Where did Intelligence begin, in matter or fundamental energy?

[DennisTate]

The rate of biological evolution can be measured and calculated.
What is the rate of your intelligence of evolution? Is it a constant?

Whether it is constant or not the fact that it could go back to something like infinite time in the past would mean that a being composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy would be a lot more intelligent than we humans are!

 

[lesliedellow]

I don't know what kind of God you believe in, but it sure ain't the Christian God.

A god who slaves away in his workshop, trying to get a universe which works, repeatedly fails, but then, through trial and error, sort of succeeds on the 10,000th attempt. Nah. Don't think so.

 

[juvenissun]

Whether it is constant or not the fact that it could go back to something like infinite time in the past would mean that a being composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy would be a lot more intelligent than we humans are!

Please think about the rate of intelligence evolution. It will give you a big hint to the origin of human.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Whether it is constant or not the fact that it could go back to something like infinite time in the past would mean that a being composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy would be a lot more intelligent than we humans are!

Are you aware that energy is not some kind of stuff, but a property that stuff has by virtue of its state or context - an indirectly observed quantity?

IOW, there is no 'fundamental' energy, and a being can not be made of energy - unless you have special meaning for that term; if so, can you explain what you mean by it?

 

[DennisTate]

Are you aware that energy is not some kind of stuff, but a property that stuff has by virtue of its state or context - an indirectly observed quantity?

IOW, there is no 'fundamental' energy, and a being can not be made of energy - unless you have special meaning for that term; if so, can you explain what you mean by it?

The off the scale level of energy in the type of energy that is a unity of either electromagnetism with weak or strong nuclear force.... and/ or gravity.....
is so great that it is almost inconceivable for circuitry... and something like a computer thought process to not develop in fundamental energy trillions of years before that latest major Big Bang event of 13.72 billion years ago or so.......

www.CarbonBias.blogspot.ca/

"It was not until 1920 that the idea of linking electromagnetism and
gravity resurfaced. At that time a new theory of gravitation had been proposed by Albert Einstein (1879-1955), called the general theory of relativity. It was a replacement of Newton's theory, which had stood unchallenged since 1687. Inspired by Einstein's work, a young German mathematician named Theodore Kaluza was seized by a curious idea. The theory of relativity links space an time together to form a four-dimensional space-time continuum. What would happen, mused Kaluza, if general relativity were formulated in five rather than four dimensions? This is what Kaluza did, and to everyone's astonishment it was discovered that five-dimensional gravity obeys the same laws as
four-dimensional gravity as well as Maxwell's laws for the electromagnetic field. In other words, gravitation and electromagnetism are automatically unified in five dimensions, where electromagnetism is merely a component of gravity!"

The only drawback of the theory concerns the extra dimension. Why
don't we see it? An ingenious answer was provided by Oskar Klein. A
hosepipe viewed from afar looks like a wiggly line, i.e. one- dimensional.
However, on closer inspection it can be seen as a narrow tube. It is, in fact,
two-dimensional, and what was taken to be a point on the line is actually a
little circle going around the tube. In the same way, reasoned Klein, what we normally regard as a point in three dimensional space could in reality be a little circle going around a fourth space dimension. Thus Kaluza's extra
dimension might well exist, but be impossible to detect because it is closed
(circular) and rolled up to a very small circumference. In spite of
these bizarre overtones, it seems probable that in future a "theory of everything" will make use of the idea of unseen higher dimensions."
....

"Although nature manifests four distinct forces, physicists believe that
each may be part of a smaller number of more primitive forces. At high energy, the electromagnetic and weak forces appear to merge into a single "electroweak" force. Some "grand unified theories" suggest that a further amalgamation takes place between the electroweak and strong forces at as yet unattained energies. The most ambitious unification schemes envisage an amalgamation of all four forces into a single "superforce" at ultra-high levels of energy." ...

"The real burden in the next three centuries will not be the development of fancy mathematics, but the experimental testing of these ambitious theories. All current thinking about total unification assumes that the effects of linking all the forces and particles together will only become manifest at energies that are some trillion times greater than those currently attainable in particle accelerators. Probably we shall never reach such energies directly" ( A Theory of Everything" Volume 21 of "The World of Science)

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The off the scale level of energy in the type of energy that is a unity of either electromagnetism with weak or strong nuclear force.... and/ or gravity.....
is so great that it is almost inconceivable for circuitry... and something like a computer thought process to not develop in fundamental energy trillions of years before that latest major Big Bang event of 13.72 billion years ago or so...

It might be more coherent if you just answered the question.

 

[Radrook]

Whether it is constant or not the fact that it could go back to something like infinite time in the past would mean that a being composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy would be a lot more intelligent than we humans are!

Why couldn't such an entity simply remain eternally ignorant and helplessly floating about not knowing where it is and how it came to be or where it is heading? Do you consider such a thing a possibility under the situation of sudden emergeance you are proposing?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Why couldn't such an entity simply remain eternally ignorant and helplessly floating about not knowing where it is and how it came to be or where it is heading? Do you consider such a thing a possibility under the situation of sudden emergeance you are proposing?

It's fanciful nonsense.

 

[Radrook]

It's fanciful nonsense.

I don't know what kind of God you believe in, but it sure ain't the Christian God.

A god who slaves away in his workshop, trying to get a universe which works, repeatedly fails, but then, through trial and error, sort of succeeds on the 10,000th attempt. Nah. Don't think so.

I agree that it isn't the Christian concept of God since the Christian concept of God is that he can't learn either through experience or via mistakes because he is incapable of making mistakes and knows everything.

Another difference is that he is attributing a beginning to his proposed entity whereas the biblical description of the creator involves an eternal existence and nowhere along such an eternal existence was he less than described in the Bible.

That's indeed a big difference.

Of course atheists will tag in as nonsense either way since they feel; that anything that is supernatural has to be tagged that way regardless of the logical necessity which the evidence indicates for its existence.

BTW
The evidence itself has to be tagged as nonsense in order to maintain that view.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...Of course atheists will tag in as nonsense either way since they feel; that anything that is supernatural has to be tagged that way regardless of the logical necessity which the evidence indicates for its existence.

BTW
The evidence itself has to be tagged as nonsense in order to maintain that view.

JFYI, I 'tagged' this particular idea as fanciful nonsense not for its supernatural aspect, but because it makes use of physical concepts in a nonsensical way in all respects, not to mention the complete absence of evidence in the claimed context ('prior' to the big bang). If it had been physically coherent in any way, I might have called it 'speculative nonsense', but it wasn't.

 

[Radrook]

Whether it is constant or not the fact that it could go back to something like infinite time in the past would mean that a being composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy would be a lot more intelligent than we humans are!

What do you mean by fundamental energy and why would that automatically make an entity intelligent?

 

[Radrook]

Please think about the rate of intelligence evolution. It will give you a big hint to the origin of human.

So what is the rate of intelligence evolution?

 

[DennisTate]

Why couldn't such an entity simply remain eternally ignorant and helplessly floating about not knowing where it is and how it came to be or where it is heading? Do you consider such a thing a possibility under the situation of sudden emergeance you are proposing?

Perhaps that happened for what could be named as trillions of years.... but the positive thing is that we are talking about essentially INFINITE time in the past!

An eternity can be wasted........ but then the spark ignites.... and you still have an eternity ahead of you to organize a massive Big Bang type event by 13.72 billion or so years ago, our time?!

 

[DennisTate]

So what is the rate of intelligence evolution?

It does seem that once it begins.... it can be almost like the
rapid increase in computer technology in our time period.

 

[Radrook]

Perhaps that happened for what could be named as trillions of years.... but the positive thing is that we are talking about essentially INFINITE time in the past!

An eternity can be wasted........ but then the spark ignites.... and you still have an eternity ahead of you to organize a massive Big Bang type event by 13.72 billion or so years ago, our time?!

Do you consider that an inevitability?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Are you aware that energy is not some kind of stuff, but a property that stuff has by virtue of its state or context - an indirectly observed quantity?

IOW, there is no 'fundamental' energy, and a being can not be made of energy - unless you have special meaning for that term; if so, can you explain what you mean by it?

Vacuum energy - Wikipedia

Zero-point energy - Wikipedia

Vacuum state - Wikipedia

Hmm, all of space is filled with energy because it not only exists in everything, but everything was made from it and it still exists everywhere. There isn't a single calculation in science that doesn't in the end rely on this energy prevading the entire universe.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Vacuum energy - Wikipedia

Zero-point energy - Wikipedia

Vacuum state - Wikipedia

Hmm, all of space is filled with energy because it not only exists in everything, but everything was made from it and it still exists everywhere. There isn't a single calculation in science that doesn't in the end rely on this energy prevading the entire universe.

Let me try to give you a (crude) analogy for energy - it's like financial value, not a thing in itself, but an indirectly observed property of things. It can be manifest in many different ways: gold, precious stones, property, cash, IOUs, numbers in a computer, labour, etc.; and it can be converted from one kind to another kind - cash can be converted to bricks & mortar and hours of labour which can be converted to a house, which can be sold and converted to numbers in a bank account. But financial value isn't stuff in its own right, you can't have 'pure financial value'.

In the same way, you can't have 'pure energy' (although people sometimes loosely speak that way). When people talk about the 'release of energy' in reactions or explosions, it's shorthand for the release of energetic stuff like fast moving particles, lots of photons, etc.

And the spacetime vacuum is a 'thing', pervaded by quantum fields (loop quantum gravity has it that spacetime is the gravitational field), which have fluctuating energy values (quantum uncertainty produces fluctuations that can manifest as virtual particles), so the vacuum can have field energy of various kinds. But although energy is often described as the capacity to do work, in practice not all energy can be used to do work - an energy gradient is required. The energy of the vacuum is a form of zero-point energy, the lowest energy state of a system, so it would seem futile to attempt to 'extract energy' from it to do useful work.

 

[Larniavc]

I am an Evolutionary Theist........

I am of the belief that a being with "Godlike" technological capability

began, far far far far far more than 13.72 billion years ago, in
fundamental or nearly fundamental energy that to at least some
degree corresponds with "Energy from Quantum Vacuum."


This Intelligence learned and learned, and experimented..... .and
designed Big Bang type events, nearly an infinite number of them,
and eventually, around 13.72 billion year or so ago began our.......
Big Bang event that led to the evolution plus creation of
all the life forms that we see here on earth.

I'd like to qualify my vote with 'possibly'.

 

[Larniavc]

All of reality is His creation and obeys His will.

Why?

 

[Widlast]

Why?

Because it is His creation. He made it. Understand that God is spirit, and creates through force of will.
Thus all that comes from His will obeys His will.