Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[Muffled]

"No-one was there to view creation"

No one had to be.

But we have a picture of it.


RELEASE: 03-064

NASA RELEASES STUNNING IMAGES OF OUR INFANT UNIVERSE

NASA today released the best "baby picture" of the Universe ever taken; the image contains such stunning detail that it may be one of the most important scientific results of recent years.

Scientists using NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), during a sweeping 12-month observation of the entire sky, captured the new cosmic portrait, capturing the afterglow of the big bang, called the cosmic microwave background.

"We've captured the infant universe in sharp focus, and from this portrait we can now describe the universe with unprecedented accuracy," said Dr. Charles L. Bennett of the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Greenbelt Md., and the WMAP Principal Investigator. "The data are solid, a real gold mine," he said.

One of the biggest surprises revealed in the data is the first generation of stars to shine in the universe first ignited only 200 million years after the big bang, much earlier than many scientists had expected.

In addition, the new portrait precisely pegs the age of the universe at 13.7 billion years old, with a remarkably small one percent margin of error.

The WMAP team found that the big bang and Inflation theories continue to ring true. The contents of the universe include 4 percent atoms (ordinary matter), 23 percent of an unknown type of dark matter, and 73 percent of a mysterious dark energy. The new measurements even shed light on the nature of the dark energy, which acts as a sort of an anti-gravity.

"These numbers represent a milestone in how we view our universe," said Dr. Anne Kinney, NASA director for astronomy and physics. "This is a true turning point for cosmology."

The light we see today, as the cosmic microwave background, has traveled over 13 billion years to reach us. Within this light are infinitesimal patterns that mark the seeds of what later grew into clusters of galaxies and the vast structure we see all around us.

Patterns in the big bang afterglow were frozen in place only 380,000 years after the big bang, a number nailed down by this latest observation. These patterns are tiny temperature differences within this extraordinarily evenly dispersed microwave light bathing the universe, which now averages a frigid 2.73 degrees above absolute zero temperature. WMAP resolves slight temperature fluctuations, which vary by only millionths of a degree.

Theories about the evolution of the universe make specific predictions about the extent of these temperature patterns. Like a detective, the WMAP team compared the unique "fingerprint" of patterns imprinted on this ancient light with fingerprints predicted by various cosmic theories and found a match.


WMAP 1 Year Mission Results Press Release

WMAP 9-YEAR RESULTS RELEASED


WMAP has refined its measurements with a final 2 years of data.



Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team
The WMAP science team has determined, to a high degree of accuracy and precision, not only the age of the universe, but also the density of atoms; the density of all other non-atomic matter; the epoch when the first stars started to shine; the "lumpiness" of the universe, and how that "lumpiness" depends on scale size. In short, when used alone (with no other measurements), WMAP observations have improved knowledge of these six numbers by a total factor of 68,000, thereby converting cosmology from a field of wild speculation to a precision science.

WMAP's "baby picture of the universe" maps the afterglow of the hot, young universe at a time when it was only 375,000 years old, when it was a tiny fraction of its current age of 13.77 billion years. The patterns in this baby picture were used to limit what could have possibly happened earlier, and what happened in the billions of year since that early time. The (mis-named) "big bang" framework of cosmology, which posits that the young universe was hot and dense, and has been expanding and cooling ever since, is now solidly supported, according to WMAP.


WMAP 9 Year Mission Results

I believe a picture comes from the mind as opposed to a photograph that is supposed to come from real time unless it has been photoshopped.

 

[Muffled]

The world is me.

"you are all the world to me" I believe that verse refers to Jesus but maybe you are just stating that Jesus is in you.

 

[godnotgod]

The underlined is an oxymoron.

Sorry, I meant (what is called) 'reality' is virtual.

 

[godnotgod]

Your last line lacks an item....virtually 'what'?

The rest of your post work is nothing.

What we call 'reality' is only a virtual reality. It only seems real.

Everything is Nothing. That's why it can be Everything.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Sorry, I meant (what is called) 'reality' is virtual.

That is a better.

So a brain teaser for you. If you can only ever observe something how do you tell the difference between what it is and what it is observed to be?

 

[godnotgod]

That is a better.

So a brain teaser for you. If you can only ever observe something how do you tell the difference between what it is and what it is observed to be?

By knowing the difference between thinking about what one sees, and seeing itself.

At first, we see via our conditioned mind. But with prolonged meditation, the nature of seeing changes so that our description of the world is no longer active, and we begin to see the world without describing it.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

By knowing the difference between thinking about what one sees, and seeing itself.

At first, we see via our conditioned mind. But with prolonged meditation, the nature of seeing changes so that our description of the world is no longer active, and we begin to see the world without describing it.

This poses a problem though. You cannot see "seeing itself". We can only ever go off of what we observe. Unless there is esoteric knowledge involved it is impossible.

 

[Kirran]

Now, I just came across this thread. I'd rather not read it all.

Can someone summarise the current status of the conversation please?

 

[godnotgod]

This poses a problem though. You cannot see "seeing itself". We can only ever go off of what we observe. Unless there is esoteric knowledge involved it is impossible.

As I mentioned, at first, we see via the conditioned mind, which thinks in terms of a separate subject/object relationship. This is transformed, however, into the merging of subject/object into a singular reality. I am not using the term 'seeing' to indicate physiological eyesight, but intuitive insight into the true nature of things. The experience of 'seeing' is knowing.

 

[godnotgod]

Now, I just came across this thread. I'd rather not read it all.

Can someone summarise the current status of the conversation please?

Briefly, the issue revolves around whether the universe is an intelligent entity in itself, and whether man has the capacity for cosmic consciousness.

 

[Sapiens]

You appear to be saying that each one of the 6 numbers on a dice can come up at equal odds. I agree. But, we do not want any of them, we want a six. That means it is more likely to not land on a six than to land on one, as there are five other possibilities. If there is a trillion possibilities, then it just won't happen. That is why the monkey experiment did not happen, there are too many other possibilities

What you don't get is that it doesn't have to come up one out of a trillion, I suspect that most any value that permit liquid water will do, at lest for "life as we know it" or similar. For any sort of life ... that's a whole lot more values that would serve. Life adjusts to those values, not the other way round.

 

[shawn001]

What is the "intelligence" behind these?

Its pretty random and chaotic, although still holds to the physical laws.

 

[shawn001]

I believe a picture comes from the mind as opposed to a photograph that is supposed to come from real time unless it has been photoshopped.

First I have no clue how you responded here.

Your brain doesn't get images without visible light and eye sight.

"photograph that is supposed to come from real time"

So you don't believe in photographs?

I don't think you know how scientists use light from space to gauge time it takes for the light to reach us from distant galaxies or the after glow of the big bang. We also don't just use visable light but also in other bands of the spectrum, X-ray, Microwave, Radio wave, and infrared.

Have you ever gotten and Xray, do you tell the doctor I don't believe my arm is broken?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

As I mentioned, at first, we see via the conditioned mind, which thinks in terms of a separate subject/object relationship. This is transformed, however, into the merging of subject/object into a singular reality. I am not using the term 'seeing' to indicate physiological eyesight, but intuitive insight into the true nature of things. The experience of 'seeing' is knowing.

I can already tell this is going nowhere and I've bashed my head against the wall with you before and I'm to tired right now to get back into it.

But I guess I can just say this. All we will ever know, as far as we have found, comes from what we observe. There are internal mechanisms that can configure information free from experience but the information has to be verified via observation. Otherwise we won't know if it is real or not. I know you don't believe that but I just haven't seen you bring a convincing argument otherwise other than telling me to just "get it".

 

[Thief]

Now, I just came across this thread. I'd rather not read it all.

Can someone summarise the current status of the conversation please?

Every man for himself!

 

[Thief]

What we call 'reality' is only a virtual reality. It only seems real.

Everything is Nothing. That's why it can be Everything.

And you don't seem real even to yourself.
You keep saying you don't exist.

type something more.....go ahead.

 

[Ouroboros]

There is no pill...

There is no movie about the Matrix...

 

[Kirran]

Briefly, the issue revolves around whether the universe is an intelligent entity in itself, and whether man has the capacity for cosmic consciousness.

Awesome. Cheers.

Every man for himself!

Man, this is gonna be a tough one.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I know you don't believe that but I just haven't seen you bring a convincing argument otherwise other than telling me to just "get it".

I think we're just looking at speculative beliefs here, not something tangible based on observation or experience.

 

[godnotgod]

I can already tell this is going nowhere and I've bashed my head against the wall with you before and I'm to tired right now to get back into it.

But I guess I can just say this. All we will ever know, as far as we have found, comes from what we observe. There are internal mechanisms that can configure information free from experience but the information has to be verified via observation. Otherwise we won't know if it is real or not. I know you don't believe that but I just haven't seen you bring a convincing argument otherwise other than telling me to just "get it".

The five senses can deceive. Even our rational mind can many times be faulty. The policies of the Nazis, the Inquisition, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, etc., seemed perfectly rational to those who carried them out. So the mystic transcends them, knowing the pitfalls, in favor of a higher state of awareness, one that is beyond Reason, Logic, and Analysis. This higher state is not intellectual, not of the discriminating mind. All sentient beings are capable of it, so no, it is not esoteric. It's just that most are attached to the machinations of the conditioned mind due to almost universal social indoctrination. It is the conditioned mind which tries to make nature fit into its conceptual framework in an attempt to 'make sense' of a world it does not understand. Science is no exception. This misunderstanding we then call 'paradox', when there is no such paradox in actuality. IOW, the conceptual mind thinks there must be something to 'figure out', when there is nothing to figure out. There is only to learn to see reality as it actually is. Once this is understood, then factual knowledge can be placed into the correct context of the Reality it is derived from. That way, the cart can properly be placed behind the horse where it belongs.