The God Force?

[volantis]

of course there is always the argument that these constants change over a time period too long for us to detect

Yes, it is an argument. But any evidence for this argument is more likely evidence that there is something wrong with our understanding of the physics, rather than the data changing.

[subversion]

Interesting SinJin. So on the one hand, entropy is supposedly always on the rise, with disorder increasing. Yet on the other hand, life is programmed to evolve more complex and thus organize matter into more complex states. This goes along with my theory that life is defined, scientifically, as being the fundamental force which negates the progression of entropy. This force is the origin of consciousness.

Masa, this is getting into your question about whether the universe is conscious. I think so. I have previously defined consciousness as being what any system of self-actuating communication gives rise to. Thus neurons are a system of (self-actuating) communication in our brains, and this system allows us to be conscious. Similarly, when humans communicate with eachother (like on this site) they are integrating their consciousnesses (plural) into a system in order to create a new, higher level of consciousness. So as systems of communication give rise to more systems of comm. the universe becomes more and more fully conscious of itself. In other words, if we were to be communicating with aliens by now, it would mean that the universal consciousness was more developed. Of course, we are only like one neuron in the consciousness of the universe, so we never actually sense the consciousness of the universe, but rest assured the universe itself senses it, and in a way influences our decisions. Conversely, our decisions factor in to what the universal consciousness is "thinking."

good thoughts all around ppl

communication is the basis of consciousness; second, this communication manifests and is integrated at multiple levels (communication of neurons, communication of brains, etc.);

for more info on consciousness see this thread
http://www.toequest.com/forum/neuroscience/288-how-maximize-the-number-neuron-connection.html

and how it relates to intelligence, see this thread
http://www.toequest.com/forum/showth...6&page=4&pp=10

ps. SinJin, I have the answer to your blank, but I'm holding off for the moment, that is my TOE which I've been reluctant to disclose

Here's what I think of life - after the big bang and particles came about, they began to form matter by way of the four fundemental forces (and probably other things.) Matter became more complex, and led to life and intelligence. Life and intelligence led to technology. So basically, from the big bang onward the particles of the universe go through an evolution, starting off as just individual particles, and eventually after forming mattter and life, come to a stage were they no longer have to rely on the forces of nature and can now reassemble themselves. But to do what? Why would all the particles of the universe try to reach a point where they could reassemble themselves? That's basically the same as asking what the purpose of life is. I would say one of the main purposes of life seems to be to survive and reproduce. So perhaps you could say the particles of the universe want to survive in their form/state. They clump together to form matter, then clump together to form intelligence, so that they can rearrange themselves at a better rate to ensure their survival. Or perhaps there is some other reason they reach a state where they can rearrange themselves, other than survival.

I know this doesn't explain much of anything, but I thought it was an interesting line of reasoning.

[subversion]

Yes, it is an argument. But any evidence for this argument is more likely evidence that there is something wrong with our understanding of the physics, rather than the data changing.

why?

*ummmm have to get my 10 character minimum to post so just ignore this*

[SinJin]

Interesting SinJin. So on the one hand, entropy is supposedly always on the rise, with disorder increasing. Yet on the other hand, life is programmed to evolve more complex and thus organize matter into more complex states. This goes along with my theory that life is defined, scientifically, as being the fundamental force which negates the progression of entropy. This force is the origin of consciousness.

Yes. I think entropy is tied directly to TOE and the meaning of life.It is constantly pushing in one direction, leading the universe and all that it encompases towards increasing disorder. Like you said, eventually life comes about to counter it. But do you see that as a seperate force, or just perhaps an aspect of some unified force?

Also, the existence of life increases entropy, so that the laws of thermodynamics are not violated. But technology does help decrease entropy, i.e. the invention of the bicycle. So if life is something that comes about in order to negate or counter entropy, is it necessary to do so with technology? Or should we not be thinking of technology as something seperate, but rather just another progression towards the next step, like matter-> life-> intelligence-> technology -> ... -> decrease of entropy.

[yogi]

In my theory, I started with the known data and traced back toward the creation. In the process, I discovered a mathematically correct Unified Force Theory.

I show that the physical Universe originated from all-powerful, all-pervading Gforce equal to 1.21x10^44 newton. This Gforce is quantum and it operates through each quantum of space-time. I was able to show that the Gforce acting on dimensions of length^2 per charge produces the quantum Aether unit.


The theory also quantifies consciousness in terms of conductance, thus providing the possibility of fully unifying physical and mental existance.

Dave

This is the best hypothesis as per my opinion.I like the interdisciplenary approach. I shall conclude this post with a what if situation - a small modification of above quote- Physical universe originated from all-powerful (omnipotent), all-pervading(omnipresent), all knowing (omniscient) Gforce (GOD) equal to 1.21x10^44 newton. This Gforce (GOD) is quantum and it operates through each quantum (living being like us) of space-time.

That sounds like description of GOD.

sincerely,
yogi

May the Gforce be with you.

[volantis]

This is the best hypothesis as per my opinion.I like the interdisciplenary approach. I shall conclude this post with a what if situation - a small modification of above quote- Physical universe originated from all-powerful (omnipotent), all-pervading(omnipresent), all knowing (omniscient) Gforce (GOD) equal to 1.21x10^44 newton. This Gforce (GOD) is quantum and it operates through each quantum (living being like us) of space-time.
That sounds like description of GOD.
May the Gforce be with you.

Yes, it does sound like a description of God. And since the math is solid, it could be considered evidence in favor of the existence of God.

The Gforce is always with us. The Gforce holds our body to the Earth by acting on mass. The Gforce mediates chemical reactions by acting on electrostatic charge. And the Gforce holds our matter together via the strong force by acting on electromagnetic charge. The Gforce also creates the space-time in which there is physical existence. It surrounds us and permeates us and is involved in every physical and mental process.

We should actually say, "may you be with the Gforce!"

volantis

[SinJin]

But what was the Gforce (or it's state) before it gave rise to our universe? Or did it not exist?

[volantis]

But what was the Gforce (or it's state) before it gave rise to our universe? Or did it not exist?

What was the electron before it gave rise to our Universe? Just because we can ask a question doesn't mean there will be an answer.

Just as the electron is an empirical fact, the Gforce is mathematically derived from empirical facts. It is the solution to the Unified Force Theory.

Where did it come from? I don't know.

Is the Gforce real? It certainly fits very nicely into empirical observations.

Maybe someone will come up with an answer someday, but I don't have it.

[Guille]

Is the Gforce real? It certainly fits very nicely into empirical observations.

There are many observations and man people conclude things from them, these things are sometimes inimaginably nonesense.

[Masa Hiryuu]

There are many observations and man people conclude things from them, these things are sometimes inimaginably nonesense.

Yes Guille interpretation of observation can be extreamely misguided due to limited or incomplete perspective in ancient days it was a scientifically accepted fact that the sun revolved around the earth and observations showed that that observation was correct...

are our interpretations of observation just as misguided? how limited is our perpsective on the universe?