What is it about woo that upsets you?

[billvon]

That is just plain wrong. Fractal growth patterns are controlled by genetic instructions.

No, it is definitely not.

The genome controls protein expression within the cell. That gets translated into cellular differentiation, cell growth, apoptosis, signaling, pigmentation etc. The result is an organism that grows in specific ways. You then see emergent properties like fractal patterns or Fibonacci numbers in the patterns that the organism creates. Nothing in the genome "encodes fractals. "

 

[wegs]

In observing the back & forth between billvon and Write4U - they both are confident in their positions, yet one must be wrong, right? It got me to thinking about the OP - when does an insistence on one's understanding of a subject/concept (yet the person is ''wrong''), become woo? Or can people just be lost in their erroneous thinking, and it not be considered woo?

 

[Write4U]

Again, no. You cannot use math to figure out if Schrodinger's cat is alive or dead, for example. For other purposes (orbital mechanics, for example) you can use math to get very, very close to the correct answer.

You just cannot let go of subjective human association with naturally occurring phenomena.

Schrodinger's cat is of no concern to the processing of universal values and function.
It is an attempt by humans to try and understand the Implications of universal expressions.

Forget human speculation, please. The univers does not function in a random manner. This suggests a mathematical aspect to all universal values and functions. The universe doesn't know this, it just functions like that, naturally.

 

[Write4U]

That gets translated into cellular differentiation, cell growth, apoptosis, signaling, pigmentation etc.

yes.. translated into a growth pattern of green leaves arranged in a fractal pattern.
Cellular differentiation!

It is not random! There is a DNA controlled growth process which determines the physical expression in reality.

 

[billvon]

Forget human speculation, please. The univers does not function in a random manner.

Never claimed it did. That is your strawman.

This suggests a mathematical aspect to all universal values and functions. The universe doesn't know this, it just functions like that, naturally.

You can say it 100 times, 1000 times, 1 million times - it won't make it any more true. The universe doesn't care one bit about math. We do, because that's the tool we use.

It is not random! There is a DNA controlled growth process which determines the physical expression in reality.

There's that strawman again.

 

[iceaura]

And that mythical species I mentioned earlier would say that the very essence of spacetime has a musical aspect to it.

That was conventional scientific wisdom not too long ago - Kepler et al.
It was not woo, at the time. It was working and valuable theory.

So there is a kind of scientific belief or convention that has - within its range - the properties of woo described above, but apparently is not woo. It doesn't feel like woo. It feels more sober, responsible, accountable, somehow.

My initial approach to this is to re-evaluate scientific description via mathematical theory as not "model" but "perception" - mathematics as sensory organ, a virtual analogy or metaphorical extension of eye or ear or nose, built to handle what our standard evolved sensory organs cannot. So we are not modeling, or at least not always modeling - that would involve unsupported and dubious assumptions of correspondence in "reality" - but perceiving, sensing.

 

[Write4U]

Nothing in the genome "encodes fractals. "

Well, you are arguing against experts in the field.
Ask Mario Livio (astro-physicist) about the natural occurence of the Fibonacci pattern and the scientist who specifically mentioned the occurence of the fractal growth pattern in bioorganisms and how the organism just follows its growth instructions resulting consistently and predictably in a fractal growth pattern.

This NOVA presentation of the "Great Math Mystery" covers some of these universal aspects of naturally emerging patterns by mathematical processes.
Take 55 minues to get a really great overview of fundamental physics and their functional mathematical behaviors.

 

[iceaura]

There is a DNA controlled growth process which determines the physical expression in reality.

That growth process is largely controlled by physical forces and feedback events - not DNA.

 

[Write4U]

You can say it 100 times, 1000 times, 1 million times - it won't make it any more true. The universe doesn't care one bit about math. We do, because that's the tool we use.

I am NOT claiming the Universe cares about math. That is your subjective interpretation of what I am arguing.

The Universe doesn't know or care about anything. It merely processes the interaction of values and functions in a mathematical manner . What is so hard to understand about that simple statement?

 

[Write4U]

That growth process is largely controlled by physical forces and feedback events - not DNA.

Yes, a twig in the way of the growth process interferes with that process. Exposure to light affects the growth patterns.
But that is all secondary to the underlying maths which drive the observable regularities in natural growth patterns.
It is not a random process! But the results need not be perfect. The environment is part of the natural mathematical deterministic processes.

Any other possible term for natural pattern forming? Should we even use the term 'pattern"? After all that is also a human term?

If we remove all human terms we end up with "The Universe works in mysterious ways which cannot be described by human language". OK where does that get us?

Determinism? And what is it that makes a process deterministic? IMO, mathematical functions inherent in the geometry of the universe. I see no logical reason why this should not be true.

It is supported by observation.

 

[Write4U]

Those functions can provide answers that are close to correct. They will never be entirely correct.

Tell Peter Higgs that. How precise do you want to be? Conjuring a physical particle from a metaphysical field is pretty subtle and requires some pretty accurate mathematics, if you ask me.

 

[Write4U]

The result is an organism that grows in specific ways.

And what kind of specific way would that be? The Fibonacci sequence? Fractality?
I say this specificity in self-organising growth patterns is a result of a natural mathematical way of processing of values and function.

 

[wegs]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but are you saying Write4U that math would exist, even if humans didn't? I think math only exists as a process (invented by humans) to uncover the truths of the universe. You keep inserting the word ''natural'' into your replies, so I'm not 100% sure.

 

[Michael 345]

The Universe functions PERIOD

You want to use maths to explain it fine

Personally I use music PERIOD

So from my perspective the Universe functions in a musical way, not mathematical

The non sentient Universe functions PERIOD

 

[wegs]

I think if I'm not mistaken, Write4U is suggesting that math is the universe?

 

[Write4U]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but are you saying Write4U that math would exist, even if humans didn't? I think math only exists as a process (invented by humans) to uncover the truths of the universe. You keep inserting the word ''natural'' into your replies, so I'm not 100% sure.

Absolutely. I am convinced that the universe functions in a mathematical manner.

This has nothing to do with human mathematics, which is a symbolic language for humans to describe these inherent universal mathematical values and functions. This is where the controversy lies.

But if we disregard human mathematics, we still have a universe with emerging mathematical patterns. They are there and almost all theoretical mathematicians agree that they are only discovering already existing mathematics in the universe.
Watch the "Great Math Mystery" it's really one of NOVA's excellent presentations.

We all agree that the universe has self-ordering tendencies. My claim is that these natural phenomena are mathematical in essence. And why not? What else would explain the way reality becomes manifest in regular patterns?

 

[Write4U]

I think if I'm not mistaken, Write4U is suggesting that math is the universe?

No, I am suggesting that Universal functional processes follow and constitute a form of mathematical order(ings).

Nothing mystical, spiritual, or woo. As Michael says; "It works"

So from my perspective the Universe functions in a musical way, not mathematical

The wave function is a mathematical property of the Universe.
Music is a mathematical ordering of sound waves. In fact we can use sound to represent the word "mathematics". Try Morse code.

Michael, and Wegs, have you watched the Roger Antonsen examples of mathematical expressions yet? They really present a good picture of my own perspective.

 

[wegs]

Absolutely. I am convinced that the universe functions in a mathematical manner.

Okay, I'd agree. Does billvon disagree with this?

We all agree that the universe has self-ordering tendencies. My claim is that these natural phenomena are mathematical in essence. And why not? What else would explain the way reality becomes manifest in regular patterns?

Uh oh, I better not say. This is where science and faith coexist ...for me.

No, I am suggesting that the Universal values and functions constitute a form of mathematical order(ings).

Only because we attribute our math findings to it. But, perhaps this is just splitting hairs, at this point?

 

[Write4U]

Okay, I'd agree. Does billvon disagree with this?

I am not sure now. He did stipulate that once, but then seemed to argue against it.

Uh oh, I better not say. This is where science and faith coexist ...for me.

It does for a lot of people.....

I use that fact as confirmation that the mathematical nature of the universe can easily be mistaken as the mind of an Intelligent Designer. IMO, that concept presents too many practical physical obstacles.

Only because we attribute our math findings to it. But, perhaps this is just splitting hairs, at this point?

We still have an overwhelming abundance of observational confirmation of spontaneous naturally forming mathematical patterns.

 

[exchemist]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but are you saying Write4U that math would exist, even if humans didn't? I think math only exists as a process (invented by humans) to uncover the truths of the universe. You keep inserting the word ''natural'' into your replies, so I'm not 100% sure.

Exactly. Mathematics is a human logical construction, which gives us a language in which to describe, quantitatively, the order and relationships we observe in nature, among other things. But plenty of mathematics has nothing to do with nature at all.