The Multiverse and Existential Scale | Robert Lawrence Kuhn

Georgina Woodward
So you personally do not understand or see the point of analogies. I am aware of that from previous interaction, it's nothing new, You are not all people. I do not write for you exclusivly.
Some people do understand and enjoy analogies. If that is not you , the analogy was not written with you exclusivly in mind. ( It's not all about you. )
Magic shows are a form of popular entertainment. Most people do not think the magic is real, but realise but not know how they are being decieved. Part of the fun is working out how the trick is done. Smoke and mirrors are associated with magic shows, as they are tools used to prevent informing potential sensory input reaching the audience.

Lorraine Ford"#p168927
Science shouldn't be decided by democracy. Reality is what it is, regardless of what the majority of people think.

There is no essential difference between the particle interactions that are happening in a living thing, like a human being, and the particle interactions that are happening on the ice planet Neptune. What is possible, what intrinsic aspects of the world are emphasized, the difference between a person and a planet or a rock, depends on what the particle environment of the particles will allow (1).

Contrary to what Georgina seems to be saying, the particles, and any subsequent atoms, molecules, and living things, are not deceiving themselves in their interactions with their environments; they are not being tricked by their environments.

The world, with its interactions, is a moving system, but it has often been noted that a set of equations cannot represent a viable moving system. I’m claiming that a viable moving real-world system requires logical aspects, as well as the aspects of the system that are represented by the equations and the numbers.

And when it comes to living things, different intrinsic aspects of the real-world moving system have more emphasis. With living things, the aspects that have more emphasis are the logical aspects of the real-world system.

These logical aspects of the real-world system are the very same aspects of the world that can’t be explained when the question is asked: "Why is there anything at all, why not nothing?"

…………………………………………….

1. This “possibility” and probability are high-level human ways of analysing the world; possibility and probability are not actually existing low-level component parts of the world.

Lorraine Ford
Contrary to what Georgina seems to be saying, the particles, and any subsequent atoms, molecules, and living things, are not deceiving themselves in their interactions with their environments; they are not being tricked by their environments.
Lorraine you are completely misrepresenting what I have said, once again. I have not said that particles are tricked by their environment or particles, molecules, simple materials are decieving themselves ,in their interactions with the environment. I am not a pan psychist . I think these simple things do what they must, obeying the local laws of nature. Given the local matter, energy, space fillling substance and relationships between. The animation of the Milky way is likely is due to the energy it inherited at formation, since energy is not created or destroyed, only changes kind .

Georgina Woodward
please disregard the first asttempt above,The first paragrapgh is lorraine's, The second paragraph is my own words
Software problem.

Georgina Woodward
A living organism,such as a human being,is a material object made or many particles, but not just that,
An organism is not just a collection of particles , it has organisation, The particles making it are arramged into conected tissues each having a function which aids survival of that organism or its species through reproduction.. The tissues includes the brain with its structure. Organisation of the particles allows energent function, that just a collection of the same number of particles that are not organised doesn't have. With this level of organisation comes the emergent ability to receive sensory input and processing of it into observation products. Organisation that allow the living thing awareness of the external environment by processing of sensory information is cpable of being informed by it and also vulnerable to incorrect conclusions .

Georgina Woodward
Were your fingers not working, again, Georgina? That is strange, because your fingers seemed to be working perfectly well, when you recently blatantly placed 10 (?, I’ve lost count of the number) advertisements on this platform for your family’s commercial products.

Seemingly, this is what you and your family have been on about all these years, with your self-published family books, and your blind-men-and-elephants’ analogies: the world is inherently full of illusion; and physicists are therefore deluded about the world.

Georgina Woodward
Re your: "I am not asking for money but sharing something Iike for free." That is typical salesperson-spiel.

Lorraine Ford
I should add that logical elements, describable as “the system’s knowledge of itself”, or “the system’s ability to interrogate itself”, are required in order to create a complex system in the first place.

Symbols for the logical elements that represent “the system’s knowledge of itself” are required in order to create a complex system, as well as the symbols for the equations and numbers. Equations and numbers alone cannot represent all the necessary aspects that are required to make a viable system.

In other words, logical elements like “the system’s knowledge of itself” or “the system’s ability to interrogate itself”, do NOT emerge from a system, but are required to in order to create a viable system in the first place.

My point being that there is NO system or organisation (e.g. of particles, or tissues, or other matter) without the pre-existence of these logical elements in the world.

Georgina Woodward
No, Georgina. You have assumed life. LOL.

And then you have assumed that something emerges from pre-existing life. lol.

Systems can’t be assumed; life can’t be assumed.

One of the topics of this discussion is: "Why is there anything at all, why not nothing?"

This could perhaps be rephrased as: “Why does a viable moving system with structure exist? But first, what are the necessary component parts of a viable moving system with structure?”

What are the necessary component parts of a viable moving system with structure?
The equations that represent laws-of-nature, with their associated numbers, cannot create structure, including life, because collectively, they don’t even represent a viable system, let alone a moving system. As many physicists have, in effect, noted: something is missing.

But it is already well known that to symbolically represent a viable moving system, you need logical connectives, as well as the equations and numbers. Logical connectives are the necessary aspects of a system that represent the system’s knowledge of itself and the system’s ability to move itself.

In other words, a viable, moving, standalone, self-powered and self-sufficient real-world system needs to:

• Know its own categories and numbers; and
• Creatively jump its own numbers that apply to the categories. (And it should be noted that physicists know very well that law-of-nature relationships are necessary, but not sufficient, to handle the numbers during situations and interactions).

So, these are the necessary logical aspects of a viable moving real-world system that can potentially create structure, including life:

• Knowledge aspects; and
• Creative aspects.

Why does a viable moving system with structure exist?
What needs to be explained are ALL the necessary component parts of a viable moving system, that can potentially create structure. I.e., what needs to be explained are the logical aspects, as well as the aspects that can be represented by equations and numbers.

However, while the aspects that can be represented by equations and numbers can potentially be explained, the logical aspects, i.e. the aspects that know and the aspects that create, can’t be explained.

I think that possibly one of the best antidotes to some of the nonsense theories of physics, mathematics, or religion, would be to ask: "Why is there anything at all, why not nothing?", and refusing to put up with the inevitable nonsense answers.

Because saying that underlying the world (i.e. universe) is a pre-existing mathematical system is a nonsense answer. Because there are already actual things in this vision of the world: there is actual ordered structure (categories, relationships, and/or numbers), and there is actual movement in the structure.

But where does this ordered structure come from, and where does movement come from? Saying “I don’t know” is a pathetic, nonsense answer, and shouldn’t be accepted, because the answer to the question is inevitably a statement about the inherent nature and physics of the world to this day.

In the end, one has to:

• Assume a standalone, self-contained, self-powered and self-sufficient world, with no outside to it, and consequently, no meddling from the outside.
• Assuming this standalone, self-sufficient world, one has to say that an aspect of the world created the structure, an aspect of the world creatively moves the structure, and an aspect of the world knows about the structure and its movement.