i cant say that i have the same views on everything as you, but I love your videos. I wish there were more thought provoking philosophies like this on the internet.
Yep, that’s why Schrodinger called it “pockets” of negative entropy. In our physical world entropy eventually always wins, and physical things eventually always die, but life pushes against that tendency while it’s alive. You have to get “outside” of spacetime before you can see the patterns that do actually exert their selection processes without having to worry about that darn entropy.
I won’t be doing the video version for a few months yet, but search for “beer miracles dimension”
Rob
Now, let us take the example of a furniture. A wooden table, for example, maintains its body with the help of intermolecular force, while radiating much less heat/entropy than do humans or bacteria.
On the basis of negentropy, would you consider the table more alive than humans?
Since Aristotle to Einstein, people have always realized that the definition of life would have to take into consideration so many aspects that the definition will itself be invalidated even before it is complete.
Now, consider my argument against your take on connection between life and entropy.
As per the definition of entropy, the formation of a star out of a well distributed cloud of gases, itself is an effort to decrease entropy to degrees. A much more successful effort than that of humans and bacteria combined. Formation of heavier atoms in the core of the star is yet another process. Ultimately, formation of black holes is the greatest of all examples in contribution to orderliness or negentropy.
Rob, there is no system or body that maintains 0K. Anything above 0K is a body that has radiation. Hence, no observable body or system in this world can exhibit negentropy. Bacteria or humans, they all try to organize their body while creating more entropy in the form of radiation/heat.
Albert Lehninger: the “order” produced within cells as they grow and divide is more than compensated for by the “disorder” they create in their surroundings in the course of growth and division.
Schrodinger defined life as any process that creates pockets of negative entropy. Since a star, like any other entropic chemical reaction, is not creating negative entropy, I would say it’s not alive.
A bacterium, in its tiny way, is using energy to create order, a little “pocket of negative entropy”, that enables it to continue being more than just a chemical reaction. I talk about this in my latest vlog, “Logic vs. Intuition”.
watch?v=GrReVlTUpLA
1. Please define continuance. (Before you use the word ’embodiment’, I seek you to define that too, with utmost detail)
2. If merely continuance defines life, would you consider stars blessed with life?
‘Any process interested in “what happens next” ‘ is a statement to which intellect is prerequisite, merely because it contains the word ‘interest’. However, intellect itself requires life for sustenance. Please abstain from using self-defining yet self-defeating statements.
In my book and in videos like Do Plants Use Quantum Effects
watch?v=ODAjIzHyzhk
I define life as being any process interested in “what happens next”. This would apply just as much to the first chemical reactions that began to self-replicate in the primordial soup as it would to any life in the universe that we might some day discover.
Most people (but not all) would agree that a rock is not interested in “what happens next”, but a bacterium is.
The Big Bang and the Big O:
watch?v=e0iofBT3Vhs
Rob
excellent vid. i really appreciate his presentation on the subject and his openness to anything that will further his understanding. thank you very much!
the background is WICKED! aahhh my eyes heard =]
tangina na warp ako sa background nya ah
the new Tower of Babel?
great stuff. Love it
Or some Sidney or the magnificent Mr. Psilocybe Cubensis!
the Big Bang and the Big O?!?!?!?! I WILL NEVER ORGASM AGAIN!!!
i cant say that i have the same views on everything as you, but I love your videos. I wish there were more thought provoking philosophies like this on the internet.
Terence McKenna FOR LIFE!!
that is some wild stuff, no lies.
i really enjoy your videos
It’s called DMT
Yep, that’s why Schrodinger called it “pockets” of negative entropy. In our physical world entropy eventually always wins, and physical things eventually always die, but life pushes against that tendency while it’s alive. You have to get “outside” of spacetime before you can see the patterns that do actually exert their selection processes without having to worry about that darn entropy.
I won’t be doing the video version for a few months yet, but search for “beer miracles dimension”
Rob
Now, let us take the example of a furniture. A wooden table, for example, maintains its body with the help of intermolecular force, while radiating much less heat/entropy than do humans or bacteria.
On the basis of negentropy, would you consider the table more alive than humans?
Since Aristotle to Einstein, people have always realized that the definition of life would have to take into consideration so many aspects that the definition will itself be invalidated even before it is complete.
Now, consider my argument against your take on connection between life and entropy.
As per the definition of entropy, the formation of a star out of a well distributed cloud of gases, itself is an effort to decrease entropy to degrees. A much more successful effort than that of humans and bacteria combined. Formation of heavier atoms in the core of the star is yet another process. Ultimately, formation of black holes is the greatest of all examples in contribution to orderliness or negentropy.
Rob, there is no system or body that maintains 0K. Anything above 0K is a body that has radiation. Hence, no observable body or system in this world can exhibit negentropy. Bacteria or humans, they all try to organize their body while creating more entropy in the form of radiation/heat.
Albert Lehninger: the “order” produced within cells as they grow and divide is more than compensated for by the “disorder” they create in their surroundings in the course of growth and division.
contd.
Schrodinger defined life as any process that creates pockets of negative entropy. Since a star, like any other entropic chemical reaction, is not creating negative entropy, I would say it’s not alive.
A bacterium, in its tiny way, is using energy to create order, a little “pocket of negative entropy”, that enables it to continue being more than just a chemical reaction. I talk about this in my latest vlog, “Logic vs. Intuition”.
watch?v=GrReVlTUpLA
Thanks for writing!
Rob
1. Please define continuance. (Before you use the word ’embodiment’, I seek you to define that too, with utmost detail)
2. If merely continuance defines life, would you consider stars blessed with life?
So you disagree that a bacterium exhibits processes designed to further its own continuance?
‘Any process interested in “what happens next” ‘ is a statement to which intellect is prerequisite, merely because it contains the word ‘interest’. However, intellect itself requires life for sustenance. Please abstain from using self-defining yet self-defeating statements.
In my book and in videos like Do Plants Use Quantum Effects
watch?v=ODAjIzHyzhk
I define life as being any process interested in “what happens next”. This would apply just as much to the first chemical reactions that began to self-replicate in the primordial soup as it would to any life in the universe that we might some day discover.
Most people (but not all) would agree that a rock is not interested in “what happens next”, but a bacterium is.
The Big Bang and the Big O:
watch?v=e0iofBT3Vhs
Rob
This guy would be so great if he could merely define life, before talking about living and stuff like that.
excellent vid. i really appreciate his presentation on the subject and his openness to anything that will further his understanding. thank you very much!
Yeah, bannedfromutopia, matter is made up of energy.
Rob rocks!
what a cool and sweet guy! now THAT’S a teacher! you don’t learn this in school..