Design: intelligent or not?

Simple.

You can't invent a creature that came from a place you also must invent and have it preform tasks by unknown means and say it's simpiler than postulating a chance act.

"god" is a super, ultra-complex explanation that explains nothing-- it merely begs a whole bundle of more questions, whereas:

0= -1+1 or 0= 0.17+0.83 or 0= .9+.01+.99-- you get the idea

Much simplier than

0/God= well, zero. No matter the value assigned to god, the equatuion will always end with (X)god
And god will always remain unknown and irrelevant to the equation. An unidentifiable intrinsic factor at best
A difference that makes no difference...

 

Gecko, you and I have had this conversation before regarding this math that produces no quantifiable results. There needs to be 3 coordinates, and these 3 coordinates align uni-directionally.

0=-1+1 is a self extinguishing expression. Multiplication is quick addition. 1+1=2. The process is not dead stop to dead stop. It is approach and recede. Not night and day but morning and evening. Positive and negative are not in opposition, they are the high and low of a single frequency.

As far as I can see, 1+1=2 is a much simpler equation than 0=-1+1 when it comes to building a house. Your equation attempts to explain a dichotomy with a mystery.

 

1+1=2 assumes that "1" already existed.

0= -1+1 assumes nothing. "0" equals chaos.

The "frequency" of the Universe fluctuates between conditions of chaos. The alpha and omega.

 

Exactly, fluctuates, is not extinguished. We cannot affix a beginning nor an end.
Simplest explanation, eternal recurrence.

 

flucuates from one extreme to the other, with total entrophy on either side.
There is a begining and an ending to our Universe.

"infinity" is not a description that applies in this universe. it's just another unwarranted assumption

 

Actually, in our experience total entropy is not demonstrated. The farther back we look, the more the horizon recedes, just as the future advances. Both are artifacts of current emergence.

 

The third coordinate of the alpha omega model is I am.

 

"The farther back we look, the more the horizon recedes, just as the future advances."
This is incorrect. the future does not advance and the past does not receed. Give Science the correct figure on the energy content of the Universe and It'll give you the day it ends--
and the day it begun.

To deny a begining just because one did not see it for one's self...
And on the other end
--Of course it hasn't been demonstrated. It hasn't been achieved yet.

The Universe in general moves toward entropy. There is no reason to believe that was different in the past or will suddenly change in the future.

 

By alpha and omega I just meant the begining and the end.

 

A segue to this response, what I mean by the future advancing is that the die of probability is cast anew in each moment, it is a perpetually open ended commitment.

 

I know what you meant. What I am talking about is an ancient esoteric model of the very issue we are discussing. These things had long ago been worked out but the really strange thing is everybody already senses it but ignores the fact because of the very real responsibility that this implies, that we ourselves are genuinely part and parcel of creation. i.e. no one to blame.

 

Open ended?
Non-sequiter. there is no infinity.

 

"These things had long ago been worked out "

Ancient models were born in the ignorance of an inflexible past.

There is a flexible future before us; therein lies the answer.

 

Is it possible that the 0/God could actually be a perfect vaccuum? I know that space-time is filled with electromagnetic fields, energy, particles etc. so it's considered a "something".

Also, what about possible rips or discontinuities in space-time such as an event horizon within a black hole where time goes to zero? If time goes to zero and nothing is allowed to happen in that particular space wouldn't that be a state of "nothingness" within the universe?

 

The answer to what? I said ancient esoteric model. The model I am talking about was born of intense and unrelenting scrutiny.
Now you've brought and entirely new universal property into the mix called the ignorant inflexible past, a phenomena for which no documentation exists.

 

Very much so.

As long as EM pulses exist, the Universe IS. Perfect Vacuum would be "space" without Energy content--
HOWEVER, Reality requires 2 quanta of Fundamental Energy to exist (something to measure against), so Perfect Vacuum is a paradox; it cannot exist.

So pefect vacuum (Nothing) is unstable.

BUT, "unstable" is a measure of Time, and if there was no Time anything would be possible because it would never have occurred. (Follow me?)

So the conclusion is: perfect vacuum would shatter into it's constituent parts. since Nothing has NO constituient parts, than it may shatter into any combination that adds up to 0.

if this is not clear, I can do a lot better when i sober Up!

Yes-- except time doesn't go to exactly zero, UNLESS, it can be quantified.

which it probably can be-- except that that Quanta exist below the Uncertainty theresshold, meaning Time can only be detcted by it's passing and there is no minimum detectable amount so the object approaching the event horizon approaches it forever as far as an outside observer is concerned.

All this means that "below" the event horizon doesn't really mean anything, and that's what gives birth to the notion of an Einstein- Rosenberg bridge (wormholes). the energy has to go somewhere!

 

Scrutiny of what? the Bible and such?
Ancient phiosophy is not Science.

Scientific thought is required; this is, after all, the science forum.

 

MonkeyBoy,

a simplier/more complex answer to the second part is that Relativity states that to reach zero time requires infinite energy

 

The question of "What is the meaning of intelligence?" hasn't really been delved into. I don't think the issue can be resolved without doing this.

We just grant ourselves the title of intelligent, but do we really have any choice but to design as we do, or are we actually more like a fungus moving as one in a single predetermined direction (predetermined by the circumstances of our being)?

So if we're still to grant ourselves that title, then perhaps it can be applied to a fungus as well, or matter itself. In other words, intelligence, by our standards, is simply the attempt to survive, or proliferate, or thrive.

Otherwise I don't think it's really a subject that can even be discussed. Human intelligence wouldn't be on par with a God's enough to even use the same word for it.

 

Intelligence is the result of cognitive processes. Any organism that lacks these processes is not intelligent, no matter how well suited it is to its environment. By my standards intelligence is not the attempt to survive.