The Self-Organizing Universe ~ Neil Theise

[@thinkneothink3055]

It’s interesting to note that the idea of a self-organizing Universe is diametrically opposite to that of the top-down design proposed by creation theory. Rather than a case where an intelligent entity created the Universe, intelligence is arising through this bottom-up process.

[@stephenblessed92]

If the universe is entirely the intelligent entity then it aligns perfectly. In other words: if God is infinite then the universe is God. Trying to figure out how God operates is a losing proposition. And no, I'm not talking about a religious definition of God.

[@mastermitch12]

This made me think so hard, I got a nose bleed.

[@Arismortal]

“Somehow out of this in a bottom up way, we have our bodies.’ Bro just tried to explain this by saying that something happens(cells organising)to create something(our bodies)due to local system interactions, but we don’t know how they know how to organise as bodies. Genius. 🤯

[@carlsagan5189]

The universe is, by definition, everything. Therefore, the universe must be self-organizing. Proof: Suppose that the universe was not self-organizing. Then some other thing must organize the universe. But, by definition, the universe is everything. Therefore, whatever organizes the universe must itself be a part of the universe. Therefore, the universe is self-organizing.

[@ADBCSH-je7uj]

I appreciate this man's inclusive approach... the scientific, the philosophical, and the mystical. The self organizing phenomena within nature may actually be directed by integral algorithms in the protoconscious substrate of matter itself. As he says, from the bottom up. This maybe another way of understanding the interface of mindbody, consciousness and matter also known as the Logos and the Tao. The eternal principle which orders natural process in this temporal dimension ... but who knows??

[@naimulhaq9626]

The quantum foam/quantum field might self-simulate intelligent conscious 'observer', collapsing the field into fine tuned particles that produce elements, that produce molecules, that produce compounds, that produce organic molecules, that produce amino acids, that produce proteins, that produce cells, that can replicate, called life. The whole and the parts are inseparable and one cannot be viewed without the other. The whole is a self-organizing system of complexity of the parts.

[@krnabrnybaran3161]

Yes, this absolutely sounds like just another way of talking about Tao, Plato's Highest Good, and the road of Heraclitus that leads both upwards and downwards. Or Plotinus' emanation theory. Individuality is the trap of time and space. You can tell the truth in so many different ways.

[@EthrFused]

Thank you for the perspective!!! Peace & Enlightenment!!!

[@lovelifewithchris5683]

I've tried to imagine my mind else where in my body but it's always in my head? Are our dreams only in our head, so that is why we always feel like we're in our head?

[@CHolve]

BRAVO, Neil!

[@placebo64]

Is your hypothesis compatible with the morphic resonance hypothesis?

[@qcon81]

Yes, it is.

[@davecole1012]

Self organisation and autopoesis does not require morphic resonance

[@RodCornholio]

Most people aren't awakened to this message.

[@fevecollins9884]

RodCornholio that's why there are only 10 comments. Are we not meant to understand our nature?

[@ProgressiveMovement200]

What are the different directions at play here? Consciousness is fundamental "substrate" in the Planck scale? Or is consciousness prior to time, matter and energy?

[@neiltheise]

We think non-dual conciousness is the substratum, the "one substance" in Spinozas term, that gives rise to time, space, matter, and energy. Google "theise Kafatos fundamental awareness PDF" for the paper.

[@ProgressiveMovement200]

Thank you for answering my question and referring me to the paper. Very interesting, it seems a few different people have inferred that consciousness is part of the underlying universe. Most notably I believe is Roger Penrose with Stuart Hameroff.

[@neiltheise]

Ed Yablecki penrose/hameroff postulate that it is embedded IN space-time. We believe space-time arises from it. That doesn't mean there work is incompatible with ours. Their OrchOR model could be a mechanistic specification within our framework for example

[@ProgressiveMovement200]

Thanks for clarifying the distinction. This seems to specially open up the possibilities of the creation of our universe.

[@ProgressiveMovement200]

I wonder if it is along the lines of Chris Langan CTMU theory, I only skimmed thru his theory.

[@sadiesmith5096]

Neil Teise is such a dude :)

[@THEMUDBUSTERS4]

I always wonder if the person on the other side of the camera understands what these people are saying and what their reactions are afterward.

[@philipchen7861]

amazing

[@ingenuity168]

Dreams convince me that consciousness does not arise out of my mind. It's from outside of my mind.

[@aerospacesystems8658]

Really? Soooo, if we remove your brain, you'll still be conscious. Let's test your funny statement.

[@isahlovemt]

The end of this is hilarious

[@johnnowakowski4062]

Everything automatically self-organized from the bottom up? Really?...

[@gsnaponfire]

John Nowakowski I don’t think it’s not that far fetched of a hypothesis. What are your disagreements with it?

[@ChrisJohnsonHome]

Things are obviously bottom up and then top down ( autocatalytic sets -> natural selection ). But consciousness is something else. We have a human flavor of consciousness which is made of many parts (memory, attention, imagination, sensory inputs, feelings including love, fear, jealousy, anger, etc, visual spatial awareness, integration of sensory data, language, learning, etc). Consciousness is more useful than non-conscious processing since things like reasoning on sparse data, making decisions, creating a self concept (like a conscious entity or soul), or seeing others with empathy as similar to ourselves gives us an advantage. This flavor of consciousness gave humans an advantage to manage ourselves better, contribute to society and change the world -- especially when paired with our eyes, hands, and the eventual development of language, culture and technology. It's easy to believe that our human flavor of consciousness is the fundamental building block of the universe (as discussed in the above video), but when you see how self centered and out of touch it is with reality (especially brain damage data) we can see that any neural network that runs in the same way as the human brain would experience the same "virtual universe" that we do -- A sort of imperfect, low resolution, fuzzy, egocentric/egoless, spiritual version of the universe. A very biased human way of thinking. A system with the right neural network could easily babble on about how it doesn't need a neural network to exist, which would be quite stunning because we can't even think, dream or talk about consciousness without an active neural network.

[@JBSCORNERL8]

What are your thoughts on reincarnation?

[@daemonnice]

Ok, some interesting points, but, I believe he makes the wrong conclusion, mostly because he is overlooking some important data relative to the ability to self-organize and also because he takes a materialist reductionist perspective. Plasma is ionized gas that was named so because of its ability to self-organize and it is electrically alive. Look up the video titled "self-assembling wires", where high voltage electricity causes ball bearings to self-organize, or the video "70kV saltwater/cymatic" where again electricity exhibits self-organizing abilities. While I have no doubt that to some degree "mind" is present in all things, "mind" is a product of electricity"s selforganizing ability. We do not know what energy is, what charge is. We separate charge because we know they differ in their behaviour. It is "charge" that causes self-organization in matter at all scales.

[@embracetheshift2464]

Sounds like you've come to the same conclusion. Electricity is just fundamentally subatomic particles, which he claims to self-organize. He's definitely not taking a materialist perspective either, he literally says he believes consciousness is fundamental lol

[@daemonnice]

@@embracetheshift2464 Ok, lol. I had to double-check what I said and sure enough, it can be interpreted that way. Oops, teehee. I was trying to say that consciousness is epiphenomena of electricity in a complex organism such as ourselves. But, at the atomic level, that which you defined using the oxymoronic phrase "subatomic particles" which I prefer to think of as "fields" of behaviour(charge), it isn't consciousness but a very simple order of awareness. At the cellular level, this order of awareness increases and at each level of the increasing complexity of an organism so too does the awareness increase in complexity until you get to mammals which all exhibit some level of consciousness with humans exhibiting the most complex consciousness, if not a consciousness of their consciousness. Well, the last one is alleged as most humans to me seem barely conscious, never mind conscious of their consciousness. So, to state consciousness is a fundamental property is a distortion of reality. Being aware and being conscious is not the same thing. So, while fundamental properties include awareness, that awareness does not equate to the consciousness of a complex organism. An analogy would be; does a drop of paint equate to a painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel? While the finished painting incorporates many drops of paint, it would be incorrect to suggest a single drop of paint is a masterpiece of art. Thanks for calling me out.

[@பாலசுப்பிரமணிராமலிங்கம்]

according to me I am only excisting, nobody else nothing else.

[@bigcheese2128]

That's weird because I'm the only person who exists because as far as I know my conscious is the only one that exists

[@algerianatheist2755]

@@bigcheese2128 same here

[@paarkour83]

Anyone who find this interesting, please lend Rupert Spira a ear

[@rowansart]

He said Flajelly.

[@rowansart]

I know it's Flagelli. but Flajelly is way more fun.

[@jimmybolton-ig7zs]

10 to the minus 33cm