A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 1st 06, 10:54 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
GatherNoMoss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 65
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

"The universe cannot hold God, yet the totality of God can be found in
the smallest of objects."

Or something along these lines the mystics claim.

The brain as a quantum computer has gained more press I notice lately.
And it occurs to me that intelligence, the brain is the key to
understand the universe.

"Well DUH !, how the hell else can we understand the universe ?! Yes
we must use our brain ! Brilliant! (sarcasm on)"

No...that's not quite what I mean.
I'm saying that how the brain functions, solveing the questions as to
what the nature of intelligence is, will also tell us how the universe
works and why.

WHY INTELLIGENCE ?? Hasn't it stuck you profoundly that it exists ??
Obviously it is "natural".

A UNIVERSE THAT HAS BUILT WITHIN ITS OWN LAWS OF FUNCTION THE TENDENCY
TO CREATE ENTITIES THAT CONTEMPLATES ITSELF (universe) SIMPLY BLOWS MY
MIND !

And that entity always tends towards greater organization and
increased contemplative powers to understand itself more completely.

Does it not seem that all intelligences tend towards "Godhood" ?
Do we not aspire to become God-like in our understanding and powers ?

In this strange universe in which time itself probably has no real
meaning how can anyone say that
"God doesn't exist" ? It's infinitely absurd !!!

You are PROOF of God !!

This whole universe and all that may be "beyond" it is a single vast
everlasting complete contemplation.
A loop, unwanting yet infinitely creative.

Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.

  #2  
Old October 2nd 06, 04:53 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 276
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

GatherNoMoss wrote:
No...that's not quite what I mean.
I'm saying that how the brain functions, solveing the questions as to
what the nature of intelligence is, will also tell us how the universe
works and why.

..
A UNIVERSE THAT HAS BUILT WITHIN ITS OWN LAWS OF FUNCTION THE TENDENCY
TO CREATE ENTITIES THAT CONTEMPLATES ITSELF (universe) SIMPLY BLOWS MY
MIND !

..
Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.

..
Well, to understand the brain, we need to understand biology and
chemistry. So the sciences that understand the outside world have their
role.

Also, it's not clear that the Universe has laws in it which _directly_
bring about mind. It is enough that its laws permit life to arise.

Living creatures reproduce themselves. One way a living creature can
obtain an advantage over other forms of life is by becoming more
complex and versatile. We already know how this can happen, such as
through the symbiosis of different types of bacteria that created the
eukaryotic cell, or through the doubling-up of genes that is a
recurring theme of plant evolution.

There is much in the Universe to be understood. How stars work, or what
sub-components exist within the proton or neutron, are not matters that
can be answered solely by studying the brain.

Nor, for that matter, will a study of the brain be likely to supersede
much of mathematics: will it answer the question of the Riemann
hypothesis, or tell us about which answer to the continuum hypothesis
lets us extend axiomatic set theory to embrace what we normally think
of as sets? No; although mathematics is a fruit of the mind, it has to
be studied as itself, not as it is buried within the capabilities of
our brains.

John Savard

  #3  
Old October 2nd 06, 05:28 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
Jim McCauley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

"GatherNoMoss" wrote in message
oups.com...
The brain as a quantum computer has gained more press I notice lately.
And it occurs to me that intelligence, the brain is the key to
understand the universe.


Astoundingly anthropomorphic. Understanding how the _human_ brain
comprehends the universe is pretty interesting, I'll grant you, but there
may be other sorts of intelligence that make equally valid sense out of it
all while operating on utterly different principles.

Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.


I'd like to have conversations with at least a few of those other types of
minds. It might offer perspectives that are otherwise unattainable.


Jim McCauley


  #4  
Old October 2nd 06, 07:59 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 276
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

Jim McCauley wrote:
"GatherNoMoss" wrote in message
oups.com...

..
The brain as a quantum computer has gained more press I notice lately.
And it occurs to me that intelligence, the brain is the key to
understand the universe.

..
Astoundingly anthropomorphic. Understanding how the _human_ brain
comprehends the universe is pretty interesting, I'll grant you, but there
may be other sorts of intelligence that make equally valid sense out of it
all while operating on utterly different principles.

..
Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.

..
I'd like to have conversations with at least a few of those other types of
minds. It might offer perspectives that are otherwise unattainable.


I agree with you.

However, I was hunting through the archives of talk.abortion to obtain
a classic post by a poster who was known by the nom de plume of Minxs,
and then subsequently M. Grey de Shirland or Malapert.

Basically, I was arguing in that group against legal abortion, and one
of the things I addressed was that a definition such as "human, born,
and alive" for a human being isn't good enough. It isn't based on
abstract first principles, but on certain concrete things.

So it discriminates against aliens from outer space, and against
artificial intelligences. And, of course, it may then discriminate
against the unborn child too.

In any event, it was an interesting post in which she noted that in
reality, any alien extraterrestrials we would ever be likely to find
would be so alien as to be utterly outside our sphere of sympathy.

I did find a post in which she made a shorter expression of this view:

A sentient, mentating "space alien" that
had no humanlike characteristics, something *really* alien (such as
you and I can't even conceive of), would not be valued by us. In
fact, the more intelligent and competent such an alien being would be,
the more certainly we'd destroy it in disgust and fear.


I certainly agree that real aliens wouldn't be the "ridgeheads" made
famous by Star Trek, with pretty much the same basic range of human
emotions - yes, even the Vulcans, mentioned in that post - and so on.

But I think of outer-space aliens in the terms of Clarke, not the terms
of Lovecraft. I think there is a common ground on which we can meet -
we can discuss the Riemann zeta function and the Gamma function... and
agree not to particularly concern ourselves with the details of alien
family life and sociology, because we would be far less equipped for a
common understanding in those areas.

(I don't say we wouldn't want to learn in those areas too, just that we
would acknowledge ourselves unqualified to comment or interfere.)

John Savard

  #5  
Old October 2nd 06, 05:04 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
Joe Strout
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 972
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

In article .com,
"GatherNoMoss" wrote:

The brain as a quantum computer has gained more press I notice lately.


I haven't noticed that, but even if it were true, it would mean nothing.
Ask any neuroscientist what he thinks of Penrose's ravings. (You can
ask me, if you can't find a real one; I have a Master's in neuroscience,
though I'm no longer practicing in the field.)

I'm saying that how the brain functions, solveing the questions as to
what the nature of intelligence is, will also tell us how the universe
works and why.


I really doubt it will tell us anything except how intelligence works.
It's unlikely that it's tied in any useful way to, say, the fundamental
laws of physics.

Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.


Especially if you ingest hallucinogenic substances. Drop out and tune
in (or whatever it is you do) if you wish, but as for me, I intend to
get out there and actually DO something.

Best,
- Joe
  #6  
Old October 2nd 06, 05:47 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 611
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains


wrote in message
ups.com...
GatherNoMoss wrote:
No...that's not quite what I mean.
I'm saying that how the brain functions, solveing the questions as to
what the nature of intelligence is, will also tell us how the universe
works and why.

.
A UNIVERSE THAT HAS BUILT WITHIN ITS OWN LAWS OF FUNCTION THE TENDENCY
TO CREATE ENTITIES THAT CONTEMPLATES ITSELF (universe) SIMPLY BLOWS MY
MIND !

.
Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.

.
Well, to understand the brain, we need to understand biology and
chemistry. So the sciences that understand the outside world have their
role.




In other words, to understand the system, we must first understand
the components? You talk of mathematics, so let's frame this
discussion in the abstract.


Also, it's not clear that the Universe has laws in it which _directly_
bring about mind. It is enough that its laws permit life to arise.



So your frame of reference would be that the laws of the physical
universe allow for, or explain, the evolution of life.
This assumes the fundamental properties of the physical universe
and of life are best displayed by the simplest or lowest level of
order the universe has to offer. For instance, the four forces
and so on, serve as the starting point to understand more
complex order such as life and intelligence.

Unfortunately, that frame of reference is in error.
The reverse is true.

The fundamental properties of the universe are best displayed
by the highest or most complex order the universe has to offer.
Such as life or it's greatest order, the mind.

Or more generally, the abstract mathematics of Darwinian evolution
explain the ....physical ....universe. Not the other way around
as has been /assumed/ from day one. An erroneous assumption
based on necessity, that it's easier to model simplicity than
complexity, so that's where we started.

WRONG!

With the computer age we don't have to make that assumption anymore.

Let me give just one tangible example of what I mean, and the significance
of this simple frame of reference error.

A market force only exists in association with the whole, not with
the components. So your reductionist, simplicity driven frame, will
NOT see such a force or recognize it's fundamental role.

A market force self tunes the whole to the optimum.
Just like natural selection. Just like the fundamental
forces self tune to allow a universe. The cosmic
coincidence problem, where all the fundamental
constants are ...just right. None are coincidences
but are the result of self organized criticality
self tuning to the optimum.

An entire cyclic cosmology based on these ideas
by a founder of inflationary theory.

A quintessential introduction to dark energy
http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/steinhardt.pdf

The self tuning or organizing force for the universe has it's source
in the higher level system order. They provide the non ergodic path
the universe follows from the simple to the complex.
This is not a random path towards higher order, but
an inevitable path towards higher order driven by random
interactions.

Which a review of random boolean networks show.

These....system properties....are not evident in the parts
AND are fundamental to the universe.
The concepts of self organizing systems apply to the physical
realm as well. Which means that physical systems will
self tune to just the right conditions for life to evolve.

Reversing the initial frame provides a seamless view from
geology to biology.

Exploring the mind first, not last, is the path to deriving fundamental
law and a grand unified theory.

This new math is here.

http://necsi.org/publications/dcs/index.html
http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm



Living creatures reproduce themselves. One way a living creature can
obtain an advantage over other forms of life is by becoming more
complex and versatile. We already know how this can happen, such as
through the symbiosis of different types of bacteria that created the
eukaryotic cell, or through the doubling-up of genes that is a
recurring theme of plant evolution.

There is much in the Universe to be understood. How stars work, or what
sub-components exist within the proton or neutron, are not matters that
can be answered solely by studying the brain.



They can be answered by understanding life, the most complex the
universe has to offer....Darwin is the path to understanding the
physical universe. NOT the other way around.




Nor, for that matter, will a study of the brain be likely to supersede
much of mathematics: will it answer the question of the Riemann
hypothesis, or tell us about which answer to the continuum hypothesis
lets us extend axiomatic set theory to embrace what we normally think
of as sets?



"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain,
as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."
ALbert Einstein

Your mathematics is consistant only with itself, and not with
reality. The new math I speak of is the reverse.



No; although mathematics is a fruit of the mind, it has to
be studied as itself, not as it is buried within the capabilities of
our brains.



Reality has some of the following properies.

Effects are not proportional to cause.
Nothing ever repeats itself
Nothing can be known exactly


Our mathematics, if it's to model reality, needs to
have the same properites of reality.
You start with a particle, or a relationship, with simplicity
We start with a cloud, chaos and complexity.

Our math begins where yours finds it's inevitable
brick walls. Almost all of modern science, that
still clings to this ancient assumption regarding
order, still exists in the Dark Ages.

For order or complexity, there are /two/ minimums, and
one maximum.

solid, liquid and gas

hint, the complex (fluids) are a result of the interplay
of the simple opposite extremes.

static, dynamic and chaotic
Newton, thermodynamics, quantum
matter, light, energy
genetics, selection, mutation
math, art, religion

Truth, Beauty and Love.

All can be understood, rigorously, with the new
mathematics. Which look at the whole, to
understand the parts.




John Savard


  #7  
Old October 2nd 06, 11:43 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 611
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains


"Joe Strout" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"GatherNoMoss" wrote:

The brain as a quantum computer has gained more press I notice lately.


I haven't noticed that, but even if it were true, it would mean nothing.
Ask any neuroscientist what he thinks of Penrose's ravings. (You can
ask me, if you can't find a real one; I have a Master's in neuroscience,
though I'm no longer practicing in the field.)




Well, here's the state of the art wrt the ideas of the chaos and complexity
sciences that Penrose helped begin. Tell me what you think!
This course is taught at MIT and Boston U by a phd with a resume
as long as my arm. Let me know which parts are the wild ravings
and we can start the debate.

Dynamics of Complex Systems
http://necsi.org/publications/dcs/index.html








I'm saying that how the brain functions, solveing the questions as to
what the nature of intelligence is, will also tell us how the universe
works and why.


I really doubt it will tell us anything except how intelligence works.
It's unlikely that it's tied in any useful way to, say, the fundamental
laws of physics.

Forget space exploration......it's all in the mind.


Especially if you ingest hallucinogenic substances. Drop out and tune
in (or whatever it is you do) if you wish, but as for me, I intend to
get out there and actually DO something.

Best,
- Joe


  #8  
Old October 3rd 06, 12:23 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
Jim McCauley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

wrote in message
oups.com...
In any event, it was an interesting post in which she noted that in
reality, any alien extraterrestrials we would ever be likely to find
would be so alien as to be utterly outside our sphere of sympathy.


exerpt snipped

Her point is well taken nonetheless, if a bit melodramatic. Of all the
science fiction writers who have tackled this, I think that Stanislaw Lem
has handled it best (_Solaris_ and _Fiasco_), but he does not have high
hopes.

But I think of outer-space aliens in the terms of Clarke, not the terms
of Lovecraft. I think there is a common ground on which we can meet -
we can discuss the Riemann zeta function and the Gamma function...


I certainly hope so -- especially if the organization of their sensoria or
mental processing has allowed them to "see" things that we can grasp but
have been "blind" to because we are set up as we are. It would also be nice
if we could return the favor. I guess the hope would be for "strange, but
not _too_ strange."

and
agree not to particularly concern ourselves with the details of alien
family life and sociology, because we would be far less equipped for a
common understanding in those areas.


You mean that it's possible that aliens from the vicinity of Tau Ceti might
be _less_ comprehensible than my teenaged daughters? Difficult to imagine
indeed :-)

Jim McCauley


  #9  
Old October 3rd 06, 01:27 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 276
Default Key to understanding universe is understanding our brains

Jim McCauley wrote:
You mean that it's possible that aliens from the vicinity of Tau Ceti might
be _less_ comprehensible than my teenaged daughters? Difficult to imagine
indeed :-)


Ah, yes. Teenage girls. Yes, they are a life-form that seems hard to
understand to their parents.

After all, everyone knows - it's just basic sociobiology - that while
it is in the interest of the male to spread his seed widely, because he
doesn't make the investment in childbearing and child-rearing that the
female does, the interest of the female is in finding one responsible
mate who will stay beside her and provide well for herself and her
children, particularly when pregnancy incapacitates her.

So why would teenage girls go around wearing short skirts... or, today,
pants cut so low that they do not meet short sweaters, baring the
midriff? One would think that natural behavior for females at any age
would be to behave modestly, not scandalously.

But an explanation exists. Although a female wants but one mate, she
still *does* need to find that mate to reproduce herself. So an arms
race of competition for mates still exists among females as among
males, but different in form. Just as males compete to be what females
want - by trying to achieve high rank order - females compete to be
what males want. Up to the point where it directly conflicts with their
self-interest, which is why they are such teases.

Note also that in our current social structure, contacts between people
and potential mates are much diminished once they leave school and
start working. Men and women of similar social class work in different
places. So high school is, for many, their last best chance of finding
their future life partner.

John Savard

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
electromagnetic force wbarwell Misc 4 January 9th 06 09:04 PM
[sci.astro] Cosmology (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (9/9) [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 October 6th 05 02:37 AM
The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory Br Dan Izzo Astronomy Misc 0 August 31st 04 02:35 AM
Breakthrough in Cosmology Kazmer Ujvarosy Astronomy Misc 3 May 22nd 04 08:07 AM
The Colour of the Young Universe (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 December 19th 03 06:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.