Meaning of Life

Author: Dr.Franklin

Posts

Total: 107
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
You have a stutter, thats unfortunate
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Shall I assume your ability to understand my language is somehow compromised? That would honestly explain a lot.
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
The universe does have a goal, what is our goal, to survive and carry on our genes
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Please supply the intrinsic goals of the universe along with evidence to support your claim.

As for survival this is a goal but not provably an intrinsic one.

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
An essential goal of the universe is to supply life
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Life so far as we know exists as a thin film stuck to the surface of one small world. If life is a goal of the universe it would seem to have mostly failed at this goal. Still I think you misunderstand the difference between goals and unguided causation. 

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The tides are not a goal of the moon. The tides are simply caused by the moon. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
Life so far as we know exists as a thin film stuck to the surface of one small world. 
wouldnt we have found life if we were just "another" planet, right?

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
The tides are not a goal of the moon. The tides are simply caused by the moon. 
How do you know?

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
wouldnt we have found life if we were just "another" planet, right?
I don't know what your point is and I'm not sure I agree with this statement anyway.
The tides are not a goal of the moon. The tides are simply caused by the moon. 
How do you know?
Must I preface every statement with it would appear or all evidence points too? Can we not at some point simply take that as read? The tides do not appear to be a goal 9f the moon. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise then I have no choice but to reject any claim to the contrary. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
If we are just an another planet, then there would be another planet of life
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
There may be other planets that support life. We do not know of any such planets however and the vast majority of observable space would appear to be completely inhospitable to life. 

If you see a flaw in my logic please point it out and offer a counterfactual. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
is evolution really that rare, wow God did it
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
We have no way of knowing exactly how rare life is but far more of the universe appears to be empty uninhabited space than anything else. Why would we not think that empty space rather than occupied space was the goal given these observations?
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
Prove it
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Prove that the universe would appear to be mostly empty space? Do you not have access to Google? Are you unfamiliar with our current cosmological models? If so you would seem to be woefully underprepared for this conversation. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
Well I have to assume the universe isnt real, right?
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Solipsism is impossible to dismiss philosophically and it is true that we can never be certain but it provides no actionable data and even if the universe is illusory we can still evaluate "reality" and become conversant in the physical laws that govern it. If the universe is an illusion it would appear to be mostly the illusion of empty inhospitable space containing no apparent life or means of supporting life.

If you see a specific flaw in my logic please point it out and provide a counterfactual. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
SOMETIMES, perceiving something as real doesn’t cut it. With the shimmering image of a hologram, the illusion is clear enough. That 3D representation is a trick of the light, a projection of information encoded in just two dimensions. But it would be a bit of a shocker if we found out that the entire universe were made that way.
We’re not close to proving that, still less working out the implications. But a groundswell of work in theoretical physics suggests it’s a distinct possibility.


The story really begins in the 1990s. Physicists were struggling to tame the intractable mathematics of string theory – our best stab at forcing gravity to play nicely with the other three forces of nature – when they discovered a cunning trick. Under certain circumstances, by subtracting one from the number of dimensions in the universe you were dealing with – in other words, treating it like a hologram – gravity could be made to disappear.



The best-researched instance of this “holographic principle”, known as the AdS/CFT correspondence, only works in a complex 5D space-time bent back on itself rather like the surface of a Pringle. The trick has proved surprisingly useful, not just in string theory but also to elucidate the workings of practical things like superconductors, and explain such stubborn problems as why particles have mass.

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
SOMETIMES, perceiving something as real doesn’t cut it. With the shimmering image of a hologram, the illusion is clear enough. That 3D representation is a trick of the light, a projection of information encoded in just two dimensions. But it would be a bit of a shocker if we found out that the entire universe were made that way.
We’re not close to proving that, still less working out the implications. But a groundswell of work in theoretical physics suggests it’s a distinct possibility.


The story really begins in the 1990s. Physicists were struggling to tame the intractable mathematics of string theory – our best stab at forcing gravity to play nicely with the other three forces of nature – when they discovered a cunning trick. Under certain circumstances, by subtracting one from the number of dimensions in the universe you were dealing with – in other words, treating it like a hologram – gravity could be made to disappear.



The best-researched instance of this “holographic principle”, known as the AdS/CFT correspondence, only works in a complex 5D space-time bent back on itself rather like the surface of a Pringle. The trick has proved surprisingly useful, not just in string theory but also to elucidate the workings of practical things like superconductors, and explain such stubborn problems as why particles have mass.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
If the universe is a hologram it still doesn't change its apparent nature. It still appears to have no intrinsic goals and to be mostly full of empty space with a very occasional material body to break the monotony. 

You say the universe may not be real. As a soft solipsistic I agree whole simultaneously informing you that it is immaterial to our discussion.
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
Te universe is pretty!!!!

 As a soft solipsistic I agree whole simultaneously informing you that it is immaterial to our discussion.
So evolution is fake too
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Within the possibly illusory universe we inhabit evolution is observable taking place. If the universe is real then so is evolution and if the universe is an illusion then evolution is an observable part of that illusion and at least as real as all the rest of it.
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
God is an observable part too 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
That many people claim the existence of god(s) is observable. The god(s) themselves do not appear to be. Not in the way that evolution and gravity are observable anyway.


Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
How do you know that? God talks to us
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Anecdotal evidence is insufficient to establish such an extraordinary claim. Without independently verifiable testable evidence your claim can and should be dismissed. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,555
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@secularmerlin
why
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Because skepticism is the default. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3