Home | Community | Message Board


Gaiana.nl
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Origin of Life
    #1112780 - 12/05/02 06:59 AM (14 years, 5 days ago)

There appear to be two main classes of thought on this:

1. A cosmic intelligence (God) created all the creatures (whether whole or by "breathing life into mud" and stimulating evolution).

2. Life arose by a series of random chemical interactions with energy provided by the sun and volcanoes.

Now, of course option 2 could still be fueled by God as he was so foreward thinking that he created the possibility with the Big Bang (if true) and then let things be after starting the wheels in motion.

Option 2 is argued against by many through the law of entropy and mathematical improbability.

Option 1 could be argued against, because there is little likelihood of life on the moon, meaning that environmental conditions are required for life (the breath of God alone is insufficient.) Also the only evidence of God doing this is the story in Genesis and lack of a better explanation.

I am just throwing out a few thoughts to get a discussion going as this is rarely talked about here and is a conerstone of philosophical discussion.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemachineelf368
self-transforming

Registered: 09/05/02
Posts: 119
Loc: in the mountains, awaitin...
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1112991 - 12/05/02 10:41 AM (14 years, 5 days ago)

well no one else has said anything, so i'll take a shot.  maybe everyone's scared of you.  :wink: I haven't read any technical papers on the whole "intelligent design" theory, but from the pop overviews I've come across it seems like a pretty good combination of the two theories.  There are other theories out there, though, including:

3. An alien, not cosmic, intelligence influenced early chemical interactions on this planet and/or injected this planet with foreign substances in order to induce life where it would not normally be.  A variation on #1, perhaps.

4. my personal favorite, though, is best explained by Alan Watts.  Go to  Elf Trance and find the section called "Apples." Basically, there are people on the earth becausee that's what the earth does.  An apple tree 'apples,' this planet 'peoples.' It happened for the same reason that a soap bubble is round: there's no other way it could be. 

5. and there are plenty of other religious creation myths.  For example, the creator stood at the center of the earth and whirled a bird in a clockwise direction, and the result was an emanation of dreamlike forms, including life.  (Fact of the Day: This spinning resulting in delusion is represented in the swastika, which many Buddhists have held saccred for thousands of years.)

I agree that the whole law-of-entroopy-thing dissuades #1, but hey, if God can do anything why can't He just violate that particular law of thermodynamics, and perhaps some of the others while He's at it? It's not like anyone's gonna stop Him.  Just my 2.333 cents. 
-m


--------------------
(the above was deciphered from phi (~1.62) using an advanced alphanumeric conversion algorhythm and should not be perceived as meaningful.)


Edited by machineelf368 (12/05/02 10:48 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRemy
Bitches Brew
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/04/02
Posts: 1,343
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Last seen: 5 years, 26 days
Re: Origin of Life [Re: machineelf368]
    #1113033 - 12/05/02 11:02 AM (14 years, 5 days ago)

In reply to:

I agree that the whole law-of-entroopy-thing dissuades #1, but hey, if God can do anything why can't He just violate that particular law of thermodynamics, and perhaps some of the others while He's at it?




Physical laws (i.e. thermodynamics) only exsist on a macroscopic level. Subatomic particles are not governed by ANY laws of phsyics, however they (groups of particles) do follow certain statistical laws (quantum mechanics). Individual particles, however, appear in experiments to actually make choices of their own. Essentially, they are acting consciously! All particles also appear to be aware of all other particles in existence. If that is so, then a whole new light can be shown on the evolution of life, that is if life is not in fact simply a false, pretense (If matter is in fact concious, then anything that is, essentially has what we can call a soul, from a rock to a parrot to an entire planet). If this sort of universal conciousness exists, than something along the lines of the intelligent design theory seems like a realistic approach to evolution of life as we know it (breathing organisms with the ability to reproduce).


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1113131 - 12/05/02 11:36 AM (14 years, 5 days ago)

You're a bit out of date swami. With the recent discovery that life colonised the earth far sooner than was originally thought, the theory now is that life was brought here by comet bombardment.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Xlea321]
    #1113315 - 12/05/02 12:29 PM (14 years, 5 days ago)

That is one theory Alex, and just pushes the question back one step and off the earth. It still leaves the mystery of how cometary life originated.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRevelation

 User Gallery

Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 6,130
Loc: heart cave
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1113484 - 12/05/02 01:14 PM (14 years, 5 days ago)

Now, of course option 2 could still be fueled by God as he was so foreward thinking that he created the possibility with the Big Bang (if true) and then let things be after starting the wheels in motion.

Do you believe in determinism? I'm thinking that at the moment of the big bang, god would already know exactly how it would all turn out.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleShroomismM
Space Travellin
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 64,434
Loc: 9th Dimension
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1113495 - 12/05/02 01:18 PM (14 years, 5 days ago)

According to popular Pleaidian theory :wink:... after Creation is formed and developed, it creates fluffy matter which evolves into gas and spirit becomes more intelligent through experience, the galaxies form. Their movement, rotation, and pulsation is controlled by the pulses of time. Trillions of years elapse during this process as the material universe is forming. Then come the clusters of gas that create suns and stars, and eventually the planets form around the stars, signalling that the New Creation now understands how to create mineral kingdom. All along, the spiritual energy of New Creation is learning and growing through experience. Once planets form, reasoning and thinking continue until the food kingdom comes into existance. Throughout the process, the New Creation is following the blueprint of the Original Creation and using thinking and reasoning to understand the results of its experiences. The development of flora and fauna is just one more step in creating a more complex and higher developed universe.

As the food kingdom is developed, the way is cleared for the creation of animals to eat the food. Fauna, the animal kingdom, is responsible for the evolution of the coarse matter of our bodies. Once the animal kingdom has evolved the coarse body material to a level of evolution that is high enough,  it is possible for the spirits of human life to come into material body. Man then begins the material life cycles and evolves the New Creation to perfection through the spiritual energies created by each spirit-form's growth.

Life develops in many different forms, depending on the planet and the sun system it is in. If a world has necessary elements of water, acids, radiation from the sun, and spiritual evolution, then life forms of varying sizes and shapes wull naturally develop. The human form is the most dominant and is found in all parts of the universe where the conditions are correct. The human form also represents a higher level of spiritual development by the New Creation, for it obviously takes more understanding and knowledge to create a human body than it does to create gas, minerals, water, or plants. We are seeing the slow evolution of the New Creation through the learning experience.

The human life form is capable of providing the New Creation with the highest order of learning experience and thinking that will be added to its evolution. The human form represents the first time the New Creation has been able to create a life form capable of rational thought and reasoning. Each level of development- fluffy matter, gas, minerals, flora, and fauna.. has taken a more complex level of understanding and consciousness to create. The human form represents the highest level of understanding and consciousness. Humans can think and experience on their own and provide energy to the New Creation, which in turn provides energy to the Original Creation, the spiritual part of the Absolutum. There is a chain of wisdom from the lowest levels to the highest which all contribute to the evolution of all life forms throughout the chain of Creations.

As the universe continues to grow, there is a point where the experiences of the material world can no longer provide new wisdom to the New Creation. There are limits to how high the consciousness of material life forms can expand. In the human form, for instance, there is a point wherein information gathered by our material senses is not of high enough consciousness to continue the evolution of Creation! The human form then transforms into a higher form of consciousness, which no longer requires the death cycle or the material body.

~ Excerpt from How the Universe was Created by Randolph Winters 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRemy
Bitches Brew
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/04/02
Posts: 1,343
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Last seen: 5 years, 26 days
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Revelation]
    #1113571 - 12/05/02 01:43 PM (14 years, 4 days ago)

In reply to:

Do you believe in determinism?




Determinism is a remnant of classical physics. The new physics allow free will to enter into the scene.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offline3eyedgod
trippinkid

Registered: 11/24/02
Posts: 684
Loc: Far away and very near
Last seen: 13 years, 3 months
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1115322 - 12/05/02 09:48 PM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Read shroomalicious's post Death and Time don't exist.
Where god comes from.










--------------------
Without everything wouldn't nothing be everything and without nothing wouldn't everything be nothing.I am the beginning and the end,the source and the void, the light and the darkness,i am but a small drop of the ocean yet i am an ocean unto myself


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCatalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1115811 - 12/06/02 12:53 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Actually, life doesnt violate the laws of thermodynamics or entropy in any way. We all comsume food and break it down for energy. If we stopped doing that, our bodies would approach chemical equilibrium and we would die. You see, life is just a complex chemical reaction that follows the laws of thermodynamics just like any chemical system. We use energy to keep that system from going to equilibrium.

The reason for life can be illustrated by the "pop-bottle whirlpool". Take two 2-liter bottles and put them together, top to top, with some water inside. When the water is on top, it is at a state of higher energy and it will begin flowing to the bottom bottle. It will eventually form a whirlpool which is a state of higher order. According to thermodynamics, this would be impossible without adding energy to the system. The reason why it happens is that the water flows through the bottle neck at a faster rate when a whirlpool is formed and therefore reaches equilibrium at a faster rate for a net gain in entropy (disorder) according to thermodynamics. In short, our purpose (life) is to simply aid in the chemical decomposition of the earth.

Depending on how you interpret these observations, the chemical orgin of life appears to be very possible, if not probable.


--------------------
:egyptian:


Edited by Catalysis (12/06/02 12:58 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRebelSteve33
Amateur Mycologist
Male

Registered: 05/28/02
Posts: 3,774
Loc: Arizona
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1115866 - 12/06/02 01:12 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Before we can think about how "life" first came about, I think we would first need to understand what "life" really is. I think both of these things are beyond the grasp of our understanding or comprehension, though.

Personally, I don't like the God theory. I think "God" is a crutch we use to explain the unexplainable. We like to know how things work. We like to know why things are the way they are. When we're unable to understand something, using an imaginary diety as an explanation is just an easy way out. We fear the unknown. Using "God" as an explanation is just a way of lessening our fear.

To me, nature is God. It somehow created life, but I cannot even begin to speculate how. I don't like the random chemical interraction theory either. If it were true, than I am sure we would have been able to recreate these random chemical interractions in the laboratory by now with the extensive knowledge of chemistry that we have.

This is one of those questions that just boggles my brain. I've laid awake in bed for hours thinking about it, but have never been able to come up with any reasonable explanations. We need to come up with some new and better theories if we are ever to solve this puzzle.

-RebelSteve


--------------------
Namaste.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCatalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
Re: Origin of Life [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1115919 - 12/06/02 01:31 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

well, we dont know enough about chemistry to create a human from scratch, but all 20 naturally occuring ammino acids (building blocks of life) have been synthesized using early earth conditions. The first "cells" were most likely oil droplets in water. The droplets with favorable chemical concentrations survived and split, merging with other oil droplets, the chemicals inside reacting with each other. The common misconception is that these interactions are all random but they are not.

There are strict rules for chemical interactions. The reason why life is based on carbon is almost strictly for its ability to consistantly form 4 chemical bonds and its abundance. It is not merely a coincidence that the elemental composition of our bodies resembles that of sea water. Life had to evolve from an aqueous environment because it is the most reactive.


--------------------
:egyptian:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRebelSteve33
Amateur Mycologist
Male

Registered: 05/28/02
Posts: 3,774
Loc: Arizona
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Remy]
    #1115932 - 12/06/02 01:33 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Quote:

Individual particles, however, appear in experiments to actually make choices of their own. Essentially, they are acting consciously!




Could you provide some examples or evidence of this?

From what I understand, I don't think this is true.  It may sometimes seem like molecules and atoms are "making decisions" on their own.  In reality, though, all bond making and breaking processes between atoms and molecules involved in chemical reactions are governed by a strict set of known rules, depending on the type of particles involved.  The particles do not have free will. 

We know what chemicals will react with what when we mix them together.  We can even predict where a certain atom or ion will attach to a molecule, how the process occurs, and why.  It all has to do with electrons.  Every atom, ion or molecule is restricted in what it can do by the number, type, and placement of its electrons.  And the particles are not acting consciously at all.  If the conditions are right, a reaction will take place.  If the conditions are wrong, it won't.  It's as simple as that.  It's all governed by rules, which are governed by electrons, and there is no free will or conscious decision making on the part of atoms or molecules at all.

That's at least what I've been taught  :crazy:

-RebelSteve


--------------------
Namaste.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRebelSteve33
Amateur Mycologist
Male

Registered: 05/28/02
Posts: 3,774
Loc: Arizona
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Catalysis]
    #1115947 - 12/06/02 01:39 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

We can synthesize the "building blocks" of life, but we have yet to synthesize life.  Also, like I said before, until we understand what in the hell "life" really is, how can we ever begin to understand how it began?

If someone can define to me what life is in words, I will drop dead in my swivel chair! :smile:  I think these things are just not meant to be understood by us mere humans.  It is fun to speculate, though!


--------------------
Namaste.


Edited by RebelSteve33 (12/06/02 01:41 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Origin of Life [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1115994 - 12/06/02 01:52 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Before we can think about how "life" first came about, I think we would first need to understand what "life" really is.
Good point. As another poster pointed out, all matter may be "alive", however for the sake of this discussion, I would submit that we define life as structures that process energy and matter to make copies of itself. I welcome any refinement to that deifinition.

I think both of these things are beyond the grasp of our understanding or comprehension, though.
Perhaps the mystery will never be solved. If we found out the "magician's trick" we might become bored with it all. But with an infinite mystery, with each new discovery revealing more and at the same time creating more questions, the exploration may have no final answer.

Personally, I don't like the God theory. I think "God" is a crutch we use to explain the unexplainable. We like to know how things work. We like to know why things are the way they are. When we're unable to understand something, using an imaginary diety as an explanation is just an easy way out. We fear the unknown. Using "God" as an explanation is just a way of lessening our fear.
Agreed. It is no different than saying "I don't know."

To me, nature is God. It somehow created life, but I cannot even begin to speculate how. I don't like the random chemical interraction theory either. If it were true, than I am sure we would have been able to recreate these random chemical interractions in the laboratory by now with the extensive knowledge of chemistry that we have.
Maybe, maybe not. We really don't have a clear picture as to the atmospheric conditions, pressures, and chemical makeup of early earth. They are at best, crude guesses.

This is one of those questions that just boggles my brain. I've laid awake in bed for hours thinking about it, but have never been able to come up with any reasonable explanations. We need to come up with some new and better theories if we are ever to solve this puzzle.
And hence the reason for the shroomery S&P forum. If thousands of mushroom-influenced brains cannot solve the riddle, then who?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1116013 - 12/06/02 01:55 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

In reply to:

If thousands of mushroom-influenced brains cannot solve the riddle, then who?



Maybe a couple hundred drunk biologists at a convention in Denver?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRebelSteve33
Amateur Mycologist
Male

Registered: 05/28/02
Posts: 3,774
Loc: Arizona
Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1116029 - 12/06/02 01:58 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Quote:

And hence the reason for the shroomery S&P forum. If thousands of mushroom-influenced brains cannot solve the riddle, then who?


:grin:!!!

Damn I missed this place...

EDIT:  Interesting definition of life, Swami... It seems to make sense to me, and I have never seen it stated so succinctly like that.  You don't really expect me to drop dead in my swivel chair, though, do you? :smile:


--------------------
Namaste.


Edited by RebelSteve33 (12/06/02 02:00 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Origin of Life [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1116050 - 12/06/02 02:04 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

You are safe because I made that up BEFORE your second post, thus no obligation to keel over. Timing is everything my friend.  :wink: 


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Origin of Life [Re: Swami]
    #1116153 - 12/06/02 02:42 AM (14 years, 4 days ago)

Great thread and Great replies!  :smile:

5 shrooms! 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRemy
Bitches Brew
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/04/02
Posts: 1,343
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Last seen: 5 years, 26 days
Re: Origin of Life [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1117669 - 12/06/02 04:59 PM (14 years, 3 days ago)

Im talking about elementary particles. Atoms and molecules are groups of elementary particles and there for are governed by probability laws of groups. Atoms are not the building blocks of the universe, like we had once thought. They are simply groups of matter, which make up more complex groups of matter (molecules), which in turn make up even more complex groups of matter (everything that exsists on the macroscopic level), which in turn makes up even more complex systems (planets), you should get the point by now. Chemistry is still governed by Newtonian Physics. On the subatomic level, individual particles will make decisions on their own, but are still governed by group statistics. If you place a screen with two slits in it, into a comepltely dark room, and shine a beam of light through one end of the room, light will project onto the other end of the room in certain areas which will be consistently illuminated (this is a property of waves, and it looks something like stacked rectangles of light with black space in between). However, when a single photon (a particle of light) is let out through one side of the room, it will go through one of the two slits, and end up illuminating some part of the wall that was illuminated by the full beam of light (I hope this makes sense, as it is somewhat hard to explain without pictures). There is no way to determine where exactly the individual photon will go, or which slit it will choose. Many physicist suggest that particles, therefore, are acting consciously, and are also aware of each other. If you only believe what you have been taught, then you are a victim of the system. Newtonian physics is taught in schools, because it governs the world we live in (the world at a macroscopic level). It does not govern matter, like we are told in school, and atoms are not the building blocks of matter. Forget what you where taught, and start learning whats really going on.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* energy manipulation while tripping. truekimbo2 1,293 12 04/13/04 03:19 AM
by truekimbo2
* Why does the universe like equilibrium?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Cognitive_Shift 3,124 72 11/25/08 08:45 PM
by Arden
* Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
OrgoneConclusion 7,784 127 10/19/07 01:48 PM
by fireworks_god
* misCONCEPTions involving science; energy doesn't exist
( 1 2 3 all )
kaiowas 2,527 41 01/14/04 04:34 PM
by kaiowas
* Energy
( 1 2 3 all )
Gomp 3,063 56 08/17/05 05:03 PM
by redgreenvines
* Cultivating male sexual energy
( 1 2 all )
onlynow 2,717 28 10/07/07 06:40 PM
by EternalCowabunga
* eating energy
( 1 2 all )
OldWoodSpecter 1,654 28 06/23/05 01:18 AM
by THE KRAT BARON
* This Is Your Brain on God - Michael Persinger has a vision - the Almighty isn't dead, he's an energy Divinorum 1,257 3 09/23/09 10:48 PM
by explosiveoxygen

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
1,463 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
High Mountain Compost
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.118 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 16 queries.