funny sheeeeet dood.

 

you said yur kids were perfect reproductions in one sentence, then claim the mutation are normal.

 

which is it?

 

the random is not a form or law of nature, it is that often the cause, is not easily identifiable on the face.

 

for example: i could not look at you and tell if  your integrity is shot or if you had aids.  I can tell that your ignorance is why you are having a hard time with the thread and comprehending to such a level.

 

the whole random/uncertainty/reductionary scope of the sciences is based on walking the planck and the adherance to the 2LoT within todays physics.

 

that model is wrong.

 

it aint rocket science to comprehend or just be honest with that FACT!

 

 

 

then stay on topic.

Why not answer the opening posts questions and start your education, now.

 

otherwise, you will not do well arguing with me!

 

 

http://www.chemteam.info/Chem-History/Planck-1901/Planck-1901.html

 

that pub?

 

to answer yourr question, you bet i know that.

 

i ws playing with the old physics at an age before most had hair on their yahoos

 

when i point to references, perhaps write them down and then go over every line item conveyed, if you learn, just one item, then we both win.

 

if you think you have identified me in an error, please represent the argument/post it.

 

 

 

 

 

7: How about every conscious life ever born, do ya tink dey wanted to know at some point in their life?

I don't know. I'm not every life form that was ever conscious.

8: Will the next generations want to know?

Same as 7:.

9: What is our duty as capable human beings, NOW; to the next generations?

Subjective question. There is no duty to forthcoming generations unless we decide to make a duty. Different beings make different choices in this regard. No answer is possible.

10: If you were to identify the pinnacle of evolution, could you comprehend the reality of a life, knowing itself, within its environment, capable of creating and enabling life, by choice and not only know it is doing it, but live in them contributions to existence/nature by choice?

You presuppose a pinnacle where there is none. Evolution is a symptom of entropy. The pinnacle of entropy is equality among forces. The heat death of the universe. The end.

You are correct, yes we are on the same page.  I stand correct it.  Bishadi is likely very high.

 

1: Words are mankinds creations, agreed? Maybe. Maybe not. I wasn't there when the first word was spoken.Neither were you.    You got me there

2: math, being the universal language............. yes no?!? Maybe. Saying "the" instead of "a" presupposes there isn't a superior universal language.  i am just standing with my feet on the ground, so even as i could submit to 'superior' universal language, on this earth, math is how we currently build just about anything.

 

3: mankind is describing itself, yes? With what?  Words/math/symbols When? all the time/see history and this page itself Where? all over this taco stand How? words/math... pencil perhaps.

 

Your question has insufficient information to be a question.   OK

 

4: and to perfectly 'name' existence itself would be to define it, perhaps? Probably.

 

that didnt need me to comment

 

 

5: in which language?  Does it matter?   how about a combining?  math is the best so far

 

6: If you 'are' it and have that universal 'want', is it to know, to understand? Incomprehensible.

are you alive?

or let me guess, you know it all, already

 

 

I didn't read it all, because simultaneously to opening it I ran a search on criticisms of it. Those criticisms tore it a new asshole.

In short, if you understand it and believe it has anything in it that resembles reality, you are a fool. So there's no reason to read it and see whether I can understand it all. It's a lie.

"entropy, mathematically imposing to systems direction"

Nonsensical sentence.

"Your whole 'the end' crap is based on what planck did at the copenhagen meetings with the uncertainty principle of the d/t."

First of all I came up with it myself. Secondly, what's your point?

"dood your are kicking your own self in the butt!"

More projection.

Feel free to continue. We're all laughing at you, but that's ok.

 

1. The words we use are our creation. Seems reasonable.   So?      to define with/articulate

2. Math is NOT a universal language.      It is a framework, a tool, for analysing and studying many, not all, aspects os reality.  I aint debating this

3. We do describe ourselves, both individually and as collectively. In words, and including math, where relevant and appropriate.       Agreed..............  that is a premise of the thread..    Nice to see someone can read.

4. Simple nonsense. Naming something only defines a label with which we can refer to it. We still need more labels to be defined to refer to the components of reality we identify thru studying it, and for use in the math we use to analyse the relationships between those components. We do not 'define' existence in any way. It is what it is. We learn about its nature by careful study.

 

i thought that hat was stupid.  Now i see that 3 and 4 of your comments, contradict and shares a lack of integrity/consistancy 

 

 

6. I exist, and have a desire to understand and know about existence. What is 'incomprehensible' about that?

 

it wasn't.

 

the incomprehensible part is how a mans integrity can be quite low for some!

 

 

  that's easy.

 

but no!   I told you before to stay thread sensitive.  Fuch your tangents!

  to idiots

from the population explosion of the last few hundred years to these very computers............. all because MATH and science EVOLVED; as presented in KNOWLEDGE EVOLVES

 

  you forgot, that a quality articulation also takes integrity

  i know; knowledge has been evolving

 

  atta boy (girl) ooops.....  mommmy taught you where to find your first meal.

 

  and if that was true, you wouldnt be here. Line items like that claim, show that some people really have no clue on how dependant they are on others.

 

just ignorance!!!!!

 

 i didnt use the chaos...........   that is the monkey in your brain talking to you perhaps!

  NOTHING.

punks like beliefs

 

science is the pursuit of understanding. 

 

 

One of the first rules of science is to be objective to information/evidence.  FRom gravity being a entanglement of energy to em being the causality of motion (the energy of a system), newton, einstein, feyman or even milo wolff...........  what you are reading, is what they all had sought to understand.

 

comprehending how nature works, is what i have been doing most of my life.

 

look up what a paradigm shift is, then come back and open a thread with questions.  Otherwise, this one thread, pretty much represents that science is definitely not your best subject.

 

 

You ARE closer to a crackpot who makes shit up to bolster his failing labido

 

 

what did newton say:  "i stand on the shoulders of giants"

 

let me get back to you on the rest

 

 

 

So you concede, and admit you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about, and that you presented an article of lies as if it were a valid hypothesis or theory. Good.

"and i could be why!"

No. You've adequately demonstrated your ignorance of science and English. You had nothing to do with it.

"but no!   I told you before to stay thread sensitive.  Fuch your tangents!"

Typical fool claims something is easy, fails to do it, then accuses me of changing the subject when the question I addressed was in the OP, and IS the subject. Rofl. I don't know if you are the dumbest person on Earth, but you're certainly in competition for the distinction.

"o idiots
from the population explosion of the last few hundred years to these very computers............. all because MATH and science EVOLVED; as presented in KNOWLEDGE EVOLVES"

None of which would have happened without English, French, German, Russian, Japanese, and a number of other...

You can't demonstrate shit because all your claims are lies and misunderstandings based on your lack of knowledge on multiple subjects.

You ARE a crackpot who makes shit up to bolster his failing labido. Lol.

I thought I should clarify some aspects of evolution.

Evolution is not really  'random'. It happens due to the interaction of random processes of genetic mutation and variation of relative frequency of each gene variant, and the non-random selection of the variation most able to survive and multiply in the particular environment.

So it relies on both random and non-random processes.

Purely random 'evolution', i.e. , in the absence of significant environmental pressure, is called genetic drift, i.e. with no apparent direction.

'Evolution' does not occur at the level of the individual, only possibly taking a step at each generation, in the context of a particular inter-breeding group.

 

 

which means, the environment is a cause.

 

that fact is what is cracking me up about reading the posts from this forums locals.   ie.... hot dont go cold, just becuase the law said so.

  did you create that post?

 

did it ever exist, anywhere within the universe, before you showed up?

 

 

 

if you had an education and could read, perhaps the thread would make sense, versus having you here just trolling.

 

for example:  you comment below................... wow!

  so the claim, represents that the pinnacle of evolution is existence (which we are a part of) comprehending its existence.

 

what is so difficult about that?

 

screw all you trolling, just focus on that opening concept

 

 

you be the I posting that lure....

 

in most every concept of information, it aint that I have it, but that anyone can see it the evidence for themselves.

 

i am just here mentioning, that i have done the work decades back and anyone can see for themselves.  That is the beauty of 'knowledge' being the evolved part of the conversation; anyone can evolve too!

 

  i did put up.   I say, LIFE: abuses entropy and that YOU are also alive, doing it right now!!!!!!!!

 

 

  i have said it for longer than perhaps anyone you've ever even thought of.............

 

i know that i break the law(s), capable, aware and not a fuching thing you can do to change that either.

 

the idiots just dont realize they are capable too!!!

 

 

  nope.....

 

i realized it as a child!

Genetic mutation is best considered as random. In this case it is because the specific result is incidental to whatever affected the transcription process so as to cause an error. It could have a cosmic ray, or an overly energetic molecule in the surrounding fluid which hit at such an angle and velocity as to affect the process. Such effects would be extremely unlikely to cause mutations with any consistent functional effect or direction. 

IOW if an event is triggered by a sufficiently complex combination or chain of prior events and states of the environment, it approximates a conceptually 'random' process so closely as to be justifiably treated as such, mathematically at least.

IE, it can only be 'predicted' statistically, probabilistically.

The specific path of an individual molecule in a volume of gas or liquid is as close to random as really matters, even though the mechanics of each collision with other molecules and/or surrounding solid surfaces obey very deterministic laws. It is sometimes proposed that apparently 'truly' random processes such as quantum scale events are 'caused' by some deeper 'reality' of interacting particles, like the molecules in a gas.

Genetic drift occurs when there is no consistent selection pressure acting, leaving just the undirected effects of occasional transcription errors. I made no reference to Wiki, but I am sure it would be described there - it is a long recognised aspect of evolution. The things that can lead to such errors are indeed the subject of scientific study. We don't anything on the scale of a gamma ray burst to explain the basic 'background' level of mutation. A single gamma ray photon would be enough to cause an error. And we are not really talking about damaging cells in any meaningful way.

 

Evolution can only be said to have occurred when some change in the genomes of the individuals making up an inter-breeding group becomes widespread thru the group and so is passed on to future generations.

You still seem to be somewhat misunderstanding the processes involved.

 

I can see both of us comprehend the reasoning but keep that 'what if', ok?

 

perfect.  I couldnt agree more.  It seems random unless you know, which angle, which wavelength caused which change at the exact time, within the same environment, to duplicate it, for any consistancy to be measured..... i am with you on that.

it is almost like asking 'whatcha thinking?'  *toooooo many variables.

 

so random makes a bunch of sense with a gazillion atoms and wavelengths to measure of one single system.

random; "it's not a law, it's a sort of guideline"

 

(of the pirates code)

 

  i comprehend the probabilities.

 

and even einstein didnt like the dice game.

 

you are aware of it as most are not. 

dude i am humbled by the level of simplicity you hold to such truths.  Agreed.

 

 

 

no no..... i agree with you.

 

the difference is, there is a way to comprehend the 'evolution' and still not lose all that common sense.

 

it aint a reduction.  The life with change as mutations occur, all the while the 'survival' of the life, is the measure of what is good for what environment.  The life itself is what is progressing, with the evolutions that assist in living longer.

 

kind of like the guy with the fire at camp, stays warm longer (learned smarts do enable longer life, too)

 

we aint so different in seeing that causality could be as simple as being detailed, to the letter

It really doesn't make sense to talk about which 'wavelength' caused something.  Which 'photon' is more meaningful, and its energy.

Quantum events do seem to have an irreducible level of randomness in just when and how they manifest. 

IOW if an event is triggered by a sufficiently complex combination or chain of prior events and states of the environment, it approximates a conceptually 'random' process so closely as to be justifiably treated as such, mathematically at least. 

IE, it can only be 'predicted' statistically, probabilistically.

The specific path of an individual molecule in a volume of gas or liquid is as close to random as really matters, even though the mechanics of each collision with other molecules and/or surrounding solid surfaces obey very deterministic laws. It is sometimes proposed that apparently 'truly' random processes such as quantum scale events are 'caused' by some deeper 'reality' of interacting particles, like the molecules in a gas.

Not sure what 'common sense' you are referring to. 'Common sense' can be quite misleading and worse than useless in many situations.

Not 'evolutions', just mutations. Only become 'evolution' if those changes are passed on and become common across the group.

That example is better considered part of 'cultural' evolution, not genetic. A bit nit-picky, but not unimportant. Learned behaviour is only affected by species evolution in that the enhanced ability to learn from experience can 'evolve', but not specific learning.

 

Fair enough but to qualify and keep it in context.  Our DNA is composed of base paired Nucleotides.  There are only four DNA nucleotides; adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine;  adenine only bonds with thymine and quanine with cytosine.  The combinations, in long chains, of these four nucleotides are genes.  The DNA of these genes "unzips" and those nucleotides are read like a recipe and turn into proteins which are what living things are made of .  Everytime they unzip they produce the same protein.  They will never produce anything other than what the recipe calls for UNLESS one of those nucleotides is damaged, removed or something is added to the original recipe(mutation).  This is the 'random' of evolution.  If the mutation didn't occur then natural selection and other mechanism would have nothing to "work with", if you'll allow me, and evolution wouldn't be what we refer to it as.

 

that's a contributing post.....

 

sure i have......  many items on this one thread that most perhaps didnt realize before.

 

Heck to just render that "knowledge evolves" is a unique combination to many. 

sorry old timer.

 

Evolution and how energy combines mass within the nature of living things, is what the current PARADIGM has failed in.  ie... why do lives even procreate?

 

life is not a reduction of chemical process.    And that FACT (statement) is something even you dont comprehend just by your above claim on 'to propagate their genes' is just STUPID!

  i didnt say they were.

I said, EXISTENCE comprehending itself, is the pinnacle of evolution. 

 

We are all just 'rocks that can roll' (life).  The pinnacle is when 'life' can ascertain what is real.

 

heck, you are on a forum, getting eaten up, right now!

 

heat is not a force of nature.   (do you see heat within the gravity, strong, weak, electromagnetic?)  So no matter how you skin it, heat is not a force of nature.

 

The EXISTING paradigm is incorrect on most every front you an comprehend.

 

  no i dont.

If i want something, i would have to follow the protocol.

 

I did follow it, back in 82' and it didnt work.   ie... it wasnt that the work was wrong, just like this thread(s)/posts, it is the morons who read the material dont have the level of commitment to actually do the homework.

 

  this forum is a skeptic corner...........  I actually LOVE it, in that regards

but just like in a physics form, there are those idiots that actually believe, that they must be sold before anyone gets by them.

 

That is where i laugh, as the release has already been underway and it is their failed participation within the sciences, that many do not realize the changes are already underway

 

i dont care about me being granted cudos or appreciation.  What i do, is already circling this earth a few times over.

 

 

  kt is a goof

 

  telling people that gravity is a property of em (entanglement), puts many of the lay, thru a spin.

 

telling people that "life: abuses entropy" brings a whole bunch of morons out, so your premise, albeit makes sense, but a 'paradigm shift' is underway and it will flip the methodology, upside-down.     ie... the world wasnt flat either

no and no

 

it was submitted into peer review and as soon as I read the first response, "a photon cannot be slowed per relativity'..... and i went to my professor and said, im done!

So now, i do what i want, when i want, with who i want and I will not publish the transition of mass/energy/time mathematically ever again.

 

what is important, is the 'life', the understanding and living longer by choice

 

not being vindicated!

 

the changes are already in the works, i just so happen to be the idiot stirring up the globe and few know i am even walking around

 

 

 

 

Ok, now I 'think' I understand your question, and how you are defining Evolution..

 

Your question, if I'm not mistaken, is this:

 

Would a complete understanding of the 'real' workings of the universe be a satisfactory criterion for any conscious entity that understands these universal laws to be deemed the pinnacle of evolution?

 

or: "If someone really understands how the whole universe works, is that as complex as that being needs to get"?

 

In this context you are not using 'Evolution' in the darwinian sense, but in a more general context  - if you think we are just rocks that roll, then by your supposition there is no difference between a man and a sentient machine-gun-wielding robot, except one is more 'evolved' because that rock that rolls can also shoot things. so perhaps you are including technology in your evolution paradigm.. I'm not clear on this. What I would say is that there's a high probability that if your 'pinnacle of evolution' can exist, there's a distinct possibility it would have an artificial Intelligence heritage.

 

Regardless, as Vastet has already stated, The arrow of time, Entropy and the heat death of the universe would eventually render this omniscient entity defunct when heat and time finally run out of steam. (Unless that being works out how to reverse entropy - Asimov's "The last question" springs to mind..)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I didnt ask a question about evolution.  I comprehend the context of evolution and its implications on a huge front, just like you do.

How about, if "YOU" wanted to comprehend the absolute, would it be 'what?' YOU are and comprehend, not necessarily everything, but uniformly, "how it works"..... and it be 'fact'?

 

what more is there to want?  The capability of living longer and know it is real; the pinnacle of every 'life'.

 

have you ever felt the security of a full refrigerator?  What about without?

Ever been on a death bed?  What do each want to know?

It's stupid easy!

 

  not a once is the word 'evolution' used in darwins first edition............  "HE" didnt mean anything about 'evolution'. It was people afterwards that combined the VARIOUS usages to the word.

 

  sorry....,  Choice, purpose and conscious empathy are quite different than a 'rock that is rolling' versus a 'rock that can roll', by choice...............  the auto has evolved?  Yes know...

 

the artificial dont have an innert intent to survive, like we do.....

 

we build them machines, they assist us in repairing many a 'lives' by our choice

science is seeking a coherance of understanding

 

Do you think that 1 day, it may happen?

is an idiot

 

now that is the old paradigm of thinking.

 

what is conservation?  does that law, exist?

 

now if i tap the surface of a pond, we both can imagine that the 'energy' (wave) will equilibrate over the body of the pond and that ideology is what the 'heat death' is all about 

 

but with intellect, remember that energy (wave), is still there, entangling more mass over time.

 

the whole other half of why the energy is coveying and where it goes, is the missing link.   Kind of like the questions left open in theology.

 

funny aint it?