The Theory on the Instantiation of Life by Natural Entanglement.

[tonylang]

The time is long overdue for us to intelligently answer the question: What is a living being? The answer, if only a plausible one, could change the world...eventually.

Being is the presence of one’s position-of-view (POV) as the central target of their instantiation, of one's life. Your presence in your current instantiation is not maintained by your body. Your current body is one of many living host vessels on Earth and probably elsewhere, each instantiated to another being, but only this one, only these atoms, are you. Moreover, we retain our individuality even as the atoms and molecules that compose our bodies come and go over the course of a life time.

How is this possible? Your presence is maintained by a very special natural tether which binds you to your current body. Since a host vessel may emerge anywhere, one of perhaps many trillions with millions of various designs per planet around any given star in the vastness of the cosmos, this natural tether needs to have some very special properties indeed. For starters it must not be restricted by the laws of general or special relativity. It must have instantaneous universal reach to anywhere life hosting species may emerge in this or perhaps any universe. As it turns out there is a phenomenon known to modern science that meets each of these specifications; Quantum Entanglement (QE).

This topic presents, perhaps for the first time, a practical scientifically minded theory for the natural processes that govern the instantiation of the individual as a being distinct from the evolution of that beings current species. I will introduce you to;

• Instantiation of the individual: The establishment of your Life.

• Your Position-Of-View (POV): That component of your being which resides in this universe.

• The Metaverse: The only real verse, and that from which the universe emerges.

• Your LifeID: That component of your being which resides outside of this universe, in the metaverse.

• The Quantum Entanglement Spectrum (QE): The Life Spectrum.

• Your Quantum Entanglement Frequency (QEF): The real and only immutable, you.

• The Cell: A biological QE circuit, the critical component in instantiating all life as we know it.

• The Entanglement Cells; Cells responsible for heterodyning the QEF in complex hosts and establishing the LifeID.

• Metamatter: An undiscovered but very real form of matter critical in instantiating and in the evolution of all life. Think dark matter without gravity.

• Entanglement Molecules; Molecules in every living cell which establish the QE connection with metamatter to create all life.

These are all elements of; 'The Theory of the Instantiation of Life by Natural Entanglement.' this ground breaking theory addresses many of the really interesting questions and surprisingly unifies nature with many old, formerly incompatible, but surprisingly instrumental ideas that mankind has believed or suspected to be true for millennia. Before we embark on this mind expanding journey, keep in mind; No matter how strange nature may seem, it is even stranger and it is all science.

The word science is the word we use today to describe mankind’s efforts to comprehend and hopefully understand nature. Comprehending nature is the goal of science and likewise it was, and still is, the goal of religion. Therefore religion may be regarded as the first science if only in the sense that it was mankind’s first effort to understand existence. Then a new school of thought arose, dubbed the scientific method with a unique approach that endeavors to explain what religion had strived to explain for millennia. Today we associate too closely the methods used to comprehend existence with the words instead of associating both, science and religion with their common goal.

Why bother, some may ask. Some may suggest that religion is just plain wrong and science is just plain right. How many of us today, after all of the upturns in our understanding of nature that have transpired throughout history, would remain close minded enough to be completely surprised by a reality where religion was never completely wrong and science was never completely right. Instead the reality we live and experience is a stunningly flexible and amazing hybrid implementation of nature which ironically incorporates necessary elements of both schools of thought. This hybrid implementation makes life possible; it makes you possible anywhere in existence. Such a truth would be embraced by only an open minded few in their current instantiation of life but would be embraced more readily by those same individuals in their future instantiations. Progress by reinstantiation, today we call it mortality, has been one of the primary vehicles of progress for mankind from the very beginning of human history.

The so called soul or lifeID, by any name, must exist for life to exist, for you to exist because your body can't do it alone. Hence the lifeID is a part of nature and therefore definable by science.

The raw theory in summary: The most fundamental element of life is a molecule called the Entanglement Molecule. This molecule has the unique property of naturally establishing a quantum entanglement connection to a form of matter called metamatter, life-matter if you will. Think dark matter but expressing quantum entanglement (the life-force) in place of the force of gravitation. Metamatter like other natural entities exists outside of our space-time and is not subject to locality or relativistic constraints. Together these entanglement molecules and metamatter are the two endpoints of each isolated, naturally occurring quantum entanglement connection contained within every living cell that has ever existed. An entanglement molecule once arranged from its constituent atoms, not unlike the ferrite magnet in a transistor radio, is instantly sensitive to available, uninstantiated quantum entanglement frequencies (QEF) upon which to entangle available metamatter.

Such isolated pairings existed on Earth for eons, and in this universe, for even longer before the naturally occurring circumstances arose on Earth and perhaps elsewhere, to provide a ring of molecules that could be described as an early cell wall. Not all entanglement molecules were likely to encounter a cell wall but those that did, enclosed by this barrier, obtained the benefit of an extra level of protection that allowed them to develop beyond the typical. This basic entanglement relationship is the most fundamental manifestation of life. It establishes the position-of-view (POV to be discussed in this volume). Over time other types of molecules joined with these proto-cells sometimes to their mutual benefit sometimes not. Those that added no benefit or diminished the proto-cells survival prospects would not survive. The entanglement connection gave surviving proto-cells something very special. It gave the otherwise inanimate molecular components on the inside of this early cell a form of intra-cellular communication. That is, the ability to interact at a distance, but more critically at that point, the quantum entanglement connection gave the proto-cell the capacity to share or imprint internal cellular state information into its entangled metamatter. Metamatter because of its extra dimensional, non-locality and non-relativistic nature acts as a kind of cloud-storage accessible instantaneously from any location in this universe and in any other as well.

This universal cloud storage is the critical factor required to get evolution started and is what makes being possible anywhere in this universe. At that point evolution existed only via random environmental contact or interactions between proto-cells and other structures in the primordial environment of early Earth. Thus, the cell became nature’s biological entanglement circuit. Each such entanglement pairing constitutes an instantiation of life whether on Earth, in this universe, or anywhere in existence. Life could now be hosted by any viable formation of cell(s) that may emerge anywhere in existence. Ones instantiation is established at one specific quantum entanglement frequency (QEF), a narrow frequency band in the infinity of possibilities on the quantum entanglement spectrum. A quantum entanglement frequency that is unique in all existence to each life and to no other, but only while that QE connection persists. This yet to be determined property, perhaps frequency, on the quantum entanglement spectrum is the singular property in nature that defines each individual being. All other components of the instantiation process may change or be exchanged but it is the QEF that positions you as the central and only target of your instantiation, of your life, and not someone else’s. Change or retune ones QEF enough and you change the being, the individual. You are your quantum entanglement frequency. You are not your cells or your metamatter.

It is very likely that the QE spectrum predated even the big bang. Your QEF is the immutable, the indestructible you. When cells on any given planet around any given star anywhere in existence entangles metamatter at your QEF that is where you will instantiate. That is where you will be, a place like that is where you are right now. A place like that is where you are likely to have been many times before your current instantiation. Places like that are where you will inevitably reinstantiate many more times in your future. This is instantiation, this is life. You and I, and your pet otter, every insect, every cell and every organization of cells all life anywhere in existence instantiates by this mechanism. While each cell entangles at a unique QEF a few specialized cells in complex organisms called entanglement cells (EC) are able to heterodyne or combine their QEF to establish and entangle at a different unique QEF thus instantiating the emerged individual, you.

The composite quantum entanglement frequency together with the metamatter it entangles is called the lifeID. No memories or behavior of the host body is carried or transferred by the lifeID. In nature such properties are electromagnetic manifestations of the host species or vessel only. The closest cultural meme to the lifeID come via religions throughout human history having referred to this, using one word or another, as the soul. Once any quantum entanglement connection is terminated, by sufficiently disrupting the cellular component (inducing death of the host vessel), the previously entangled metamatter becomes available for entanglement by other cells. However this particular metamatter has been imprinted to some extent by its previous entanglement. Each generation of entanglement, each instantiation, each life, imprints information, from both the cell and QEF, to its entangled metamatter. The degree of this imprinting is yet to be determined. This time dependant, perishable imprinting of cellular state in metamatter becomes available to future cells that entangle this metamatter while simultaneously limiting its entanglement opportunities to cells of matching state. The passage of time decays the imprint left on metamatter causing a return to a state best described as stem-metamatter (to be discussed later in this volume). This transfer of cellular state information may impact cellular behavior and/or development and to the extent that this imprinted information manifests an advantage for the cell, may provide a survival benefit. This is the evolutionary mechanism used by early life that predated the development of the DNA/RNA molecules. With QE communication the proto-cell became the laboratory of evolutionary innovation we see today from which emerged a great many useful cellular structures and processes, but most pivotally, a clear benefit to augment the cloud storage mechanism of metamatter with a more local, more expandable and flexible information storage mechanism which became RNA and eventually DNA. This was the birth of the modern living cell. Much is yet to be learned but the implications of this process are vast and pervasive.

For example; the degree to which metamatter imprints on its host cell and unique QEF will determine after deinstantiation (death) the likelihood that your imprinted metamatter will, for a time, reject entanglement opportunities from dissimilar host cells (of even your same or similar species) in favor of entanglement with cells that contain your familial DNA which are more compatible with its imprinting, thereby increasing the probability of reinstantiating you in your former family line or if less finely imprinted, to any random line in your previous species, or if less finely tuned still, to another species entirely. Also when we discover the entanglement molecule in nature and in the cell, just as we eventually discovered the DNA molecule in the cell decades after Darwin presented his theory of evolution by natural selection, likewise this may allow us to develop technologies capable of detecting and tracking each individuals unique QEF in this life or across multiple instantiations. This alone will change the world, at the very least it will change the way we write our wills. As for practical implementations, discovering and using metamatter could change everything. Metamatter satellites would be very different yet similar to regular orbital satellites even though they will reside outside of our space-time they'll permit instantaneous communication with any point in the cosmos. This will forever alter the human relationship not just to each other, but to all living creatures biological or otherwise. Also for the first time in human history we could begin to take practical actions in life that would affect our reinstantiation prospects into our next life, thereby tailoring your next instantiation ahead of time, minus the mysticism and ideology.

[Endy0816]

Most of the above is non-evidenced. Theory as it is used in Science is something backed by mountains of evidence.

 

Life is a process. That's why the atoms involved don't really matter. They come, they go but the process is what is ongoing.

[Acme]

For a non-religious well-reasoned view on how a 'vessel' can manifest self-awareness, see Douglas Hofstadter's I Am A Strange Loop. In a phrase, tangled hierarchy consciousness.

[tonylang]

Great, a reasoned purely scientific dialogue is what I'm seeking. I will look at the proposed link.

 

My reasoning starts with the presumption that one of two possibilities is true.

 

1- Every individual you for example will experience life only on one occasion and never again... end of conversation.

2- Individuality at least from the individuals point of view, is repeatable in nature (whether the individual knows it or not).

 

The first if true from a scientific standpoint, which is the only standpoint I care about, is a very short conversation and will always be so since no evidence to the contrary will ever be discovered.

 

The second however is a potential scientific gold mine for discoveries of how nature actually instantiates any individual in any species that emerges anywhere in the universe. How is it that scientifically minded people have avoided this obviously very important question amazes me. Everything in the universe is eventually definable by science so approach it scientifically.

Edited July 23, 2014 by tonylang

[pears]

The first if true from a scientific standpoint, which is the only standpoint I care about, is a very short conversation and will always be so since no evidence to the contrary will ever be discovered.

 

Not a very scientific approach

[tonylang]

Most of the above is non-evidenced. Theory as it is used in Science is something backed by mountains of evidence.

 

Life is a process. That's why the atoms involved don't really matter. They come, they go but the process is what is ongoing.

 

I site my individuality primarily and the other trillions of individuals on Earth secondarily as exhibits of evidence that one of my two conclusions above are valid and both are worthy of reasonded scientific inquiry. We really should know one way or the other and it starts with logical thought.

 

Not a very scientific approach

 

As i stated, If the first item is in fact true, then by definition no scientific evidence to the contrary will be found.

This is a very logical statement.

For a non-religious well-reasoned view on how a 'vessel' can manifest self-awareness, see Douglas Hofstadter's I Am A Strange Loop. In a phrase, tangled hierarchy consciousness.

 

This is the critical mistake that so many make about understanding what life is, consciousness, self-awareness, intelligence, etc can't scientifically have anything to do with the implementation of life. These are human embellishments. Remember however nature implements life it must apply to all life. The cell is the only life on Earth and has been here for billions of years before any of the above traits manifested in complex organisms. I suggest that one only use the single cell when thinking about this.

[pears]

 

As i stated, If the first item is in fact true, then by definition no scientific evidence to the contrary will be found.

This is a very logical statement.

 

Then what do you mean by "true from a scientific standpoint"? Scientific theories are always open to falsification on the basis of new evidence.

[Endy0816]

My reasoning starts with the presumption that one of two possibilities is true.

 

1- Every individual you for example will experience life only on one occasion and never again... end of conversation.

2- Individuality at least from the individuals point of view, is repeatable in nature (whether the individual knows it or not).

 

The problem is that you are presuming it has to be one or the other. It can in fact be that both are true in a Universe with increasing entropy and a finite self life.

 

Something may be repeatable but that does not mean it will be.

[tonylang]

 

The problem is that you are presuming it has to be one or the other. It can in fact be that both are true in a Universe with increasing entropy and a finite self life.

 

Something may be repeatable but that does not mean it will be.

 

Yes, and in this case that "something" is you, life, and you know that you exist, so let us consider the natural processes for your repeatability or lack thereof. Whether any individual does reinstantiate (live again in some form) or not may depend on a number of factors. Shouldn't we figure out scientifically what those factors and circumstances are or may be? Or is it that we should believe such things are not knowable?

 

Then what do you mean by "true from a scientific standpoint"? Scientific theories are always open to falsification on the basis of new evidence.

 

True from a scientific standpoint means exactly what you've stated and it also excludes non-scientific standpoints.

[Phi for All]

True from a scientific standpoint means exactly what you've stated and it also excludes non-scientific standpoints.

 

There is no "true" in science. Neither is there "truth", nor especially "Truth". Evidence supports a conclusion, but it's always open to change because of new evidence. A theory is as strong as it gets in science, which is very strong, but it's never "proof" or "truth".

 

When we think we've found the "truth", we stop looking. We don't EVER want to stop looking.

[tonylang]

I agree wholeheartedly.

So I'm seeking open minded, scientific input on a very real question. Try to solve the problem... or is there just no problem to solve?

Edited July 23, 2014 by tonylang

[Strange]

 

Whether any individual does reinstantiate (live again in some form) or not may depend on a number of factors. Shouldn't we figure out scientifically what those factors and circumstances are or may be?

 

Shouldn't you start by seeing if there is any evidence for "reinstantiation" before worrying about the details?

[tonylang]

 

Shouldn't you start by seeing if there is any evidence for "reinstantiation" before worrying about the details?

 

Absolutely...once we acknowledge the question is worth asking, we begin to think about where best to look for such evidence. Of course where you start would depend on a scientifically sound working theory of how nature might implement the process. For now I favor a QE based mechanism so there may need to be a molecule in nature and in every living cell that can entangle. Current researchers are just beginning to comprehend how the dynamics of quantum entanglement of multi bodied structures (more than two particle) behaves. They are just developing the mathematics to describe the observed behaviors.

 

If we had insisted that Darwin present evidence for evolution and natural selection he would have been in real trouble. Darwin didn't even predict the possible existence of the DNA/RNA molecules. He observed nature and with his best scientific understanding he deduced a theory based on "evidence" many had seen before but seen differently.

 

ref:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.7816

Fluctuations and Entanglement spectrum in quantum Hall states

Edited July 24, 2014 by tonylang

[tonylang]

 

Not a very scientific approach

 

 

 

The problem is that you are presuming it has to be one or the other. It can in fact be that both are true in a Universe with increasing entropy and a finite self life.

 

Something may be repeatable but that does not mean it will be.

 

 

Let me cheerfully clarify the first premise, in other words proposes: If nature is fundamentally structured in this universe such that all instances of individual life is in fact a one-off experience then obviously no evidence to the contrary will ever be found.

Axiom: A proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follows from it.

 

So the first thing to do is seek evidence for, or against some fundamental aspect of the working hypothesis. How about this: To test the existence, or lack thereof, of the proposed entanglement cells (EC) that establish and maintain life via the QE connection in complex hosts: Termination of the host's EC's and no other cells, should result in the termination of the subject.

 

Premise: Can death be induced without damage? Can an otherwise healthy living subject be terminated with empirically no physical damage contributable to the subject’s termination? Barring any limitations of technical proficiency or of equipment in analyzing and identifying the root cause of the subject’s death.

 

Axiom: There exists some absolute minimum number of cells that may be terminated in any complex organism whereby such cells may be scientifically established to be the root and only cause of death of the subject organism with no premortem adverse effects to other cells in the subject. Cells that meet these criteria are candidates for the theorized entanglement cells and the collection has a high probability of including some or all of the subject’s proposed entanglement cells.

Practical Test: Perform controlled experiments using approved subjects, i.e. fruit flies, to terminate the minimal number of cells per specimen to conclusively induce death of the test subject. Carefully repeat and document the number and location of target cells per subject for each scientifically substantiated successful sample. Repeatability per species is mandatory as the specifics may vary from species to species or subject to subject. In qualifying samples the cells that are the root cause of death must be gradually minimized and physically isolated. Cellular damage must be limited to only the target cells for a duration beginning at the time of the target cells death up to and including the time of confirmed subject death. In other words, for a successful trial no cells in the subject other than the target cells may be adversely physically affected premortem.

 

[tonylang]

To understand this idea let us imagine if you will a very practical real life scenario;

Earth is gone. Complements of some natural occurrence, you name it, perhaps a rouge primordial black hole that happens to be passing through our solar system which then sends the earth into direct collision with Jupiter. Or perhaps there is a giga-solar flare which perturbs earth’s orbit sending it careening into the sun. Result? All that you and I and your pet salamander were, every cell and every DNA molecule, every atom that was on or in the earth is now ionized nuclear fuel within the sun. The Darwinian evolved chemistry and biology that many fall back upon to describe life, particularly human life, on earth has ceased to exist in this solar system along with its thermodynamically described, Gibbs-free energy processes once used to represent the entirety of earth life.

Additionally, imagine if you will that there is life elsewhere in this universe. Let us imagine there exists at least one other evolved ecosystem (ECO-2) capable of hosting Darwinian life. Different from earth but governed by the same laws of physics and biology and thermodynamic processes that manifested earth’s ecology. This planet orbiting a viable star may be located anywhere in this universe since the laws of physics are expected to be consistently applied throughout. Also for this anecdote let us say that this other bastion of life is some 10 billion light years from earth’s sun. A distance so vast it would take much longer than the age of the big-bang to relativistically travel that distance, assuming of course there were any classically defined remnants of one’s biology left to make the journey.

Like earth ECO-2 has been around for awhile and hosts its own set of Darwinian evolved biological forms likely different from anything that existed on earth. Also, for the comfort of some, let us assume one other unessential embellishment; let us say that ECO-2 also hosts intelligent forms of life (Yes with personalities). Different from human beings but similar to us in that they are sentient, self aware, intelligent, and have a handle on science and technology as did we. On second thought let us not assume intelligent life. There is only wild life in ECO-2. :0)

Regardless, the question becomes; could you or I or any individual formerly hosted by earths ecology ever find oneself a part of ECO-2’s ecology? Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could make the immediate jump to reinstantiate to ECO-2? If you adhere to the classically understood, Gibbs-free energy etc. thermodynamically describable, relativistic ally constrained mechanisms to explain life writ large then you are forced to say no, (please correct me if not so), and in so doing you would necessarily ignore most of nature. Because in that view, clearly some aspect of what biologically, thermodynamically, chemically, defined ones singular existence must relativistically travel to bridge the unbridgeable distance between your last physical location, earth’s solar system, and ECO-2’s.

What scientifically accepted, mechanisms addresses this very practical scenario of our reality? What biological understanding may describe how one may naturally assume some other form in another location perhaps billions of light years from where one’s life, your biology, your chemistry, your matter last existed. While keeping in mind that the earth, and indeed the body you now occupy is just such another viable location in this space-time. Classical mechanisms simply cannot address this scenario but there are plausible natural scientifically understood non-classical (quantum) mechanisms that can describe and account for the above reality. The Instantiation of Life By Natural Entanglement proposes such a mechanism.

[Strange]

I suppose in an infinite, or near-infinite, universe something like this is possible. But the idea that an exact replica of "you" will be created is just very, very, very improbable. I doubt there would be two identical fleas in the universe, never mind someone thinking the same thoughts as you.

[tonylang]

I suppose in an infinite, or near-infinite, universe something like this is possible. But the idea that an exact replica of "you" will be created is just very, very, very improbable. I doubt there would be two identical fleas in the universe, never mind someone thinking the same thoughts as you.

 

If you carefully read the scenario you will see that the point being made is, as you indicate, that ones’ physical body can never be replicated and therefore if mobility of individuality exists in this universe it requires that one must be able to reinstantiate, and live in another viable environment such as ECO-2 but in a form (species) indigenous to ECO-2 (clearly not human). This possibility would demand a natural implementation of life which abstracts individual identify from any physical host form which may emerge in any given ecosystem anywhere in this universe or in existance. Ergo; You are not your body. The instantiation hypothesis describes such an implementation.

Since ancient times humankind has felt endeared by certain properties, skills, or talents observed in the living forms all around us. Properties which are misconstrued to be fundamental identifiers of life and of all living beings, properties such as mobility, voice, speech, sight, memory, and biology as we know it.

 

 

The reason Thomas Edison could so enthrall spectators with his newly designed speaking device, which he dubbed the phonograph, is due to humankinds hitherto engrained, evolved or learned, and largely subconscious understanding that a voice for example, is the sound of a living beings soul. Although consciously many people knew better, nevertheless it wasn’t until they were able to actually witness the spectacle of a clearly inanimate device producing a voice did the rewiring of people’s minds and the accompanying enlightenment take place. So it was with self locomotion or mobility of inanimate objects which also took some getting used to by our not so distant ancestors, as did light detection describable as sight, so to with the introduction of retrievable memory and such surprising spectacles exhibited by inanimate non biological devices.

 

 

Then there is life. Today we have a much more detailed description of biology and its chemistry than did our forbearers. Nonetheless, we perhaps more than ever, continue to see nature’s implementation of life as we did those other skills, as a feature indigenous to and expressible only by the biological forms we currently see around us. With the exception of life, it is only the encroachment of our synthetic, non-biological technologies upon these formerly cherished skills and talents that has helped us to see nature’s true design. In so doing we now realize that these functions are not exclusively properties of living beings or of biology but rather examples of utilization and manipulation of more basic properties of nature such as temperature and pressure, light, chemical, electromotive, and ponderomotive forces, friction, entanglement etc..

 

 

However, where life is concerned, and taking no example from the past, we continue to cling to the misconception that life is not a skill or talent comparable to speech or memory, a property which similarly evolved here on earth in biological form. Instead we define life by the observed biology and chemistry of the forms we see around us. This is akin to defining speech, communication, memory or vision by the description of your eyes, or larynx or neurons and their chemistry, or by the design of Edison’s phonograph, or by the intricate electrical designs of the cell phone. Life too is an evolved capability with a natural implementation abstracted from any particular biology or chemistry we may see around us. In nature life has a fundamental implementation based on natural entanglement via a molecule that may have existed in nature long before life emerged, a molecule like so many others utilized by the cell to exceptional effect, the entanglement molecule. A molecule that may also be utilized in synthetic, perhaps non-biological, forms to create an independent genesis of life.

 

 

No matter how detailed or convincing the illusion of life may become in its implementation, for example in an android or computer or even in a biological entity, despite what your eyes may urge you to believe, each continues to be a non-living entity absent natures fundamental mechanism of life. An essential mechanism provided via natural entanglement between the properly implemented entanglement molecules within living cells located in this space-time with metamatter in Hilbert-space which together produce each unique living individual’s position-of-view (POV) and lifeID. This is the essential mechanism that permits any viable form to host an individual like yourself or your pet otter anywhere in our space-time. It is how you are where you are right now. It is the natural anti-entropic mechanism that permits any viable planet or species to host your life. By this hypothesized definition even the most convincingly implemented appearance and behavior of an entity not naturally entangled in this way will continue to be an inanimate entity. In contrast, a hand held brick such as a calculator instantiated by natural entanglement to establish a POV, despite all appearances, this unconvincing brick would in fact be a living being.

 

 

The day will shortly arrive when we are confronted as we previously have been, with a new implementation of entities that meet all of the aesthetic and behavioral misconceptions we now harbor about life, or alternatively ones that show no traditional evidence of life what so ever, absent an understanding of the true determinant of life natural entanglement, we will be ill prepared to tell the difference.

Edited June 15, 2015 by tonylang

[tar]

"It is very likely that the QE spectrum predated even the big bang. Your QEF is the immutable, the indestructible you."

 

TonyLang,

 

I don't think that makes sense. If the universe is doing everything it is doing, right now (in the universal now sense,) for the first time, then the exact arrangement of the rest of the universe, around any POV instantiated being, is unique at the moment, and could not have existed this way, even a instant ago, much less "before" the Big Bang.

 

Your OP seemed good up to the point where you used the term vessel. You seem to be a ghost in the machine type of thinker. I believe reality is what it is that we experience from this particular POV and you can't have it, any other way. You can put yourself in someone else's shoes, but that is just imaginary.

 

The second place where I lost you, was in your talk about belonging to a verse more basic than this universe. While such talk is understandable from an imaginary point of view, it makes no sense from a sensible, scientific, discussion point of view. As in "show me the evidence". If some evidence can only be found in some other verse, how could we possibly see it from this POV? And what difference could it make. I am thinking we are well insulated from both the beginning and the end of this universe, by immense distances and time spans. Reaching beyond those points for something understandable, is rather unsubstantial. Not quite the job of a substantiated POV type human. Not that religion is not a thing that people can agree upon. There are many instances where millions agree on imaginary stuff. But science is an area where billions agree on stuff that shows itself to be substantial, in this universe, every time you check.

 

A connection to the world is obviously something we all have. But if conscious humans require an Earth with lots of carbon compounds around, to emerge in the first place, all things about a conscious human, substantiated POV type individual, require carbon at least. Something it took a generation or two worth of stars to create from hydrogen. How can we predate ourselves?

 

Regards, TAR

[tonylang]

It is the way of humankind to name things which we sense, perceive or conceive. Once we have assigned a name or a label to one of our perceptions it begins to evolve along with our understanding but only in the mind of the human being. So it is with the universe. We detect those states emerged from Hilbert-space or the metaverse if you will, states which circumstantially lend themselves to detection by our host forms’ particular suite of evolved senses or vice versa. Certainly other hosts (vessels) for life which emerged in circumstances different from earths or from this universes’ may evolve skills and capabilities which perceives aspects of nature very differently from us and other aspects not at all, yet resolves nature accurately enough for their continued survival. Labeling our perception of nature as “The Universe” is very much like naming the foam on the ocean or the displaced swells of water molecules on the surface as “waves” or the energy moving silently beneath the waves as “currents” or the large masses of water covering the earth’s surface as “oceans” etc. We name things to give them meaning and an identity. For us this simplifies the process of understanding nature. However once we name an entity we tend to adopt an unfortunate habit of distancing that entity from the rest of nature, particularly if we don’t understand its other underlying aspects. This is akin to seeing, naming, and discussing ocean waves in isolation as our sea faring forbearers did absent any proper understanding of the underlying mechanisms which causes waves on the ocean, or indeed without even a real understanding of what the ocean itself is. While they knew enough to fulfill their ambitions, and for now so do we, make no mistake nature runs as deep as it does and our best labels certainly are inadequate to describe the reality of it.

 

Nonetheless we cannot escape or deny those aspects of nature that our current hosts (species) are evolved to discern, and so it is that we collectively make a tacit agreement to speak of the “universe” as those aspects of nature that we are able to perceive for the sake of survival, scientific progress and enlightenment. However for this topic, and increasingly for others, we need to consider a bit deeper. The mobility of individuality provided by the instantiation of life is not dependent upon any particular design or chemistry or biology or location of host to naturally entangle and thereby establish a position-of-view. Nor is it likely dependant on any one particular type or state of universe. Universes are most likely as varied and unpredictably emergent as are host forms for life. This universe in which one currently find oneself clearly hosts life and individuality and hypothetically the mobility of individuality as well, but nature thus far has proven to be nothing if not diverse in its implementation of its entities (at least those we are able to perceive) so it is likely that life may also be hosted in other circumstances quite different from these. In short you may live anywhere in any viable form. This begs the question; What natural implementation is capable of fulfilling such amorphous requirements as trans-universal, instantaneous, simultaneous, non-locality described in the scenario of post (#15)? The instantiation of life by natural entanglement proposes such a mechanism.

 

Entanglement, like other natural phenomena, is outside of the range of normal human perception yet we now know it exists and, at least in this universe, it has for some time. It is indeed likely that entanglement is a natural mechanism sufficiently fundamental in nature so as to predate even the big bang. This is not an essential aspect of the hypothesis since it is an acknowledged extrapolation to suggest that the instantiation of life hypothesis extends beyond this universe.

Edited June 16, 2015 by tonylang

[tar]

tonylang,

 

But you are talking about human perception as if it is something weak and fragile and limited, as if your personal ID is so much more than that. You are talking about human consciousness in the third person, as if your first person is something different than human. This is what makes no sense to me. With what senses does this ID sense the pre universe? And what kind of nature could you possibly have before space and time are?

 

Regards, TAR

[tonylang]

However rare or ubiquitous host species for life may actually be in this universe, they nonetheless likely emerge via countless varied means and circumstances throughout this universe or throughout existence. Most can never be imagined by us. The implementation of host species in any particular environment in this universe is only one component of a much larger, grander implementation, that of individuality. We have become too accustomed to, and somewhat tunnel visioned in, our understanding of life as being only the classical functional chemistry of the physical hosts that emerge here and there on this planet or in this universe. Individuality however is the original, the indigenous component of life. Like snowflakes, living hosts transiently come and go as they assume forms too varied and randomly influenced to predict or to repeat. With humankind being the very visual species that we are, we are once again confounded by the visible and captivating facade of life that reflects visible light, namely the physical, electromagnetically congealed component of the living individual, the species. The ongoing cognitive immaturity of humankind is engendered by this limited or flawed understanding of life.

 

The only life on Earth is the living cell. The lesser point being submitted for your collective consideration is that such attributes as consciousness, self-awareness, sentience, intelligence etc., concepts already defined by others, are emergent skills or capabilities arbitrarily ascribed by observers to particular emerged composite hosts (with EC) and therefore cannot be fundamental to natures’ basic implementation of life. Currently and for billions of years on earth %99.99… of living hosts for life were and continue to be either single cell individuals or non-emerged (no EC) collections thereof. To truly understand what life is and the mobility of its fundamental component; individuality, and the natural principles that govern and influence its instantiation, we need consider only the single living cell. Viewed as an individual, a property traditionally ascribed only to human beings, the single living cell forces us to come to conclusions we never would with our usual limited perspective.

The first person position-of-view we refer to as individuality (Life) in this universe has emerged from a very basic natural phenomenon, namely natural quantum entanglement, a property of a naturally occurring molecule. Clearly like all other phenomenon or processes or reactions involving groups of atoms and molecules these can also be categorized as being chemical in nature. Natural entanglement is the basis for individuality. When one is misguided into thinking that life is only the physical component of this natural entangled relationship a great amount of confusion and misconception will be the inevitable outcome. The first casualty is the dismissal of the mobility of individuality in this universe. As is usually the case we can live just fine with all of our misconceptions as life makes few demands on the intellectual awareness of its tenants. However as we all know advancement requires enlightenment and the time for our further enlightenment in this regard grows near.

[Strange]

The first person position-of-view we refer to as individuality (Life) in this universe has emerged from a very basic natural phenomenon, namely natural quantum entanglement, a property of a naturally occurring molecule.

 

As far as I know, it is extremely difficult to produce entanglement at the molecular level. It requires cooling to near absolute zero. So I doubt this is significant to life or consciousness.

[tonylang]

To date the most promising structure yet discovered which displays some of the features and function consistent with those predicted by the instantiation hypothesis for the entanglement molecule (EM), while perhaps falling well shot of complete equivalence, is the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) complex. This photosynthetic antenna complex is the naturally occurring molecular structure responsible for the photosynthetic non-classical conduction observed in living plant cells via natural entanglement. In green algae it operates to overcome the otherwise inefficient latency of classical mechanisms which would result in a devastating loss of anti-entropic information needed from sunlight for the continued evolution of viable hosts on this planet.


Likewise, a similar natural entanglement antenna complex describes the predicted entanglement molecule which instantiate the living individual to available hosts wherever they may emerge in this universe. This Entanglement is between the living hosts (cells) and a form of matter (metamatter) in Hilbert-space made accessible only by the non-locality, non-relativistic reach of natural entanglement. It is indeed a true testament to the amazing ingenuity and flexibility of nature that such an implementation is not only possible, but naturally emerges, for life may not exist without it. This instantiation mechanism is the most plausible solution to the conundrum of individuality in this universe posed by the scenario of this thread.


If the entanglement molecule indeed predated the cell then, structurally if not functionally, it must be of a different design than the FMO complex. The FMO is a protein based structure assembled from complex amino acids and likely evolved within the cell here on earth or planets nearby. To predate the cell the EM must permit natural entanglement by utilizing a more fundamental elemental design. The entanglement molecule may be one with which we are already familiar.

 

link: http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.3210

 

http://www.thomasyoungcentre.org/research-highlights/take-a-deep-breath-you-just-created-a-quantum-entangled-state/

 

Journal link: http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v110/i10/e106402

Edited June 18, 2015 by tonylang

[tonylang]

"If you analyze it closely you will, I think, find that it is just a little bit more than a collection of single data (experiences and memories), namely the canvas upon which they are collected. And you will, on close introspection, find that what you really mean by ‘I’ is that ground-stuff upon which they are collected." [schrödinger, Erwin (1992-01-31). What is Life? (Canto) Cambridge University Press]

The next fertile undiscovered frontier of science is the study of how the individual (you) naturally inhabit this universe. This topic speaks to the really interesting question of how any life, you, came to be where you are in the form that you are. Consciousness, self-awareness, sentience are evolved attributes had by very few forms of life in earth’s ecosystem, yet all are just as alive in nature. Such attributes cannot be relevant to either nature’s fundamental implementation of life, to being alive, or to experience. Experience may be enhanced by these attributes as they evolve in more complex hosts or species, but the phenomena which establish an instance of life likely brings no experience at all.

The position-of-view (POV) as described by the instantiation hypothesis is implemented by a fundamental property of nature called natural entanglement. This process produces the POV which localizes you in your space-time, whether you have five, one, twenty or no senses. Regardless of what or where ones living form may be in this universe. Effectively ones POV is the target for all of the sensory information we call experience. Any beings lifeID is temporarily localized to its host body by the naturally occurring entanglement between its physical host such as ones cell(s) together with a non-relativistic form of matter called metamatter (in Hilbert-space). The POV of each individual life can be represented mathematically by its unique wave function. This wave function is a unique solution of state for the individual in space-time and is the term missing from many of our quantum mechanical solutions. The POV is nothing less than the mathematical representation of a living being.

In life the POV brings no experience but only that which may have an experience. In nature a POV is the mathematical representation of a lifeID established either by entanglement of a single cell to metamatter, or alternatively by the heterodyning of multiple entanglement cells (EC) to metamatter. If you are in fact alive then your composite lifeID and its position-of-view together constitutes your being regardless of your physical state, form, condition or location in space-time. If the entanglement hypothesis accurately depicts the reality in this universe and the entanglement molecule exists, then it represents the most fundamental physical component of life as we know it. Like the Top-Quark, or the Higgs, the Ether or DNA, the entanglement molecule may someday be isolated and identified either in the cell or in the environment. or not. Either way we may learn something along the way.

Edited June 22, 2015 by tonylang

[tonylang]

Instantiation is a scientifically plausible hypothesis that predicts:

Life inhabits any universe fundamentally by the temporary natural entanglement between a viable physical host such as a cell(s) with meta-matter in Hilbert-space at one’s specific value, or aspect of some property of the quantum entanglement spectrum, i.e. frequency (QEF). Your QEF is what locates you in this space-time in your current body or in any viable host anywhere in this universe. This has occurred and therefore may reoccur and can occur anywhere there are entanglement molecules which are the metaphorical seeds of evolution and life.

A Few Plausible Inquires:

1. What is the elemental or molecular formula of the entanglement molecule?

2. Where in the cell do entanglement molecules reside?

3. How could researchers test for its existence?

4. What property of entanglement is responsible for individuality?

5. How is a host (body) naturally selected above all other hosts for entanglement at your QEF? Ergo, why are you human?

6. Assuming the availability of viable hosts, on average how much time passes after deinstantiation (death) until reinstantiation (life) reoccurs.

7. What factors effect average time to reinstantiation?

8. Why can’t an individual reinstantiate while alive?

9. Why doesn’t individual lives short circuit with one another.

10. How could an individual’s QEF be detected?

11. Are there implications for reinstantiation of activates performed during life?

12. Does longevity (i.e. infant death vs centenarian death) have an effect on an individual’s reinstantiation prospects?

13. Does time uninstantiated (dead) affect an individual’s reinstantiation prospects?

14. Why would society care to distinguish, if it could, an individual across multiple instantiations?

15. What is the useful (Hamiltonian) form of the wave function for the position-of-view (POV)?

16. How does the POV interact with telemetry from the nervous system in complex hosts.

17. How does Entanglement cells heterodyne (combine) their unique QEF to establish the individuals QEF?

18. Does terminating only an individual’s entanglement cells terminate the individual?