Do you think that AI will ever feel emotions?

↑
Life form the microtubles .
Click to expand...

No these are pure carbon nano-tubules and AFAIK are also self-organizing in nature, but not self-regulating.

Arranged in certain crystal patterns they might well acquire some sensory abilities. It would be very difficult to verify but many Scifi stories are
Click to expand...

Self organizing because of the physical three dimensional structure geometry of these crystals .
 
river said:
↑
Self organizing because of the physical three dimensional structure geometry of these crystals .
Click to expand...

Geometry
Geometry is, with arithmetic, one of the oldest branches of mathematics. It is concerned with properties of space that are related with distance, shape, size, and relative position of figures. A mathematician who works in the field of geometry is called a geometer.
Click to expand...
Wikipedia
 
Please post on topic.
river said:
And therefore what ? Arithmetic is based on the physical . Geometry is based on the physical . The physical is the basis of mathematics .
Click to expand...
The logical rules of mathematics guide the physical pattern formations.

Mathematical laws transcend physics. In the end there is no "irreducible complexity" and the physical is always reducible down to the metaphysical.
Physical objects are patterns and physical patterns are reducible to metaphysical values.
 
Last edited:
river said: ↑
And therefore what ? Arithmetic is based on the physical . Geometry is based on the physical . The physical is the basis of mathematics .
Click to expand...



Write4U said:
The logical rules of mathematics guide the physical pattern formations.

Mathematical laws transcend physics.
Click to expand...

We have been through this before Write4U , you are wrong on both statements .
 
river said:
We have been through this before Write4U , you are wrong on both statements .
Click to expand...
You know my position. I believe in a "beginning" from nothing, the absolute reduced permittive condition.

Your claim is that the physical has always existed. That is illogical, IMO
 
This forum is not about "positions" and "personal beliefs".

Please heed the subject of the forum and the thread topic.
 
From your post#806

river said: ↑
We have been through this before Write4U , you are wrong on both statements .
Click to expand...


Write4U said:
You know my position. I believe in a "beginning" from nothing, the absolute reduced permittive condition.

Your claim is that the physical has always existed. That is illogical, IMO
Click to expand...

Your wrong again . On all three thoughts . None make sense .
 
river said:
From your post#806
You're wrong again . On all three thoughts . None make sense .
Click to expand...
OK. I challenge you to describe the original eternal physical objects or patterns.

Wait, remove the term "original" and change the phrase to "eternal physical objects".
 
Last edited:
river said:
Particles and waves . In both Heat energy and Cold energy .
Click to expand...
Wrong. None of that existed before the BB

First, "cold" is the absence of energy.

Is cold energy real?
Believe it or not, cold does not actually exist. What you're experieincing when you experience cold, is the absence of heat. Temperature is the energy of clashing atoms. A cubic meter of deep space would make you freeze instantly due to the lack of atoms. Jan 26, 2016
Click to expand...
https://www.chicagotribune.com/redeye/redeye-theres-no-such-thing-as-cold-20160126-story.html

Second, "heat" is created by colliding atoms and atoms have not always existed.

Try again.....
 
Last edited:
river said:
In mathematics . But to the physical they absolutely do, for infinity .
Click to expand...
Nope. Before the Big Bang there was nothing. No space, no time, no energy.
BB is mathematical theory . Which reduces to nothing .
Click to expand...
Again, no. It is a physics based theory. In fact, we don't have the math to describe what happened in the first 10-43 seconds of the universe; none of the cosmological constants were settled yet, so the math is effectively impossible. The four forces hadn't even separated out yet.
 
billvon said:
Nope. Before the Big Bang there was nothing. No space, no time, no energy.

Again, no. It is a physics based theory. In fact, we don't have the math to describe what happened in the first 10-43 seconds of the universe; none of the cosmological constants were settled yet, so the math is effectively impossible. The four forces hadn't even separated out yet.
Click to expand...
That is assuming that mathematics are dependent on physical dynamics.
The the question arises if origins was physics based what physical stuff was there before the BB.?
OTOH if we use the concept of an eternal meta-physical mathematical logic , then we don't need physical stuff to arrive at physics.

IMO, unless one accepts the concept of irreducible complexity (physical patterns) the only alternative is a non-physical permittive condition without energy of any kind. Energy is a result of dynamic physical motion. But Logic is independent of physics.

Unless I hear a persuasive argument that there was a dynamic physical condition before the BB , there is not alternative choice.
 
Last edited:
river said:
There was never a before the BB. Everything always was . No beginning no end .
Click to expand...
Sorry, there was a beginning. We can see the echo of the creation of the universe.
Define nothing .
Click to expand...
Nothing. No dimensions, no energy, no matter, no time. Nothing. It's not anything humans could perceive.
This makes sense to you ? Doesn't to me
Click to expand...
Doesn't really matter if it makes sense to you or not. I mean, women's shoes don't make sense to me. Doesn't mean they don't exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top