The anthropic principle seems to have an aspect of Nietchian recursion about it. In physics at least, the conscious awareness of a deterministic evolution in a steady state Universe leading to life is held to be what-true, untrue? Philosophers perhaps would want to examine the terms and language accurately in order to determine what sort of premises are concerned and if they have at least syllogistic validity.
Circular arguments were invented in logic before the era of multi-verse theories; hence the concept may not itself be valid except in a Universe where the geometry is consistent with circles and further that circles traveled return one to where one started in space-time (thus the eternal recursion) as improbable as it seems. I suppose therein is the difference between nominalist points that may be valid outside of space-times as quasi-real tings such as one might regard neo-Platonist nouns in a Kripkian context and the steady state field itself that does not work in reverse presently, nor return the money that typed a circular argument back to the space-time point where he or she started writing it.
I enjoyed reading Tegmark's 2014 book 'The Mathematical Universe'. Ultimately all of the quantum Universe may be no more than pure math. I suppose if one regards Leibnitz's monads as math infinitesimals (tiniest possible points) then one-dimensional monads could be representative of a fundamental quantum structure that would perhaps be equally well regarded as a field of pure thought of God.
Monkeys with typewriters enabled to exist in a deterministic steady state quantum Universe sustained by the will of God might be irreducible to being a circular argument in-themselves even if they evolved in space-time.
Here is a book with some of the topics I wrote on the subject (it's free to download). I am Christian, and I tried to cover many of the questions people have about the existence of God today...
http://www.lulu.com/shop/garrison-cliff ... 99175.html
[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=291701#p291701]Braininvat » Sun Nov 22, 2015 4:39 am[/url]"]Nietsche's doctrine is eternal recurrence, not "recursion," which is a concept is math and cognitive science. This confusion of terms somewhat undermines the whole post. And "circular" in the thread title refers to a logic structure, not to a spatial loop in spacetime.[/quote]
I have used some philosophical language in my post, yet philosophy is about discovering truth as a kind of wisdom so one wants to write descriptively and objectively even though, or perhaps, while aware of the problem of implicit subjectivity in any quantum observational system (i.e. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle).
Certainly circular arguments were intended by the author of this thread to refer to logical tautology. I was aware of that and intended to place the phenomena of thought and logic within a proper metaphysical context (such as Ortega y Gasset described in 'An Essay on Metaphysics) wherein thought is within a monistic field continuum.
Thought is a part of the physical Universe comprised of extremely complex relationships of neurons with trillions of possible relationships denoting data. There are more possible configurations of connections in a human brain that their are stars in the galaxy. Our Universe is one of four dimensions where circles may exist not only in thought yet also in reality. Einstein's friend Paul Erhenfrest invented the idea that only in a four dimensional Universe could atomic structures exist such as can form life (at least physical life based on atoms and molecular structures) because orbits require three dimensions of space and one of time.
Paradoxically max Tegmark; the brilliant M.I.T. physicist expositor of multiverse theory, wrote in his 2014 book ;' The Mathematical Universe', that their may be no actual dimensions of time, and that it could instead be another dimension of space in which every possible worldline or form of atomic structure might be embedded or exist. So there is really not time, motion, or evolution; (I inferred that not Tegmark). Instead human conscious awareness actualizes within a present embodiment of all those possible configurations in 'spacetime'.
The concept is rather advanced. It is also consistent with principles of a holographic Universe as well as a completely deterministic mathematical Universe and one that exists only 'in the mind of God'.
Obviously there are several philosophical approaches to cosmology, epistemology and Christian teleology. It is rare than anyone finds concurrence with others on all of those principles. Modal logic has different theoretical Universes with different laws, and so might any Universe that exists be one within an infinite number of Universes that creates a new Universe each time even one tiny particle (such as a quark) take a different course. The sum of all that infinite number of Universes may be known only to God, as a set of all sets containing itself cannot exist outside of the mind of God (probably).
It is a fun topic to consider the idea of logic, tautology and cosmology. It is possible to create loops that return only negative answers I suppose or loops that return only positive answers in math and cosmology. What if defining any sort of response as positive automatically negated it? I think the problem of certainty that relies on one's own finite knowledge is inherently subject to circularity. It is possible to make infinite reductions of verifications requiring further proof of proof ad infinitum or temporal recursions of logic as loopy[u] go to [/u]statements (in programming) that have an eternal recurrence until the power runs out.
I have thought that Neitschze's eternal recurrence mind experience he had walking along the shore of Lake Lucerne one evening was a cognitive problem stimulated by syphilis. It is possible under stress to view external reality perceived as a recursion, and make an inference that it is infinitely loopy. One may also understand that if the Universe is embedded in an infinite deterministic continuum and that it is actually experience as mind that travels through it (perhaps as a vast atemporal deterministic continuum of God like a neural network structured hologram), Neitschze may have short-circuited his proximal perceptions a little and experience some of the field of infinite permutations of universe and made the mistake of believing it infinitely recurrent without change.
Circular arguments were invented in logic before the era of multi-verse theories; hence the concept may not itself be valid except in a Universe where the geometry is consistent with circles and further that circles traveled return one to where one started in space-time (thus the eternal recursion) as improbable as it seems. I suppose therein is the difference between nominalist points that may be valid outside of space-times as quasi-real tings such as one might regard neo-Platonist nouns in a Kripkian context and the steady state field itself that does not work in reverse presently, nor return the money that typed a circular argument back to the space-time point where he or she started writing it.
I enjoyed reading Tegmark's 2014 book 'The Mathematical Universe'. Ultimately all of the quantum Universe may be no more than pure math. I suppose if one regards Leibnitz's monads as math infinitesimals (tiniest possible points) then one-dimensional monads could be representative of a fundamental quantum structure that would perhaps be equally well regarded as a field of pure thought of God.
Monkeys with typewriters enabled to exist in a deterministic steady state quantum Universe sustained by the will of God might be irreducible to being a circular argument in-themselves even if they evolved in space-time.
Here is a book with some of the topics I wrote on the subject (it's free to download). I am Christian, and I tried to cover many of the questions people have about the existence of God today...
http://www.lulu.com/shop/garrison-cliff ... 99175.html
[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=291701#p291701]Braininvat » Sun Nov 22, 2015 4:39 am[/url]"]Nietsche's doctrine is eternal recurrence, not "recursion," which is a concept is math and cognitive science. This confusion of terms somewhat undermines the whole post. And "circular" in the thread title refers to a logic structure, not to a spatial loop in spacetime.[/quote]
I have used some philosophical language in my post, yet philosophy is about discovering truth as a kind of wisdom so one wants to write descriptively and objectively even though, or perhaps, while aware of the problem of implicit subjectivity in any quantum observational system (i.e. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle).
Certainly circular arguments were intended by the author of this thread to refer to logical tautology. I was aware of that and intended to place the phenomena of thought and logic within a proper metaphysical context (such as Ortega y Gasset described in 'An Essay on Metaphysics) wherein thought is within a monistic field continuum.
Thought is a part of the physical Universe comprised of extremely complex relationships of neurons with trillions of possible relationships denoting data. There are more possible configurations of connections in a human brain that their are stars in the galaxy. Our Universe is one of four dimensions where circles may exist not only in thought yet also in reality. Einstein's friend Paul Erhenfrest invented the idea that only in a four dimensional Universe could atomic structures exist such as can form life (at least physical life based on atoms and molecular structures) because orbits require three dimensions of space and one of time.
Paradoxically max Tegmark; the brilliant M.I.T. physicist expositor of multiverse theory, wrote in his 2014 book ;' The Mathematical Universe', that their may be no actual dimensions of time, and that it could instead be another dimension of space in which every possible worldline or form of atomic structure might be embedded or exist. So there is really not time, motion, or evolution; (I inferred that not Tegmark). Instead human conscious awareness actualizes within a present embodiment of all those possible configurations in 'spacetime'.
The concept is rather advanced. It is also consistent with principles of a holographic Universe as well as a completely deterministic mathematical Universe and one that exists only 'in the mind of God'.
Obviously there are several philosophical approaches to cosmology, epistemology and Christian teleology. It is rare than anyone finds concurrence with others on all of those principles. Modal logic has different theoretical Universes with different laws, and so might any Universe that exists be one within an infinite number of Universes that creates a new Universe each time even one tiny particle (such as a quark) take a different course. The sum of all that infinite number of Universes may be known only to God, as a set of all sets containing itself cannot exist outside of the mind of God (probably).
It is a fun topic to consider the idea of logic, tautology and cosmology. It is possible to create loops that return only negative answers I suppose or loops that return only positive answers in math and cosmology. What if defining any sort of response as positive automatically negated it? I think the problem of certainty that relies on one's own finite knowledge is inherently subject to circularity. It is possible to make infinite reductions of verifications requiring further proof of proof ad infinitum or temporal recursions of logic as loopy[u] go to [/u]statements (in programming) that have an eternal recurrence until the power runs out.
I have thought that Neitschze's eternal recurrence mind experience he had walking along the shore of Lake Lucerne one evening was a cognitive problem stimulated by syphilis. It is possible under stress to view external reality perceived as a recursion, and make an inference that it is infinitely loopy. One may also understand that if the Universe is embedded in an infinite deterministic continuum and that it is actually experience as mind that travels through it (perhaps as a vast atemporal deterministic continuum of God like a neural network structured hologram), Neitschze may have short-circuited his proximal perceptions a little and experience some of the field of infinite permutations of universe and made the mistake of believing it infinitely recurrent without change.
No comments:
Post a Comment