Cosmos or Chaos

Topics that make you think. Expand the reaches of your mind. Explore philosophy, religion, psychic phenomena, and all manner of enlightenment here.

Cosmos or Chaos

Postby van » Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:07 pm

Kia ora

Is the Universe Cosmos or Chaos?
Religionists often use the Universe as proof of the existence of God/Creator citing its " orderly arrangement"
What say you?

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby pilvikki » Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:55 pm

erm... orderly?

shouldn't someone be up there sweeping up asteroids and meteorites? [they could go into the nearest black hole.]

why are things exploding/imploding all the time, creating more mess.

orderly.

bah.
Somebody's boring me. I think it's me.

Dylan Thomas (1914-53)
User avatar
pilvikki
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 5802
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:42 am

Postby emanresu » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:30 am

Without advocating either side, I would say it's both. There is order, but order in itself doesn't necessarily imply design. Given enough time and space, pockets of order must surely arise from chaos if only from a cyclical standpoint. There is also disorder, but lack of order doesn't really prove absence of design. Disorder is viewed subjectively by humans and yet it might actually prove to be a type of order beyond our understanding or it could be the entropy of previous order. To stretch a point, what we observe as disorder could actually be a point in unfinished design wherein chaos might constitute purposeful mechanism toward something we are incapable of envisioning. In short, to answer your question is like trying to perceive an automobile from a scrap of tire. It's interesting to speculate on but the answer is beyond us for now.
Are we there yet?
emanresu
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:07 am
Location: u.s.

Postby van » Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:58 pm

Kia ora eman

Given enough time and space, pockets of order must surely arise from chaos if only from a cyclical standpoint.


Can order arise from chaos?
As has been asked in the past :"Can a book be the end result of an explosion in a printing works?"
If the Big Bang theory is correct does this imply that the singularity presents order?

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby emanresu » Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:09 am

I think order can arise from chaos given unimaginable time and the concept that the physical universe and whatever catalysts brought it into being might have the potential to cycle through all possible states of being and configurations. If anything, the Big Bang indicates chaos, at least in the sense given it by the newer theory of colliding parallel universes which suggests our ordered/disordered universe was created by the impact of two other ordered/disordered universes. If the theory is correct, then our Singularity is really just a common event in the larger scope of space and time. And yes, if an explosion in a book factory could be perpetuated for eternity, I imagine quite a few books would result just for the simple reason that endlessly kinetic particles would eventually arrange themselves into all guises of existence, no matter how briefly.
Are we there yet?
emanresu
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:07 am
Location: u.s.

Postby ohlia » Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:30 am

I think you cannot have one without the other. For them to be apparent they both must exist to conform.
You calling me stupid do not make me stupid; it makes you a person calling me stupid.
User avatar
ohlia
Stone Cold Crazy
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:21 am

Postby van » Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:42 pm

emanresu wrote:I think order can arise from chaos given unimaginable time and the concept that the physical universe and whatever catalysts brought it into being might have the potential to cycle through all possible states of being and configurations. If anything, the Big Bang indicates chaos, at least in the sense given it by the newer theory of colliding parallel universes which suggests our ordered/disordered universe was created by the impact of two other ordered/disordered universes. If the theory is correct, then our Singularity is really just a common event in the larger scope of space and time. And yes, if an explosion in a book factory could be perpetuated for eternity, I imagine quite a few books would result just for the simple reason that endlessly kinetic particles would eventually arrange themselves into all guises of existence, no matter how briefly.


Kia ora eman

From the standpoint of biological chaos, over time, order arising, I would agree, however in the case of inanimate matter I have serious reservations
What if anything would be a motivating,ordering force?

I am interested in learning more about about the newer theory you mention, please enlighten me, for I was unaware of this

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby van » Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:00 pm

ohlia wrote:I think you cannot have one without the other. For them to be apparent they both must exist to conform.


Kia ora Lia

From my understanding of the comments of religionists (fundamentalist) their claim is that only order exists and thus is evidence of a guiding force (Deity, God,Creator etc)
When faced with incontrovertible proof that things aren't ordered they then seek to lay the blame on the antigod Satan (Chaos) believing that in its time chaos will be removed and order fully implemented

In that sense I am drawn to Oriental philosophy which merely states that "things are", Yin and Yang, the one balancing the other

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby pilvikki » Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:21 pm

but then, what constitutes Order and what is considered Chaos?

all ducks in a row could be said to represent order, but if they're quacking off without purpose, that would destroy that theory.
Somebody's boring me. I think it's me.

Dylan Thomas (1914-53)
User avatar
pilvikki
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 5802
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:42 am

Postby van » Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:57 am

pilvikki wrote:but then, what constitutes Order and what is considered Chaos?

all ducks in a row could be said to represent order, but if they're quacking off without purpose, that would destroy that theory.


Kia ora Hooch

I suppose that would depend on one's understanding of the words
Generally speaking, I would suggest that "order" is predictable, at least in the short term, whereas "chaos" isn't

An example from real life
An artist wields a brush with some purpose, and while (s)he may change his/her mind as the process unfolds the end result will have some meaning, perhaps only in their mind, and that is called "art"
But it is a purposeful determined exercise

On the otherhand, a person sets up a series of canvasses in a geometric patern of their desire
In the midst of this, a conglomeration of various paints is piled, over an explosive mixture, which when detonated, will splatter paint over the canvasses in an indiscrimate manner, and this too will be called "art"

While both share a purpose (covering a canvas with paint) one is to all intent and purpose a deliberate action (order), the other random (chaos)
I haven't phrased this too well, but hope it makes sense

The ducks cited, may well have an orderly reason for quacking off :lol:
Till such a time as we understand what the quack is happening, we perceive chaos

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby emanresu » Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:08 am

As far as inanimate material, I think it would be the absence of an ordering force rather than the presence of one. In my thought experiment, time is the greatest factor. Consider an eternity wherein that which constitutes matter is constantly rearranged by whatever catalysts might exist. All states of being would eventually ensue through randomness, and if not, then and only then would an ordering force have to be considered in the instance of purposeful omission. Matter that has arranged itself in a certain pattern through randomness alone has the potential to arrange itself to any other imaginable pattern given a stupendous time frame. For it not to do so would evidence control.
Here is a link to the theory I mentioned. It's BBC, but once you get the key points, you will be able to research the rest through other sources.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/20 ... luni.shtml
Are we there yet?
emanresu
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:07 am
Location: u.s.

Postby van » Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:12 pm

Kia ora eman

I have 2 of Kaku's books and have read about supersting theory and // universes, but this a new one
In fact the BBC is currently screening a Kaku doco dealing with Time

From my reading I was under the impression that // universes were only possible due to their existing in a different time, hence I am somewhat surprised by this new one, will have to examine this further :D

Is it my imagination , but you sound apologetic in your reference to the Beeb?

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby pilvikki » Wed Jul 18, 2007 9:35 pm

yeah, what's happened to the revered BBC?

The ducks cited, may well have an orderly reason for quacking off
Till such a time as we understand what the quack is happening, we perceive chaos


:lmao1:
Somebody's boring me. I think it's me.

Dylan Thomas (1914-53)
User avatar
pilvikki
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 5802
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:42 am

Postby emanresu » Thu Jul 19, 2007 5:03 am

I have nothing against the BBC, or at least no more than I have against mainstream media in general but I probably sounded somewhat apologetic for linking to a popular culture source (and therefore suitably dumbed down for the masses) rather than a hard science reference.
Are we there yet?
emanresu
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:07 am
Location: u.s.

Postby van » Thu Jul 19, 2007 5:02 pm

Kia ora eman

Hehehe
I have read the first link on that new theory, rather hard to wade thru
No doubt reading it several more times will make it more comprehensible
The one thing I like about Kaku's writings and documentaries is the way he couches things in laymans terms,making it easier to get a grasp of the concepts

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby pilvikki » Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:55 pm

i could read it until my eyeballs drop off and still have no clue what it means.

drat.

someone pls, really dumb it down for me...
Somebody's boring me. I think it's me.

Dylan Thomas (1914-53)
User avatar
pilvikki
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 5802
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:42 am

Postby emanresu » Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:45 am

I sympathize, Pilvikki. We're so used to our understanding of things as relating to our everyday, physical world and then all of a sudden the quantum theory comes along brimming with all sorts of counter-intuitive possibilities. Add to that dimensions beyond height, width depth and time that we don't even have the faculties to envision and it's no wonder those few who claim to have understanding leave the rest of us in the dark. Wikipedia gives a slightly less technical grounding than the actual theory plus it's easier to branch out from the highlighted 50 cent words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model
Are we there yet?
emanresu
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:07 am
Location: u.s.

Postby pilvikki » Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:44 pm

great! thanks! i'll read it a few more times and then the ha'penny should drop...
Somebody's boring me. I think it's me.

Dylan Thomas (1914-53)
User avatar
pilvikki
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 5802
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:42 am


Return to Brain Formation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron