To death death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by Janic » 11/09/21, 17:55

sen no sen
In the first case on a literal (and reductive) reading of the Old Testament,
the Hebrew writings (which are not an Old Testament) are a mixture of historical and symbolic.
in the second on an interpretation consistent with physics and biology.
the second is one interpretation very particular physics coming from the antireligious / religious conflict and is precisely not in conformity with biology, on the contrary!
See subject: the evolution of biological species and chance!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré

User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6834
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 720

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by sen-no-sen » 11/09/21, 18:35

Janic wrote: the Hebrew writings (which are not an Old Testament) are a mixture of historical and symbolic.


Le beresheet that is translated by Genesis has been reinterpreted late and literally by movements (mainly nowadays of US Christianity) in the form of a creationist doctrines to "counter" the theory of evolution.
However, and this is crisp to say the least, it appears that the creationist interpretation is in reality only a competing evolutionary thesis ... it simply traces the creation of the world back to 6000 years (well, it depends on the authors!) instead of the 13,7 billion years of physics *.
Creationism is nothing other than a disguised political movement, it has nothing to do with spirituality, the objective is to rewrite the past in order to dominate the future ... it is an old technique of manipulation without much scope.

The second is a very particular interpretation of physics coming from the antireligious / religious conflict and is precisely not in accordance with biology, on the contrary!
See subject: the evolution of biological species and chance!


Perhaps it is Darwinism interpreted stricto sensu (i.e. without updates), on the other hand Evolution in the sense of thermodynamics and its latest advances on the subject (MEP principle, LYfe principle) are perfectly in accordance with physics, they are objective and not based on political or religious dogmas.





* Period which only covers the causal chain accessible to our current theories (RG). It is therefore absolutely not an assertion on any "beginning".
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 11142
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 1881

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by Ahmed » 11/09/21, 20:00

Sen-no-sen, I would like to add a few details. Globalization brings about various reactions, sometimes partial adaptation, often indeed opposition. To the upheavals of local ways of thinking and life is added a mimetic rivalry, the Western model is rejected by many out of spite of not having access to it.
I explain: the external aspects of this model exert a powerful effect of seduction on the youth of the countries of the Third World, but only offers them very limited tastes and denies them the essential because of the "under- "chronic" development, that is to say the inability of the model to be universally exported in its substance, due to competition between countries which de facto downgrades many of them definitively (the advance of the central countries is too large to now be caught up by the collapsing peripheral countries *). Refuge in pre-existing thought systems, radicalized for the occasion, is an opportunity to unite around an identity structure, but far from constituting a step backwards, as many analyzes rather lightly, it is a modernist dynamic. , as an inverted mirror of Western modernity, itself in crisis.

* There are exceptions, as we have seen with China, but it is in so far as it has enabled the countries of the center, in a recent phase of capitalism, to "save the furniture" by restoring the margins of creation of value that was no longer possible to achieve in situ and therefore by temporarily postponing its crisis.
2 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6834
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 720

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by sen-no-sen » 11/09/21, 21:00

I valid! 8)
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by Janic » 11/09/21, 21:03

sen-no-sen »11 / 09 / 21, 18: 35
janic wrote: the Hebrew writings (which are not an old testament) are a mixture of historical and symbolic.
The Bereshit which is translated by Genesis has been reinterpreted late and literally by movements (mainly nowadays of US Christianity) in the form of creationist doctrines to "counter" the theory of evolution.

Or rather the reverse, historically, by atheistic and even more anti-religious movements using Darwin's writings to support their anti-theist thesis. Even though his writings in his first editions only speak of adaptation, no evolution which is only a mere sight of the mind, one doctrine among others. We have seen all of this and seen it again and re-seen it!
However, and this is crisp to say the least, it appears that the creationist interpretation is in reality only a competing evolutionary thesis ... it simply traces the creation of the world back to 6000 years (well, it depends on the authors!) instead of the 13,7 billion years of physics *.

Except, once again you take fanciful interpretations for reference, which is not the case with theologians of Judaism. No particular age is given to the earth, except for the Adama, taken from the earth which brings together matter to the spirit! As I have said over and over again, the formation of the earth could be older than 13.7 billion years of CURRENT physics or younger AS MUCH. (Principle of the relativity of time and space)
Creationism is nothing other than a disguised political movement, it has nothing to do with spirituality, the objective is to rewrite the past in order to dominate the future ... it is an old technique of manipulation without much scope.
And blah blah, your orientalist beliefs, compared with accidentalist beliefs, have no more or less value than any other. Also your persistence, linked to this belief, to reduce it to politics rather than history is characteristic, but not credible.


The second is a very particular interpretation of physics coming from the antireligious / religious conflict and is precisely not in accordance with biology, on the contrary!
See subject: the evolution of biological species and chance!
Perhaps it is Darwinism interpreted stricto sensu (i.e. without updates), on the other hand Evolution in the sense of thermodynamics and its latest advances on the subject (MEP principle, LYfe principle) are perfectly in accordance with physics, they are objective and not based on political or religious dogmas.
Worse, it is based only on materialist concepts where matter depends on matter only and on a nature (sic) (with the characteristics previously attributed to the creator god (s) it is only semantic hypocrisy, as well as this famous chance "which does things so well"
As for the LYfe which is also only a hypothesis providing no answer on life, ours!

it starts from great theoretical principles, unsuited to living matter, since without this vital principle, everything becomes again dust precisely absent from life, final entropy.
But all this has already been seen and reviewed without providing an answer on life and not on the animation of matter where, despite all technological science, no one has succeeded in recreating it…. Nowadays !
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré

User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6834
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 720

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by sen-no-sen » 11/09/21, 21:36

Janic wrote: Except, once again you take fanciful interpretations for reference, which is not the case with theologians of Judaism. No particular age is given to the earth, except for the Adama, taken from the earth which brings together matter to the spirit! As I have said over and over again, the formation of the earth could be older than 13.7 billion years of CURRENT physics or younger AS MUCH. (Principle of the relativity of time and space)


Judaism is not representative of creationist circles which are essentially to be related to American Christian movements or recent Islamic currents (harun yahya etc cie).
For the former the age of 6000 is often reported, but as I mentioned, most of its authors do not all agree ...
The age of the universe may be more (or less) important than we think, this does not change the theory of evolution (second principle of thermodynamics).
To imagine that the world was created by a demiurge X years ago remains an evolutionary thesis, because it is based on the principle of the arrow of time (past : Arrow: future). However, this thesis is in no way compatible with our observations.

And blah blah, your orientalist beliefs, compared with accidentalist beliefs, have no more or less value than any other. Also your persistence, linked to this belief, to reduce it to politics rather than history is characteristic, but not credible.


According to your approach, no system of thought has more value than another, in short, believing in the tinkerbell or in contemporary cosmology would be on the same level. It's good to believe in it but it leads to nothing.
This is good because at one point there was a thought system that supported solid theories that we can currently communicate at lightning speed.

It starts from great theoretical principles, unsuited to living matter, since without this vital principle, everything becomes again dust precisely absent from life, final entropy.
But all this has already been seen and reviewed without providing an answer on life and not on the animation of matter where, despite all technological science, no one has succeeded in recreating it…. Nowadays !


And what will you say when researchers succeed in creating synthetic life? Will you end your life?
More seriously speaking of a vital impetus has little value, what is an impetus? What is vital This is semantics.
As already seen elsewhere: one cannot explain a partial ignorance by the means of a total ignorance.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 11142
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 1881

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by Ahmed » 11/09/21, 22:09

To complete my previous analysis a little, I must specify that the opposition between the periphery and the center is also subdivided in a fractal way inside the center, with inside the latter growing areas of populations that have become useless to capital appreciation and which are, as such, potential hotbeds of reactive extremism, religiously or otherwise, but capable of externalizing their frustration by taking action nihilist *. Conversely, there is a "centrist" structure that has been orbiting the periphery, with all the direct tensions that this implies, it is the State of Israel ...

* By that I mean without political significance with an emancipatory aim, but only by a pure negativity aiming at another negativity felt as unbearable.
1 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6834
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 720

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by sen-no-sen » 11/09/21, 22:36

Yes, it is also for this reason that we find terrorist centers on our territory, the latter locally reproduce the mechanisms at work globally.
It is, as we have already seen, Ising domain We can also go further in miniaturization and demonstrate by a psychological approach that it is still the same phenomenon at work in the mind ... Most terrorists thus superimpose cultural layers with characteristics nesting boxes that promote their alienations.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 16841
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2273

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by Janic » 12/09/21, 09:31

Janic
it starts from great theoretical principles, unsuited to living matter, since without this vital principle, everything becomes again dust precisely absent from life, final entropy.
But all of this has already been seen and reviewed without providing an answer on life and not on the animation of matter where, despite all technological science, no one has succeeded in creating it…. Nowadays !


sen no sen
Judaism is not representative of creationist circles which are essentially to be related to American Christian movements or recent Islamic currents (harun yahya etc cie).
Who cares to know if, in the basket of apples, there are healthy and rotten ones, it is the life. But to retain ONLY the rotten ones as being representative of apples, it is a moral deception.

sen no sen
For the former the age of 6000 is often reported, but as I mentioned, most of its authors do not all agree ...
Either bad apples. What you are talking about is only a tiny non-representative and non-theological minority. But what matters, once again, is not what is rotten (in the sense of degraded) but what is healthy.

sen no sen
The age of the universe may be more (or less) important than we think, this does not change the theory of evolution (second principle of thermodynamics).
On the contrary, your principle, not accepted by all and even less in quantum physics, is only an aspect limited to raw matter, pebbles, not to living things where this only applies very partially and from many a priori due to our ignorance of what life really is (eg Miller's experiments on amino acid reconstruction.)
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exp%C3%A9 ... iller-Urey

sen no sen
To imagine that the world was created by a demiurge X years ago remains an evolutionary thesis, because this one is based on the principle of the arrow of time (future past). However, this thesis is in no way compatible with our observations.
Still a priori and presuppositions from the East and its eternal cycles that we want to confront with the postulates of a world created and not appearing by chance. On the one hand there is not a demiurge (it is only a cerebral representation intended to be admitted in temporal cultures) who would construct such or such a system or object in a particular time for that time only. But we HUMAN BEINGS are in a particular time of which WE decide its dimension to satisfy our needs for reference points. A billion, 1000 billion or 1/1000 of a billion is the same thing in another system which does not take these references there as so-called temporal benchmarks. Get out of these images of Epinal made for simplifying minds who arrange them.

Janic
And blah blah, your orientalist beliefs, compared with accidentalist beliefs, have no more or less value than any other. Also your persistence, linked to this belief, to reduce it to politics rather than history is characteristic, but not credible.

sen no sen
According to your approach, no system of thought has more value than another, in short, believing in the tinkerbell or in contemporary cosmology would be on the same level.
Exactly, everything comes from our imagination, our mental construction of the world which passes from the pure imagination, the tinker bell, to the materialist imagination permanently where everything merges!
sen no sen
It's good to believe it, but it doesn't get anywhere.
Everything is useless! We are just a breath that appears and disappears as quickly as it came, ephemeral dust in this universe, and of which we still do not understand its reason for existing (fortunately, moreover, humans are already sufficiently proud of 'themselves)

sen no sen
This is good because at one point there was a thought system that supported solid theories that we can currently communicate at lightning speed.
it is scientism!
Who cares about this materialist vision which concerns only a tiny minority of bulb heads who try (but hardly succeed) to understand and explain what the vast majority of living beings have nothing to do with to do, their one and only concern is to live and not to suffer too much in this one before dying, ephemeral flame among the others.

Janic
It starts from great theoretical principles, unsuited to living matter, since without this vital principle, everything becomes again dust precisely absent from life, final entropy.
But all this has already been seen and reviewed without providing an answer on life and not on the animation of matter where, despite all technological science, no one has succeeded in recreating it…. Nowadays !

sen no sen
And what will you say on the day or researchers will succeed to create synthetic life? Will you end your life?
I have already largely answered on this fantasy which also leads to transhumanism, the human being becomes god, even more than god still! But everything in appearance only! To recreate life again, it would be necessary to know what it is, already!
The only fact that you say will succeed and not would succeed, (future and not conditional) already underlines this a priori on human vanity which has no doubt that it could be so!

sen no sen
More seriously speaking of a vital impetus has little value, what is an impetus? What is vital? This is semantics.
No momentum but principle, this word used everywhere and for anything!
Inevitably, these are just words with the limited scope of our vocabulary, and inventing substitute words does not change much like chance = indeterminism as opposed to determinism.

sen no sen
As already seen elsewhere: one cannot explain a partial ignorance by the means of a total unknown.
This is the only point on which we fully agree. We do not know anything about life and a theological and even less scientific explanation does not allow it. " Vanity, vanities, all is vanity and pursuit of the wind! »
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6834
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 720

Re: Death to death, immortality soon? (Laurent Alexandre)




by sen-no-sen » 12/09/21, 10:46

Janic stop dicking it is undrinkable!
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.


 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 10 guests