The universe is not limited by how humans can think

[cthulu2016]

We human beings have brains that can think and feel in certain ways.

These brains evolved. They are not really very different from cat brains. We think they are incredibly different from cat brains because we are the ones assessing what constitutes "incredibly different" and we place great stock in the differences.

Being a person, I think the differences are quite significant.

Cats probably cannot conceptualize their own thought process. They cannot "think about thinking." Cats also cannot do higher math. Cats cannot possibly theorize about the universe the way we can, and will never figure out that light has a speed, or that electrons can "tunnel" through insulation by simply appearing on the other side.

But our edge over cats is not the difference between ignorance and truth, wrong and right. There is nothing ultimate about our ability to conceptualize. Our ability to conceptualize arose from evolution driven by, and only by, the problems involved in walking around on Earth and interacting with other human minds.

There is not any reason whatsoever for human beings to be able to fully grasp, for instance, a situation without time. We can model it. We can even discover it. We can make predictions (even the word is an irony) based on modeling it.

But we cannot really "feel" it. Even our thoughts about time occur in time, and in a direction. Past is followed by future. (The arrow of time)

We can bootstrap our way to a non-human perspective using math. We can manipulate symbols representing what happens inside an atom. But we cannot really feel it.

At some level of scale time ceases to exist as the "past then future" affair we live within. If we did not "know" that by modeling it then our computers probably wouldn't work. (electrons don't always care what direction our macro time is supposed to be running in) But no human being can think outside of time.

But just because we think a certain way and cannot really think another way contains very, very little evidence about the laws of the universe.

But we cannot shake the idea that our perspective on the world is complete and representative of some deep reality.

So we have questions like, "What happened before the big bang?"

Now, perhaps our evolved mode of thought happens to be useful there, and perhaps not. Perhaps our universe came into being in the context of a "larger" universe and in the context of a larger directional time stream.

But just because we think philosophical thoughts like, "Everything has a beginning," that seem a priori to us does not make them true statements about the meta-universe.

Many people know that our best understanding is that time was created in the big bang, but the question persists, "What preceded the Big Bang?"

You see the problem... if concepts like "before" and "preceded" have no meaning outside of directional time, and directional time was created in the big bang, then the human concept "before the big bang" is an imposition of whatever makes sense in walking around on the plains of Africa upon the universe with the assumption that if it works for catching little animals to eat it must work for describing the environment our universe does or does not exist within.

Again... there is nothing magic about our brains. There is no reason whatsoever to think that the architecture of thought is the same as the architecture of the universe.

[pscot]

1. Cat brains in sooth!

Monkey brains, fool! Big difference.

[zazen]

2. awesome post!! n/t

[LuvNewcastle]

3. I don't know if humans will ever be able to truly understand

anything beyond the concept of time. As long as we're in these bodies that are susceptible to the ravages of time, our minds will be constrained by the body's limitations.

I wonder about cats and other intelligent animals all the time; I wonder if they have self-awareness like we do. I think it's been proven that some of the primates have it, but I think they were only able to prove that because they were able to teach some of them a limited form of sign language. Unfortunately, we can't communicate with cats or dogs. It would be a frightful thing to find out that all the mammals have self-awareness, considering how we treat many of them. I think we'd see a lot of people become vegans overnight.

[cthulu2016]

4. Elephants seem to be a borderline species

There are "modeling of self" type things that are not typical of elephants, but that some elephants can do.

I find that delighful.

[LuvNewcastle]

6. Interesting.

I wonder how different the world would be if we were able to communicate with some of these animals and prove conclusively that they are self-aware. How would it change the way we treat them and would that also change our views about each other and the rest of the Cosmos? I think it might make us more caring and a lot more careful about how we treat the environment. It could be beautiful and it could transform our entire existence.

[Scootaloo]

9. the game is actually rigged

As our concept of "self-awareness" is fully rooted in our own concept and understanding of self-awareness.

Any creature possessing a central nervous system has a degree of self-awareness that is sufficient or better for that species' needs. testing how "humanlike" their response to stimuli is and then grading them on "awareness" is a sort of ego-stroking self-delusion.

The best part? We're not the only species that does this! The OP mentioned cats... Well... you know how cats will bring you a dead (or sometimes very lively) animal? Do you know WHY? Well, because that cat has judged you to be an infantile (and perhaps very ugly) kitten, in need of learning how to hunt and feed yourself. And you WILL be graded. The cat will watch you dispose of the dead animal. if you get rid of it where it can't see or smell it, it assumes you've eaten it. Maybe a few more times and it'll bring you a live critter... and sit back to watch you catch it.

The cat is judging your conformity to catlike behavior.

[LuvNewcastle]

11. I didn't think of that.

Humans over-estimate their intelligence, for sure. It's humbling to think about the fact that there are plenty of other observers on the planet who also have a point-of-view -- and they're analyzing us just as we are them. So many of us are stuck in the mindset of the Genesis model, where we're viewed as the masters and caretakers of the planet and the crowning jewel of all creation. We're able to learn more, it seems, when we realize our limitations.

[Thirties Child]

29. A cat once was so proud when he presented me with a rabbit's foot on a chain

[rhett o rick]

5. Great post. Isnt there a theory that the universe contracted before the big bang and that

it's a grand cycle of contraction and expansion?

[Phlem]

14. Hmm.

I think you talking about the Cyclical model.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model


I know there's also a theory of dimensional branes that, when they touch for whatever reason, can cause a Big Bang event.

http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/branes_collide.html

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a010100/a010137/



-p

[Rozlee]

16. I guess that might tie in with the idea that our universe began within a black hole.

Which I understand is kind of a fringe theory. But, it's all kinds of cool.

[Phlem]

18. Interesting.

I haven't heard that theory yet but your right, it seems to tie in quite nicely. If you happen upon a blue link could you post it? I'm all curious now.



-p

[Rozlee]

20. I'm terrible at bringing up links.

But, google "universe began in black hole" and you'll get scores of hits from several science journals and magazines. It's fascinating stuff.

[rhett o rick]

28. Yes, the Cyclical Model. Thanks for the link. I read one of Hawking books

and at the end of the book (going from memory) he said that the Catholic Church had just warmed up to the Big Bang theory and invited him to speak (in Rome I think), about the same time he was switching to believing in the Cyclical Model.

[WhiteTara]

7. You are talking about suchness or isness

I think of our thinking in terms of focusing our attention at something. All is occurring NOW, we just happen to be looking one part...like the blind men and the elephant.

The first quantum mechanical law is the observer affects the experiement. So we turn our focus to certain things and call it the three times (past, present, future.) But mind is always there and always remains even if we turn our focus on what we call the past present or future; but all is in the same Now.

[PowerToThePeople]

8. MIB

[Democracyinkind]

10. Great post. k&r

[Phlem]

12. I've felt this for a long time.

Especially when people fully believe the bible is fact and try to force their beliefs on others but also when Scientists or atheists have such a resounding conviction that there is no god.

How can we know either, we're a small insignificant dot living in never ending space and time.

How the hell do we know anything yet.

We're to busy killing each other for mortal power and significance.

[Rozlee]

17. I'm an atheist myself.

But, I do have a lot of respect for Father Georges Lemaitre, who is credited for being the father of the Big Bang and is being rethought as taking credit away from Hubble for discovering the theory of an expanding universe. He was a truly great man.

[Phlem]

19. I have to apologize.

My post generalized very large groups but I am fully aware there are the sane in any group of which I have full respect for you. I just get frustrated sometimes because it seems like eons before more people ask these kinds of questions during the day instead of tuning in to Dancing with the Stars, no pun intended.



-p

[Rozlee]

21. *

[Arugula Latte]

13. Yes, and you put that concept into words very skillfully.

On the Big Bang/god thread I wrote: "So matter came into being (at least, that is how our human minds are grasping it at this point, but there is probably some other way to think about it)" and this is what I was trying to get at.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Well said. We consider ourselves important only because we tell ourselves we are.

“Once upon a time, I dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was myself. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.” Chuang Tzu

[AtheistCrusader]

22. No one said the universe was limited by our powers of perception, and

you are no authority to decide that our brains aren't capable of understanding, or building tools to help us understand, the entirety of the universe.

It's a possibility, but not a certainty.

[Zorra]

23. I don't know anything, I believe that I apparently use my brain to apparently assess my apparent

environment and apparent existence, but I don't know, maybe not. Who knows?

There are no known knowns. This is something I believe I don't know. There may unknowns, but I don't know what these are. That is to say, there are things that I know I don't know, but this is something I don't know. There are also unknown unknowns I don't know, but I don't know. Therefore, I know nothing, because I don't know anything, I suppose.

I think I am, therefore I am...I think, but I really don't know.

That said, would you like what appears to me to be a nice homemade cookie that I believe I apparently baked?

[dotymed]

24. Well put. thank you. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Our everyday notions of commonsense logic may be totally inadequate for these questions, yes.

However, some of them - like "was the big bang part of an even larger process" are still valid to ask. In fact, the latest data on gravity waves seems to confirm not just Alan Guth's hypothesis about hyperinflation after the big bang, but Andrei Linde's theory of chaotic eternal inflation, which not only poses potential explanations for the big bang, but posits it as part of an even larger, perhaps infinite, series of events and ever iterating, branching, fractal multiverses.

It is worth remembering, too, that prior to Hubble in the early 20th century, the "Universe" was just the Milky Way galaxy-- galaxies beyond our own were unknown. Now we know existence is MUCH bigger than that.

We may be in the process of discovering that The Universe itself is just a tiny part of something much, much, bigger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_inflation

[LuvNewcastle]

31. I think our universe, the one started by the Big Bang, is just part of

an infinite number of other universes, which I call the Cosmos. I think that different universes in the Cosmos are continually expanding and contracting. The death and rebirth cycle is always happening, without a beginning or an end.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. You might be interested in reading further about Guth's ideas re: hyperinflation and Andrei Linde's

theory which builds on that, that posits a sort of infinite series of eternally expanding universes budding off of each other fractal-style.

I don't pretend to completely understand it; certainly not the math- but what I do know is that these recent results were exactly what would be predicted by that exact scenario, which is why Linde had reporters from SciAm showing up at his house.

This is a PDF of Linde's 1986 Paper entitled "A Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe":

http://www.mukto-mona.com/science/physics/Inflation_lself_prod_inde.pdf



http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2014/03/andrei-linde-and-the-beauty-of-science.html

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2014/03/17/andrei-linde-learns-his-big-bang-theory-is-true-video/

[jtuck004]

26. "But our edge over cats" < uh...

My cat wanted me to pass this along...




He suggests we wait 500 years and re-visit that. See who is out catching voles in the meadow that's growing back after those with "the edge" destroyed it vs who is worm food.

But he says have fun with your physics.

[panader0]

27. We are filters, mind and body

Humans are capable of accessing only a very small part of what is going on.

[Fairgo]

30. Very nice, thank you

A pleasant amusement to end the day.