Recovered: Is the universe a living organism?

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:58 pm Post subject:
OP "Krackonis"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Train wreck" is a phrase that definitively applies to this thread. It should also have not been started in this part of the forum.

The EU model does not in any way mean that the universe is alive. Electricity is a purely mechanical process; consciousness is not.

To make the statement that astronomers (or scientists in general) shouldn't be atheist is like saying "only God knows the Truth". You make plain your personal bias and demonstrate an inability for critical thought. When I discovered Eric Lerner's book, I didn't find my "meaning of life issues" challenged in any way. Substituting one faith for another doesn't get you anywhere (just look at all the technological progress that the BBT has lead to, i.e. none).

The universe itself is neither alive nor aware. It simply Is. This is the sort of thing that people interested in the EU model need to be wary of - pseudoscience finding a new jacket of plasma physics.

Well, no... It's an unlikely possibility. Since we know not the composition or structure of the ENTIRE universe, we don't know for sure, but sufficed to say. Not likely no.
_________________
Neil Thompson

Krackonis

"We are the universe, trying to understand itself."
- Delenn

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:14 pm Post subject:
OP "Krackonis"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It does lead to some interesting insights into the origin of life and other such complex issues. Yet, to me I have yet to find anything to lead me to religion when dealing with EU.

I'm not particularly very religious myself, nor do I see anything in EU theory that particularly supports any specific religion. IMO however, EU theory does open up the scientific possibility that the universe is alive and aware. It is a scientific possibility.

I concur that the Universe MAY be alive. (might aswell be dead for all it matters.. We could be in the brain of a dog for all we know) But I disagree that EU does not support any religion.

It in fact destroys all of them. If all a relgiions symbols and tapestry is unraveled and it's mysteries explainable to the average electrically aware human, then it certainly is not a relgion any longer. It's an interesting tale that passed on from generation to generation that infected and "biased" the mind from a reality based point of view (The Greek Common sense, for example) to a fear based emotional stable, easily controlled, if introverted, society.

EU offers the chance for us to move beyond and recognize the futility of our actions in attempting to curry favour with a long gone planet to grant us his favour in the afterlife. We can realize that we do not have to allow "old wise men" interpret signs for us to go by, or support whatever, righteous cause they feel is good this week. It changes the world, I think, only in a good way. We can move onto more meaningful enlightment or philothropic endeavours than to live in false fear of hell and false hope of 71 naked virgins...


_________________
Neil Thompson

Krackonis

"We are the universe, trying to understand itself."
- Delenn

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:33 pm Post subject:
OP "Michael Mozina"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mgmirkin,

Michael Mozina and I were not bickering. We were engaging in friendly banter. Neither of us resorted to name calling or any other childish attacks.

It was fun and I enjoyed it.

I have certainly enjoyed the conversation as well. Sorry for the delay in responses. I'm moving into a new house this month, and it's been quite a process.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:46 pm Post subject:
OP "Michael Mozina"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I concur that the Universe MAY be alive. (might aswell be dead for all it matters.. We could be in the brain of a dog for all we know) But I disagree that EU does not support any religion.

It in fact destroys all of them.

Well, I don't really see how it could do that. Assuming for a moment that the universe is a living organism, that simple revelation would seem to bolster the notion of an "intelligent creator", and it would bolster theism in it's most general sense.

If all a relgiions symbols and tapestry is unraveled and it's mysteries explainable to the average electrically aware human, then it certainly is not a relgion any longer.

In the case of a living universe, theism (in a general sense) would tend to move into the range of scientific fact and scientific research. Some of the mysteries would simply be "understood" from a scientific perspective. I hardly see how that would wipe out religion however.

It's an interesting tale that passed on from generation to generation that infected and "biased" the mind from a reality based point of view (The Greek Common sense, for example) to a fear based emotional stable, easily controlled, if introverted, society.

Then again, a living universe may involve an "awareness" and a "consciousness" that human beings have been communing with since the dawn of recorded civilization just like they have claimed. I'm not defending any religion here, I'm simply noting that humans won't likely give up religion anytime soon, particularly if it can be established that we live inside a living organism that we may be able to commune with.

EU offers the chance for us to move beyond and recognize the futility of our actions in attempting to curry favour with a long gone planet to grant us his favour in the afterlife. We can realize that we do not have to allow "old wise men" interpret signs for us to go by, or support whatever, righteous cause they feel is good this week. It changes the world, I think, only in a good way. We can move onto more meaningful enlightment or philothropic endeavours than to live in false fear of hell and false hope of 71 naked virgins...

Well, I'm a "be here now" sort of spiritualist. I believe that heaven and hell are states of mind and states of being, not places. I tend to believe in eternal, unconditional love. I too would like to see us move beyond religious dogma, but I'm afraid I don't share your optimism that EU theory will have much impact on the funky aspects of religion. IMO EU theory will only strengthen the notion of theism in it's most general sense, and it will do little to change religion as you are describing it.

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject:
OP "Michael Mozina"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, no... It's an unlikely possibility. Since we know not the composition or structure of the ENTIRE universe, we don't know for sure, but sufficed to say. Not likely no.

Just out of curiosity, what in your subjective opinion makes it "unlikely"?

[bboyer]

Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:53 pm Post subject:
OP "arc-us"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

....
Then again, a living universe may involve an "awareness" and a "consciousness" that human beings have been communing with since the dawn of recorded civilization just like they have claimed. I'm not defending any religion here, I'm simply noting that humans won't likely give up religion anytime soon, particularly if it can be established that we live inside a living organism that we may be able to commune with.
....

What if that awareness and consciousness that human beings may have been communing wih since the dawn of recorded civilization ... and before ... is one and the same with the "communee"? Perhaps it is best appreciated when the "otherness" of it is set aside for a moment.

I find it fascinating that rocky planets people (people v, to produce or manifest people). Not unlike how apple trees apple. It's what they do. Yes, this can be argued as poor logic (logos, word, ratio) but perhaps this thing we apprehend as life goes beyond logic. Consider the reciprocity: there is intelligence, consciousness, and awareness in the universe; there is a universe in intelligence, consciousness, and awareness. Certainly, there are times I find the notion of a living universe rather remote from my living of life, where it seems self-delusional at best. But at other times, mostly during moments of quiet appreciation and gratitude for some minor blessing or other ... like the sweet, mysterious fragrance of night-blooming jasmine wafting along a cool evening breeze, or the unquestioning companionship of my dog ... at times such as these everything does, indeed, seem vibrant and alive. Inherently connected to and instilled throughout with the mere fact of my own aware presence.

Guess I'll go and hug a rock.

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us "the universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separate from the rest - a kind of optical illusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening the circle of understanding and compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:38 pm Post subject:
OP "Krackonis"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, no... It's an unlikely possibility. Since we know not the composition or structure of the ENTIRE universe, we don't know for sure, but sufficed to say. Not likely no.

Just out of curiosity, what in your subjective opinion makes it "unlikely"?

Well, from what we know of life, it does not conform. Now, you can interpret certain phenomenon, such as, the Quasar expulsion, Growing Earth and other such as signs of "growth" per se but it still falls a bit short.

I agree that we share characteristics with plasma, but that is because we are made from it, in the primal sense, and the nature of it's instabilities lend us to believe it can have directed input. But, in the end Plasma is a natural occurance and I think that ancient man has already attributed to it, too many supernatural powers.
_________________
Neil Thompson

Krackonis

"We are the universe, trying to understand itself."
- Delenn

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:42 pm Post subject:
OP "Krackonis"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I concur that the Universe MAY be alive. (might aswell be dead for all it matters.. We could be in the brain of a dog for all we know) But I disagree that EU does not support any religion.

It in fact destroys all of them.

Well, I don't really see how it could do that. Assuming for a moment that the universe is a living organism, that simple revelation would seem to bolster the notion of an "intelligent creator", and it would bolster theism in it's most general sense.

If all a relgiions symbols and tapestry is unraveled and it's mysteries explainable to the average electrically aware human, then it certainly is not a relgion any longer.

In the case of a living universe, theism (in a general sense) would tend to move into the range of scientific fact and scientific research. Some of the mysteries would simply be "understood" from a scientific perspective. I hardly see how that would wipe out religion however.

It's an interesting tale that passed on from generation to generation that infected and "biased" the mind from a reality based point of view (The Greek Common sense, for example) to a fear based emotional stable, easily controlled, if introverted, society.

Then again, a living universe may involve an "awareness" and a "consciousness" that human beings have been communing with since the dawn of recorded civilization just like they have claimed. I'm not defending any religion here, I'm simply noting that humans won't likely give up religion anytime soon, particularly if it can be established that we live inside a living organism that we may be able to commune with.

EU offers the chance for us to move beyond and recognize the futility of our actions in attempting to curry favour with a long gone planet to grant us his favour in the afterlife. We can realize that we do not have to allow "old wise men" interpret signs for us to go by, or support whatever, righteous cause they feel is good this week. It changes the world, I think, only in a good way. We can move onto more meaningful enlightment or philothropic endeavours than to live in false fear of hell and false hope of 71 naked virgins...

Well, I'm a "be here now" sort of spiritualist. I believe that heaven and hell are states of mind and states of being, not places. I tend to believe in eternal, unconditional love. I too would like to see us move beyond religious dogma, but I'm afraid I don't share your optimism that EU theory will have much impact on the funky aspects of religion. IMO EU theory will only strengthen the notion of theism in it's most general sense, and it will do little to change religion as you are describing it.

I disagree. For what is there to a faith if it's most devout mysterious holy scriptures become explainable?

In regards to spiritualism, I don't see that ending anytime soon. People will always want a more personal connection with the universe. But the basis of religion, as it stands now, is based off past celestial events. Explaining that will end it's power of us. Give us a new direction.

I have no doubt that the "Church of the Universe" will be made later...
_________________
Neil Thompson

Krackonis

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:49 pm Post subject:
OP "Krackonis"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

....
Then again, a living universe may involve an "awareness" and a "consciousness" that human beings have been communing with since the dawn of recorded civilization just like they have claimed. I'm not defending any religion here, I'm simply noting that humans won't likely give up religion anytime soon, particularly if it can be established that we live inside a living organism that we may be able to commune with.
....

What if that awareness and consciousness that human beings may have been communing wih since the dawn of recorded civilization ... and before ... is one and the same with the "communee"? Perhaps it is best appreciated when the "otherness" of it is set aside for a moment.

I find it fascinating that rocky planets people (people v, to produce or manifest people). Not unlike how apple trees apple. It's what they do. Yes, this can be argued as poor logic (logos, word, ratio) but perhaps this thing we apprehend as life goes beyond logic. Consider the reciprocity: there is intelligence, consciousness, and awareness in the universe; there is a universe in intelligence, consciousness, and awareness. Certainly, there are times I find the notion of a living universe rather remote from my living of life, where it seems self-delusional at best. But at other times, mostly during moments of quiet appreciation and gratitude for some minor blessing or other ... like the sweet, mysterious fragrance of night-blooming jasmine wafting along a cool evening breeze, or the unquestioning companionship of my dog ... at times such as these everything does, indeed, seem vibrant and alive. Inherently connected to and instilled throughout with the mere fact of my own aware presence.

Guess I'll go and hug a rock.

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us "the universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separate from the rest - a kind of optical illusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening the circle of understanding and compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

I can certainly understand where you are coming from. Truly.

I, however, have no faith that ancient man was even conscious as we are and as he clumsly built language he began to create his world of words in his mind.

I see mythological man as beginning to make the first steps to consciousness, but he is not unlike a dog or a chimp. Once he began to "divine" what God wanted after God "went away" we began to "think" about "possibilities".

And we rode it roughshod from there till now ;P
_________________
Neil Thompson

Krackonis

"We are the universe, trying to understand itself."
- Delenn

[bboyer]

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:55 pm Post subject:
OP "cbreeze34"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i hate doing this, i always seem to find the interesting conversations way late.

Just out of curiosity, what in your subjective opinion makes it "unlikely"?

to me, the universe being an organism seems plausible. it would conform to the general trend of self-similarity that we seem to observe everywhere. however, remember that the larger the scale, the longer the time required for electrical interactions to complete; so if we are living in an organism, its time scale is much longer, i.e. many orders of magnitude longer, than our own. thus we would never be able to "meet" or "commune with" the universe, because, assuming its "thoughts" are facilitated by processes similar to ours, our entire existence would be much shorter than the duration of one of its most trivial thoughts.

[bboyer]

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:54 pm Post subject:
OP "mgmirkin"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Could ET be a particle of interstellar dust?

Another bit of anecdotal evidence / speculation... About the properties of dusty plasma that give it a life-like quality. IE, the ability to divide, replicate, evolve, improve its structural integrity over time, etc.

And when one considers that it takes on a helical form or double-helical form, DNA itself starts to make a bit of sense. As I said earlier in the thread, it may simple be a structuralized plasma vortex with reinforcing or studier elements that have been added over time through some evolutionary plasma process...

It rather makes sense as well, when one considers the braiding or unbraiding of plasma filaments, which themselves appear to take on the appearance of DNA (double helix).

My understanding of DNA from high school classes is that the double helix is divided during replication (much like a zipper being undone; much like the diagram above appears to be), then the opposite bases are attached to the unzipped strands to form new complete double-strands. This seems to be the process that the article above alludes to in plasma division & replication, etc.

Here are a few images I've scrounged up online that show the DNA braiding (not dissimilar to the diagram of a braided plasma filament):

WatercolorDNA.jpg (10.3 KiB) Viewed 14203 times

BraidedDNA2.jpg (14.19 KiB) Viewed 14203 times

DNAReplication2.jpg (19.34 KiB) Viewed 14206 times

Is DNA basically, for lack of a better term, a replicating structuralized (sturdy/reinforced through various elemental bonds / interactions) filamentary plasma braid? Are we built out of "enhanced" / "evolved" dusty plasma?

The article also alludes to similar filamentation in lightning strikes (obviously) and that it could have led to the creation of inorganic plasma structures/molecules, which in turn gave rise to organic molecules.

I'd wager, based on the Urey-Miller experiments (even if they weren't taken as far as they could possibly go), that they're finally on the right track!

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

P.S. Sorry 'bout the bickering comment, was aimed at some way earlier comments in the thread (which I didn't quote), & I commented before reading the next few pages. My bad. ;o] Onward and upward! Glad to see folks are in good spirits and happily chatting away. Spirited, non-hostile discussion is a wonderful thing! Keep it up!

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:42 pm Post subject:
OP "Krackonis"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Could ET be a particle of interstellar dust?

Another bit of anecdotal evidence / speculation... About the properties of dusty plasma that give it a life-like quality. IE, the ability to divide, replicate, evolve, improve its structural integrity over time, etc.

And when one considers that it takes on a helical form or double-helical form, DNA itself starts to make a bit of sense. As I said earlier in the thread, it may simple be a structuralized plasma vortex with reinforcing or studier elements that have been added over time through some evolutionary plasma process...

It rather makes sense as well, when one considers the braiding or unbraiding of plasma filaments, which themselves appear to take on the appearance of DNA (double helix).

[SNIP]

Is DNA basically, for lack of a better term, a replicating structuralized (sturdy/reinforced through various elemental bonds / interactions) filamentary plasma braid? Are we built out of "enhanced" / "evolved" dusty plasma?

The article also alludes to similar filamentation in lightning strikes (obviously) and that it could have led to the creation of inorganic plasma structures/molecules, which in turn gave rise to organic molecules.

I'd wager, based on the Urey-Miller experiments (even if they weren't taken as far as they could possibly go), that they're finally on the right track!

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

P.S. Sorry 'bout the bickering comment, was aimed at some way earlier comments in the thread (which I didn't quote), & I commented before reading the next few pages. My bad. ;o] Onward and upward! Glad to see folks are in good spirits and happily chatting away. Spirited, non-hostile discussion is a wonderful thing! Keep it up!

I would agree on most points in this and in principle, I agree. For advancing life beyond basic plasma structures in dust, we would need water. From my understanding water is allows the electrocchemical reactions and offers a conduit for chemical information throughout the organism.
_________________
Neil Thompson

Krackonis

"We are the universe, trying to understand itself."
- Delenn

[bboyer]

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:59 pm Post subject:
OP "mgmirkin"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Could ET be a particle of interstellar dust?

Another bit of anecdotal evidence / speculation... About the properties of dusty plasma that give it a life-like quality. IE, the ability to divide, replicate, evolve, improve its structural integrity over time, etc.

And when one considers that it takes on a helical form or double-helical form, DNA itself starts to make a bit of sense. As I said earlier in the thread, it may simple be a structuralized plasma vortex with reinforcing or studier elements that have been added over time through some evolutionary plasma process...

It rather makes sense as well, when one considers the braiding or unbraiding of plasma filaments, which themselves appear to take on the appearance of DNA (double helix).

[SNIP]

Is DNA basically, for lack of a better term, a replicating structuralized (sturdy/reinforced through various elemental bonds / interactions) filamentary plasma braid? Are we built out of "enhanced" / "evolved" dusty plasma?

The article also alludes to similar filamentation in lightning strikes (obviously) and that it could have led to the creation of inorganic plasma structures/molecules, which in turn gave rise to organic molecules.

I'd wager, based on the Urey-Miller experiments (even if they weren't taken as far as they could possibly go), that they're finally on the right track!

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

P.S. Sorry 'bout the bickering comment, was aimed at some way earlier comments in the thread (which I didn't quote), & I commented before reading the next few pages. My bad. ;o] Onward and upward! Glad to see folks are in good spirits and happily chatting away. Spirited, non-hostile discussion is a wonderful thing! Keep it up!

I would agree on most points in this and in principle, I agree. For advancing life beyond basic plasma structures in dust, we would need water. From my understanding water is allows the electrocchemical reactions and offers a conduit for chemical information throughout the organism.

Oops, just suffered a "duh!" moment. Left one crucial bit out that some folks had run across. Don't recall the original article, but found an equivalent one (or two, as the case may be)...

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/3066
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2892
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/60
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2733

Am i surprised that DNA is electrically conductive, and possibly superconductive under the right conditions? Well, not really...

Anyway, just thought I'd throw that in there for kicks!

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

[bboyer]

That's all the recovery posts I found for this thread.

- 30 -

[Bluewaters]

I have question, which I hope will be considered "scientific". I am not stating any conclusion but possibly pointing out something which I feel is obvious. Is the Univerise a living organism? What do we mean by a living organism? An electric universe certainly is not dead? So is it alive? Can we say the universe is alive? It is surely isn't dead. And to say that it is a living organism is not unreasonable depending on how we are defining "organism". Language is limited and can put us in the box. Once we speak it we have removed ourselves from the actual "happening".

I guess a question to someday be answered by science is from "where does the electric universe come"? What gives "instructions/information" for the electric universe to do what it does, to create etc.? I mean we now know the Big Bang didn't happen and become intelligent by some kind of randomness.

We are all human beings and these questions have to be asked.

I hope to read deeper into all the post of everyone here. The Electric Universe Model has blown away so much of what I had "believed" from the quantum scientists. I think we have to question everything, don't you?