Is Morphic Resonance Real

[Landon Caeli]

AI Overview

Morphic resonance is
a theory proposed by biologist Rupert Sheldrake that suggests all natural systems, including organisms and crystals, have a collective memory that influences their form and behavior over time. This proposed mechanism of "formative causation" claims that past forms and behaviors of similar systems create a cumulative, invisible influence that shapes the development and patterns of present systems, rather than being governed by fixed physical laws alone. It implies that nature is habitual and that new behaviors can spread more rapidly through a species because of this shared, non-physical memory.

Key concepts

Collective memory: Each species, from animals to plants, possesses a collective memory that individuals can access and to which they contribute.

Habitual nature: The theory suggests that the regularities of nature are more like habits that have been reinforced by repetition, rather than being immutable laws.

Similarity: The resonance is based on similarity. The more similar an organism or system is to past ones, the greater the influence it will have.

Behavior and form: Morphic resonance is said to influence both the physical form and the behavior of a system. For example, it is proposed to explain instincts and how certain patterns of behavior, like a new trick learned by rats in one location, can be learned more quickly by other rats of the same breed elsewhere.

Individual memory: The resonance of a system with its own past is also suggested as a way to explain individual memory, where memories are not entirely stored in the brain but are accessed through a resonance with the brain's past states.

 

[Landon Caeli]

 

[Landon Caeli]

This is the solution I have been looking for, in regards to why convergent evolution exists - why an octagon shaped species on the north side of the planet looks almost exactly like a species on the south end, completely unrelated, and having evolved separately from one another. Couldn't it be true, that the one species existed first, and the successes were somehow *easier* to develop then for another.

The amount of times, and the amount of crabs that have evolved, completely unrelated - Couldn't it be, because it happened once, and twice, and then three - and then many more because of morphic resonance?

Convergent evolution - Wikipedia Convergent evolution - Wikipedia

 

[Landon Caeli]

How many times have eyes developed? The answer to that is 40 to 65 different times! How many times has flight developed, in different species, completely unrelated, having no common history of flight with one another? Species have evolved to look like crabs (a process called carcinization) at least five separate times in evolutionary history... Completely unrelated.

 

[The Barbarian]

This is the solution I have been looking for, in regards to why convergent evolution exists - why an octagon shaped species on the north side of the planet looks almost exactly like a species on the south end, completely unrelated, and having evolved separately from one another. Couldn't it be true, that the one species existed first, and the successes were somehow *easier* to develop then for another.

The amount of times, and the amount of crabs that have evolved, completely unrelated - Couldn't it be, because it happened once, and twice, and then three - and then many more because of morphic resonance?

In biology, it's called "natural selection." It might look like magic, but species evolving in the same environmental pressures often tend to look very much alike.

Species have evolved to look like crabs (a process called carcinization) at least five separate times in evolutionary history... Completely unrelated.

Actually, they are all decopod crustaceans. And interestingly, some lines of "crabs" have undergone "decarcination", suggesting that conditions changes, with a subsequent loss of crabby features. The reason this can happen is that arthropods, unlike chordates, are composed of a linear arrangement of essentially identical segments. Muscles, gills, legs, and so on. So they can rather easily change morphology.

Echinoderms, the two radially symmetrical examples you show, begin life as bilaterally symmetrical larva, and later become radially symmetrical. Number of radial segments vary, though. Interestingly, echinoderms and chordates are both deuterostomes, more closely related to each other than either is related to (for example) crabs. Some chordates also begin life as bilaterally symmetrical larva and later lose that symmetry. Ascidians, (sea squrts) for example.

Bats, birds, and pterosaurs all use forelimbs for flight, but the anatomy is different. They are analogous forms, but the homology stops at basic vertebrate form (femur, ulna/radius/carpals/metacarpals/phalanges). They each evolved separately, under the pressure of natural selection.

I'd be interested in any literature about rat populations being able to learn more quickly after an isolated population learns something. What do you have?

 

[Landon Caeli]

I'd be interested in any literature about rat populations being able to learn more quickly after an isolated population learns something. What do you have?

• Harvard Water Maze Experiment: A series of experiments started by William McDougall at Harvard in the 1920s involved training rats to escape from a water maze by avoiding a brightly lit pathway (which resulted in an electric shock).
  • Generational Improvement: Over many generations (up to 22 in some studies), rats learned the maze significantly faster. The initial rats required an average of around 150 shocks to learn, while later generations needed only about 20.
  • Control Groups' Improvement: Crucially, Sheldrake points out that even control rats whose parents had never been trained showed the same rate of improvement, suggesting the ability was not passed genetically but through a wider influence.
• • Global Spread of Learning: This is the core of the morphic resonance argument. When the same experiment was replicated with rats of the same breed in Edinburgh (Scotland) and Melbourne (Australia), those first-generation rats started their learning at the advanced rate where the Harvard rats had left off. The knowledge seemed to be instantly and non-locally accessible to rats of the same species and breed.

Sheldrake's Interpretation
According to Sheldrake, this phenomenon occurs because:

• Repeated behavior forms a "morphogenetic field" which acts as a kind of species-wide collective memory.
• Individual animals can "tune in" to this field through a process called morphic resonance, making it easier for them to learn behaviors that many other members of their species have already mastered, even without any physical communication or genetic link.

 

[Landon Caeli]

In biology, it's called "natural selection." It might look like magic, but species evolving in the same environmental pressures often tend to look very much alike.

Yes, but why couldn't there be two things?

 

[Hans Blaster]

AI Overview

Morphic resonance is
a theory proposed by biologist Rupert Sheldrake that suggests all natural systems, including organisms and crystals, have a collective memory that influences their form and behavior over time. This proposed mechanism of "formative causation" claims that past forms and behaviors of similar systems create a cumulative, invisible influence that shapes the development and patterns of present systems, rather than being governed by fixed physical laws alone. It implies that nature is habitual and that new behaviors can spread more rapidly through a species because of this shared, non-physical memory.

Key concepts

Collective memory: Each species, from animals to plants, possesses a collective memory that individuals can access and to which they contribute.

Habitual nature: The theory suggests that the regularities of nature are more like habits that have been reinforced by repetition, rather than being immutable laws.

Similarity: The resonance is based on similarity. The more similar an organism or system is to past ones, the greater the influence it will have.

Behavior and form: Morphic resonance is said to influence both the physical form and the behavior of a system. For example, it is proposed to explain instincts and how certain patterns of behavior, like a new trick learned by rats in one location, can be learned more quickly by other rats of the same breed elsewhere.

Individual memory: The resonance of a system with its own past is also suggested as a way to explain individual memory, where memories are not entirely stored in the brain but are accessed through a resonance with the brain's past states.

No. SHeldrake is a fraud.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Echinoderms, the two radially symmetrical examples you show, begin life as bilaterally symmetrical larva, and later become radially symmetrical. Number of radial segments vary, though. Interestingly, echinoderms and chordates are both deuterostomes,

Actually, the two radically symmetrical examples are not echinoderms, but are plants that live on land. The first is of the euphoria genus, which is more closely related to the poinsettia than it is to the plant that looks just like it, which is a kind of cacti from the astrophytum genus.

The two plants similar appearances are not connected genetically in any way.


....If you look at the pebbled surface of the ground, you see an environment where one species has successfully survived, and then a second species, later in time, develops similar traits based on a collective resonant memory shared by the two plants.

 

[Landon Caeli]

No. SHeldrake is a fraud.

Here's an example of scientific materialism attempting to explain morphic resonance, from that view:

Plants "Listen" to the Good Vibes of Other Plants | National Geographic Plants "Listen" to the Good Vibes of Other Plants

"Whatever the signal is, we don't know if the plants produce it for the purpose of signaling or if it is an accidental byproduct that other plants then 'eavesdrop' on," Renton said.

Other unknowns: What structures are plants using to talk to and listen to one another? And can insects and animals spy on plant conversations and exploit them for their own purposes?

To these questions and more, Gagliano said, the answer is "we don't know."

But "the data are here. Plants are doing something," she added. "I can't fully explain it, but that doesn't mean it's not happening."

 

[The Barbarian]

Actually, the two radically symmetrical examples are not echinoderms, but are plants that live on land. The first is of the euphoria genus, which is more closely related to the poinsettia than it is to the plant that looks just like it, which is a kind of cacti from the astrophytum genus.

The two plants similar appearances are not connected genetically in any way.

All plants are genetically connected.

Now, given that they look very much like some echinoderms...

One can either suppose that the shape is selected for in many different contexts (for which there is abundant evidence) or suppose that there's some kind of whatever doing it. (not much to support that, and a lot of data to reject it). Of course, it could be both. But that comes down to evidence.

For some of those rats, the effect could be merely epigenetic, retention of acquired characteristics over one or more generations.

Crucially, Sheldrake points out that even control rats whose parents had never been trained showed the same rate of improvement, suggesting the ability was not passed genetically but through a wider influence.

Rats are very good at learning from experience of other rats. That's cultural. They quickly learn to avoid baits and traps, from other rats. Now, if completely isolated rat populations were doing this well, with new conditions and researchers doing the testing, that would be something. Got a link?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Here's an example of scientific materialism attempting to explain morphic resonance, from that view:

Plants "Listen" to the Good Vibes of Other Plants | National Geographic Plants "Listen" to the Good Vibes of Other Plants

"Whatever the signal is, we don't know if the plants produce it for the purpose of signaling or if it is an accidental byproduct that other plants then 'eavesdrop' on," Renton said.

Other unknowns: What structures are plants using to talk to and listen to one another? And can insects and animals spy on plant conversations and exploit them for their own purposes?

To these questions and more, Gagliano said, the answer is "we don't know."

But "the data are here. Plants are doing something," she added. "I can't fully explain it, but that doesn't mean it's not happening."

This is chemical signaling and had nothing to do with Sheldrake's nonsense about "morphic resonance". I watch the short video in you earlier post and Sheldrake goes on about crystals of the same compound "communicating" throughout the planet. That was his "morphic resonance" and it is utter nonsense.