What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?
- Thread starter tonylang
- Start date
- Status
Well, Elon Musk isn't going to wake up one day and find himself occupying the body of a an eight-legged robot or an alien species, unless his memories can be magically copied or transferred to such. And even upon that "miracle", his personality and behavior probably wouldn't be quite the same afterwards due to either absence of or the presence of different biochemicals than what once affected the neural operations of his original human brain/body. Not to mention the disorientation (and horror?) of being a wholly different creature in an unfamiliar social or ecological environment.
And although "generic subjectivity" (below) might be entertained as continuing even after death -- that the basic, non-specific properties and characteristics of being a conscious agent are still distributed and instantiated by living bodies elsewhere... That is not the survival of the particular identity of the individual that expired. Sans amazing technology of the future, no transfer of acquired and developed [unique] personal memories takes place. As well as transfer of anything else -- it's only the general properties of conscious agency that might be quasi-universal, arising independently across multiple life forms and locations.
Transformation and Generic Subjectivity
Death, Nothingness, and Subjectivity | Naturalism.org
www.naturalism.org
EXCERPT: Let us call TC's fate in becoming TC/rad "death by transformation". My claim is that awareness is subjectively continuous, in this generic sense, across such a transformation. Considered from "its" point of view, experience never stops even though objectively speaking (from the "outside") one context for it ends and later on, as much later as you care to imagine, another context picks up. The next step in my argument is to apply this conclusion to ordinary death and birth. Instead of being transformed into some sort of successor, imagine that TC is allowed by a careless technician to lapse from unconsciousness into irreversible brain death. Somewhere, sometime later, a fresh consciousness comes into being, either naturally or by artifice. Except that the physical incarnations of TC and this other consciousness have no causal connection, this situation is the same as death by transformation. That is, one context of awareness has lapsed and another very different one begins. During the objective interval there has been no subjective hiatus in awareness; only the context of experience has changed.
_
Last edited:
tonylang
Registered Senior Member
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.
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.
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.
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.
tonylang
Registered Senior Member
Continued...
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.
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.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Actually engaging: 8 word aphorism (Post 83)
More blogging: 1000+ words over multiple posts (Post 84 AND 85).
Reported.
More blogging: 1000+ words over multiple posts (Post 84 AND 85).
Reported.
Humans can honestly only survive in a narrow set of parameters, without some kind of support. It would seem anyway, unlikely (but anything is possible because we don’t know) that another atmosphere would have the right balance of natural resources for our survival. This isn’t a “human-centric” viewpoint as you say, and I don’t feel “forced” to say no because of this. Just because we are “constrained” as you say to a certain set of parameters doesn’t mean I’m “discounting” the possibility of life elsewhere. I don’t think the two ideas are mutually exclusive.
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
Yeah total garbage. That's fine. If James is giving him a pass I may engage again to to point out the drivel. That will be a lot.
Well, he did post it in the appropriate sub-forum “Pseudo-science.” But, the OP doesn’t seem to be engaging much with anyone, just responds with more blog-like essays.
ETA - I just noticed DaveC426913 posted something similar. lol
No, they aren't. Lots of unproven conjectures are untestable.
I guess I'm out of this pseudo-discussion of yours, then.
No great loss. I see you weren't able to respond to any of my critique or questioning of your claims anyway.
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
"Engaging Much. .."
Try "None."
If his posts were not stupid nonsense (they are) it would still be an annoyance to watch him spam his stuff without interaction with anyone else.
Akin to varying "shrimp Jesus" replications, the meme and narrative of "What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?" is being circulated all over the internet in terms of site accounts and forum posts. Suggesting that some of the more valid aspects of "dead internet theory" might be at work.
But probably not, or seems a bit of a stretch to go there. The real Anthony Lang is probably still involved, rather than it being wholly distributed and articulated by the non-human interests and goals of AI now.
_
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Well this is new...
"The dead internet theory essentially claims that activity and content on the internet, including social media accounts, are predominantly being created and automated by artificial intelligence agents.
These agents can rapidly create posts alongside AI-generated images designed to farm engagement (clicks, likes, comments) on platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. As for shrimp Jesus, it appears AI has learned it’s the current, latest mix of absurdity and religious iconography to go viral.
But the dead internet theory goes even further. Many of the accounts that engage with such content also appear to be managed by artificial intelligence agents. This creates a vicious cycle of artificial engagement, one that has no clear agenda and no longer involves humans at all."
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Haha no. I wasn't making that connection. I just thought C C's funding was interesting - moreso than Tony's ramblings.It could make a lot of sense of some of the pointless crap we get on these forums. But indeed I’ve a horrible feeling tonylang is real
tonylang
Registered Senior Member
You are not your body. This is why you can live.
tonylang
Registered Senior Member
The hypothesized entanglement molecule, a primordial arrangement of atoms, naturally establishes a shared information state with a form of matter called metamatter hypothesized to exist outside of our space-time within the Hilbert-space called the metverse. 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.
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.
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.
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.
tonylang
Registered Senior Member
Continued...
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.
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.
we are all just matter and pixie dust.
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
shh
- Status