Evolution in Physics

[BadgerJelly]

This is something that has been in my mind for a few years and also something that was brought to my attention recently.

Right now there are experiments that appear to consist with a theory of Quantum Evolution so I would like a discussion about this and also about my own personal tilt on this subject dealing with what i like to call Conceptual Evolution.

Anyway anyone is welcome to start the ball rolling.

And I have a motto for this topic that relates to the implications of the very theory itself and why I am so passionate about humans having an Education Revolution: Ignorance is not bliss but destroying it is!

see here : http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=21398

[BadgerJelly]

No one has a thing to say?

[BadgerJelly]

Rupert Sheldrake and Bruce Lipton - A Quest Beyond the Limits of the Ordinary.avi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ButXLkQSbD4&feature=related

[BurtJordaan]

I have watched (or rather listened) to this; incredibly thought provoking.

Do you know if the next morning's session is available online?

--
Regards
Jorrie

[BadgerJelly]

Sorry no idea

[Obvious Leo]

Evolution towards complexity is a fundamental organising principle of our universe. This is extensively covered in my philosophy of the bloody obvious. This thesis offers a model of quantum gravity which explains how our cosmos is a universal Turing machine which programmes its own input. Complexity theory is one of its cornerstones.

[BadgerJelly]

It is bloody obvious. To regard the universe as a vast Turing machine though is a little tunnel visioned though.

I think it is more appropriate to see it as a neural network ... or rather the "space" between neural networks.

This is simply because the universe is not OF time rather it is projected "onto" time and plastically woven around it.

In a sense you can take on many metaphorical images and develop many ideas ... such as viewing space as neurons and matter as neurotranmitters (on a macro scale). Then you can even consider a gluon as being a neurotransmitter and subatomic particles as being the neurons.

The brain does not act like a computer. If it did computers would be talking to us by now ... then again maybe they are?

I would just like to add Bruce Lipton does bring some simple ideas to the fore but I DO NOT agree with everything he has to say and the conclusions he has personally come to.

[Obvious Leo]

I did not mean to imply that the universe is analagous to a Universal Turing Machine. It is exactly a Universal Turing machine. My statement is to be regarded literally. It is literally a computational entity which programmes its own input via the mechanism of evolution towards complexity. In my quantum gravity model I describe the universe as existing in only one dimension. It expands in the dimension of time only, thus the cosmos is expanding through its own frame of reference. This throws up some rather bizarre observer effects, the most notable of which is 3-dimensional space. The universe expands at a non-constant rate since the speed of time is determined by the strength of the gravitational field. Thus the speed of light, the most obvious observer effect of all, is equal to the speed of time. Relative to us light does not move at all and thus appears as a constant. The universe exists only at its temporal boundary which is forever beyond our perceptions because the speed of light is finite. All we can ever observe is the wake of time. We live in a hologram. Every single paradox in physics can be resolved by this model. Unfortunately general relativity will need a major mathematical shake-up and quantum mechanics must be cast into the conceptual dustbin where it belongs. Special relativity will survive the ordeal even though it was constructed from a false premise.

I agree that the mind is not like a computer. It is more like a universe. It is a self-programming computational entity which emerged as a consequence of evolutionary law. It programmes its own input. In this way the universe mandates its own comprehensibility, which is a pre-requisite for an eternal reality.

The riddle of quantum gravity is solved but I don't know what to do with it. The implications are staggering.

Regards Leo

[BurtJordaan]

The riddle of quantum gravity is solved but I don't know what to do with it. The implications are staggering.

I have suggested before that you post your essay in your own blog here. After that, get it accepted at arXiv and we can discuss it here. Only accepted theories and possible variants/interpretations are discussed in this sub-forum.
--
Regards
Jorrie

[BadgerJelly]

Where can I read about your ideas Leo?

I may not understand it all yet but I am VERY interested in new ideas and I feel it would help me develop my mathematical ability to tackle something complex.

[Obvious Leo]

I appreciate your interest Badger. My philosophy is a full length book and not yet ready for publication. However I have written a synopsis essay which summarises the basic principles of quantum gravity as I explore them in my thesis. I am very keen to post this essay on this site as the moderator advises me to do but my computer skills are negligible and I can't figure out how to do it other than re-typing the entire thing into this little box. I could honestly condense this essay no further and it still comes in at over 3,000 words. Quantum gravity is a big subject. Your advice would be warmly welcomed as I am anxious to receive some feedback on this subject, which has been my life's work.

[BurtJordaan]

If your essay is in some or other word processor, all that is needed is a copy and paste - mark the contents of the essay (or part you want to post), right-click, copy (or CTRL c) and then click on the 'little box' in the Blog editor (which will open automatically if you select "New Block Entry"). Then inside the "little box" you right-click, paste (or CTRL v).

If you have problems with that, tell me and we can make some other arrangement.
--
Regards
Jorrie