First Things First: The Physics of Causality

I respect your point of vue.But never you shall ponder general équations,or theories if you Don't insert this infinite Eternal consciousness,this maincause of our reality.It's odd for a doctor to not encircle this.For your information Einstein said that God dindn't play at dices.We can have faith and in the same time respect our pure determinism.For your information stil,all these past thinkers like Tesla,Newton,Galilei,Dirac,Einstein,Planck,Maxwell,Lie,Feynmann and so more had considered this main cause.Don't confound religions which are Simply human inventions,it's totally different,I am not religious.I just consider an infinite Eternal consciousness creating the codes to imply this physicality.For me Eckard,it's odd for a doctor to not understand this main cause.On facebook,many freinds from USA,India....,philodoctorates understand what I tell,and them too consider this main cause,for your information,even Witten and his strings,branes consider a 1D main field creating the matters.Don't confound religions please which are human inventions,not rational.Even Poincarré,Cantor,Euler,Riemann,Lie....Don't be offensed but instead learn better the works of these general thinkers ,you shall understand better these finite series,the infinities,and the INFINITY.If not you shall just ponder details but vever generalities.Sorry but it's the Truth Eckard,don't forget,God doesn't play at dices,but with sphères in motions,rotations,oscillations.Don't forget too,don't confound the religions with a deterministic faith in God.Regards

Eckard,really it's very odd,do you know that Cantor considered this too?he identified the Absolute Infinite with God,and he considered his work on transfinite numbers to have been directly communicated to him by God, who had chosen Cantor to reveal them to the world.Lol so you speak about infinities,infinity,finite systems without really understand their real meanings.Don't be vanitious but learn more generally speaking.I can understand it's not easy to change a line of reasoning,but I am persuaded that you can do it,you seems smart,so please go farer,deeper in your analyses about Numbers,matters,energies,infinities,infinity,finite systems,constants.Friendly

Dear Dr. Merali,

You saw fit to remove my comments because you deemed them inappropriate for this thread. Why then are you allowing Steve and Eckard to parrot unnatural codswallop that has nothing to do with supposedly finite causality?

Joe Fisher, Realist

How to explain at Akademia the remarkable 3,003 Views and Paper Rank 2.1 for "Cantor on Infinity in Nature, Number, and the Divine Mind"? If I recall correctly, the paper by Anne Newstead was printed in a Catholic Journal.

To those who intend learning about confusion in fundamentals of mathematics, I recommend reading at least key papers by Katz and by Mückenheim, beginning with "Die Geschichte des Unendlichen", firth edition Augsburg 2004.

What about ethics by Leibniz, Feuerbach, and maybe Oskar B. too, I would like to vote for a completed ethics that includes the obligation to birth control as a part of reasonable limitation to destruction of the globe. Richard Dawkins and Greta Th. were cowards when they shied back from this consequence.

Eckard Blumschein

Hi,

Dear Joe ,yes of course and the next president of USA will be Mickey Mouse and the next director of UN Donald Duck,of course of course,and your visible surface is the key for all our unknowns,yes of course,thanks for all your nonsenses.

Dear Eckard,thanks for developping.

Hi Eckard,

I repeat ,please don t confound the religions and a kind of deterministic faith in a thing above our understanding.The religions have nothing to do with a real understanding with this infinite eternal potential ,consciounsess.You can tell us all what you want about maths,physics,numbers,infinities,infinity,finite series,that does not change the interpretation of a majority of thinkers,searchers...I am conscious that the sciences community is divided,but for me it is odd for people wanting to know what is matters energy transformation to not consider this main cause.How can we encircle,understand the codes,informations,encodings,diversities of matters...without this important parameter.You beleive that we come from nothing? that we are a result of a hazard,it seems so not possible,even nonsense.Regards

dear Joe,

please explain us differently.Philosophically,physically,mathematically.There we don4t understand nothing. Please explain the causes of your conclusion, it is odd there,we need more details to encircle what you mean,what you tell us.Invisible,visible,am,this and that,me I want well but your Words aren t sufficient simply.

Steven.

Was there a real visible Earth surface millions of years ago?

Joe Fisher, Realist

Steve,

Did humanly contrived supposedly FINITE mathematics and physics exist millions of years ago?

Joe Fisher, Realist

Joe,no the Earth has more than 4 billions years,do you need a course about evolution? I know well in all humility. I have too ranked this evolution and too animals and vegetals,minerals,maths,physics,biology,chemistry. About maths and physics,yes they are foundamentals and the language of this infinite eternal consciousness creating this physicality.So what do you mean frankly with Always your Words wich define nothing there? Is it a hidden galactic cemera Joe,if yes it is time to tell us my friend instead to repeat this nonsense.Friendly

Today's Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of news:

"Jared Diamond makes the case that the human need for explanation is a survival mechanism, and that religion fulfilled that need. He proposes that the original functions of religion are explanation, defusing anxiety, and providing comfort in the face of bad things. Has religion lost it's explanatory function for modern people? Is the primary function of religion today to provide comfort for upsetting life events? Tell us your thoughts in the comments.Watch more interviews on evolutionary psychology and religion: http://bit.ly/2Ok867q"

I have posted this sensiblecomment at the website and on the FQXi.org website and on my own Facebook page.

When the FINITE question: "Has religion lost it's explanatory function for modern people?" Was entered into the Google Search Engine, it elicited "About 6,290,000 supposedly FINITE results (0.72 seconds)" Did the planet Earth have a visible surface for millions of real years before Jared Diamond ever appeared on that real visible surface and began publishing his unnatural guesswork about FINITE invisible religious influences affecting imaginary people? Of course it did. Nature must have only provided one sort of visible reality. There has only ever been, and there will only ever continue to be one unified infinite visible surface eternally occurring in one infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by one form of finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher Normal Realist

:( you make me crazy more Tham I am lol ,please if it is possible develop with physics and maths and about your philosophical point of vue.PLEASE for the respect of FQXi and the members and people PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE JOE

One of the three recent Nobelists was chosen for his contribution supporting the belief in something first, a kind of creation.

While the two others illustrate how shaky guesses may be, I dislike the hope for finding some substitute for our globe. Instead, Kadin was perhaps correct in that we need global birth control and serios restrictions to consumptive economy.

Eckard Blumschein

Dear Eckard ,are you serious about the births? we don t lack of matters,energy nor space considering this universe.We can give water,food,energy,jobs,hopes to majority if the high spheres of power take their responsabilities.It is just that this world bank and UN aren t conscious of solutions where all wins.We can liberate the funds and industrialise our solar system and harmonise on Earth the interactions of ecosystems in improving this ecology.All wins,we don t need to check the economy and births or this or that,we must just open this sphere Earth to our universe with a wisdom,consciousness,freewill even,universal and altruistic for the well of all.The rest seems vain Eckard.

If they didn t exist these solutions,I could understand but they exist and are rational,objective,deterministic,logic because we have not limits about this space,these matters,this energy.The problem is just the unconscious governances.And if we insert the corruption,the Vanity,the stupidity,the power and this unconsciousness so we understand quickly our global problems.

Today's Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of news:

"Does evolutionary psychology undermine religion? Can religion be attributed to brain structure and chemistry? Watch Warren Brown's full interview: http://bit.ly/30IXsd6"

I have posted this sensible comment at the website and on the FQXi.org Community Board and on my own Facebook page:

When the FINITE question: "Does evolutionary psychology undermine religion?" was entered into the Google Search Engine, it elicited: "About 9,970,000 supposedly FINITE results (0.54 seconds) When the FINITE question: "Does regular psychology undermine religion?" was entered into the Google Search Engine, it yielded: "About 24,400,000 supposedly FINITE results (0.62 seconds)" Guess what? There has only ever been, and there will only ever continue to be provided by nature, one unified infinite visible surface eternally occurring in one infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by one form of finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, Regular Realist

LOL Today closer to truth ,Joe continues to repeat without detailing or explaining what he means to us

"How many people the Earth can sustain at a comfortable standard of living is a function of technological development (as well as of how resources are distributed)" wrote Mick Bostrom in his Transhumanist FAQ 2.1 . Is this true for good or are there rational limits to the acceptable or even optimal number of humans from the global perspective of mankind?

When Marx was for a century successful in competition with Malthus, they both merely considered nutrition. However, isn't pollution human too?

Are billions of cars and overmuch vacation travels by flight and crusaders and other limitless laziness still really comfortable? Do you dream of living in cities each with a billion of citizen? Don't get me wrong. I too don't like the autist Greta and XR activists. However, I feel sympathetic with the rapidly growing number of young people who feel having no good perspective in particular so far in the notoriously politically unstable regions of Africa, Asia, and South America. When religions demanded to "be fertile and get more", they did perhaps derive doomsday speculations from correct observation of dead as element of life in nature while they couldn't imagine that the globe and the inhabitable part of universe are definitely finite and certainly causal, with or without a Big Bang or crunch.

Eckard Blumschein

Hi Joe,well we have understood,let s go farer please.I have several questions.When I was 17 years old I searched answers to our universe.So I have read a Little bit of all,books of philosophy,the talmud,the bibble,the coran,the buddhism ,this and that.The best answers I must say were given by sciences,I have ranked a Little bit of all,the animals,the vegetals,the minerals,the Chemistry,the biology,the physics,the maths mainly.So in all humility we can discuss about all.So I repeat do you beleive in God,what is your personal faith.Me I beleive in this infinite eternal consciousness but with determinism,I am not religious because they are human inventions simply but I respect the persons having faith in their religions chosen.So tell me you are christian ? or others ? please explain me what you mean by your analyses,thanks

My Salvatinian understanding of infinity is aware of many papers including Bolzano's paradoxes and Yitzhak Malamed's work on Parmenides and Spinoza.

When my credo causality led me to the necessity of stopping growth in the interest of the humans altogether, I feel that the view of XR is much to narrow. Perhaps I need not explaining that XR stands for Extinction Rebellion and focuses on manmade climate change. My intention is to rather correct ethics for the sake of survival.

This includes to overcome national, religious, and male egoisms by making in particular women aware of their chance and obligation. Every intelligent people should grasp that speaking in a metaphor she or he doesn't STAY like a car in the tailback but we altogether ARE the tailback unless we will get control over our animality. Unfortunately, the total number of most uneducated people goes on tending to rapidly increase worldwide. I see a crucial competition and hope those who don't see Boko a Haram will win in time.

Eckard Blumschein

Hi Eckard,

Like I have explained ,we cannot stop our evolution and its correlated technologies.It is well like that.The problem,foundamental is the lack of universal consciousness in the high spheres of power.I repeat it does not lack space,matters,energies.We have no limits Eckard,the only limits that I see is due to stupidities simply.

The pollution is unfortunally due too to this unconsciousness and we can solve it too.About this human psychology we know that many people don t understand this universe and its laws,so that explains the opulence,the individualism,the Vanity,the taste of money,the materialism and others stupid comportments.

About the Towns with billions of people,we can harmonise them correctly with a real ecological equilibrium,we can create Towns and buildings in inserting this ecology and harmonical ecosystems,the walls can be gaedens and like I said all can have a job,water,food,energy,hopes,money to catalyse the actual economical global system.Not necessary to extrapolate the socialism,marxism,capitalism ...it is the balance wich is important between them.

About the countries forgotten or not stable like in africa asia or others like in Yemen,it is still due to bad governances and unconscious people,that i all,that is why the UN must act and balance.

About the religions,they are human inventions and they imply for a majority better comportments but for a minority of illuminated several problems like the killers extremists muslisms killing people,like still today in germany,they are simply crazy people ,psychologically sick.

About the Big Bang and Big Crunch,they are assumptions,we aren t sure.Personaly in my theory of spherisation,I consider a spherical expansionmcorrelated with this Dark energy seen like an anti gravitational spherical push from the central biggest cosmological sphere.The mass increqasers in logic,so we can have on this irreversible entropical Arrow of time,an acceleration,decceleration towards the maximum spherical volume,and after maybe it is an assumption a contraction in the same logic towards the points of equilibrium.

About the infinity,the infinities,the finite systems,I have explained how I saw them.I respect your philosophical analyse,I just see differently.

About the climate,we are obliged to adapt us,and specialy for several parts of this Earth.For the births,no it is not acceptable,I have explained that we have the solutions,deterministic for all Lifes.

About the hormons,the vanity,the power,it is a big global problem indeed like the lack of education,this implies,explains an ocean of stupidities and odd thoughts.

About Boko Haram and all these extremists they must be stopped simply,they are dangerous and we cannoy accept this.In Belgium we have had many problems with these extremists and their manipulations,they are stupids and unconscious.Regards Eckard.

"we cannot stop our evolution and its correlated technologies". Hm, here I rather agree with Rovelli. Shouldn't we feel responsible for our future and steer us accordingly instead of behaving like ordinary consumers/animals? Even if there are no known limits to progress in science so far, the Earth and its physically reachable surrounding are definitely finite. Causality is not mushy at all. Humanity has left the safe brutal mechanisms of self-stabilization.

Spinoza was expelled from community for repeatedly uttering "Deus sive natura" (God or nature). Of course his "or" was not meant as the exclusive "either or" but in the equating sense of mutual exchangibility.

Let me check: Is conservation of nature the same as conservation of God?

Eckard

Steve,

All science books supposedly provide myriad pieces of FINITE information. But Nature provided only one unified infinite visible surface eternally occurring in one infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by one infinite form of finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Joe ,still you don t develop,it becomes crazy to Always repeat the same,are you conscious of that? We have understood Joe,so now explain why philosophically speaking.Is it a joke Joe? Your Words are nor relevant ,nor interesting,really,you have found nothing in fact.

"entropy to set time's direction" ?? Isn't the 2nd law of thermodynamics only valid for closed systems? If I recall correctly, I learned this when I was freshman in Dresden.

I prefer accepting that there is first of all not entropy but causality which excludes negative elapsed time as there is no negative distance too. Maybe this view of mine is at odds with some monist philosophy by Parmenides, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Fourier, Cantor, and Einstein? While elapsed time has a natural point zero of reference, the usual scale of time requires an arbitrary choice.

Why not considering the possibility that elapsed time sets the direction of entropy change?

What is more puzzling to me is the unquestionable obseration of simultaneity between not causally related events. Here I am an agnostic.

Eckard Blumschein

Hi Eckard ,Have you understood the solutions that I have explained about the liberation of funds,the industrialisation of our solar system and the harmonisation on Earth on ecosystems and its interactions ? and this to give water,food,energy,jobs,hopes to all ? that will boost,catalyse the global economy and I repeat,ALL WINS without exception.I don t agree about your analyses about finite systems,I repeat still,it does not lack matters,space,energy.

For God and the nature they are correlated,you must understand this.

About the laws of theormodynaöics and heat,wer have an irreversible entropical Arrow of times and the finite systems aren t the problems.Riemann and Fourier d agree I beleive humbly like Cantor,not need to discourse about philosophy for that you know Eckard.

PS you can change about your agnosticism,see the truths simply.

Regards

Steve,

The one infinite visible reality that was eternally provided by Nature needed no humanly contrived FINITE development.

Joe Fisher, Real Realist

But Joe ,How is it possible that you cannot develop your ideas? we have understood yoyur words,now for the respect of this platform and the persons here please accept to tell us more.

Steve, the topic was set by Carroll and Rovelli. While I didn't realize that they were dealing with your claim:"boost,catalyse the global economy ... ,ALL WINS", I feel challenged to reveal the basics of possibly serious logical fallacies.

What about so called creatures in nature, Darwinism tells us, that there is selection and never all species did win. Menkind is in a different situation. The most effective mechanisms of stabilization were (fortunately) excluded but (unfortunately) not yet substituted by responsible birth control and restricted exploitation of the finite nature. Well, it was e.g. possible to make agriculture more effective and feed at least 10 billion people by increasingly destroying not just forests but also rather irreversible poisoning of water, soil, etc. Can you imagine all people living with the same high consumption as I and perhaps you too?

I repeat my question: How many people does the mankind need? How to cope with the growing amount of waste in millenias to come? Trees don't grow endlessly. Why should mankind and its consumption get bigger and bigger?

Being aware of apparent weakness in my argumentation, would like to give some explanations:

I used Boko in the sense of our (western) science and education and Haram as what Islamists are consindering a sin: Boko. Let's sin in this sense. I didn't refer to the group.

My strongest argument is the lack of a natural reference to our time scale.

I wonder if it is correct to overlook that Shannon's entropy is merely formally similar to Boltzmann's.

Eckard Blumschein

Hi Eckard, I have really difficulties to undertand your philosophical analyse about the finite systems and the infinity disponible.It is simple in fact,how can I convice you that we have the solutions and they are deterministic in considering that space ,matters and energy are infinite.The darwinism or the lamarckism or others aren t the problems but the global consciousness yes.The economy too is not a problem when we are governed by real universal altruists understand this universal truth.About forets,agriculture,ecology,pollution,environments,....be sure the solutions exist too,for your information,I am agronomist of formation and I know well in all humility what is the points of equilibrium for our global ecosystems,do you know the vegetal multiplication,the composting,the harmonisation of ecosystems with a correlated universal consciousness? if yes you can understand that we can solve globally speaking.Not need to discourse about a so evident truth you know Eckard.The consumption is not a problem and the irreversibility is not true for me,wer can solve them.About Boko and Shannon entropy or Boltzman,it is not a problem ,really.

Regards

Steve,

It am not my idea. I did not exist millions of years ago. Only eternal infinite visible surface has ever existed.

Joe Fisher, Extremely Patient Realist

Joe,so lol you speak to God or it has send you this information lol ? DEVELOP!!! if you cannot ,stop to repeat please it is irritating for the blogers of FQXi,really Joe.Friendly

In Darwinism/Weismannism there is no first cause, just a causal chain. Well, all we entruists may hope and fight for global social consciousness including awareness of the unavoidability for the sake of humanity to control births and restrict consumption.

You Steve and typical Americans seem to share the overly optimistic belief of trusting in God creationists that there are no problems which cannot be solved: eat the putatively sweet cake and have it though.

July 29th was the international day after which the consumption already exceeded a declared for sustainable value in 2019. While the USA is blamed to be leading with 16.2 tons annually emitted carbondioxide per person, the values 8.7 for Germany and 7.4 for China are also irresponsibly high.

Reportedly, the 10 million city of Moscow already faces serious problems to dispose its waste, and now it plans to transport it 1,200 km far away. Is this a solution for good?

Worldwide the cities are getting larger and larger. The capital of China will perhaps be the first one in excess of 100 Million inhabitats.

Eckard Blumschein

Hi Eckard,you seems persuaded by your Words and thoughts.I don t understand how it is possible,really.I must insist on this too,don t take my for a creationist please,my theory of spherisation has nothing to do with these riligious things,so please respect this and my deterministic researchs.I repeat all the pat relevant thinkers like Einstein,Tesla,Maxwell,Galilei,Planck,Lorentz,Newton,Dirac,and so more conisdered this infinite potential with DETERMINISM,are you conscious of this? you study the works of theser thinkers but you don t encircle the real meaning of their thoughts about matters energy transformations.How is it possible for a generalist? In fact you are too much focus on economy,you forget to insert these universal parameters simply showing us the truths about the real possible harmonisation and points of equilibrium.Forget your chains and insert this infinite potential Eckard you shall see these solutions so simple generally speaking,really.Forget too these economocal numbers,you know the econonomy can be harmonised too when we insert this said universal altruism for the governances.The problem I repeat is this lack of global consciousness for the high spheres of power and the responsabilities of the richest.Take care,we can discuss hours but the most important for me is to show you these truths and maybe to convice you in changing your points of vue.Friendly

Joe,do you understand that the universe is finite like our series of particles coded and that we have constants and infinities too inside this physicality like tools ,and now philosophically speaking ,above ,beyond this physicality we have an infinite eternal consciousness and this infinity created this fionite physicality in sending codes ,informations to build this universe? so all what you tell us need details simply,we don t need courses about what is this infinity,the infinities like pi or others and the finite systems coded,DEVELOP PLEASE

Steve,

Darwin contradicted to the view of Parmenides, ..., and Einstein by considering life material but "consciousness an epiphenomenon", cf.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(08)61884-X/fulltext

"Darwin pioneered the materialistic approach to history--like Marx".

"darwinism provides a framework in which science is done. Since no framework is infinite, by definition, no framework is complete"

Hello Eckard, thanks for sharing the link.

The philosophy is a complex topic and these thinkers were relevant.It is in fact not easy to see clear in all this puzzle about the human psychology,the determinism,the consciousness.We have so many parameters to take into account,the education,the Environments,the encodings,the psychology,the freewill,the deterministic Learnings,the consciousness,the intelligence,the minds,the genetic,the evolution,this and that...complex is a weak Word lol Darwin maybe has forgotten that consciousness evolves and so that competition considering this evolution can be harmonised towards the synergies and this foundamebtal complementarity between Lifes,so we return at this opening to our universe where we don t lack öatters,space,energy.We cannot consider only this finite sphere Earth if I can say knowing our potential.Friendly

Steve,

What was a visible surface called 25 million years ago? Oh, that's right, there was nobody around 25 million years ago to call anything.

Joe Fisher, Literate Realist

Joe, study a Little bit the evolution of this Earth,we have bones analysed with the carbon 14,we know the age of the Earth and its evolution in billions and millions years ,so please explain me what you mean because really I don t understand nothing.