The only word that comes to mind is nonsense.Then please do tell what the correct wording is in context of describing information sharing among universal values and functions.
The only word that comes to mind is nonsense.Then please do tell what the correct wording is in context of describing information sharing among universal values and functions.
Ok, let me try to clarify;I would put it that the Universe DOES NOT PROCESS ANY INFORMATION
https://resonance.is/spacetime-as-information-an-ordering-principle-for-living-systems/The predominant scientific paradigm does not regard the Universe as a Living System. This stems from a perspective that the Universe is unconnected, and mechanical. What is the difference between a mechanistic concept of the universe (acting like gears and cogs in a machine) versus a dynamical self-organizing system? Information.
As simple as physical touch.Processing, to me implies, receiving information
As simple as processing the informationgiving said information consideration
IMO, does not belong in that list> [/quote]deciding on a course of action
As simple as a self-organizing chemical reactionimplementation of that action
I agree with your list, except for one quality which is not essential in the process of action<-->reaction. IMO.Since the laws of physics are fixed THERE ARE NO CHOICES
Again, I agree with the way you stated it, but I disagree with the implied conclusion. Any action <-->reaction will still result in a probabilistic mathematical action. Consciousness is not a required property in the quantum decision making process. But sentience? Proto-sentience? Physical mathematical consistency?Apart from the Universe being non-sentient hence has no ability to make choices
And what does that mean? Does it need "consciousness"? Yes, no?The only word that comes to mind is nonsense.
How is information the connecting fabric of the cosmos? Is this just an abstract – unphysical statement? Hardly. John Archilbald Wheeler, one of the preeminent physicists of the 20th century and colleague of Einstein, developed geometrical equations that described the origin of the most fundamental characteristics of matter – such as a particle’s charge and mass – one of the most active areas of research even today (with contrived notions of a Higgs Boson). His formulations produced these characteristics purely from the geometry of spacetime, therefore deriving ‘charge without charge’, and ‘mass without mass’ – as emergent characteristics of the structure and dynamics of spacetime
If you were really sorry you would delete the post since it is nonsense.Oh , I'M HIJACKING THE THREAD. SORRY.
Ok, let me try to clarify;
https://resonance.is/spacetime-as-information-an-ordering-principle-for-living-systems/
quantum decision making process.
Processing of information does not necessarily require conscious decision making. Computers are very good at it.
Consciousness is not a required property in the quantum decision making process. But sentience
It is? Why? I've already answered the OP question with the obvious answer.If you were really sorry you would delete the post since it is nonsense.
According to Penrose a quantum event is a threshold event, a limitation has been exceeded and an energetic phenomeon takes place where a small quanta of energy is transferred from A to B (another pattern). He calls it a "bing", a moment of non-conscious physical experience.I don't think there is such a animal
The decision lies in the choice (wave collapse) between superposed quantum states.Except, again, no such animal as quantum decisions
andIn physics and systems theory, the superposition principle,[1] also known as superposition property, states that, for all linear systems, the net response caused by two or more stimuli is the sum of the responses that would have been caused by each stimulus individually. So that if input A produces response X and input B produces response Y then input (A + B) produces response (X + Y).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principleThe superposition principle applies to any linear system, including algebraic equations, linear differential equations, and systems of equations of those forms. The stimuli and responses could be numbers, functions, vectors, vector fields, time-varying signals, or any other object that satisfies certain axioms. Note that when vectors or vector fields are involved, a superposition is interpreted as a vector sum.
What in the hell are you talking about? Choice? Decision? Who or what do you think is making a decision?The decision lies in the choice (wave collapse) between superposed quantum states.
Origin, when we say "natural selection" what the hell are we talking about?What in the hell are you talking about? Choice? Decision? Who or what do you think is making a decision?
You make some of the bat shit craziest statements...
According to Penrose a quantum event is a threshold event, a limitation has been exceeded and an energetic phenomeon takes place where a small quanta of energy is transferred from A to B (another pattern). He calls it a "bing", a moment of non-conscious physical experience.
I have no idea what you are talking about. To people that understand evolution it simply means that animals that are well suited to an environment will survive to reproduce passing on their genes.Origin, when we say "natural selection" what the hell are we talking about?
No one is doing the selecting. Who do you think is?Who in hell is doing the selecting?
Are you saying all this crazy shit you are saying is a joke. Are you just wasting our time and trolling?We all make up some batshit craziest statements as long as we are familiar with them and we get the joke, no?
It is not an abstract term and of course I have no problem with it.Do you have any problem with using the abstract term "natural selection"?
Because there are no DECISIONS or CHOICES being made! A wave does not decide to collapse!If not, why are you on my case for the abstract use of "probabilistic choices and decisions" as being similar metaphors to "natural selection".
Ah but I think he does think that. That's part of his religion.I have no idea what you are talking about. To people that understand evolution it simply means that animals that are well suited to an environment will survive to reproduce passing on their genes.
No one is doing the selecting. Who do you think is?
Are you saying all this crazy shit you are saying is a joke. Are you just wasting our time and trolling?
It is not an abstract term and of course I have no problem with it.
Because there are no DECISIONS or CHOICES being made! A wave does not decide to collapse!
I know English is not your first language, so why don't listen to what native English speakers are trying to tell you about your misuse of words. I hope this is just a language issue and you do not think inanimate objects make decisions.
No one. It is the outcome of a natural process.Origin, when we say "natural selection" what the hell are we talking about? Who in hell is doing the selecting?
Yes sir, it would be pretty silly. And at no time did I intimate that the choosing and decision making is performed by a motivated sentient being. I am a hard atheist. Please consider my posts in that context.No one. It is the outcome of a natural process.
Surely you are not claiming that the word "selection" implies that a person or other conscious entity makes a decision, are you? That would be pretty silly.
Not even wrong......Ah but I think he does think that. That's part of his religion.
He thinks mathematics makes choices and decides, because he has elevated mathematics to the position of God in his worldview.
Or that is how it seems to me.
True, the (non-sentient) "stressor" does. In the double slit experiment the wall is causal to the the wave collapse. Penrose calls it a "threshold event".A wave does not decide to collapse!
Nope.But I submit the term "selection" is a similar verb that implies intent
Look at post 85. Where I am directly refuting your assertion:No, you did not quote me at all verbatim or otherwise.
No. This is a non sequitur. The latter does not follow from the former.
(Roger Penrose beliving in something does not make it true. or even likely, just because he's a smart guy. But let's just take his belief as a truth, for argument's sake.)
Here's what you've constructed:
'Sentience beings at the quantum scale.'
This is synonymous with 'anything that has a quantum scale is sentient'.
Since the universe has a quantum scale, it is sentient.
The second statement is false.
... at no time did I intimate that the choosing and decision making is performed by a motivated sentient being.
These two statements are directly contradictory.the term "selection" is a similar verb that implies intent...