Is the universe a giant mind?
Well some suggest that the fundamental properties or nature are symmetrical geometrical shapes. Many fractals also exist within nature and i have seen images like this before:
I do not see a credible reason to believe it but I won't say it is not possible that the universe is the projection of the conciousness of something, or perhaps of all of us. There is no way of really testing it. For all we know our universe could be a complex computer simulation or anything.
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
No. The universe is mostly vacuum. No mind can exist in a vacuum. A mind is an emergent phnomenon arising from electro-chemical processes in an organic matrix (a brain, for example).
Yes, and the study of this phenomenon is called "Physics".
Google "Big Bang".
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
No. The universe is mostly vacuum. No mind can exist in a vacuum. A mind is an emergent phenomenon arising from electro-chemical processes in an organic matrix (a brain, for example).
Yes, and the study of this phenomenon is called "Physics". By the way, the are just as many 'broken' symmetries in nature, as well.
Google "Big Bang".
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
Last edited by Fnord on 23 Apr 2011, 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
I've thought so. A mind doesn't need to have self-awareness (in the form a human mind has it, anyway) to be a mind. They're both systems that "direct/run" the organisms that could be called their selves. If the universe is an organism, which I see no reason why it isn't, then I'd say yeah it is a self run by a mind (that is itself).
Awareness is a characteristic of a mind. A vacuum does not even have the potential to become aware. No awareness --> no mind.
Also, an organism needs to be organic.
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
I guess I was using organismin its sense denoting an entity composed of different organs that do different functions. Personally I don't think the presence or absence of carbon is such a distinctive delineator between "life systems"... though obviously a scientist would disagree.
The parts of the universe that are not a vacuum have the potential for awareness though. The vacuum doesn't need to be considered part of the universe that contains the mind. It could just be nothingness,and the mind is the somethingness. I'm just blathering, feel free to point out holes in this logic.

I do not see a credible reason to believe it but I won't say it is not possible that the universe is the projection of the conciousness of something, or perhaps of all of us. There is no way of really testing it. For all we know our universe could be a complex computer simulation or anything.
Nice Photoshopping. Even if the two appearances do somehow correlate, that does not imply the same causitive or emergent factors.
The universe is mostly vacuum, and the matter and energy within it behaves in a consistent way. There is no evidence to conclude from this that the universe has a mind.
There is no evidence or physical principle to support the fantasy that the universe is one giant mind.
Isn't it enough to marvel at the wonders of the universe without imagining a mind behind it all?
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
Last edited by Fnord on 23 Apr 2011, 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Minded organisms behave pretty darn consistently. They are sophisticated robots as far as I can see. Me, you, dogs, cats, dolphins, bees, etc.
Seeing symmetry between a human mind and the structure of the universe is a form of marvelling at it. It's a pretty magical hypothesis to me anyway. Feels it's approaching the ultimate meaning of everything.
The parts of the universe that are not a vacuum have the potential for awareness though. The vacuum doesn't need to be considered part of the universe that contains the mind. It could just be nothingness,and the mind is the somethingness. I'm just blathering, feel free to point out holes in this logic.
Do you have any empirical evidence for the existence of minds, as opposed to evidence for the existence of brains?
ruveyn
Well, there is "I think therefore I am"... "I" being the mind, the self I guess, Can't get much more empirical when you're examining the entirety of yourself. An entire thing can't examine its exact entire self objectively. But the fact of there being an "I" necessitates an "I" to be the "I"... I would call this evidence of a mind. Really I only have evidence of my own mind's existence though based on this, not even other humans. For all I know the entire universe = my mind = myself. Sounds disgustingly egocentric but my point is it appears you need to have faith just to believe in anything beyond the existence of one (your) self, one mind. I think I'm explaining this poorly but I'll try to better later if possible.
If so, what do you think is the cause of all of this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Berkeley
I don't buy into it myself, but it might interest you.
I understand that, from a philosophical standpoint all people are aware of directly is mind, and its contents, but I don't see how the Idea the Universe is mind is falsifiable, or even useful, so there's no point speculating about it.
_________________
The scientist only imposes two things, namely truth and sincerity, imposes them upon himself and upon other scientists - Erwin Schrodinger
Member of the WP Strident Atheists
It's interesting how mathematical properties underlie similiarties in our Universe from spiral galaxies, hurricanes, whirlpools, beaks and claws, animal horns and tusks, nautilus shells and other seashells, and sunflowers.
There are many patterns in nature that are related to the golden section and the Fibonacci numbers. The golden spiral is a logarithmic or equiangular spiral, a type of spiral evident in all the examples that I gave. An equiangular spiral does not alter its shape as its size increases. Because of this remarkable property known as self similarity.
There are similarities, but the physics are different. Hurricanes are structures in the gravitational field of the Earth, while galaxies are gravitating objects in space
Which makes the Golden Ratio's presence all the more remarkable.
The Golden Ratio (Phi) or logarithmic spiral is a key shape for things that grow, because with growth the ratio doesn't change. No one knows why the logarithmic spirals appear in totally unrelated phenomena.
Our own solar system has some interesting Golden Mean properties.
The distances of orbits of planets working out from the Sun displays a Golden Mean proportion. The distance from the sun to Mercury plus Mercury's distance to Venus equals the distance between Venus and Earth.
The Phi relationship is clearly defined by the planets nearest the sun. It is clear that there is some kind of mathematical relationship between all objects in gravitational fields, whether it is hurricanes, galaxies, or even the spiraling of water around a bath tub drain.
Other examples include: arrangement of vertebrate skeletons and tree branches; patterns if the flight of birds and swim courses of fish, the form of ocean waves, and the placement of human joints, the development of the human fetus, and the design of our kidneys, circulatory system and cerebrum.
There is clearly order in the Universe among unrelated phenomenon. It is all different stuff, but there is a clear underlying order among so many things that can be measured by science.
We are good at observing this kind of thing; but we really have no understanding of why so many different things share the same mathematical properties of form throughout the Universe.
If there is God, Phi is certainly an expression of God. And the consciousness we have may be similiar in all sentient life throughout the Universe.
Perhaps we are all the mind and eyes of God. Every creature that is part of the Universe, has been part of the Universe in the past, and beyond, if there is a beyond. This brings light to the Bibilical phrase man was made in the Image of God.
When does one's existence truly start. Is it possible to totally disconnect one's self from our parents, their parents, millions of ancestors before that, and the inanimate material from the beginning of the Universe that came together to make that existence possible. If any of those links were broken one would not exist. It is all connected, one is made from something and something is made from one.
The ingredients that combine to make us who we are, are the same ingredients from the beginning of time; everything in the Universe is different, but yet the same.
It is all mysterious, but perhaps was more evident to our ancestors that took the time to notice the kinship, evident in all things.
Tollorin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
No. The universe is mostly vacuum. No mind can exist in a vacuum. A mind is an emergent phnomenon arising from electro-chemical processes in an organic matrix (a brain, for example).
Yes, and the study of this phenomenon is called "Physics".
Google "Big Bang".
Creation from a mind, stimulation from a computer and just the plain Universe (If real) can theorically all be defined with the same mathematical formulas.
_________________
Down with speculators!! !
