this theory doesn't make sense in my head yet

[...the Nagger]

but for real, what of cancer is literally colonies in your body that figured out how to survive forever/leave their galaxy etc lol?

like they became so smart, they're tryna do something now, inside you, and don't realize they're killing you in their efforts

or they somehow blow themselves up inside you

[Chyeahhh!!!]

Originally Posted by ...the Munster

like they became so smart, they're tryna do something now, inside you, and don't realize they're killing you in their efforts

like us and the Earth. Again, abiding by the same principles

[Split]

Originally Posted by ...the Munster

but for real, what of cancer is literally colonies in your body that figured out how to survive forever/leave their galaxy etc lol?

like they became so smart, they're tryna do something now, inside you, and don't realize they're killing you in their efforts

or they somehow blow themselves up inside you

current laws of physics say that "molecular" style of life exists only on the one we know now. So our galaxy isn't an atom of some larger universe, and electrons aren't the stars of some other small universe etc

[...the Nagger]

Originally Posted by Split

current laws of physics say that "molecular" style of life exists only on the one we know now. So our galaxy isn't an atom of some larger universe, and electrons aren't the stars of some other small universe etc

I understand what you're saying in terms of "complex life"

but what I'm talking about isn't the same concept idt

[Split]

Originally Posted by ...the Munster

I understand what you're saying in terms of "complex life"

but what I'm talking about isn't the same concept idt

Word. u should check out Into the Wormhole.

they had one episode where they talked about macroscopic life, and how cities and galaxies both fulfilled all the criteria to be considered life forms. it was mad interesting and they didn't twist anything around

they also showed how the cycles of a city mimicked that of people, which explains the lifelike qualities


@namix there must be a POSSIBILITY for the opposite of a concept to exist.just because it can exist doesn't mean it has to within a given system ie our universe

[namix]

Originally Posted by Split

@namix there must be a POSSIBILITY for the opposite of a concept to exist.just because it can exist doesn't mean it has to within a given system ie our universe

the concept of it IS the possibility though, no?

i hear you tho, a concept can be real or just possible. and in fact, a concept can be quite real to one person, but only possible to the next -- and depending on their perspective and perception, perhaps even impossible (e.g. indigenous tribes seeing ships come across the seas lead to very dissimilar historical accounts, due to the fact that "concept" was previously either impossible or only possible for them, so without 'shared experiences' to anchor that new experience to, some thought the ships were like flying - some thought they were beasts, and some literally couldn't even see them)

[Split]

Originally Posted by namix

consider the fact that much of the supporting math behind physics, way, way back - began with assumptions.... self-defined variables we threw into equations while trying to make the equations work

ultimately, the laws of physics - while mostly agreeable to the world at large - are built on theories, which were built, at some juncture, on assumptions.

we keep on thinking we'll find the smallest sub-atomic particle, for example, by accelerating larger particles at each other....

What do they see? the same thing over and over again - but many of the ingenious folks in the scientific community are so close to the trees they dont see the forest.

the answer isn't in a finite-sized, 'smallest particle' --- it is IN THE PATTERN. the fact that we can break down shit further and further, or look further and further into the cosmos, and see the same relationships.

"Seek and ye shall find".... there was so much confirmation bias based on our physical experience and what 'great minds' before us taught us, that we fail to see that it's not that we're not finding the right answers -- we're asking the wrong questions.

What limited our understanding in the past was technology - what limits it now is technology - technology breeds more technology, and the evolution of technology becomes exponential --- which is why subject matter from like the late 1800s and early 1900s was disproved in the late 1900s... and why subject matter I learned in the 90s has been disproven in less than 20 years, and why shit we discovered a decade ago is being re-evaluated already lol.


The providence of "microcosms" and "macrocosms", and their intimate (often fractal) relationship IS evident in all sciences, and supported by many faiths and philosophies, ancient and modern alike.



so alas, i say to you: FUCK THE LAWS OF PHYSICS!!!

lol, for real though - it's relevance is only as meaningful as our desire to be 'ruled' by those 'laws'.


the laws of physics which are most likely to withstand the test of time will be the ones that are observed in other subject matters as well -- the real 'make-up' of the universe is seen most clearly when our (fallible) SCIENCE aligns with our (fallible) FAITHS/beliefs and the two combine to ring truth within the individual beholding them. :)

Yeah man, no offense, I'm pretty sure you have no idea what you're talking about. you can't just extrapolate circumstantial evidence into philosophical claims like that.

and life mirrors science mirrors thought because they're all interconnected by the same middleground, but you can't zip up their separate 'frameworks' with the infinitesimal amount of 'fabric' we have now.


I agree with you about the fractal-like relationships from the smallest to the largest levels of existence.

but yo I don't think anyone's looking for "answers" by looking for smaller and smaller particles, but they do find some 'answers' every step down the rabbithole they go. they just have a lesser and lesser individual relevance to our world

[namix]

Originally Posted by Split

Yeah man, no offense, I'm pretty sure you have no idea what you're talking about. you can't just extrapolate circumstantial evidence into philosophical claims like that.

and life mirrors science mirrors thought because they're all interconnected by the same middleground, but you can't zip up their separate 'frameworks' with the infinitesimal amount of 'fabric' we have now.


I agree with you about the fractal-like relationships from the smallest to the largest levels of existence.

but yo I don't think anyone's looking for "answers" by looking for smaller and smaller particles, but they do find some 'answers' every step down the rabbithole they go. they just have a lesser and lesser individual relevance to our world

totally agree, to the point i'm not even sure where you think we disagree? when you boil it down, the scientific method is not so dissimilar from the philosophical method.

honestly, grasping the fractal relationship above and below is all that's need for literally every other answer to be reached. it's why we cellular mitosis works the way it does, it's why we create in our image in our offspring when we pass on our genes, and it's why we create in our image in every creative moment, invention, computer and machine.

But of course they are looking for answers bro - that is the goal of any question, and the very concept of science (just as philosophy) stemmed from the desire to answer questions in a methodical way.

again though - that fractal relationship is the key, and everything else in between is typically miscommunication.



but word, interested in where in particular you think we are in disagreement?

[namix]

Originally Posted by Split

current laws of physics say that "molecular" style of life exists only on the one we know now. So our galaxy isn't an atom of some larger universe, and electrons aren't the stars of some other small universe etc

consider the fact that much of the supporting math behind physics, way, way back - began with assumptions.... self-defined variables we threw into equations while trying to make the equations work

ultimately, the laws of physics - while mostly agreeable to the world at large - are built on theories, which were built, at some juncture, on assumptions.

we keep on thinking we'll find the smallest sub-atomic particle, for example, by accelerating larger particles at each other....

What do they see? the same thing over and over again - but many of the ingenious folks in the scientific community are so close to the trees they dont see the forest.

the answer isn't in a finite-sized, 'smallest particle' --- it is IN THE PATTERN. the fact that we can break down shit further and further, or look further and further into the cosmos, and see the same relationships.

"Seek and ye shall find".... there was so much confirmation bias based on our physical experience and what 'great minds' before us taught us, that we fail to see that it's not that we're not finding the right answers -- we're asking the wrong questions.

What limited our understanding in the past was technology - what limits it now is technology - technology breeds more technology, and the evolution of technology becomes exponential --- which is why subject matter from like the late 1800s and early 1900s was disproved in the late 1900s... and why subject matter I learned in the 90s has been disproven in less than 20 years, and why shit we discovered a decade ago is being re-evaluated already lol.


The providence of "microcosms" and "macrocosms", and their intimate (often fractal) relationship IS evident in all sciences, and supported by many faiths and philosophies, ancient and modern alike.



so alas, i say to you: FUCK THE LAWS OF PHYSICS!!!

lol, for real though - it's relevance is only as meaningful as our desire to be 'ruled' by those 'laws'.


the laws of physics which are most likely to withstand the test of time will be the ones that are observed in other subject matters as well -- the real 'make-up' of the universe is seen most clearly when our (fallible) SCIENCE aligns with our (fallible) FAITHS/beliefs and the two combine to ring truth within the individual beholding them. :)

[Nigma]

Originally Posted by ...the Munster

but for real, what of cancer is literally colonies in your body that figured out how to survive forever/leave their galaxy etc lol?

like they became so smart, they're tryna do something now, inside you, and don't realize they're killing you in their efforts

or they somehow blow themselves up inside you

Also cancer is literally rapidly growing cells, which directly correlates to the overpopulation issues we're having. Our race is literally a cancer in the universe. Cells which manifest into properties beyond most cells, go void, rapidly produce, die off, and begin a new cycle. A verse topical I'm going to write is actually about this very topic. Comparing it at three levels, from the micro cell, to the mid plain of consciousness, us, and the macro, being the galactic pattern of life. It's like a fractal you can follow and trace back from the biggest conceivable concept of space down to smallest form of matter we have the capability of seeing.