How Can Molecules Think?

[Astrid]

The "Rings of Power" show?

Dunno that one but must be super boring

 

[Astrid]

"woo"? Easy thoughtless discount.

Zactly backwards.
Totally thought- less is not even noticing it's woo!

 

[Hans Blaster]

How do you characterize "matter"?

As quantum excitations of the fundamental fields. (OK, not personally, I tend to work a few layers up.)

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

As quantum excitations of the fundamental fields. (OK, not personally, I tend to work a few layers up.)

Good but it kicks the can. What is the substance of those fundamental fields?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Good but it kicks the can. What is the substance of those fundamental fields? Or how would you characterize them or it?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Good but it kicks the can. What is the substance of those fundamental fields?

What do you mean? The fundamental fields are the basis of all material substance.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

What do you mean? The fundamental fields are the basis of all material substance.

I mean it seems the closer one looks the more there is to see. Just when you think you reached the "fundamental" level don't be surprised if it opens new vistas. Just another step along the way.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I mean it seems the closer one looks the more there is to see. Just when you think you reached the "fundamental" level don't be surprised if it opens new vistas. Just another step along the way.

That's math, not science.

We've looked for structure inside the electron and the photon. There's nothing in there. They are fundamental each with their own field.

 

[Astrid]

That's math, not science.

We've looked for structure inside the electron and the photon. There's nothing in there. They are fundamental each with their own field.

Big fleas have little fleas
Upon their back to bite 'em,

Little fleas have lesser fleas,
And so we infinitum.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Big fleas have little fleas
Upon their back to bite 'em,

Little fleas have lesser fleas,
And so we infinitum.

Until you get to electrons and then it stops.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

That's math, not science.

We've looked for structure inside the electron and the photon. There's nothing in there. They are fundamental each with their own field.

We reach a limit of perception. We do not know for sure that there is "nothing in there."

 

[Hans Blaster]

We reach a limit of perception. We do not know for sure that there is "nothing in there."

Every few years we probe to higher energies = smaller scales. Still nothing.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Every few years we probe to higher energies = smaller scales. Still nothing.

We are not done yet.

 

[Hans Blaster]

We are not done yet.

Exactly what property of electrons indicates to you that it has substructure.

 

[FredVB]

Variation of the state of a wave particle that being observed will define it is explainable with a further dimension, which involves our consciousness settling at nodes.

https://medium.com/the-infinite-universe/another-dimension-may-explain-time-and-quantum-mechanics-b353afcbb2f2

 

[FredVB]

I do not deny there is a soul, and all of us in this world have one, whether we think we have sold ours or not, and unlike a spirit, a soul is intimately connected with the body. If a soul departs, there is a new body it needs. Hence there is the promise to believers of resurrection to come. And certainly we work our bodies through our brains. It will work much the same way after the resurrection, with new bodies as we were meant to have.

 

[FredVB]

Your brain does the thinking. And it creates the appearance that there is a person in charge controlling everything. Rather, what you have is a mass of neurons acting in parallel. But within that mass of neurons, some ideas rise to attention and drive the body. They create the story that the attention is in charge, but it is only there for the ride. The many neurons acting in parallel are in charge. I discuss this at How Can Molecules Think?

I remember learning things that relate to this in a college philosophy class long ago. Indeterminism is a view that events are not certain and what happens is from probability, and it seems to fit with quantum theory. Determinism is a view that all things are caused and determined by what preceded, and it seems to fit well with what is seen on a much larger scale. Free agency is a view that we are moral agents which deliberate from what we see to choose, and choose accordingly as we see would fit. And epiphenomenalism is a view that the physical processes all occur deterministically as they will, and there is real consciousness that has no effect on any physical occurrence and has just illusions that there are effects which have things caused from the choices from consciousness, this seems to fit with what this original post claims, in which consciousness is there just along for the ride. It does not fit well at all with there being Christian responsibility, but if it was this way, you could never be sure anyone else has that consciousness. Right?

 

[partinobodycular]

I remember learning things that relate to this in a college philosophy class long ago. Indeterminism is a view that events are not certain and what happens is from probability, and it seems to fit with quantum theory. Determinism is a view that all things are caused and determined by what preceded, and it seems to fit well with what is seen on a much larger scale. Free agency is a view that we are moral agents which deliberate from what we see to choose, and choose accordingly as we see would fit. And epiphenomenalism is a view that the physical processes all occur deterministically as they will, and there is real consciousness that has no effect on any physical occurrence and has just illusions that there are effects which have things caused from the choices from consciousness, this seems to fit with what this original post claims, in which consciousness is there just along for the ride. It does not fit well at all with there being Christian responsibility, but if it was this way, you could never be sure anyone else has that consciousness. Right?

I think that you've pretty much nailed it, except for the bit about 'epiphenomenalism' being incompatible with the notion of Christian responsibility. But then again I'm an uneducated doof. I don't know much about anything beyond what my ability to reason tells me. And my ability to reason says that if a person's consciousness is a direct result of some underlying cause, then in judging that underlying cause one must by necessity judge the effect as well. In this case that's the individual's actions. The problem lies in identifying the underlying cause. However if we identify the underlying cause as being the soul, and we determine the soul to be an indispensable part of the person, then it would seem perfectly reasonable to judge the person based upon the nature of their soul, which is manifestly reflected in their actions.

Hence if this relationship between the body and soul is accurate, then 'epiphenomenalism' is perfectly compatible with the notion of Christian responsibility.

At least that's the opinion of an uneducated doof. On this subject however, differing opinions are definitely welcome.

 

[FredVB]

I think that you've pretty much nailed it, except for the bit about 'epiphenomenalism' being incompatible with the notion of Christian responsibility. But then again I'm an uneducated doof. I don't know much about anything beyond what my ability to reason tells me. And my ability to reason says that if a person's consciousness is a direct result of some underlying cause, then in judging that underlying cause one must by necessity judge the effect as well. In this case that's the individual's actions. The problem lies in identifying the underlying cause. However if we identify the underlying cause as being the soul, and we determine the soul to be an indispensable part of the person, then it would seem perfectly reasonable to judge the person based upon the nature of their soul, which is manifestly reflected in their actions.

Hence if this relationship between the body and soul is accurate, then 'epiphenomenalism' is perfectly compatible with the notion of Christian responsibility.

At least that's the opinion of an uneducated doof. On this subject however, differing opinions are definitely welcome.

Epiphenomenalism does not attribute cause of actions to the soul. The claim is that it appears to the soul that the soul is cause of actions which it is not, as though it was coincidence. No actions are caused by the conscious mind, according to this view. Hence, it is not compatible with the perspective of Christian responsibility. We can search for where 'choose' occurs in the Bible, to show that, and our choices which result in consequential things are our responsibility then. This is in disagreement with epiphenomenalism, that view that the consciousness is not connected with physical occurrences, though that view works with the perspective of the original post, which is why I mentioned these separate approaches in philosophy.

 

[Qubit]

Therefore, molecules, when arranged in a certain way, can think.

Everything is alive, including Particles...

​

Ezekiel 1:20
Whithersoever the spirit was to go, they went, thither was their spirit to go; and the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.

Eyes = Electrons = Spirit/Holy Ghost

The Light Within...

Matthew 6:22
"The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light."

Light = Electromagnetism.

Both electric and electricity are derived from the Latin ēlectrum (also the root of the alloy of the same name), which came from the Greek word for amber, ἤλεκτρον (ēlektron).

Electron - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ezekiel 1:4
"And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire."

Whirlwind = Whirling Electrons
North = Magnetic Pole
Great Cloud = Electron Cloud
Fire Infolding Itself = Electron Shells/Orbits
Amber = Electron
Fire = Light

​

Four Faces = Four Forces

Lion = Electromagnetism (Power)
Ox = Strong Force
Eagle = Gravity
Man = Weak Force

Etc.