a separate body adjacent to the Earth. Now virtually remove from the barren Earth a second body, this time consisting only of an amount of purely inanimate matter exactly equal in mass to the biomass body. We now have three masses all mutually at rest and suspended in space, one consisting only of living entities, the second mass consisting only of an amount of inanimate matter exactly equivalent to the first, and thirdly we have what’s left of the Earth after both subtractions.
 
The LINE hypothesis suggests that if we were to now separately calculate, with appropriate accuracy and resolution, both the Newtonian and Einsteinian gravitational effect for each of the two subtracted masses, the inanimate, and the biomass, each calculation will yield a result measurably different from the actual measured gravitational influence of the biomass. That is, the biomass is hypothesized to produce a measurably greater actual gravitational influence than its equivalent in purely inanimate matter, and its Einsteinian calculated values. This extra gravitation possessed by the biomass is the LINE gravitation (LG or GL).  In living entities the LG is hypothesized to be due to the increased information drain into the metaverse which is not accounted for in either Newton’s or in Einstein’s formulations. This information drain occurs via the increased bandwidth of the dilated Planck holes (PH) which establishes the position of view (POV), the natural teleportation channel within every living cell. This is a natural property of the cells’ instantiated entanglement molecules (EM) which instantiates each living being contained within the biomass.

It is this increased information drain that will also deflect a passing light beam to a measurably greater extent as it passes near the living biomass, or near the Earth, or near any living planet. In short, a planet with life, all factors being equal, will bend light more than a planet without life. This is because the entanglement molecule, like DNA and many other complex molecules, does not function or may not even remain intact in inanimate matter. Yet, in living matter, the entanglement molecule in each living cell dilates the PH and gravitates to a greater extent than do other molecules. With the appropriate resolution, the density of life on distant planets could be determined by this metric. Of course, this is a very delicate measurement to undertake, as planets such as Earth are much smaller than stars and the differential in gravitational influence, LG, specifically caused by the information drain via the POV of its biomass is even smaller. The Moon may be an obvious candidate for an experimental platform for such a test. A nearby cosmic body with no life, this is half the requirement. The trick is finding a clever way to implement the second requirement of the test, to measure the Moon with sufficient living matter on it to make a contrasting gravitational measurement. However, since we are able today to measure the diminutive gravitational waves of distant sources, I have no doubt that this measurement can be performed successfully.

Let us now venture to perform this same conceptual scenario on the Milkyway galaxy; First separate the Milkyway’s total mass of inanimate matter into one spherical body, sufficiently diffuse so as not to collapse into a huge black hole. Now separate into another sphere the known living biomass of the Milkyway galaxy that would be the same biomass as the previous scenario, Earth’s biomass being the only known life that exists. Next, separate into a third sphere a mass equal to the total measured gravitation necessary to keep the Milkyway intact and rotating with its current observed galactic sigma. This third sphere is of a mass sufficient to exactly account for the Milkyways’ extra gravitation, ergo; its’ dark matter. Dark matter is hypothesized to express gravitation but no other aspect of baryonic matter including mass. This would be an inexplicable behavior absent the LINE hypothesis. The sphere of dark matter has a gravitational constant (GD) at present assumed to be equal to the Newtonian gravitational constant (G). This is a necessary placeholder assumption required until dark matter is actually detected and its actual gravitation per unit dark matter particle measured. The eventual value of GD is of little importance to this scenario. The LINE hypothesis suggests that the eventual dark matter gravitation, whatever it turns out to be, is proportional to the extra gravitation of the biomass (GL), even if that value is different from the Newtonian value (G). That is, the extra gravitation hypothesized to exist in living entities is the same extra gravitation measured in galaxies. This prediction infers that the gravitational influence of dark matter (GD) can be measured in any living biomass, like Earths biomass, which is expected to excessively bend a passing beam of light. So, how does this work?

The LINE hypothesis agrees that Dark Matter is an undiscovered particle with subtle degrees of freedom in this space-time and suggests that these degrees of freedom also dilate local PH, to produce gravitation but by a mechanism not present in normal matter. Dark matter particles which act to negatively dilate PH are the most fundamental conveyors of gravitation in this space-time and thereby constitute the particle which manifests gravitation in all forms of matter. As such, dark matter is hypothesized to be the active ingredient in the entanglement molecule. The atomic structure of the entanglement molecule, once formed in viable hosts, captures, and for a lifetime, retains an excess of dark matter particles, not unlike the way atomic isotopes capture and hold electrons, except dark matter particles brings additional gravitation but virtually no additional rest mass. This combination of unlikely partners increases the bandwidth of PH in the vicinity of the entanglement molecule. This extra PH dilation is the superpower, if you will, of the entanglement molecule which establishes the position of view (POV) at unique degrees of freedom of the entanglement spectrum (QEF) in every living entity. This added gravitation occurs by the instantiated entanglement molecule’s sequestration of an excess of dark matter particles which adds an amount of extra gravitation to the collective biomasses total gravitation. Without dark matter, there would be no galaxies as we know them in this universe but also there would be no life as we know it. Dark matter is famously difficult to detect in the environment. Upon the isolation and identification of the entanglement cell and entanglement molecule, we would be significantly closer to identifying and understanding this elusive ingredient in the instantiation of the living individual.

These scenarios each shed light on Vera Rubin’s discovery of unrecounted galactic rotation or sigma currently ascribed to dark matter because PH dilation accounts for each. The LINE hypothesis suggests that dark matter continues to be the undetected phenomenon which dilates the PH regime encompassing entire galaxies and groups thereof which accounts for the unexpected galactic sigma. The measurement of Earth’s predicted planetary gravitational LG differential is hypothesized to be proportional to this galactic sigma, as the galactic sigma was expected to be proportional to Newtons’ gravitational constant (G), but isn’t. This is also the case for occurrences of gravity lensing, due to the prediction that each is caused by accumulated PH dilation, ergo gravitation by dark matter. Vera’s extra gravitation is active in the gravitation of living ecosystems in a common degree of freedom shared by both the entanglement molecule and dark matter. Hence dark matter isn’t merely a source of extra gravitation; it is the particle that conveys all gravitation even to normal matter. This prediction infers that the Newtonian gravitational constant (G) is not a universal constant but is proportional to the number of sequestered dark matter particles within baryonic matter. Given the aforementioned LINE gravitation (GL), when dark matter particles are finally detected and its unit gravitational effect measured (GD), it is hypothesized that (GD= GL).

Entanglement molecules are composed of inanimate atoms which together constitute one component of the natural mechanism needed to establish the antenna-state which defines the living POV. Once entanglement molecules are assimilated into the gestation process of an available viable host, the instantiated entanglement molecule acquires the added capacity to capture available dark matter particles. Together these unlikely participants establish the antenna-state of the POV by sufficiently dilating the bandwidth of local PH to open the vital teleportation channel which enables the critical information transfer that imprints metamatter at ones’ unique degrees of freedom of the quantum entanglement spectrum, ones’ QEF. This state, as long as it persists, instantiates ones’ new position in space-time, ones’ individuality. When released into the environment upon deinstantiation, death, the entanglement molecule’s sequestered dark matter particles are also released.  Consequently, like the unignited matter in a gas nebula or the inanimate matter of Earth, the uninstantiated entanglement molecule, should it persist, resumes its mundane alter ego to gravitate in a more Newtonian manner as does all inanimate matter. Further, if it became feasible to strip baryonic matter of all of its bound dark matter particles, baryonic matter may be dispossessed of gravitation.

On the galactic scale, persistent PH dilation in the absence of detectable matter is a very important phenomenon of this space-time. These scenarios of information transition infer the existence of a commonality between the function of the hypothesized entanglement molecule in living entities and the properties exhibited by dark matter. This is due to their mutual ability to dilate the PH to a degree greater than, and in the absence of normal matter respectively. It is hypothesized that entanglement molecules capture and hold an excess of dark matter particles for the duration of each living entities lifetime. This identifies dark matter as the entanglement particle (EP) which most fundamentally maintains the PH dilation which defines a QE connection to metamatter even in the absence of matter. This gives the entanglement molecule its capacity to establish life. Additionally, dark matter is the particle which singularly causes gravitation in matter. All normal (baryonic) matter gravitates primarily, or entirely, by the sequestering of dark matter particles. Hence, although the Higgs field imbues matter with mass it is a degrees of freedom of dark matter not mass that is responsible for PH dilation both in living entities and imbues gravitation to all baryonic matter and gravitates in the vacuum of deep space. This implies that the eventual isolation and identification of the entanglement cell, entanglement molecule and entanglement particle will unlock the mystery surrounding dark matter. I encourage all thoughtful, nimble-minded researchers or teams thereof, having the means, the capability and the wherewithal to take on these groundbreaking career-defining challenges and do so for the betterment of humankind.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 22/08/2018 17:02:51
In honor of the late Stephen W. Hawking;

The LINE hypothesis suggests that the universal rendering rate determines the rate of expansion and contraction of any verse. In this universe, it is the universal information budget which informs this rendering rate and the speed of light. The level of universal expansion is not directly due to the local effect of gravitational displacement in this universe. Gravitational displacement, under rarefied conditions, may become consequential to the present state of universal expansion but only as one of several factors in the net universal information budget which together determines the universal rendering rate. The universal expansion may continue to change and accelerate in that change despite any particular state of gravitation at a given time, so long as the net universal information budget precipitates that state, so it will be. At the current stage of universal evolution, what, if any, class of manifestation or phenomena or local information state could precipitate a radical change in the universal rendering rate, and thereby expansion, by its very existence and proliferation?

The influence of this information transfer we call gravitation is not due to its very local effect of force-like path displacement, but far more influentially by the reduction in rendering latency it imparts upon the rendering engine, both locally and universally. So, with black holes being the huge gravitating drains of information flow out of this space-time that they are, and able to grow to even greater influence, together with the information reduction caused by other gravitating structures, one could be forgiven for expecting such imposing information drains to reduce the universal latency sufficiently to propel the current accelerating universal expansion, however, the complexity of such structures are relatively diminutive in the rendering of reality in this universe. Therefore, such aggregations of matter impart a low latency and tax the universal rendering engine minimally. In this comparison lies the clue to what it would take to impose a guiding influence upon the rendering of this space-time. Life is the answer. Yes, though it may seem improbable at first thought, that such a diminutive structure as the living cell and manifestations thereof could pose a significant influence in this arena among the titans of aggregated matter including all manner of dust, planets, stars, galaxies and such, it is in life’s complexity that embodies the key to taxing the universal rendering engine sufficiently to alter universal expansion.

At this stage in universal evolution, it is only the overhead or universal latency induced by the proliferation of structures of densely packed complexity such as living forms which become sources of rendering overhead which can be pivotal. Be careful lest you underestimate this potent ingredient in any universal ecosystem. It is life’s complexity which imbues the most potent catalyst for changes in the universal rendering imaginable. This complexity is evolved from a process of recurring instantiation that can occur by no other natural process in this space-time. This is the process which coalesces information into a density present nowhere else in nature. The effect on the rendering engine of the presence of living cells are orders of magnitude greater than that of inanimate structures such as stars. Rendering a single living cell is far more taxing than rendering a star or a black-hole. Rendering an emerged being like a human or an ant or your pet salamander imparts a universal latency comparable to the rendering of immense swatches of space-time and the inanimate matter contained therein.

Over the course of each lifetime, the organized information feedback through the diminutive teleportation channel of the POV, via the Planck-Holes (PH), permit the evolution of complexity to become living forms. The emergence of the mind is yet another threshold of the universal evolution of complexity which further taxes the rendering engine as nothing before. With this understanding, some early assessment can be made from measurements of the rate of universal expansion, as to the proliferation of life currently in one's universe. Since a greater proliferation of increasingly complex life significantly taxes the universal expansion, this bares a relationship to the amount or proliferation of life in that universe. The LINE capacity (LC) of ones’ verse may limit the proliferation of life before it can influence the universal expansion. However, if by the indigenous laws of physics it doesn’t, because the LC is sufficiently high, then an observed accelerating universal expansion is a likely indicator of a low universal proliferation of complex life. 

 This is not to suggest what type of living forms in particular or the universal population of such forms that are necessary to influence the rendering rate of any particular verse. Such parameters would be specific to the laws of physics and conditions of circumstance within that verse.  Further, the type of life and the threshold of complexity life may ultimately imbue may be unlike anything so far emerged in ones' ecosystem or universe. A significant change in the current state of one's universe may await the eventual emergence of living beings the existence of which could grind the universal acceleration and expansion to an eventual halt, and even cause a reversal therein. The life expressions of living forms may evolve to embody levels of complexity in emergent skills and phenomena humankind could scarcely imagine.

A universe observed to have an accelerating expansion will be an under populated universe. These are young universes populated predominantly by relatively few wild ecosystems such as earth. On the other hand, a universe which displays an accelerating contraction will be one with a very high universal living population and likely is near or at its LINE capacity (LC). The LC, a property naturally imposed by the indigenous laws of physics of a universe, acts as a limiter on the universal living population. This mediates the number of simultaneous living individuals possible in any verse. The LC, therefore, behaves as a potential breaker on universal contraction due to overpopulation by highly complex, highly taxing structures and living entities and could also serve to keep a well-adopted universes’ rendering rate perpetually stable.

Consequentially,  when the universal rendering latency changes sufficiently to alter the universal rendering rate and the speed of light, black holes, whose event horizon (EH) is by definition informed by the universal speed limit, the speed of light, will adjust accordingly to the new rendering rate. Thus, the event horizon of every black hole will contract in direct response to reductions in the universal rendering rate and the speed of light it informs. Further, the EH will never expand by this influence or any other influence except by ingesting sources of gravitation. This adjustment, when contracting, will liberate information caught in black holes since the rendering rate internal to the black holes remain different from the new rendering rate in the surrounding universe. That is, until a balance, an equilibrium is once again reached between the internal rendering rate within the EH and the new external rendering rate outside of the EH. The amount of information liberated in the form of energy released during this adjustment is proportional to the delta between the new and the former light speeds. For example, in a hypothetical case where the universal load is sufficient to tax the rendering of reality by suddenly reducing the max speed limit, the speed of light, say; from 300K km/s to 275K km/s, the information that would be liberated is information previously captured within the EH at the higher light speed.

This information, which by circumstance has sufficient escape velocity in excess of the new lowered speed of light 275K, is given off in this scenario as a blast of energy. This release of bound energy proportionately contracts the diameter of the black hole.  Of course, this example of abrupt changes in universal information load is not a scenario that is likely to occur; more likely is a very gradual virtually imperceptible alteration of the universal rendering rate and the speed of light, which occurs on cosmic timescales. As the actual, dynamic information budget of any verse informs a very diminutive reduction in the speed of light, this causes black holes to radiate only very diminutively; this is the mechanism which produces the effect hypothesized by the iconic physicist; Stephen Hawking, known as Hawking radiation. This suggests that Hawking radiation is produced not by virtual particle separation at the EH but by the ongoing information state of the universal information budget, mediated by the information transition with the metaverse via the PH. Further, if the speed of light in this space-time becomes, either momentarily static or is increasing, then the level of Hawking radiation, universe wide, will be zero as black holes universally further increase their grip on their captured bounty. Hence, by this mechanism, the LINE hypothesis suggests that within a contracting universe, the diameter of black holes will perpetually decrease as they emit Hawking radiation, but in an expanding universe, Hawking radiation will always be zero. Hence, in an expanding universe, there can be no reduction in the diameter of black holes. Together these naturally imposed mechanisms conserve information universally, and solve the Hawking information paradox.

Stable information budgets are evolved or maintained adaptations characteristic of very old verses.  Such budgets may be maintained by an evolved or enforced symbiosis between the living universal populations, the LC, and the universal information budget via the QE spectrum upon which all of these mechanisms operate. By this definition, a universe may also perpetually cycle or bounce between an expansion phase due to a high rendering rate caused by an effective combination of low universal complexity and diminishing information load as may be the current state of this universe, and a contraction phase which eventually destroys sufficient complexity therein to once again start another expansion phase as the universal rendering rate rebounds. So, attempts to determine the age of ones’ universe by measuring its current expansion proximity relative to its most contracted state, ergo its instantiation event (big bang), may provide no insight into the true age of ones’ universe.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 06/09/2018 00:30:23
So, how might the age of such a cyclic universe be determined? What entity could persist the tell tale imprint that such contortions of space-time may leave in it’s wake?  As the rings of a tree records the history of its growth for all to see, so too does the contraction history of a particular type of black hole reveal this hidden metric. With each contraction phase of a universe, all black holes therein also contract as they liberate a proportional amount of Hawking radiation. However, since all black holes may feed and thereby arbitrarily adjust their bulk in due course, only a black hole that has been isolated for as long a time as possible will persist this critical information. A black hole that has stopped feeding very early in its existence or has never fed is most desirable for this investigation. The ideal candidate is likely to be one that perhaps began its existence as a relatively stationary super-massive black hole instantiated by sudden collapse which then very soon evacuated its surrounding debris field.

 

This body will also need to be distinguished in its age as, to be useful for this endeavor, its age must be as near to the age of the universal instantiation event (big bang) as possible. Such an isolated super-massive primordial (ISMP) black hole would have experienced each of the universal contractions and expansions and would therefore have a diameter and gravitation shaped by those perturbations. As such, an ISMP black hole would gradually diminish in size with each cycle of its cosmos, becoming increasingly smaller with, and only with, each contraction. Of course the litany of time that is possible to describe by this mechanism is unlike any time-scale currently familiar to humankind. The oldest remaining embers of ISMP black holes that exist in truly senior verses would be smaller than any black hole could possibly get by any other natural means. These are Ember Black Holes (EBH). EBH’s carry the entire contraction history of its’ host universe within its size, degrees of freedom and remaining gravitational signature. An understanding of how a particular EBH formed and its original features, compared to its current state would reveal the valuable data. The current cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation profile may only be the signature of the most recent collapse turnaround or transition event which may have occurred 13.8 billion years ago in a much longer cyclic expansion history.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 01/10/2018 19:49:57
The LINE hypothesis suggests that time dilations are the relative differences between local rendering rates of reality within a gravitational gradient. The information teleportation that is gravitation, increases in closer proximity to regions of more dilated Planck-Holes (PH) and decrease toward the less dilated PH regions, i.e., of deep space away from sources of gravitation. Why would a higher rate of information drain produced by a higher PH dilation and bandwidth decrease the local rendering rate of reality? On local scales, information drain, via the PH, produce a local information deficit which is conserved by consuming local vulnerable information states. This will manifest as a bending of a beam of light or the slowing of a ticking clock. This occurs even in the presence of a single gravitating body (M1). M1 hosts gravitation which although increasingly imperceptible at a distance, reduces the information load on its hosting universe writ large in an unbounded sphere of influence centered upon the PH dilation distribution around M1’s center of gravitation.

Metaphorically, consider an Olympic size swimming pool with a small drain hole at the pool bottom which may be dilated remotely. As water drains out of the pool via this sufficiently dilated opening, this flow produces rotational turbulence locally as water molecules jostle and displace each other under a number of influences to enter the drain. In this circumstance, this turbulence is organized into a funnel or whirlpool effect local to the center of drain dilation. This drain of water also draws in masses within local proximity and of vulnerable size and state. These effects of hydraulic displacement manifest most influentially locally to the center of the drain but rapidly diminish further away. For example, in an increasingly larger pool, the funnel displacement of an object floating on the surface, on the opposite end of the pool, will be practically imperceptible as compared to the movement of objects in and near the drain funnel. However, the pool-wide effect of the ongoing drainage of water is not zero and may be more apparent in its influence upon other degrees of freedom of the pool. For example, the weight of the entire pool or its water surface level as compared to fixed entities as the water drains may be somewhat more detectable. Analogously, information flow, via the PH, produce very local gravitational effects and also collectively manifests net universal effects.

 It is the local information drain into the metaverse which alters the rendering rate of the affected entity. This occurs because all amalgams of information, particles, and manifestations thereof, define a rendering rate informed by its current state including its momentum. In a gravitational gradient, this momentum is consumed at all scales to fulfill the information deficit. This slows the rendering rate of change, ergo; time. Hence, a clock may be observed to slow as it approaches regions of higher gravitation. The universal expansion accelerates by the same influence, but not of gravitational displacement but more fundamentally by the net universal information drain into the metaverse it produces which lowers the information load universally and quickens the rendering rate of reality and influences the rate of change, time, and distance and informs the current speed of light. Hence, the reason the vacuum energy (dark energy) is currently calculated to be so unreasonably high, some 120 orders of magnitude above measurement, is due to this PH information drain not being accounted for. Existing quantum mechanical formulations assume no Planck scale universal information transfer into the metaverse. Upon the inclusion of this critical factor the calculated values will come into alignment with measurement.

How does the QE channel via the PH produce individuality in living beings? Individuality is an instantiated POV which is a channel of information teleportation outflow from this space-time into the metaverse. The antenna state of the POV, that condition which most fundamentally places you here, now, is most fundamentally a state of information transition, not a state of information processing as is widely believed today. Inanimate matter evolved to incorporate this information flow to be the antenna state of the POV as the basis for individuality. Complex emerged host with EC further evolved to incorporate sensory telemetry processing, via the POVH bond, centered upon the POV which became consciousness, self-awareness, cognition, intelligence, etc.. It is a strange and unexpected effect which emerges from the PH teleportation of information into the metaverse which becomes the instantiated position of view.
 
That this very basic condition of an apparently mundane natural phenomenon could become the basis for individuality, perception and intelligence and all manner of evolved features of a living being is not at first intuitive. With no basis for comparison, we can only accept this implementation for what it is. Its usefulness as a foundation for individuality due to the observed monogamistic qualities of the QE spectrum seems plausible. Also, the POV being primarily a claim on territory, essentially a point in space-time, makes some sense when considered through PH dilation. This begs the question, does a particular PH regime define the POV and therefore travels with the individual for as long as it is instantiated? Or is the teleportation channel to metamatter the entity which is handed from one PH regime to another as the individual moves through space-time? As gravitation moves through space-time with a body of mass all the while passing its influence from one PH regime to another. Comparatively, as the persistence of a TV transmission owes no allegiance to any persistent formation or aspect of the electromagnetic spectrum. However, the electromagnetic spectrum is not monogamistic as is the QE spectrum.

Hence, instantiation of the individual POV far away from an appropriate PH dilation field, ergo gravitation, will be impossible. This suggests that reproduction will not be possible in deep space. This is not only a consequence of classical biological and environmental conditions but due to the low QE bandwidth of the undilated PH of deep-space. In fact, if instantiation, life, depends upon the persistence of the POV yet the POV requires some minimum level of PH dilation, greater than that found in deep-space, then a living being straying too far beyond an appropriate gravitational scape or gravityscape, regardless of how that field is manifested, may be fatal. Neil Armstrong and other brave astronauts have empirically shown that straying beyond the earths' gravitation, at least as far away as the Moon, is not fatal.

However, life has not been tested in regions of ultra-low gravitation of extra-solar space. The PH dilation of Interstellar and intergalactic space may or may not prove to be sufficient to maintain life.  Life on earth may be as stable as it is only due to the stability of the gravitation in this region of space due to the specific PH dilation distribution or gravityscape of this solar system. Not only due to the earth's gravitation but due to a combination of the suns and that of the other planets and other bodies as well. If this is indeed the case, it may be one more reason why life seems to be so rare in these cosmos. An ideal environment of PH dilation adequate for the instantiation of life may require specific intra-solar system gravityscape and straying too far beyond it could deinstantiate the delicate teleportation channel that is the position-of-view.

By this hypothesized definition, a deeper causal distinction can now be made between natural gravitation and the artificial gravitation of an accelerating reference frame, as the PH dilation defines only the former. The need for natural gravitation required for the instantiation of individuality cannot be fulfilled by centrifugal rotation (artificial gravity) which does not produce the requisite teleportation channel with metamatter. Until a means to measure the PH dilation of deep space from within a solar system is achieved, without actually sending life there, bacteria or other champions of earths’ microbiome would be the only viable candidates for such a test. However, testing the limits of instantiation here on earth once the entanglement cell (EC), molecule (EM) and particle (EP) are isolated and identified will yield relevant data.

The reason such a seemingly delicate phenomenon as the instantiation of a standing quantum wave which constitutes the POV is sustainable for decades are a direct consequence of dark matters very weak interaction with the rest of this universe. This is the reason life can be sustained amidst all manner of aggressive and corrosive effects so long as the EM’s that sequester the EP (dark matter) are shielded so they may retain these critical particles. Like a fortress protects a treasure, the continued retention of the EP is the very definition of life. It is a great and necessary asset that as long as this retention is maintained, there exist very few environmental intrusions that may directly affect the EP. If not for dark matters’ extremely weak interaction with baryonic matter and the fields and conditions which affect normal matter, the typical onslaught of X-ray photons from a visit to the doctor’s office or showers of neutrinos and such unstoppable invaders would end life. If the entity which directly establishes PH dilation and maintains the quantum teleportation channel at ones unique QEF was also susceptible to such intrusions, life would never have occurred. Unfortunately, this immunity isn’t shared by the very corporeal EC or EM which hosts the EP. Instead, it is these replaceable, disposable, corporeal structures of the host form which are susceptible to such attacks that give their existence in due course to maintain ones' current instantiation. For these structures an adequate protective enclosure is required, one that provides these vital systems with the necessary isolation from all manner of host and potential environmental intrusions and effects. The integrity and fortitude of the living host is the requirement that has driven evolution from the very beginning of life on Earth.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 25/10/2018 14:39:55
The natural mechanisms which establish the position of view (POV) in living entities must be definable by all of the laws and structures of nature. As such this standing quantum wave manifested by the entanglement molecule is describable in normal physics terms some familiar, yet some will remain novel for a time. All are necessary for the instantiation of life in this universe. Further, the phenomenon known as entanglement has been known for some time but is poorly understood yet is fundamental to the workings of nature writ large. The coherent sharing of state information is the wiring between this space-time and the degrees of freedom (DOF) of the metaverse. Some of these DOF defines metamatter. Metamatter is hypothesized to be the metaverse phenomenon which enables the mobility of individuality in this universe. It is how you came to be where you are right now. It is not one's parents or any particular line of ancestry that instantiates you in your current ecosystem. All have played what is a rather mundane role in local host proliferation and evolution and contribute to one's fidelity of teleportation and prospects for one's future life. Nonetheless, in nature every living host, to one degree or another, does likewise. So how do the most fundamental mechanisms of nature interact to make this amazing phenomenon of nature possible?

 
The LINE hypothesis suggests; In this universe, Planck Holes (PH) are the fundamental multidimensional degrees of freedom (DOF) of the fabric of space-time which, under very specific conditions early in the universal instantiation event (big bang), forged amalgams of information from the information entering this universe to become particles of all types including dark matter (DM) and its antiparticle (ADM). The effect known as mass is induced in all baryonic matter by its interaction with the Higgs field which produces a minimal PH dilation and thereby minimal gravitation. This minimal PH bandwidth produced by normal matter is what causes the information flowing out of this universe into the metaverse to accumulate around affected PH. As water swirls around an open drain; information accumulates around minimally dilated PH and thereby imbues mass to particles of baryonic matter. This information trap around the PH is the most fundamental mechanism which defines spontaneous symmetry breaking within baryonic matter.

 
Further, and just as significantly, not unlike the most diminutive black hole feeding effect imaginable, this information bottleneck creates a circulating or spinning information channel around local PH. These spinning information channels define the quantum states of all baryonic particles. While within sufficiently close proximity, these rotating information channels in normal matter strongly heterodyne to manifest a particular type of strong entanglement to form the powerful and pivotal binding interaction, the glue (ergo; Gluon) known as the strong nuclear force (SF). This spherical, rotational information drain around baryonic particles, imbued by the Higgs field, is effective on the nuclear level but originates on the sub-nuclear PH level. Hence, the SF also acts as a sub-nuclear strong force to bind the baryonic triad of quarks which form atomic particles. It is this joining of circulating information channels around PH that manifest the strong force which permit normal matter to congeal into atoms. Furthermore, the weak nuclear force emerges from this mass defining feature as a sporadic ejection of amalgams of information to manifest diminutive particles (alpha, beta, neutrinos, etc.) in unstable atoms to produce a form of radioactive mass decay. This decay is akin to the jets of information ejected by an overfeeding black hole due to insufficient PH bandwidth. This effect also occurs in overfed PH within particles essentially choking on accumulated information within radioactive particles.

 
Additionally, this revolving or spinning PH channel of information, induced by the Higgs fields’ interaction with baryonic particles, not only informs particle mass and the mechanisms for binding and decay but also embodies the aptly named fundamental defining degree of freedom known as spin. Spin is the DOF which fundamentally manifests the electromagnetic properties of baryonic matter. Consequently, not unlike the earth’s molten circulating mantel, the quantity of information accumulated around the PH (the core) in baryonic matter defines the property known as mass, while the circulation of this information defines particle spin and its electromagnetic properties known as charge. These common states of PH interaction by sub-nuclear information channels within baryonic matter constitute the strong-electro-weak interactions. In normal matter, some configurations of the circulating information channels around PH positively (inflow) dilates the PH to teleport mass-less amalgams of information into this space-time from the metaverse in the form of the particles known as photons.

 
Emitted photons, once in the Higgs field, neither accumulate information (mass) nor dilate the PH (gravitate) so they travel at the maximum universal rendering speed, ergo; the speed of light. Photons will have a spin that is informed by and are entangled with, the spin state of their parent PH regimes from which they emerged. As the spin of a bullet is informed by features indigenous to the rifle barrel from which it emerged, so too are the amalgams of information called photons imbued (entangled) with the net spin state of the circulating channel of information around the PH regime from which it emerged. Consequently, photons are the particles that carry electromagnetic radiation, light. Light is emitted when information enters this space-time via positively dilated PH and defines the mechanism which creates otherwise mysterious phenomena such as sonoluminescence and the Casimir effect. These PH channels of information that flow within particles manifest at or near the Planck scale in three-dimensional space-time. Therefore, PH’s, like all fields, entirely pervade the occupying particles. On this scale, the familiar macroscopic processes of burning, fission, fusion, sonic stimulation, etc. which exposes these effects, are themselves universes away.

 
The effect known as gravitation occurs as Higgs effected particles of dark matter negatively (outflow), and more substantially, dilates local PH to a greater bandwidth than occurs in normal matter. Hence, dark matter provides a wider channel for information teleportation out of this space-time into the metaverse with little or no information accumulation or circulation. Therefore, no spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs when dark matter interacts with the Higgs field; ergo; no mass or spin. This lack of circulating information is the key to all of the differences between baryonic matter and dark matter. This smooth flow of information into the PH dilated by dark matter defines the presence of an enhanced gravitational effect as information exits this space-time unperturbed. Yet, the absence of these pivotal disruptions in information teleportation mandates that dark matter will not express the other fundamental properties and forces of nature such as mass and electromagnetism, or the strong force, or the weak force. Hence, dark matter will be weakly interacting. By this separation of responsibilities, it is hypothesized that baryonic matter is only imbued with significant gravitation upon its sequestration of dark matter particles while both are under the influence of the Higgs field. Ergo; matter radiates, and dark matter gravitates.

 
The Higgs field is the attenuation field responsible for PH dilation which produces spontaneous symmetry breaking in normal matter. The Higgs field is itself another among many of the mostly anonymous dimensions (DOF) predicted by string theory. The Higgs field exposes its own unique DOF that interacts with different particles in different ways to produce the DOF which define this space-time. These interactions manifest in this space-time as mass and as the known fundamental forces and all of the phenomena of this universe. Entanglement, Einstein’s spooky action, is one such phenomenon. Quantum entanglement is the coherent sharing of state information which occurs at a particular bandwidth of PH dilation. The PH bandwidth appropriate for entanglement (space-time  thru-flow), defines a different DOF of the QE spectrum for information teleportation than that of gravitation (space-time outflow) or radiation (space-time inflow).

 
 Entanglement occurs in baryonic matter as these circulating channels of information in particles, while within adequate proximity, become weakly heterodyned to entangle weakly and thereby monogamistically share a common degree of freedom of the quantum entanglement spectrum, ergo; the quantum entanglement frequency (QEF). This common QEF, is not necessarily a frequency, and is monogamistically unique to each QE connection with metamatter and defines the teleportation channel between each of the entangled participants’. This shared state is nonlocal and persists across any separation in this space-time. This entanglement manifests a channel of appropriate bandwidth for two-way teleportation of information as compared to the one-way, PH bandwidths which constitute both the negative gravitational and positive photon radiating, PH states. Entangled states may be induced synthetically in the laboratory or naturally, in among other things, in living beings. This mechanism defines the LINE hypothesized mechanism that instantiates the antenna-state known as the position of view (POV) in living entities and enables the mobility of individuality in this universe.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 29/10/2018 21:11:26
"On The Universal Mobility Of Individuality - By Means Of Natural Entanglement" ...you know where.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 06/01/2019 16:53:07
Empirical observations for the existence of Earths' predicted LINE Gravitational Differential (LG) described in post#:113

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.4184.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238772150_Investigations_into_the_unexpected_Delta-V_increases_during_the_Earth_gravity_assists_of_Galileo_and_NEAR
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 01/04/2019 16:23:46
The LINE Queue:

On Earth, during the gestation period  of each viable host for life, the processes of Mitosis, Meiosis, Cleavage, Bifurcation, Translation, Transcription, Replication are all essential processes that construct, and for a lifetime, maintain the stage, the host form, from which any individual will live life and are all quite interesting in their own right. However, it is during the process called instantiation which establishes the individuals position-of-view (POV) that you enter stage-left (instantiate) and will eventually exit stage-right (deinstantiate) leaving behind the anonymous local material, the atoms and molecules which construct the living host, the stage from which each lifetime will unfold.

What is it that every pharaoh, emperor, sheik, king, or individual of sufficient power and means eventually desires most above all else in life? It is to influence, or otherwise take control of what comes next for the individual after one’s current life ends. A control, without which, for any living being, all of the power and treasure in the world will eventually come to nothing. Such individuals may pass on their fortunes and status to others but what is to become of the individual? What becomes of you? No doubt we have been nurtured by our respective societies and cultures to consider such notions in established traditional often mythological ways, however, until a culture accepts the actual, natural, and empirical process which govern and mediate the universal instantiation and mobility of individuality, this amounts to nothing more than an accepted or enforced cognitive dissonance, ergo; self delusion. So, how can a living individual influence in what form, circumstances and where one will reinstantiate in one's next life?

On Earth, in the year 2019 AD, being the only known life hosting ecosystem in existence, the human birth rate is an average of 360,000 births per day and the human mortality rate is approximately 151,600 deaths per day. Hence, with each rotation of the Earth, there is, on average, over 200,000 additional viable human host forms available for instantiation than there are deceased human lifeID’s imprinted to metamatter. LifeID's of individuals that have been recently instantiated, living as human beings hosted by earth's ecology. Understand that the lifeID is the heterodyned information states of a particular individual’s instantiated degrees-of-freedom of the QE spectrum (QEF) and host form imprinted to metamatter which serves to bias that particular individual to extant compatible host wherever such forms may exist in space-time. Such locations are some viable habitat within a viable environment. Therefore, individuality, life, may be instantiated either  by way of a viable host form’s QE connection with an available, compatible lifeID previously imprinted to metamatter or, alternatively, by such hosts QE connection to un-imprinted stem-metamatter at an original to this ecosystem, ergo; virgin QEF.

These numbers suggest that on earth, there is, on average, 150,000 additional human individuals per day who have been recently instantiated to earth’s ecology and therefore possess imprinted lifeiID’s which are compatible with extant Earth forms seeking reinstantiation, seeking a new life. Given the current human reproduction rate, these 150,000, formerly human, individuals each day will very quickly be reinstantiated to newly available, highly compatible human hosts. This leaves the additional 200,000 newly conceived human hosts to entangle QEF that are recently new to the human form. These new QEF are individuals that are probabilistically more likely to have been previously instantiated to near-human species. Such near-species possess genetics which imprints metamatter, ergo lifeid’s that are evolutionarily more compatible with human hosts then other extant host forms. Such compatible species may be those of extant primate forms and eventually of increasingly more distant mammalian hosts and beyond. Over time, the uninstantiated lifeID imprinted to metamatter, fades as its metamatter imprint gradually regresses to a stem-metamatter condition. In so doing, its compatibility with extant host forms probabilistically regresses down the evolutionary tree of Earth-life. This regression of the lifeID causes ones QEF to reinstantiate related extant forms, population providing. Else, lifeID compatibility will continue to descend the evolutionary tree until a stem-metamatter condition is reached which describes a truly indeterminate or null LifeID. A null lifeID renders the individual QEF able to instantiate any viable host form that may emerge anywhere in this space-time.

This also suggests that host reproduction over and above the mortality rate of any given ecosystem will instantiate virgin QEF. That is, the individuals’ degrees-of-freedom, ones’ QEF, becomes the dominant bias of ones’ lifeID, having no remaining host specific bias whatsoever imprinted to metamatter. This leaves the individuals’ QEF probabilistically highly susceptible to reinstantiate into existing distant DNA lines or beyond. So, why would the regression of the LifeID conform to the evolutionary path of DNA? For the entire history of earth-life metamatter has been imprinted by all of the evolved host forms which have led to present-day forms. As the individual lives and species evolve, metamatter is hypothesized to imprint gradually in increasingly opaquely influential layers of metadata which obscures but also protects and essentially fossilizes prior  imprinting much as Geological sedimentation covers and protects ancient layers and artifacts. Thereby permitting the winds of time during prolonged periods of deinstantiation to gradually erode ones imprinted metamatter to gradually expose past imprinting to available compatible hosts seeking instantiation. This is what permits the possibility of regression over time, to ancestral host forms.

The LINE hypothesis suggests that metamatter is as much a part of life as is ones genetics, they go hand in hand, regardless of the differences between the physics of the metaverse and the physics of this universe. Hence, as rock progressively erodes to reveal its distant fossilized history, likewise, the compatibility or FT of the dissipating lifeID is informed by its imprinted evolutionary history. However, metamatter imprinting is tempered by long spans of evolutionary time. Therefore, recent ancestral traits will not naturally persist in matamatter with any great potency. As a result, few, if any, culturally significant inherited distinctions existing for less than some minimum span of time will be found to naturally imprint to metamatter. Hence, such traits are unlikely to influence the lifeID and the individuals FT. For one’s FT, such traits constitute weak attractors.

Gender, for example, having been an indigenous trait of earth-life for many millions of years across many diverse species may be a strong attractor to species within mammalian imprinted lifeIDs, but will nonetheless, remain a weak attractor for the individual FT given the highly transient nature of the gene expression that determine one’s current gender. Likewise, other more transient host features such as fur, hair and dermis details and complexion or facial structure, will also be weak attractors. This suggests that many culturally contrived demographic traits will not carry from one instantiation to another. So, when Sheik Zayed, Queen Elizabeth, or Bill Gates, say they would like to reinstantiate into their current family line or to a specifically prepared host, though they may have particular demographic features in mind, there is no telling what compatibility their actual natural FT describes. Hence, only synthetic manipulation of the conditions of their next deinstantiation event will permit some degree of influence over their prospects for reinstantiation.

For natural familial instantiation to occur one must deinstantiate within the instantiation period of gestation of a highly compatible host form, ergo; a close relative. However, it is typically highly improbable that any individual would deinstantiate during the instantiation period of gestation of a member of one’s immediate and desired family. Such an occasion would almost certainly need to be pre-arranged and would require a conception that is carefully synchronized with one’s next deinstantiation event, death. The instantiation period or LINE period (LPD) is hypothesized to be that span of time during the gestation of a viable host within which the developing host form seeks to instantiate available QEF or lifeID. At present, for humans, the LPD is estimated to be a moment around the eleventh day of gestation. The LINE process will benefit from refinements of the LPD to within hours instead of days of this pivotal moment in the reproductive process.

Hence, the LINE hypothesis suggests that the individual at death has a very small chance of naturally reinstantiating into their current immediate family line. What is typical for an individual at death, in an ecosystem which hosts an abundance of one’s current species, is certain reinstantiation of one’s lifeID to a sufficiently compatible host. However, to do so, some amount of time will need to pass during which the individual's lifeID will adapt or regress from its current imprinted host state to another sufficiently compatible DNA line. The location of such candidate forms in space-time is completely inconsequential to this non-local process. Regress in this context is the time dependant loss of imprint resolution of one’s imprinted metamatter with ones current heterodyned DNA and QEF state. This regress causes one’s fidelity of teleportation (FT) to become increasingly dissimilar and hence less compatible with ones current host, and increasingly more compatible with increasingly distant relatives. Since all living forms in an indigenous ecosystem are ecological relatives with each other, all species in ones current ecology are eventually candidates for reinstantiation with indigenous lifeID’s.

If no familial or closely compatible hosts are undergoing the instantiation process within a robust and tightly similar DNA pool such as homo-sapiens, reinstantiation will be to increasingly distant extant relatives and eventually to near and increasingly distant species within ones indigenous ecosystem and eventually beyond.  Such distant and near-species instantiations are much less likely when ones current species is genetically similar and thriving with no extant near species such as Neanderthals or Cro-Magnon etc.. Of the 360,000 instantiations of human hosts that occur each day on earth, how could one influence and simultaneously maximize ones reinstantiation prospects to one preferred host? The LINE hypothesis introduces such a process called; The LINE Queue (LQ).
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 11/05/2019 21:26:13

* Pyrine - Depiction2.jpg (26.88 kB . 320x248 - viewed 1656 times)
Figure 1: Depiction of a Pyrine composed of dark matter particles sequestered around a minimally dilated Planck hole regime within normal (baryonic) matter. (CH-30 ‘On The Universal Mobility Of Individuality, - By Means Of Natural Entanglement’ Amazon KDP Press.)

The Baking Of Pi (π):

The LINE hypothesis suggests that both matter and space are most fundamentally composed of amalgams of information states within a scaffolding of Planck-scale features called Planck holes (PH). The amalgams of information known as sub-atomic particles are composed of Planck-scale structures formed around PH called pyrine (sounds like pie-reen from the Greek ‘pyrí̱n or pyrí̱nas’ for core, nucleus or kernel). Pyrines are a structure naturally formed when the mass defining information channels accumulated around minimally dilated Planck Holes (PH) within hadronic matter sequesters a proportional number of dark matter particles. The pyrine is the most fundamental structure of information that composes baryonic matter. Pyrines are as many orders of magnitude smaller than an atom as the atom is smaller than the observable universe. Pyrines are the structures formed around Planck holes in the presence of Higgs affected particles of Hadronic matter and which produce the information channels which manifest mass and the strong-electro-weak nuclear interactions. Pyrines do not form in dark matter; consequently, Pyrines define all of the differences between normal matter and dark matter.

All manifestations of space within this universe came into existence early in the universal instantiation event (UIE). Space formed when the PH field congealed and PH regimes therein became moderately compacted. Like sediment in a landslide, portions of the PH field was compacted from metaverse information states entering this universe called; solutions-of-state (SoS). Individual PH regimes became quantized and separated yet bound together by a type of spatial entanglement. This spatial entanglement is the information transition which separates or ‘spaces’ PH regimes in vacuum to form the dimensional topography of space and determines the value of the Planck length. These tethered PH regimes are the scaffolding upon which the pyrine form. Prior to the formation of these compacted PH regimes, space did not exist, only the space defining, entangled channels which would soon connect separate PH regimes dominated the ocean of SoS infused at the UIE. These channels permitted instantaneous communication and expansion within the SoS of the UIE.  Soon this primordial field would render to become the fabric of space. The density of space, its’ PH spacing, persists and proportionally deforms with PH dilation in the presence of the circulating information trapped within channels around affected PH. These information traps only form within hadronic matter and proportionally sequesters dark matter particles to form pyrines. Hence, particles of dark matter dilate the PH, the pours, the most fundamental drain for information in this universe. Together, these structures most fundamentally manifest the effects of stretching, curvature, and waves in space-time known as gravitation. Gravitation is produced by dark matter whether as free particles or sequestered within baryonic matter. Therefore, gravitational waves are most fundamentally waves of dark matter particles released in a cataclysmic confluence of gravitational sources of sufficient magnitude needed to liberate and accelerate dark matter, whether free or bound deep within the information channels that form the pyrine. 

A black hole, within its event horizon, is essentially an extremely large pyrine as both, unlike all other structures; possess the capacity to sequester the elusive dark matter particles. The number of dark matter particles sequestered within a black hole may be calculated but never measured. The detectable, measurable portion of a black holes’ gravitation exists on our side of the event horizon (EH) and therefore conforms to Newtonian and Einsteinian physics. However, within the pyrine, as within the PH and within the EH exists a different regime of altered space which harbors streams of free and bound dark matter particles and information within channels that cannot be supported by the fabric of normal space. Pyrines are the most fundamental structures that compose hadronic matter. The Debyton is the name given to the undiscovered particle that most fundamentally composes dark matter to dilate the PH in the absence of mass. The energies that are required to detect the Debyton is extremely high as it would essentially require the breaking apart of the pyrine to liberate its sequestered Debytonic particles of dark matter.

The universally consistent value or constant, known as Pi (3.14159…) has emerged from the density and separation of the PH in normal space. This spacing is the average distribution of PH in any space which defines the value known as the Planck length. This spacing, defines the concentration of PH, the pours of the fabric of space which informs the information permeability of space. This permeability is proportional to PH dilation and to its teleportation bandwidth and was initially established at the universal instantiation event (big-bang) and has since evolved to its’ current state. Consequently, normal space is not the only space at play in this universe. Higgs-space is a different layer of PH density with a different PH permeability. Together both layers manifest all of the degrees-of-freedom (DOF) of normal space and are metaphorically in contact at what can be thought of as a boundary layer filled with information. An apt metaphor for this configuration is an osmotic membrane consisting of two porous layers, one denser than the other. Hence, normal space is stretched via this interaction and locally becomes more permeable to information. This transition or teleportation of information into the metaverse through the boundary layer that is normal space is what we call gravitation. The PH density of normal space determines the minimal or vacuum bandwidth of a PH regime. The ground state vacuum permeability is informed by the boundary interaction between these two different layers of PH density. Higgs-space applies a type of symmetry breaking pressure to normal space which we call the Higgs field, therefore PH dilate proportionally to produce the effects of gravitation. This gravitational effect is amplified by the local amalgams of information of various types and densities called matter particles and manifestations thereof.  Under the influence of the Higgs field, particles of Dark matter dilates PH to greater bandwidth than does normal matter, hence produces a greater gravitational effect.

 The value of Pi can be thought of as the result of the topography produced at the boundary layer where Higgs-space’s higher PH density meets the metaverse’s lower PH density. The effect or pressure for spontaneous symmetry breaking provided by the Higgs field is produced by its interaction with the budget of trapped information between these two layers. This interaction manifests all of the features that emerge from the pyrine. These features include information density known as; mass; quantum states and information dynamics called; the strong-electro-weak interactions and the net Lagrangian energy profile, called; momentum.  The information drain produced by dark matter particle sequestration density within the pyrine and the resulting net PH bandwidth for information teleportation out of this universe are known as gravitation. The pyrine and its' effects form in the presence of hadronic matter and are transferred from one PH regime to another as the parent particles move through space. Movement is most fundamentally the transition of pyrine from one PH regime to another. This hand-off, or path, depends upon the specific local gradients of PH bandwidth that pyrine within particles undergo as they move through space. This path is linear and constant when both the pyrine state as well as local PH dilation remain constant. Alternatively, curved motion and acceleration of matter in vacuum occur either via the change of information density within the pyrine, ergo; mass, via the transfer of energy and additionally, via gradients in the local PH dilation of surrounding space, ergo; gravitation.

Consider a large sheet of elastic fabric pulled taught in all directions; now draw a one-meter diameter circle on the fabric. Now stretch the fabric from its edges and place a bowling ball in the center of the fabric. As the fabric stretches in all directions, the circle appears to dilute or break apart as it acquires missing pieces or gaps. These gaps occur because the structural elements of the fabric upon which the circle is defined, is becoming more dilute, less dense. In this metaphor, it may seem as though this is nothing more than a cosmetic illusion of the paint or ink cracking as the fabric stretches apart, however, in space the ink is information aggregated as matter within pyrine and the fabric is space defined by the PH regimes. As this stretching and dilution of PH continue, the aggregation of the gaps or arcs in the circle can be represented as some total amount of arc or gap greater or less than the normal 360 degrees of a circle.  Also, the diameter of the circle is also severely altered by the presence of the bowling ball to an even larger degree than is the circumference of the circle. This measurably alters the relationship between the diameter and the circumference of the circle ergo; Pi. Both of these contortions demonstrate the dependency of Pi on the density of the substrate of space. The current density of the PH in this universe produces a Pi of 3.14159…. Very few phenomena can measurably alter this relationship of Pi to PH density in real-time. Gravity waves and black holes are two such phenomena.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 09/06/2019 14:51:44
The empirical foundations of nature upon which life and the recurrence and mobility of individuality is implemented is as real, and eventually, as definable as ones genetics. The LINE hypothesis suggests that the most fundamental topography of this space emerges from multiple layers of compacted Planck hole (PH) regimes. The layer of denser compacted PH called Higgs-space is in contact or otherwise, affects the less compacted PH of the Hilbert space called the metaverse. The influence or pressure at the boundary layer where these two multi-dimensional topographies meet creates normal space and the iconic feature of this space known as the Higgs field. Higgs-space has a higher (by convention) PH density hence a higher Pi value, whereas the metaverse has the opposite (lower by convention) PH density and therefore a diminishing value of Pi. With a diminishing Pi value of the metaverse, the diameter of circles and spheres therein unintuitively becomes greater than its’ circumference. Within the metaverse, this altered relationship manifests a space which approaches the state known as a singularity. 

As with any more dense substance that is in contact with a less dense substance, Higgs-space behaves as a weight resting against a sheet of the fabric of the metaverse. The primordial amalgams of information in this space called matter emerge from an ocean of information infused at the universal instantiation event (UIE) and are akin to grains of sediment trapped between these two boundary layers. This interaction produces a type of universal attenuation field or pressure on the information filled boundary layer that is this universe. This pressure, called the Higgs-field is proportionally amplified by aggregations of matter particles of various densities which dilate local PH bandwidths. As a direct result, matter becomes non-relativistic, thereby locally further dilates the PH of normal space to produce local information transitional effects. Hence, information osmotically teleports through the locally dilated PH of normal space in the presence of normal matter and in the vacuum of deep space via free dark matter particles under the influence of the Higgs field and, to a greater extent, within living beings via the instantiated entanglement molecule (EM).

The entity known as the Higgs boson is produced by the local shortening of the Planck length in space. This fundamental length, which describes PH spacing and density, is due to a particular spike in the PH bandwidth of affected PH regimes by a sufficiently high infusion of information, ergo; energy.  A more gradual increase in PH dilation is produced by increasing the velocity at which matter moves through space. As the relative velocity of baryonic matter approach the current maximum universal speed limit, the speed of light, information accumulation per pyrine also begins to increase. Consequently, dark matter particle sequestration capacity per pyrine and its’ accompanying gravitation increase proportionally. Hence, increasing PH dilation will begin to proportionally absorb the spatial entanglement channels which separate the PH in normal space. This is the mechanism by which the information deficit demanded by increasing gravitation is paid and thereby produces the phenomenon known as Lorentz contraction, among others. The attenuation of PH spatial entanglement reduces the separation between affected PH but only in the path of motion since only those PH regimes become occupied by the pyrine of the accelerating matter. This contraction directionally shortens distance (and diameters) within the affected space. Consequently, highly localized, concentrated infusions of energy may cause a highly localized deformation of the fabric of space. Such contortions of space may be measured as a fleeting bump which can be described as a particle known as the Higgs boson. Similar deformations of space greatly amplified under the proper conditions, are the phenomenon which amalgamates space to produce all manifestations of matter particles within this universe.

The average PH density or separation of normal space, which is a metaphor for a property that may have no analog in this universe, is directly responsible for the value of Pi. Pi is the relationship between the diameter and circumference of any minimally enclosed PH regime, ergo; a circle or sphere. One could easily outline a PH regime that is not minimally enclosed. This would be any closed outline in space that is not perfectly circular or spherical (perimeter is not continuously circular or spheroid or is bumpy). A circle arises when any outline minimally encloses a PH regime in any space. Once a circle is outlined, in any density of space, some value of Pi is the relationship between the diameter and the circumference of this minimized enclosure. This is because the largest linear distance across the boundary of the regime, its diameter, is determined by the PH density of the enclosed space. This density determines the relationship between linear paths and non-linear paths in space, ergo; Pi. Increase the density of the PH, as in Higgs-space, and you get a greater value of Pi (i.e. Pi=7.32879…) for any minimally enclosed PH regime therein. In short PH density defines space, distance, and geometry. Reduce the PH density of space, as in the metaverse, and you get a space that produces equivalent circles with a diminishing value of Pi (i.e. Pi=0.05623…), and thereby circles and spheres therein approach a point, a point known as the singularity. The singularity is predicted by general relativity to exist within maximally dilated PH regimes known as black holes.

Density and volume emerge from changes of the quantity of information accumulated within PH regimes by any of several means. Means which include increasing velocity, adding mass, heating within a confined space by any means, etc.. Such processes increase the quantity of information within PH regimes or accumulated per pyrine in normal matter. Velocity has the unique property of directly uniformly increasing the information aggregated per PH, ergo; mass, which forms individual pyrine. At first, adding more mass in bulk does not increase information accumulation per pyrine, but does initially increase both mass and volume to produce a normalized increase in the density of matter as seen in the accretion process of planetoids. In the accretion process, while the mass of the body rises, so too does its volume, while total gravitation remains insufficient to compact the PH regimes therein. As mass and volume gradually rise, so too does the bodies’ total PH bandwidth ergo; gravitation, within a growing PH regime. This normalized increase in density continues until all unoccupied space between and within the object's atoms become occupied to the nuclear level. Eventually, within any space, gravitation may become sufficiently powerful to compress and merge multiple separate pyrine into a single compacted pyrine while maintaining the normal spatial entanglement bandwidth which separates the PH. In so doing, the quantity of information accumulated per pyrine and its proportional number of sequestered dark matter particles increases within a given PH regime. Increasing density under hyper gravitational compression in matter involves the rising of dark matter sequestration capacity of individual pyrine therein. It is at this stage that a maximally dilated PH regime known as a black hole begins to form.

Normal gradients in mass density within baryonic matter describe a change in the number of pyrine within the affected volume while maintaining the same proportion of sequestered dark matter particles per pyrine. This spatial compacting of pyrine within a diminishing PH regime will continue to increase the density of the body up to a critical point. That point is reached when the number of sequestered dark matter particles per unit volume reaches a maximum number, ergo a critical density and gravitation within a given PH regime. The radius of such a gravitationally saturated PH regime in any space, for a given value of Pi, is known as the Schwarzschild radius. As information density increases past the critical stage within the Schwarzschild radius, PH separation begins to increase as PH density decreases and space abnormally begins to stretch, not into normal space, but into the singularity. Hence, PH teleportation bandwidth, ergo; gravitation, may also continue to increase while the value of Pi continues to decrease. This phase describes the spatial collapse toward the metaverse space known as the singularity. In this collapse, the normal meaning of distance demarked by a circles diameter not only changes value but loses its meaning in normal space and in the mathematics thereof.

The Schwarzschild radius is the radius of a PH regime wherein the spatial entanglement channels, which binds the PH to define space, can no longer normally support additional dark matter particles per pyrine. Within the Schwarzschild radius, space then becomes immediately unstable. Fundamentally, the PH teleportation bandwidth of gravitationally saturated pyrine now begins to consume the bandwidth of the critical spatial entanglement channel which normally separates and binds PH together to create space as we know it. This spatial entanglement separates the PH at the core of every pyrine and determines the current normal value of Pi in this universe. Within the Schwarzschild radius, the value of Pi is no longer normal as it diminishes toward the metaverse value of Pi. With it, the degrees of freedom (i.e. bandwidth) of the entanglement channels which maintains spatial separation between the PH is absorbed. In so doing, space within the EH undergoes what appears to observers in normal space to be a spatial contraction. This contraction inferred by general relativity is referred to as the collapse toward a singularity. This collapse is counter-intuitively produced by PH separation. This stretching of space expands not into the three dimensions of normal space but into the dimensions of the singularity, into the metaverse.

Comparatively, as an overabundance of baryonic particles sequestered within the atomic nuclei within radioactive atoms become unstable, so too does an overabundance of dark matter particles sequestered within the pyrine produce an information drain and a teleportation bandwidth that may eventually destabilize the spatial entanglement channel that normally binds PH regimes together.  As the critical spatial entanglement which normally binds the PH begins to weaken deep within the photon trap that is the event horizon, the metaphorical separation or spacing between the PH also begins to increase. This stretching effectively deforms the fabric of space and alters its’ PH teleportation bandwidth and the value of Pi within the maximally dilated PH regime of black holes. The space within the EH of a black hole begins to contract as the value of Pi reduces and inextricably guides captured information into the metaverse. These interactions define the most fundamental relationships between the PH field that is space and the various forms of information transitions and teleportation; ergo; gravitation, radiation, entanglement, momentum and information accumulation known as mass, and informs the flow of time and the geometry of any space and its' value of Pi. All are manifestations of the interdependent degrees-of-freedom which inform the universal information budget and emerge from the dynamics of a common universal quantum entanglement (QE) spectrum. Further, the LINE hypothesis suggests these DOF define the quantum entanglement frequency (QEF) which establishes the state of PH dilation that is the antenna state that defines the unique position of view (POV) able to recurringly instantiate individuality (you) throughout this universe.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 07/08/2019 17:07:06
Dark Matter Comes To The Standard Model;

The LINE hypothesis suggests that space in this universe is defined by a three-dimensional scaffolding of Planck holes (PH) that are interconnected and separated by spatial entanglement channels. With a sufficiently high infusion of localized information as energy, this space and particles therein may be contorted, amalgamated and splintered off to form matter particles of all types. These particles populate the well-known catalog of particles known as the standard model but also inform manifestations of other fundamental particles currently only hinted at and yet others remain unbeknownst. The most fundamental amalgamation of PH regimes that form matter particles known or unknown involves the splintering off of a single minimal PH regime which consists of one entanglement channel terminated at each of two ends by a single PH to form a strand otherwise known as a string. The PH at each end of a separated strand is thereafter called a transmission conduit (TC).


One or more strands or mesh, once separated from the fabric of space, will describe a particle informed by the specific local conditions which precipitated its separation. For example, a strand may have sufficient energy to dilate both of its TC’s sufficiently to fully absorb the entanglement channel which separates them. Thereby producing a particle having no spatial separation, no distance between its TC, no size, hence produces a point particle. On such occasions when both TC’s also become opposing overlapping and outward-facing conduits, (make two adjoining fists with thumbs extended and each pointing in the opposite direction), the particle becomes emissive and radiate phase-shifted information into this space-time in the form of entangled packets called photons. The well-known point particle produced on such an occasion is called the electron.


Each TC of an electron perpetually emits information in the form of entangled photons. Photons are emitted in opposing directions and phase and thereby manifest two types of fields known as electric and magnetic. Each photon pair attracts the other and may travel through space-time as electromagnetic waves in the eternal dance of the photons. Photons emitted by electrons circumstantially also enable all manner of bonds between baryonic particles.  This opposing TC configuration of the electron gives the electron a more stable demeanor, like two rockets strapped together but with thrust directed in opposite directions. Hence, the electron may spin but comparatively tends not to go very far or very fast. Consequently, and most importantly for reality, as we know it, the electron can, therefore, be stabilized to form atoms.


Alternatively, a severed strand may follow most of the electrons prescription except, instead of its TC becoming opposing overlapping outward-facing conduits they may be oriented in the same outward-facing direction (make two adjoining fists with thumbs extended and each pointing in the same direction) this configuration produces another well-known point particle called the neutrino. Within the neutrino, the complementary outward-facing TC configuration makes the neutrino all go and no stay. The neutrino is akin to two rockets tied together but having their thrust vectored in the same direction. Hence the neutrino is a fleeting highly transient point charge that showers space-time from any sufficiently energetic and emissive source.


The PH at the core of every pyrine within baryonic particles is not actually a part of the particle but composes the fabric of space. This abstraction allows the particle the mobility to move through space by transitioning from one PH regime to another. The rest mass of baryonic particles is defined by the accumulated information channel around this transient core PH regime.  Other more massive versions of the hadronic point particles are formed similarly but with a different information accumulation forming a more massive pyrine. Such particles include the Muon and the Tau variants.


 The force-carrying particles exist as pure information states which do not consist of strands of separated TC. These information packets may originate from the mass defining circulating information channel accumulated around the PH which sequesters dark matter particles to form pyrine, or alternatively, may emerge from the underlying metaverse. The Gluon is a strong binding interaction between neighboring information channels. The W and Z bosons, like the jets from a diminutive overfeeding black hole due to insufficient PH bandwidth, are packets of information ejected from the channels of accumulated information within the pyrine.


 Photons, on the other hand, are an original inflow of information into this universe from the metaverse and constitute an information gain to the universal information budget of this space-time. Gravitation, in all cases, is the outflow of information into the metaverse via the dilated PH or TC and constitutes an information loss to the universal information budget of this space-time. Since each of these transitions or teleportation’s of information is universally conserved, no fundamental laws of nature are broken. The photon, gluon and W and Z bosons all have gauge symmetry because they are not structured amalgams of PH strands which give the other particles dimensionality and rest mass via the pyrine. Gauge bosons exist only as unstructured information and therefore travel at the current maximum universal rendering rate, the speed of light.


However, dark matter is a strange animal which possesses none of the information trapping features of other strand based particles, and yet harbors a much greater indigenous gravitational outflow. This is unlike baryonic particles which acquire their gravitation via the sequestration of dark matter particles.  A debytonic particle of dark matter is a negatively hyper-dilated strand and is a point particle like the electron or neutrino but hosts no pyrine structure thereby possesses none of those DOF and yet establishes enhanced gravitation. The LINE hypothesis suggests that the cause of this unique debytonic behavior of dark matter is due to a DOF that dark matter coherently shares with the metaverse via its very own undiscovered particle. This shared metaverse DOF is called; metamatter. This behavior grants dark matter the capacity to dilate the PH to create the tangible physical structure that manifests viable habitats for life and the living forms they host in this space-time and also to instantiate emerged individuality (you) via the entanglement molecule (EM) wherever viable host forms may arise in this universe.


The emerged information channels produced by the PH regime of a strand or a mesh of strands produce the color charge of Quarks. The triad of emerged information nodes called quarks is a projection into the subatomic scale of a composition of PH strands that define a particulate PH regime which exists at the Planck scale. Each quark is defined by two TC’s and their combined degrees-of-freedom (DOF) of in or out information flow combinations known as colors. The information hot spots within baryonic matter known as quarks are not separate entities but are projections of an underlying PH regime and are akin to a three-pronged household electrical socket into the underlying PH regime and cannot be permanently separated.


Furthermore, these PH regimes are congealed into a mesh of three end-to-end strands possessing insufficient energy to further dilate the TC at the end of each strand and are thereby unable to absorb the spatial entanglement channel which separates them. This state, for which we are eternally grateful, produces the persistent separation between the emerged TC nodes that form this pivotally important structure, thereby forming the familiar triad of quarks that give baryonic particles dimensionality, ergo; size. This persistent separation bestows upon the emerged particle (protons and neutrons) a DOF of dimensionality called size, or the lack thereof, and is among the most important manifestations of reality in this universe. This relationship reveals the basis for the distinction between dimensionality (size) and substance (mass). An entity may possess any amount of mass and yet possess no size in this space-time (i.e. a point particle) and vice-versa, informed only by the spatial entanglement channel which separates its quarks.


Each quark in this universe is defined by a combination of two TC, each from one end of two adjoining strands of the triad of strands which compose hadronic matter. There are six known types of quarks; Up, Down, Top, Bottom, Strange, and Charmed. However, the LINE hypothesis suggests that each quark is defined by two possible TC information flow orientations in combinations of; (in, out or null). The combinations of these information transitions yield eight possible effective flow orientations for each quark:

Up (in-in), Down (out-out), Top (in-out), Bottom (out-in), Strange (in-null), Charmed (null-in), ? (out-null), ? (null-out). BG (null-null)

The null-null TC flow combination is the background (BG) state which describes a minimal, no-flow transmission mode. This BG state defines the ambient non-quark regions surrounding the three effective-transmission nodes known as quarks within particles such as the proton and neutron. The remaining eight effective transmission states each possess at least one effective TC flow state of either (in) or (out). Of these eight, there are six widely known standard-model quarks that produce all of the hadronic matter in this universe. These six are readily apparent because each is defined by TC pairs which include, or are always accompanied within the triad by, at least one inflow TC state. That defining inflow channel of information exists within each baryonic combination of the six known quarks, and most influentially within the Up-quark, and delivers all of the baryonic information that defines normal matter and connects the underlying PH regimes to the macro-world we may experience.


Further, notice that there are two other TC information flow orientations remaining; (out-null) and (null-out). These two states also define quarks, for nature waists nothing. These undiscovered quarks are defined by TC pairs which include only information outflow channels and thereby constitute purely gravitational channels and render these quarks very difficult to detect. These purely gravitational quarks unknown to the standard model define the much sought after, purely gravitational particle, widely known as dark matter. This new particle is called the Debyton.  Consequently, the LINE hypothesis suggests that there are in fact eight flavors of quarks; these two missing quarks bring the elusive dark matter and its anti-particle into the standard model to include the proton, the neutron, and the debyton. The debytonic quarks attempt to configure as other quarks do into a triad but consume the spatial entanglement channels that separate them to collapse the triad into a point particle having all six TC in the outflow (gravitating) orientation. Hence, the debyton becomes the hyper-dilated gravitating particle that is dark matter. The debyton is the missing fundamental particle which dominates every aspect of reality in this space-time.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 20/11/2019 04:09:40
A secret only Tabby’s star can tell;

The LINE hypothesis suggests that Ember Black Holes (EBH) are the remains of Isolated Super Massive Primordial (ISMP) black holes that have undergone all or most of a universe’s expansion and contraction cycles. With each contraction cycle of a verse, all black holes therein contract as they emit a proportional amount of Hawking radiation. By this process, ISMP becomes EBH black holes. EBH, therefore, carries the information which reveals a verse's true age. So, how can an EBH be found? Since EBH are as small as a black hole can get by any natural means and is, by definition, isolated for most of its existence, one could be forgiven for expecting it to be a significant challenge to find EBH in a circumstance conducive to extracting this valuable data. However, in nature, with proper consideration, the possible becomes practical.

Consider that the mass of EBH’s may range from the very massive to being sub-planetary in size. Within this envelope, one crucial factor for the detection of EBH is the observers’ technological capability. For humans, in the year 2019 A.D., planet-sized EBH is the best fit for current human technological capability and accuracy in determining the age of this universe. This viable approach is to search for EBH’s which, after surviving countless universal contraction cycles spanning epochs of deep universal time, have been captured by a star’s gravitation and now orbits its host star as a typical planet does. These are solar EBH. In this approach, we may use a suite of exo-planetary detection technology and methods to study and mine the desired data. So, what to look for?

What distinguishing features would a solar EBH captured at a stable distance from its host star reveal? In this endeavor, both the transit and wobble methods of planet detection remain options for the study of solar bound EBH. Solar EBH’s will display many of the features of a planet orbiting its star with one revealing exception. All EBH will lens light in a manner distinguished from a normal planet of any given size. In place of the normal atmospheric effect upon light displayed by some planets, instead, an EBH will offer a dynamic gradient of light distorting gravitational lensing effects as any black hole would.  The innermost border of this lensing PH regime marks the boundary called the event horizon (EH). Near the EH the lensing distortions of light succumb to the gravitational well of the EBH which captures light in an invisible orbital sphere just outside of the EH. This is the wall of fire (WOF). The WOF is not directly observable and is a feature of all black holes, including the light feeding solar EBH. The WOF is the orbital wall of information created where the path of affected photons is curved by its gravitation into a closed orbit around the EBH. Within the WOF, photons temporarily neither fall into the event horizon nor escapes the gravitation of the black hole but are in a temporary orbit above the EH. Hence, as a satellite orbits its planet, light orbits the EBH. Because light is captured within the WOF, it will never be detected unless such light can somehow be perturbed into escaping its covert path around the EBH.

As a satellite may be knocked from its orbit by external effects, so to can the light captured within this unusual orbit. Similar perturbations of the WOF can be produced by very few influences. Gravitational gradients are perhaps the only influences that can affect the WOF. As planets and other gravitating bodies tug on the Earth and moon and as the Moon gravitates the earth, EBH in orbit within an otherwise typical planetary solar system will participate in similar influences in due course. However, within the delicate balance that is the WOF, even a relatively minor gravitational imbalance may give light captured in the WOF just the right escape conditions needed to liberate information from this dark path. This lensing and emission of energy can occur constantly and sporadically around the sphere of the WOF informed by the local solar environment. Make no mistake, such emissions are not the liberation of information from within the black holes’ event horizon, since the WOF is not within the event horizon but is just outside of it. The difference being, information within the EH will forever remain beyond the influence of any external effect. Whereas, information within the WOF which is outside of the EH, may succumb to adequate external gravitational stimuli. The distinguishing light signature of a solar EBH that is properly aligned with its observer, will appear periodically during transits as it orbits its host star.  A solar EBH, like a planet, is continuously bathed in the solar energy of its host star. The light signature of a solar EBH will be observed as a periodic but erratic and arbitrarily extreme light signature in place of what should be a diminutive, predictable, normal planetary transit signature.

Unlike a normal satellite that can be knocked, boosted or thrown out of its orbit, and with the speed of light being constant on human planetary time scales, how then could captured light be similarly liberated from the WOF? The speed of light will remain the same for the duration of any foreseeable observation, therefore, it is only via the gravitational tidal effect of the solar environment that will alter the gravity well of the EBH. Not by altering the escape velocity of light but rather by high tide, if you will. The gravitational tidal effect in one location on the WOF will produce a low tide on some other location of the WOF. It is these gravitational tidal differentials that will permit the liberation of information previously captured around the EH. Low tide is in effect a reduction in gravitation which will act as a hole or opening through which a proportional amount of information possessing sufficient escape velocity may escape from the otherwise impenetrable gravity well that is the WOF.  The profile of such releases can be quite tumultuous yet possess a certain periodicity indicative of planetary solar orbits. Tabby’s star is one such profile. The LINE hypothesis suggests that most of the observed perturbations in starlight intensity seen in Tabby’s star may be due to a combination of gravity lensing and photon capture and release within the WOF of an orbiting solar EBH under the influence of the local gravityscape in that solar system.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 24/11/2019 17:53:41
Further, the LINE hypothesis suggests that the presence of solar EBH anywhere in one's universe is the sole indicator that this universe is a cyclic universe older than one universal transition event (big bang). The presence of EBH requires many cycles of universal contractions to contract an ISMP black hole to this diminutive mass. Solar EBH formation is not possible by any other natural means within the time span of only a single universal transition phase. To further refine the known age of one’s universe to its true age we must look into the light released from the wall of fire (WOF) of a gravitationally perturbed solar EBH such as the one orbiting Tabby’s star. The WOF is the invisible closed region of space-time adjacent to and outside of the EH which traps photons within a spherical orbit. Consider the perspective of a single photon trapped within the WOF. From the photon's perspective, it is traveling through space-time normally. The fact that the space-time of the WOF is a closed orbit around a maximally dilated PH regime of a black hole is inconsequential. Photons will travel for eons of deep universal time within the WOF oblivious to their circumstance even as the ISMP contracts into an EBH.


Photons that have managed to remain within the WOF of an ISMP black hole for the entire duration since the universal instantiation event are called primordial photons (PPH). PPH’s are photons that, by chance, have never had the occasion to escape the dark treadmill of space and time that defines the WOF of its black hole. As an ISMP black hole experiences each of the universal contraction cycles, it liberates a proportional amount of information as Hawking radiation. Moreover, due to its isolation, it all the while remains significantly unchanged for each universal expansion. By this mechanism, the mass of an ISMP black hole diminishes as does its footprint and sphere of influence in space-time. In so doing, the space-time of the WOF in which PPH relentlessly orbits the EBH also contracts. For PPH this contraction of WOF space is no different from the contraction or expansion of normal space, each will produce a proportional Doppler shift in the PPH degrees of freedom. The LINE hypothesis suggests that the contraction of all EBH is informed by the universal information budget, and produces PPH that is proportionally blue-shifted in a manner equivalent to the manner in which the current universal expansion of normal space produces a proportional red-shift of light.


Consequently, EBH are like time capsules for light. As emissions from a solar EBH are released by local gravitational tidal differentials, such releases contain a mix of photons from every stage of an ISMP’s existence, including the valuable PPH. The telltale degrees of freedom of PPH imbued with the long history of the ISMP’s evolution into an EBH is told by emissions of the most heavily blue-shifted PPH compacted within the WOF. The proper measurement of the degrees of freedom of EBH from the otherwise mysterious emissions of stars like Tabby’s star ascribes the litany of time that reveals the true age of this universe.

Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 17/01/2020 15:30:10
The Blooming Of The Galaxies;

The distinguished astronomer Vera Rubin was the first on Earth to discover the non-Einsteinian galactic sigma. The galactic sigma is the non-Newtonian relationship between the orbital velocities of stars at the outer edges of galaxies and those deeper within.  Since Vera’s seminal discoveries and the subsequent discovery by others of supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies, a great debate has ensued. How to account for this strange discrepancy in what should be resolved physics. How does the central black hole fit in? The answers to these questions lie in understanding how galaxies form through the prism of the LINE hypothesis.


The LINE hypothesis suggests that it is only during phases of universal contraction that black holes liberate information as Hawking radiation. The final emissions of Hawking radiation released by surviving black holes in the latter stages of each universal transition event (UTE) mark the blooming stage of surviving black holes to become transitional primordial structures called galaxoids. The UTE phase compresses all particles into a free information state. Any free information not bound within the event horizon of surviving black holes degenerates back into the original information state of the SoS (solution of state) from which all information in this universe originated. Even the Planck Holes (PH) that normally define the scaffolding of normal space succumbs to this degeneracy. In addition to the free SoS, this compacting leaves only a background substrate consisting of the spatial entanglement channels which normally separates and binds together the PH in normal space. During the UTE, space as we know it is no longer normal as it degenerates into a very high rendering, extremely low latency information teleportation mode. In this mode, the barrier of space that normally separates the verses is stirred into the SoS carried by spatial entanglement channels.


A UTE produces an inflationary phase which approaches but is not identical to the original inflation phase of the universal instantiation event (UIE). Today both of these very different and pivotal phases of universal instantiation and transition are referred to as big bangs. This is because they are incorrectly thought to be one and the same. Each UTE phase initiates a new expansion phase when the vast amount of information liberated as Hawking radiation from all black holes within a contracting universe is compressed to a critical density, temperature, and state. This rebound is the hyper luminal inflation of the information liberated from all black holes during the entire contraction phase as black holes establish equilibrium per the surrounding universal information budget. During each UTE, some, but not all of the universal degrees of freedom (DOF) known as ‘constants’ which will inform the next universal expansion and reality, are uniquely initialized thereby probabilistically informing a unique evolution of information in the burgeoning universe. Black holes that do not completely dissipate are the only structures that may survive the UTE.


The primordial phase immediately following the universal instantiation event (UIE) called inflation, was first hypothesized by Alan Guth. The UIE and UTE inflation phases both imbue a certain homogeny to affected information within the new verse. However, only the UTE has the opportunity to inflate the information trapped within the WOF of black holes. This inflation is informed by the universal information budget. Consequently, a new universal expansion phase ensues. In the UTE this early inflationary phase grows or blooms the information released as Hawking radiation around every black hole into a dispersed homogenous (in substance and in kinetics) disc of gas which in time evolve to become nebulae, stars and all manifestations thereof in galaxies. Because the atoms in this transitional disc of gas did not migrate to their positions by Newtonian physics but by rapid inflation, the stars and other cosmological manifestations that emerge from these constituents also will not be observed to strictly adhere to Newtonian dynamics. 


The blooming of black holes into new galaxoids, occurs during UTE inflation. UTE inflation occurs as a consequence of the severe contraction of space-time. This contraction destroys complexity universally at all scales and initiates a universal phase transition. Consequently, as a CPU’s rendering rate increases with the shutdown of all active complex processes therein, likewise, by destroying complexity, the UTE initiates a rebound of the decreasing universal rendering rate and with it an increase in the maximum universal speed limit. Additionally, upon this phase transition state, the spatial entanglement channels which normally bind the PH in normal space become dominant during the UTE. This degenerate state of space permits information to travel within this unfamiliar medium at a non-deterministically high velocity that is much greater than the familiar speed of light.


During each UTE, Hawking radiation accumulates around each surviving black hole. This accumulation forms the shell of information formerly described in normal space as the black hole’s wall of fire (WOF). During the inflationary phase of the UTE, the WOF shell around each surviving black hole also inflates. This WOF inflation produces a far more defused sphere of information around each black hole called the WOF halo. This inflated information bloom gravitationally encompasses each primordial transitional black hole. Together these manifestations compose a galaxoid. Galaxoids are the primordial seeds that evolve to become galaxies. Galaxies cannot gravitationally aggregate in normal space as planets and solar systems do. Galaxies evolve from galaxoids that are superluminally inflated during each universal transition event.


Like the free information that fills the new universe, the WOF halo is the material that, in time, condenses into particles and atoms around central black holes.  These particles eventually gravitationally collapse to become stars and all of the manifestations which form galaxies, which may thereafter be circumstantially held together by dark matter. Hence, there can be expected to be a remnant of the blooming black hole remaining at the center of a typical galaxy. By transitional inflation during each UTE, the uniformity, distribution, and velocity of stars and other matter at the galactic edge become unexpectedly correlated with matter deeper within. So too is the uniformity, trajectory, and velocities of structures throughout the cosmos writ large informed by the initial inflation at the UIE and with each subsequent UTE inflation.


The LINE hypothesis suggests that transitional black holes bloom into galaxoids during the inflationary phase of the UTE. This is the process that forges the otherwise mysterious relationship between a galaxy and its central black hole. The Hawking emissions from black holes during all stages of universal contraction and particularly during the final stages of each UTE causes a verse’s inflationary rebound. This inflation disperses information at the then maximum universal rendering rate, a velocity faster than light as we know it. This circumstantially cyclic inflation accounts for the initial homogenous distribution of matter in galaxies. Moreover, the UIE, which sparked the initial, much different, universal inflation widely known as the big bang similarly accounts for this universe’s initial homogenous microwave background and distribution of galaxies.


So how can an ISMP black hole remain isolated through numerous UTE? Doesn’t a UTE cause black holes to become galaxoids with a WOF halo? Yes, but not all WOF halos are equal or substantial. It is important to remember that within the UTE, space as we know it does not exist and neither does distance or size. Black holes within the UTE is nothing like black holes in normal space. So, picturing black holes as regular black holes all bunched together is a completely false representation of the UTE state. Suffice it to say that the laws of conservation of information are maintained through each UTE. Hence, once the PH and space reconstitute after inflation and the next expansion phase ensues, black holes may maintain their prior information content within their enclosed regime and near the event horizon. Therefore, transitional black holes may not all become viable galaxoids. Many black holes may continue in their isolation in the new universe. A subset of these will maintain their significant isolation through each UTE to the present. While the majority become galaxies that hosts life, these relatively few become the tell tale ember black holes (EBH).
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 04/06/2020 04:47:07
In memory of George P. Floyd Jr.: Memory is a mirror we cannot see beyond;

It has been over 160 years since Charles Darwin helped to open one of humanity's eyes to an understanding of life on Earth, that is, how living entities transform and evolve in the forms they do within Earth’s ecosystem. Prior to Darwin’s seminal insights humanity remained in a state of abject ignorance. Unfortunately, with Darwin’s insights, humanities ignorance has become only slightly less abject. In fact, one could say that humanities ignorance has become even more abject for all of the dysfunction that has since emerged or grown even more so from them. The problem is, evolution and its genetic underpinnings doesn’t explain what humanity has always realized, perhaps even subconsciously, must be true about life, that is; you are not your body, and yet has never had the knowledge to explain this natural implementation. Consequently, religious notions became the rule of the day. Mysticism and narrative fantasy were long practiced and were the easiest source of explanations available.


Despite humanity's historical failure to explain this abstraction of the body from individuality, we were not wrong in principle. As it turns out in nature individuality is indeed abstracted from form. We have all the evidence required to prove this fact. And yet, even the most educated, able and contemplative among us overlook this fact time and again. I have personally listened to numerous highly enlightened conversations between the most professional of practitioners in various fields as they brush within a singe of the flame of truth on this matter and yet are never quite able to land on it. If even one could see the reality of life this could change the world. This is how human enlightenment often comes about, the essential details are gleaned often by a few or by the one and then that insight is shared with the rest of humanity, at such moments progress is made. The abstraction of form from individuality has long been embraced by the many religions of the world. This causes the science community to repel any possibility of this implementation as being fundamentally natural.


Most of humanities dysfunctions have emerged from this lack of understanding of personal individuality. Individual identity, in each lifetime, is iconized by what one sees in the mirror and the explanations and narratives given to us by our respective cultures. Which culture you are exposed to depends on the random lottery of circumstance that informs the specific location where you instantiate within any ecosystem, like Earths’ ecosystem, ergo; where on Earth you are born. This initial culture gets initial critical access to your new mind and so will influence its’ development. Within closed societies, for the individual, this initial access to a new mind could be decisive. Within more open societies, not so much. The misunderstanding that fuels the flame in which humanity has always burned is that the individual, you, can never live in any form other than the form you currently see in the mirror, it is the only form you can remember. However, memory is a mirror we cannot see beyond.


Carl Sagan once said; “The cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be.” True he may be, and furthermore; life is short. The Earth is small. Viable habitats for life are rare. Healthy living conditions are far too limited.  Preferred living circumstances are even more limited. There is no paradise, no inferno no heaven or hell. In this universe there is only nature, the earth, and other viable habitats not unlike it. With humankind possessing no grasp of the reality which informs the individuals’ presence and placement in space-time, the future of the individual human being remains entirely dependent upon the one degree of freedom left by this pervasive ignorance. That is, the conditions human individuals foster for each other and for all life on earth, and eventually, beyond. Other individuals seem to be significantly different or alien to oneself only because we are ignorant of the most fundamental natural mechanisms of life that informs the instantiation of the individual, the mechanism by which one lives.


Currently, the Earth and its myriad circumstances, such as they are, are probabilistically what comes next for you and every living individual on this planet. The natural processes that implements individuality, you, don’t cease to operate when one’s current life ends. In life, you laugh, you cry, you hurt, you long, you hunger, you thirst, you suffer, or nothing at all, by means of the form you instantiate. Regardless of where, or when you live it will be you that is the target of that experience as it is now you, only physically, experientially, differently. In each case, ones’ position-of-view (POV) is the target, the definition, the instance of your presence in nature. With no control over how and where one instantiates, you will remain at the mercy of the unconstrained probabilities of nature and random chance. As you live each lifetime confident in the certainty that the living conditions of others will never apply to you, be equally certain of how misguided you may be in that certainty. This ignorance leads to the delusion that the form with which you self-identify can be replaced by living forms that are perceived to be physically and culturally different from yours. Individual humans, while in this confused state of mind, can hardly conceive of how a past or future instantiation of ones QEF was, and will again be you, as much as you are you at this moment. Furthermore, while any individual is hosted within a wild culture, ignorant of the principles of the LINE hypothesis, by any name, and having no control of the instantiation process, one will continue to naturally reinstantiate into unforecastable circumstances for perpetuity.


The LINE hypothesis suggests that the more prolific, equitable, prosperous and benevolent a culture becomes, the less reason each individual member has to be concerned about death and what comes next. However, while vast deficits in the moral and situational landscape of living conditions persist and with no recognition and therefore no control over the instantiation process of its ecological tenants exists, all individual QEF remain fodder for the circumstantial reinstantiation lottery of nature. As conditions for all living entities in an ecosystem improves, even in the absence of any control of the instantiation process, so does each individual's prospect for naturally reinstantiating into a preferred living condition with reduced suffering, strife, and despair from which none is otherwise immune. As this preferred condition is approached, the most disrupting element that remains of concern may be the loss of any memory of all that was held dear to the individual in past lifetimes. This loss of inter-longevous identity can eventually be mitigated by the development of an accurate and accessible QEF detection technology and methodology. Thus, reinstantiated individual QEF’s, once identified, may be informed of their past recorded histories across multiple instantiations if so desired.


In nature, each living host form is indeed a one-off occurrence. The specific features formed by atoms and molecules by which you and others self-identify has been changing since the time of your initial gestation in the womb up to this moment. Human individuals self-identify by a persistent mental image of self that most fundamentally has little to do with what one actually looks like. Most individuals, throughout a lifetime, are not often challenged in this regard. Nonetheless, disfigurements occur all too often and without warning. It is at times such as these that the individuals’ perception of self becomes salient. Misfortunes of gestation or of circumstances such as the loss of a limb or severe facial disfigurement induce contemplation in all but the most recalcitrant minds. In humans, skin is not often fully disfigured or entirely altered so it remains an all too popular feature for the support of prejudices. There are conditions that can alter the individuals’ complexion severely, so a combination of often superficial features is used to maintain the cognitive dissonance of self-identification that racism among humans requires. The belief, conscious or not, that the living circumstances you currently enjoy or suffer as a consequence of these physical features and demographics and their ascribed historical narratives, is all you can and will ever be, is an unnatural and unscientific belief.


Wild evolution tends to encourage early group survival by the cultural adoption of preferences informed by the use of evolved host senses such as they are implemented in the individual. These preferences which become prejudices occur even as most living individuals remain unaware of one’s own physical form. Since for example, for sighted hosts, mirrors and other reflective surfaces were nonexistent for most of human evolution. Nonetheless, this now dysfunctional evolved tendency, like many others, can, should, and ultimately must be overridden by enlightened cognition. For humankind, that time has arrived. In each life, the story that self-aware individuals tell themselves has been hitherto contrived based upon that individuals’ current host form. The host form and too often its superficial features and emerged properties dictate the narrative which informs individual and group behavior. Upon death and subsequent reinstantiation, the individuals’ memory is reset by host termination and POV deinstantiation and by the gestation process of a new host form, and therefore each previous identity and its prior narrative is abandoned to adopt the next. Humankind has been ignorant of the natural process which implements each individuals’ instance of life in any available form that can emerge and evolve in this universe.


What then do you accept as the description of how you are present in this universe on this planet in this form at this time? Assuming you don’t accept some supernatural narrative, do you believe that the natural processes that implement you in this life occur only once for you and for all individuals? Why would you think that life for you and any individual is a one-off occurrence? We don’t accept that any other natural process, which amounts to all processes, is a one-off. This is the Copernican principle upon which all of science is based. If any individual announces the discovery of a novel natural process, the first thing that happens is all interested parties, wherever their viable position in space-time, seeks to duplicate that process as described. If the stated process can be successfully duplicated in various locations then the process is validated, else it is debunked. So why do most believe that the process that instantiates the living individual presence is thought to be a one-off natural occurrence, ergo; you only live once?


While, at present, we may imagine this to be true for other individuals, for one’s self this is not so obviously true. The Copernican principle dictates that the natural mechanisms that instantiate you as a living being can do so again. Memory is the mirror we cannot see beyond. What’s hidden just beyond the mirror of our memories or the lack thereof, is your true history and all of the possibilities that nature describes for any individual. Those possibilities are all around you. They are all of the possibilities that any living being may experience. If you think that the thin veneer of fur, hair, skin, etc. or preferred delicate facial features upon which you self-identify are naturally kept in escrow just for you, think again. Neither is ones' preferred location or circumstance in space-time kept in account for any individual. The natural process that implements individuality is fundamentally agnostic to any individuals’ cognitive expectations, desires, or comfort.   

 
Human understanding of one’s own identity and the process which places you where you are, in the form that you are, is the basis for all that follows. What becomes one's loves and hates and fears and joys and beliefs and oppositions all derive from the narrative, true or false, that one accepts either consciously or subconsciously. What one fights for defends or perpetrates is underpinned by what you accept as the process natural or otherwise that will inform what you believe comes next for oneself and one's progeny and for other living beings perceived to be different from you.


Prior to Darwin, what humankind accepted as the reality which describes the individual’s presence on this planet and what comes next was widely supernatural or similarly misguided. After the mechanisms that underpin Darwin’s insights were discovered, a new natural description of life became available to each individual. These natural underpinnings of evolution by natural selection are supported by data and observation, a new option for how the human individual understands oneself became a science. With this revelation, newly instantiated individuals gained the option to learn or were taught early in one's new life, these new ideas.


Darwin’s insights and the ensuing genetic revolution are the descriptions of the outer layers of the local processes which construct and evolves the physical host forms upon which an individual may instantiate. These descriptions are only the transient, perishable, temporary façade of a living individual. The missing component of life is the instantiation of the individual to this physical host form. The LINE hypothesis is the introduction of humankind to the description of this missing component because in nature you don't only live once.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: puppypower on 12/06/2020 13:54:21
One thing that Darwin left out was the impact of migration. This is a form of natural selection where the living entity changes its environment to suits is strengths. This would not have been a major factor on the Galapagos Islands, where Darwin developed his thesis. since this place was small and isolated. His data isolate only half of the story of natural selection.

Humans migrated all over the earth with the criteria of natural selection different in different places. Some people enjoy the cold and others prefer the warm. If possible, we will try to migrate to where the weather suits our clothes. This may not always be possible, so natural selection may not be out friend where we remain. 

If you are an intellectual you may not be optimized in the rough and tumble world of street gangs.  You may not be selected in that environment. So you would have the urge to migrate to where there are birds of a feather and where you have selective advantages.

Consciousness can play a role in natural selection. Consciousness has an internal version of natural selection, that tries to align itself with the proper external world of natural selection. If it cannot migrate, consciousness can change that world to suit its clothes. Humans have transcended aspects of external natural selection, by being able to alter the environment.
Title: Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
Post by: tonylang on 12/06/2020 18:25:49
Thanks for your insights.