The Universe has to instantiate structures all by itself.Originally Posted by Jag, Vincent Wee Foo
In order to generate the seemingly wide array of structures which it does - there needs to be a simple method underneath.
A classic physics platform in which a cycle of
monotheistic generates duals combine to give duality recapitulates/resonates with
'monotheistic' generates duals (on higher evolutionary level) combine to give duality recapitulates/resonates with
'monotheistic' generates duals (on even higher evolutionary level) combine to give duality recapitulates/resonates with
'monotheistic' ... ... ... and so it continues ... ... ...
There HAS to be a simple mechanism which permits the Universe to be so creative (as evidenced by the structures it supports)
- what modern physics does - is to make the simple process seem much more complex by characterizing it with more and more esoteric labels
- the evolutionary process needs simplicity for otherwise - the autonomous process of evolutionary self-assembly unidirectionally to complexity would fail.
From what I'm seeing - the basic method of the evolutionary method (ToE) has been known for thousands of years
- all of the confusion has simply arisen through people over-complicating
- for that is sadly with 'professionals' do.
Expand their academic discipline for purposes of self interest.
The explosion in information in the sciences of the last 100 years has not taken us closer to enlightenment
- has taken us further a collective understanding of the world around.
All there is to reality - is the evolutionary process which is encoded as an innate property in fundamental substance.
It (fundamental substance) evolves because evolve is what it does.
For it to evolve - it must be working to an autonomous pattern - where the schoolboy favourite for evolution to work to - will be loss of resonance/resonance achieved/loss of resonance ... etc ... with a standing wave
- where resonance with the standing wave can be viewed as vortical structure formation.
All that I'd add to Vincent's first post - is that ToE rests in the process by which evolutionary vortices form
- rather than considering them when they've formed.
The process of vortex formation as the ToE - which is pretty much what I gather Vincent is describing.
The vortex forming when a standing wave (Adam and Eve duality) results.
The key bit of the standing wave formation - is the ejection from the Garden (ie loss of resonance) when Adam and Eve first succumb to attraction - that is - upon attraction, they lose their resonance with God
- and thereafter have to work to form a duality (vortex) prior to being allowed re-admission into the Garden of Eden (as vortices/standing waves which are thereafter (following duality formation) placed back in resonance with God).
Enforced loss of resonance when evolutionary potential is encountered.
Return to resonance when pair-bond completion is ensured.
Pair-bond formation (at the level underlying phenomenological reality) is the mechanism which evolution (of fundamental substance) works to.
It's not very hard to realise what this means to man - that pair-bond formation (so called soul-mate formation) is what we're expected to be striving towards - to allow us to return back to the Garden; it's important to realise that having our head screwed on properly is important to pair-bond formation
- where having one's head screwed on properly relates to a personal and unceasing personal quest to understand (rationally) the meaning of morality.
So - luckily - we can simply extend Vincent's ToE with the imagery from the Adam and Eve myth - explaining away the actual proces of formation of the standing waves/vortices which exist in our shared phenomenological reality
... ... and we're there.
Note - the idea of extending empirical science (matter is all there is) for a logical model (as new science) -
appears to represent Kant's extension of phenomenological reality into noumenal reality.
Phenomenological reality is but a subset of TOTAL reality
- noumenal reality appears to be able to encapsulate aspects of real reality which Phenomenological reality cannot fathom (expose).
Now ... ... ... is there anything outside of TOTAL reality which cannot be imagined within noumenal reality.
At least from the perspective of all that we see in Phenomenological reality (the existence of a centre to a bar magnet which is neither + nor -, the existence of the mind)
The noumenal construct (mind) can deliver the simplest explanatory model of all observational data
- empirical science cannot.
Bringing us once again around to the Hawking/Mlodinow statement that a physicist won't uncover ToE
- the physicist is an empiricist - experiments in the material world
- will be in danger of over-stepping the mark - if s/he dares to throw out untestable conjectures.
The same constraint is not placed on all of us though - and an unaligned mind (to any academic discipline) is free to make the statement that everything we know is grounded in no-thing, from the materialist perspective.
Physics can't accept No-thing (a thing which doesn't exist within our frame of reference).
As the fundamentalist scientist responds to the existence of No-thing -
how ever are we accept the existence of a construct which can not be prodded empirically.
To which the response is, well things can be no other way.