Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: [FutureBuddha (Hunches II)] Further Hunches

  1. #1

    [FutureBuddha (Hunches II)] Further Hunches


    A RATHER LONG ESSAY … BUT WELL WORTH IT, I ASSURE YOU!

    This is the second post in which I present a few personal 'hunches' on why the world works the ways it seems to. I would argue that, while these ideas are obviously quite speculative (thus, I am very happy to call them "suggestions" or mere 'hunches,' based on my reading of modern scientific discoveries, traditional Buddhist perspectives and my own experiences in Zazen practice), my assertions are very much resonant of traditional Buddhist and Zen perspectives, although phrased in more modern terms. While Buddhism generally has avoided speculation on where the world came from, let alone how, I would assert that traditional Buddhism does posit something rare and most special about our having been born at all as a product of prior causes, and the place of human sentient beings in the scheme of things.

    ~~~

    The strongest evidence that “something is afoot,” that there is something more to the history of this universe, that the course of events has not been as random as many believe, is ...... YOU.

    You personally, dear reader. Specifically, it is your being alive now, in this present moment, with an ability to ponder likely conditions as they existed following the Big Bang, or at any time thereafter up to the instant of your conception, and to consider how unlikely your birth and your being here now would have been at any such point in time if our current beliefs about how the universe works were correct. We know that physical events in this universe are not totally random, restricted as they are by the fundamental laws of physics and chemistry, the limits of biology, as well as the system of trial and error which is natural selection and evolution. However, within those parameters, our universe is generally believed to function much like a vast pachinco machine of complex, wild and chaotic events, endless chance encounters, constant “need not have happened” happenings, generations of fluke fornicatings, “wrong place at the wrong time” accidental deaths and impromptu predator devourings.

    Nonetheless, despite all it apparently required, this fact is true:

    You are here to experience and contemplate your being here now, as well as to contemplate the fact that, in order for such experience to be occurring now, not a single physical event, chemical reaction, biological development or twist of evolution, not one during any moment throughout 13.8 billion years, failed to occur if that event, reaction, development or twist was somehow irreplaceable and necessary to your being here now. That is proven by your being here now to consider that fact.

    Furthermore, not a single physical event, chemical reaction, biological development or twist of evolution, not even one or once throughout 13.8 billion years, occurred if that event, reaction, development or twist would have foreclosed your being here now. Not a single one. That is proven by your being here now to consider that fact.

    This state of affairs is true despite it seemingly being the case, according to our present understanding of how events occur in nature, that countless physical events, untold chemical reactions, billions upon billions of biological developments accompanied by the twists and turns of evolution, within the incredibly long, interwoven and tangled chain of events from Big Bang to your parent’s banging and your birth, had ample opportunity to happen or not happen, or to happen but quite differently, or to wind around in some other among untold manifold directions, thus not leading to you. They did not, not even once, not even once in any single instant which would have presented ample opportunities to do so, not a single time if that one link in the chain which led to you had to happen if you were to happen. Your being here now is all the proof you need of this fact.

    To summarize, never once, in the entire history of all universal history, not a single time among the endless atoms reacting, molecules coupling, couples coupling, floods flooding, earthquakes quaking, winds blowing and ancestors surviving among the countless events within events in every single moment of time, did a single left turn of events instead “hang a right” if that left turn was necessary for you, while a right would have led off elsewhere.

    Several objections can be raised to such way of thinking but, on closer examination, all fail to pack much of a punch:

    First, it can be asserted that your birth is just brute fact: Somebody had to win the lottery, and that winner just happened to be you, together with all the other living creatures who shot out on this side of evolution. It cannot be denied that “dumb luck” is a possible explanation, namely, that the dice had to roll some numbers, all equally likely, and it might as well have come up with your number as any others. Anyone born and considering their birth or their winning a lottery would consider that fact just as amazing as do you now.

    However, there comes a point at which the luck involved becomes so extreme that one would be foolish not to consider the possibility of a “fix being in.” Namely, by another way of considering things, you are not the winner of but a single lottery (happens every day), or even a few lotteries won in sequence (happens too), but a thoroughly unbroken, perfect succession of trillions of lotteries, which seemingly offered endless alternative outcomes, involving a roll of the dice or spin of the wheel or deal (dice with trillions of faces, spinning wheels with a trillion trillion slotted spaces, plus decks of cards with as many combinations as atom combinations in the universe) in every moment of every instant since the cosmos began spinning and rolling and dealing nearly 14 billion years ago.

    Of course, there is the underlying question of why there is any cosmic casino at all, any games in the first place, any chemical crap shoots and biological bingo in any form, "something versus nothing" offering basic conditions to allow any longshot possibility of you whatsoever. But it seems the case, unless our eyes deceive us, that a universal poker night did pop up in the middle of (and as) time and space, and that it included at least the possibility of you as one potential (if seemingly outlandish) straight flush ... a possibility confirmed and fully realized, I hope you will agree, by your eyes seeing the cards that have been dealt you right now.

    So, let us imagine as a thought experiment that you were to walk into the place as if an actual casino … one where the bet requires your continuing to win hand after hand, dart toss after dart toss, every single deal, bullseye, crapshoot, jackpot, and roulette turn too … in every second of those 14 billions of years if that hand, roll or toss, etc., is necessary for you. (To keep it simple, let us limit things to one gamble try per second in each and every one of the approximately 32 quadrillion seconds since the big bang, although nature actually would have had googols of separate, parallel gambles going on in each one second, all of which would be needed as “wins” for you.) In this ultimate version of “Russian Roulette,” if but one necessary “win” were to turn out a “bust,” even once among all those turns and plays, you would cease to exist, dropping dead on the spot. In fact, you would never be born. Nevertheless, you keep winning, and living, due to victory in every single one.

    What a winning streak!

    You are either one heck of a lucky fellow or (as I propose) one heck of a mark or fool if you fail to entertain seriously the possibility of loaded dice, trick cards and weighted wheels, something more behind the scenes, something not fully upfront about the gambling, the situation not being quite as it seems, perhaps some shadowy "controller" or hidden processing in a back room making the odds less than fair, or maybe just some nature to the nature of gambling that is not what we assume. It might be that we have failed yet to recognize the “fix or fixer,” the set-up or cheat that causes the apparently random to be far less so. There might be no “fix or fixer” (the latter perhaps an intelligence intending and able to set up outcomes, the former perhaps a blind, natural process which results in the same but without particular intelligence or intent). But I will bet you quadrillions-to one that in some way there is.

    Another objection concerns the fact that this universe, our casino, might not be the only casino. There might be a vast, infinite multi-verse of universes, endless casinos, each slightly different in how it plays its games. Or this one uni-Vegas of ours could be vastly vast, beyond our wildest imagination, a possibility demonstrated by our great space telescopes which, every time they look, seem to find more of it. In a universe or set of universes so sweeping, even infinite, would not the fact of there having been born a creature just like you (or close enough) be vastly improved in odds or rendered inevitable, perhaps so many "yous" if not infinite "yous?" On a boundless dice table of endless rolls, every number combination is going to come up sometime, and ultimately endless times, yes?

    However, there are two problems with such an assertion, stemming from how modern science (and likely you too) presently considers what a “you” is.

    First, in our current understanding of who “you” are to be “you” (not to mention your present experience of you being subjectively the only “you” you have) you are only this very “you,” on this planet, in this timeline. You are the “you” you need, and any other “you” somewhere or sometime else would do “you” no good. You are this one, the only one you really should care about in fact (not that you wish any bad fortune to the other alternate “yous”). Why is this “you” you? Based on your personally lived sense of “you-ness,” any totally identical “you” elsewhere in this universe, or in other universes, or ages in the past or to come in the future, might look and talk like you, and might even feel to themselves as much subjectively “you” in their own experience as you do, but they would not be “this very you” here and now. They would be more like a twin, clone or doppleganger perhaps, but not you “you.” Their existence does little if anything to address the central question of why "this here you” popped up in the one place and time where "this here you” needed to be.

    Second, you might ask why the universe, even if a vast ensemble of universes, would have any “you” at all. No offense, but I assume that the universe, as well as all universes, could have gotten along quite nicely without any “you” at all, even one. You seem expendable (I feel less so about myself, but honestly, the same goes for me too.) Nonetheless, here you are, me too.

    Thus, we are left to ask why any casino needed or ended up with you as a possible outcome, even one time let alone possibly many or infinite times and, more importantly, why you turned up the winner in the one casino where “this very you” needed to be “this very you.” You needed to get this "you right here" right, not some other "you(s)" elsewhere, and luckily you did. Once again, we would be fools not to consider the “fix or fixer.”

    Of course, it is also possible that any “you” anywhere or everywhere else where “a” you pops up is also actually “you,” not just a twin, in ways in which we just do not readily perceive. Please see my earlier “Hunches” essay (https://www.treeleaf.org/forums/show...287%29-Hunches) in which I posit the following:

    It is much the same as if I were in a large house, looking out of one window seeing the world a certain way, then (with amnesia causing me to forget the first window) looking out a second window seeing the world a quite different way ... but this is happening simultaneously. In other words, we are all the very same consciousness looking out of different windows at once, but not aware of each other, thus feeling like individuals of separate experiences and views out our window eyes.
    In other words, every “you” is precisely “you” right now, such that any other “you” (not to mention every other sentient creature perhaps, and maybe even the stones) is also “you,” and you them, but with a kind of “firewall” between, or “horse blinders” on, partitioning the hard-drive or narrowing the scope of vision and experience, so that each “you” does not experience the other “you(s).” That might explain parts of the puzzle.

    Nonetheless, it still does not fully address the question of why there is “this” you which you are currently experiencing as “this” you, even if seemingly there could be endless “other yous” elsewhere (and/or endless other sentient beings not “you” at all), but no “this very you” … or even no “you” at all, not even one.

    If it does turn out that the universe(s) had to have “yous” for some reason, that “yous” are somehow hard-wired into the system as inevitable somehow, that "yous" must be popping up here and there again and again, and that all those “yous” are somehow you too (not only this little one here who will someday leave this mortal coil), would that not be nice for you to know? It would mean that you are somehow more connected, more in extent, more diverse, than just this single, lonely version of you right here. You are literally lots of places, maybe all over the place, maybe the whole place itself in some way! Possibly a whole You-niverse of you(s).

    Bringing these questions right home to “you” makes more personal a related topic that scientists have been debating recently: namely, beyond just you or me, and instead, with regard to all of us, why do we live in a universe seemingly so-well suited to the advent of life in general, any life at all, and more intriguingly, the possibility for intelligent life beyond just simple life?

    As most viewers of science documentaries are now well aware, had gravity, the electro-magnetic force, the strong and weak forces, the electron’s mass, the neutron’s weight and a wide panoply of other phenomena (the so-called “anthropic coincidences”) been even a tad stronger or weaker, massier or weightier, stars and the periodic table would never have happened, or would have happened much differently, and any life, including complex life, seemingly would have been impossible. The problem is resolved if there is a multi-verse of universes, each with somewhat different conditions, but there is little more evidence for a multi-verse right now, apart from conjecture and a handful of intriguing theories, as there is for the “fix or fixer.” A multi-verse still begs the question of how “you” (this one here) happens to find yourself in one of the universes where any life was possible, let alone in this particular universe where your “this very you here and now” life is possible.

    It could perhaps be nothing more than some “selection effect,” it is true, to wit: If you were not in such an hospitable universe, you would not be thinking about it because you would not be. However, because you are thinking about it, you must be in an hospitable universe. But does that not beg the question of why there is any hospitable universe at all, for life in general let alone for you in particular, and why “this you” lucked out in getting the very “this universe” that was precisely on the spot where it was needed by “this you” (and by the rest of us here too)? If you were to find yourself afloat in an ocean, about to drown, and were to reach out to find a tree branch floating by, a branch sufficient for you to grab and thus keep from drowning, you would consider yourself lucky indeed! But this planet on which we find ourself is much more than just a drifting log: Located in the so-called “Goldilocks Zone” of our solar system, with water and dry land, struck by meteors to form its core just enough, where and when, not too cold and not too hot (not yet anyway, unless we knock things off balance), with gravity of certain strength, a moon above to turn the tides, circling a sun not too close nor too far, with properties of heating and lighting suitable to grow the food which sustains us, all of it made of elements of the periodic table with just the properties (as slews of diverse molecules in combination, each with unique abilities and functions) to do all that, including the oxygen and carbon and other stuff that are our very bodies and brains, all of which is allowed by a universe with the physical properties to allow all that. One miss there, one missing element or off-course mega-meteor, temperature disparity or temperamental sun, looney moon or drifting off of evolution, and you would not be here to think of it at all. Goldilocks would get no porridge, let alone air, light, gravity, ground, water, quite complex brain or living body.

    That might be just a “selection effect,” it is true. But, also possibly, it could be a special phenomenon so unusual (unusual to your quite complex brain anyway, not to mention to the quite complex brains of the rest of our human race) that it cries out for special explanation and consideration of a “fix or fixer,” rather than a shrug and a resigned, “Well, them’s just the lucky breaks.” While every other ant on this planet, or alien being on any other, snail and salmon or silicon-based jelly creature from the New Jersey swamps to out in the most distant galaxies we can see, would be equally entitled to be amazed at their being where and what they are, intelligent and inquisitive enough to ask the question (probably the ants crawl along just fine without wondering, it is true), we still can marvel that we are here to ask why and how … especially when considering the much greater set of seemingly potential, “conceivably might have been but never panned out, unborn or unconceived” beings who never got a chance to be born at all, let alone a chance to consider the question of why. One would think that they far outnumber those of us who did get conceived and born, so much so that we should question why, not a tree branch, but a fully equipped and stocked planet popped up right where our feet needed to plant themselves.

    And that leads to a final point: Why do you have feet perfectly fitted to the ground, lungs just right for the chemistry of respiration and earth’s particular mix of air, eyes suited to the light of our sun so as to allow you to see, a heart, other organs and other bodily systems to so ably handle the needs of circulation, digestion, protection from bacterial invasion, reproduction and other machinations sufficient to let you be alive? Obviously, the answer is evolution: Your ancestors, over long generations, evolved eyes which suited the sunlight for the simple reason that doing so aided survival, finding food, navigating, locating mates, escaping enemies (improving survival chances over those who did not.) You have feet which evolved for like reason, teeth, thumbs, and all the rest too. This is now the accepted wisdom of biologists, and it is hard to deny. I do not.

    However, it also presents the same mysteries: How did all that evolution happen to wind around, not only to the particular body that is you, but to the particular STRUCTURE of BODY among all potential structures (let alone no structure and body at all) necessary to allow you to be “you,” and to have a mental sense of you right now, when very few if any possible other structures would have done so?

    In other words, it seems that the world could have continued along just fine with only the body structures of amoeba, worms, elephants and roaches, or any other creature for that matter, or no creatures, let alone the specific body structure for this “you” creature. Or it could have evolved intelligent species who were not our human species at all, and quite distinct. Even after it did evolve us humans, it could have skipped the particular human body structure that is reading these words now (i.e., you), but it did not, and that required you to have almost exactly the kind of body you have, besides seemingly this particular one. But if you did not have your stomach and your reasonably good brain, let alone heart and lungs and the rest, there might be some “lump or ooze” vaguely you, some semblance of you sharing some characteristics, some other creature with a hint of you, some amoeba or roach (let alone rock or other inanimate object) with the atoms that are now you instead restructured as amoeba or roach or rock, but not the very form of “you” that needs to have been pretty much just as it is right now in order to enable a “you” that can read and is reading these words. Things turned out pretty nicely for you, I hope you agree, assuming that you are happy to know that you have the sense organs, lungs, blood, guts and brain you need to make “this you” what you are. You could have been a boneless you, or one without lungs or bowels or brain … which really means, frankly, that “you” would not be at all, or at least, an unrecognizably different version.

    And that is not all: For you to be “you” (the one listed on your drivers license, and the one reading and considering what it says) you needed to be on precisely this world, or one pretty much just like it. In other words, if you lacked eyes or hands, you probably could still get by (and even thrive, for I do not mean to imply in ANY way that sensory or other physical so-called “disabilities” are truly “defects” and make somebody less in any way. Quite the contrary! You might even be a better you without some limb or sight or hearing.) However, without that brain of yours of intricate construction to sustain a modicum of intelligence and your inner “sense” of “you” there would (you would assume) be no “you” possible. You needed neurons, in certain complex structures of connection and interrelationship, with certain brain regions and abilities joined and interworking in just the right ways, all as sustained by a heart and lungs able to keep it alive by being well geared to the atmosphere and chemistry of this planet, all built of atoms in molecular combinations very fortunately able to be the “building blocks” of each “piece” of you, with the right properties, all combined and efficiently inter-functioning to allow and sustain all that, without which “you” would not be you subjectively experiencing you, let alone smart enough to be aware of how ridiculous the happening of your “you-ness” actually is. And all of those parts and combinations would be most unlikely to have evolved just as they did without a planet with pretty much the properties, narrow environments and resources that this one has. Small chance of a "you" evolving on Jupiter or Venus, for example. Some extremophile life, perhaps, but not "you."

    Just as surprising, as a corollary, your “you” being “you” is as it is because it is a mirror reflection of the planet: If this planet were not as it is, with the narrow range of conditions, wide variety of resources and other life nurturing properties it has, you could not be who "you" are with the properties you have, because those specific properties which allow your "youness" each and all evolved "hand to glove" to suit the particular conditions, resources and properties of this particular planet. You have eyes with receptors that match the light, legs suited to the ground, blood of a certain chemistry fed by water and nutrients found on this world, with a brain running by electro-chemical properties precisely balanced to allow its braining. Your body evolved that way to suit conditions. In other words, you are very much the planet's mirror reflection, the product stamped out of its mold, someone (i.e., you) made with precisely the properties and materials that the planet earth had available to use, suited to survive in the very particular terrestrial conditions that the planet presents.

    Failing any of which … you would not be you.

    I am not saying that evolution, and good old Darwin, are wrong. Not at all, the evidence is too strong, the process visible before our eyes. But might the theory be a little bit incomplete? Might there be something more to the game, “Evolution +Alpha,” those weights in the roulette wheel we have not yet caught on to, the hidden compass which points out directions, "the fix or the fixer" in the otherwise wild casino of nature’s “eat or be eaten” jungles? We just don’t know what this “+Alpha” is yet, just as we did not know why giraffes have long necks before Darwin came along to resolve that long debated mystery. Of course, anything is speculative until found (or disproven) assuming "+Alpha" actually exists and can be found. But if we suspect such, we might look for it, find it, test for it. I suspect that, when we finally know, it will seem as obvious as a giraffe's neck.

    Just on a lark, I merely point out, as a fun thought experiment to show that things need not be what they seem, that, for example, a film or simulation depicting evolution with a runtime millions of years long, when played back, would look just like “live action” evolution to someone watching but unaware it was a film or simulation. The course of events would be safely determined within the bits and bites of the DVD or hard drive on which the movie or simulation is held but, when replayed, would appear to be the real world changing in a wildly undetermined manner through passing time. (Even without need for an entire film or simulation, a simulated memory merely of finding dinosaur bones and learning such history would have the same effect, although admittedly much too close for comfort to "the dinosaur bones were planted" notion.) Likewise for some hyper-realistic and detailed dream to a dreamer unaware they are dreaming (possibly creating the experience as their own imaginings, perhaps as a kind of shared dream that we are all dreaming and creating together, perhaps as some boltzmann brain or the like which is dreaming us.) Likewise, characters in a video game of “Mario Evolution,” unaware that they are characters in the game, would see evolution play out as wildly as any race, not aware that the game machine has hidden parameters that limit the possibilities and directions that the race might take. Or, quantum mechanics suggests that our observations determine physical events, but how far does that reach? Rather than history causing us to live and observe, might somehow our observing cause our living and history? Butterflies, fish and birds accomplish astoundingly precise and targeted migrations across the earth, not by random chance driving them willy-nilly to purely odd and unpredictable destinations, but because they possess inner, non-obvious, thoroughly natural (themselves evolved) navigation systems which guide them through night and darkness, storms and open space to just the mating fields where they need to go. Might nature have other guidance systems pointing to certain destinations in its natural and otherwise open-ended and wild wanderings? Might something like one of those scenarios be true and, if so, is there some inventive way to test for it? It is fun to speculate, no harm in that.

    Whatever it is, the system is not perfect, at least not to our human standards: It does go by trial and error, eat or be eaten, wasteful in seeing what new mutation will keep its bearer alive long enough to pass it on, mercilessly killing off and recycling the atoms of the rest. Children are born with defects, cancers and other diseases, strange and harmful mutations appear in genetic inheritances, all of which makes me think that the system is quite buggy, if not downright broken and cruel. Were I to design a universe (not to say there was any designer, and if there was, apparently not a very nice one or efficient one who could cut directly to the final ideal design), I would want a place where children do not suffer, and all were born healthy. Could we not have had change and evolution while leaving the dying children out, as well as war, rape, murder and a few other things? We cannot all live forever and, in fact, each generation must die to make room for what comes next (what a crowded, dull and non-developing world this would be if we were just to stick around forever). Yet I wish deer were never hit by cars, that cats would leave the birds alone, that birds could let the fish swim by unmolested. We need to eat, and nature seems to have come up with killing and violence as the central means to that end.

    However, maybe we human beings can now choose to move beyond all that killing and violence, at least for our part. I get the sense that the “programming” (if that is an apt description) is self-correcting, namely, it is rather organic, but tends to isolate and remove its “mistakes” by the simple mechanism that they die, don’t reproduce, don’t continue. In other words, as sad as it is, harmful mutations tend not to be carried further because their carriers do not carry on further. Most children do not get cancer, although some unfortunate ones do. Perhaps our developing brains, some of which are smart enough to become “cancer researchers,” allow that someday soon we can correct that glitch too. After all, "scientists" and "engineers" are what nature has cooked up too as its evolutionary natural creation, as much as nature came up with flowers and trees. Modern medicine and laboratories are products of nature too. As well, let us grow beyond anger and violence, especially if we hope to survive in this age of mass destruction weapons. Perhaps the reason that all these galaxies, and all the planets within them, are so spaced apart is precisely so we cannot get to each other either, isolated by the solid barrier of the speed of light, like petri dishes safely kept in isolation or seedlings spaced in a garden field of outer space. Even if we muck things up here, or just are unlucky on planet earth, I am sure that countless other species on other worlds will persevere.

    But my thoughts wander too far afield now ...

    Rene Descartes posited, Cogito, ergo sum, “I think therefore I am.” It is perhaps the one thing that we can be sure of, for sure. However, I believe that we are entitled to take the next step and each ask, “why am I, and why am I thinking at all?” when that seemingly need not have been the case. It is a special question that I, and you, are entitled to ask about you, me and the rest of us, a question that possibly you and most of us have been thinking about all wrong until now.

    ~~~

    ANNEX:

    In a wonderful book entitled “A Perfect Vacuum,” science fiction author and social commentator Stanislaw Lem wrote a story detailing what goes into somebody's life. It is not only the physics and chemistry of the universe, but historical events, including many so tragic. It is something to consider too. Here is a small taste:

    A certain army doctor, during the First World War, ejected a nurse from the operating room, for he was in the midst of surgery when she entered by mistake. Had the nurse been better acquainted with the hospital, she would not have mistaken the door to the operating room for the door to the first-aid station, and had she not entered the operating room, the surgeon would not have ejected her … [thus] the young surgeon would not have considered it his duty to go and apologize to the nurse, would not have taken her to the café, fallen in love with her, and married her, whereby Professor Benedykt Kouska would not have come into the world as the child of this same married couple. …

    [There would have been no war, thus no Professor Kouska, but for] the coincidence, too, that the Archduke Ferdinand was shot in Sarajevo, for had he not been shot, war would not have broken out, and had war not broken out, the young lady would not have become a nurse; moreover, since she came from Olomouc and the surgeon from Moravská Ostrava, they most likely would never have met, neither in a hospital nor anywhere else. One therefore has to take into account the general theory of the ballistics of shooting at archdukes, and since the hitting of the Archduke was conditioned by the motion of his automobile, the theory of the kinematics of automobile models of the year 1914 should also be considered, as well as the psychology of assassins, because not everyone in the place of that Serb would have shot at the Archduke, and even if someone had, he would not have hit, not if his hands were shaking with excitement; the fact, therefore, that the Serb had a steady hand and eye and no tremors also has its place in the probability distribution of the birth of Professor Kouska. Nor ought one to ignore the overall political situation of Europe in the summer of 1914. ….

    But the same reasoning holds for those ancestors of the line of the Kouskas and the line of the nurse who were not at all human yet, being creatures who led a quadrumanous and arboreal existence in the Lower Eolithic, when the first Paleopithecanthropus, having overtaken one of these quadrumanes and perceiving that it was a female with which he had to deal, possessed her beneath the eucalyptus tree that grew in the place [because previously] great herds of weakened mammoths had eaten their fill of eucalyptus flowers and then, suffering indigestion from them … had drunk copious quantities of water from the Vltava; that water, having at the time purgative properties, caused them to evacuate en masse, thanks to which eucalyptus seeds were planted where previously eucalypti had never been [because previously] water of the Vltava underwent sulfurization approximately two and a half million years B.C., this on account of a displacement in the main geosyncline of the tectonic formation that was then giving rise to the center of the Tatra Mountains; this formation caused the expulsion of sulfurous gases from the marlacious strata of the Lower Jurassic, because in the region of the Dinaric Alps there was an earthquake, which was caused by a meteor that had a mass on the order of a million tons; this meteor came from a swarm of Leonids, and had it fallen not in the Dinaric Alps but a little farther on, the geosyncline would not have buckled, the sulfurous deposit would not have reached the air and sulfurized the Vltava, and the Vltava would not have caused the diarrhea of the mammoths, from which one can see that had a meteor not fallen 2.5 million years ago on the Dinaric Alps, Professor Kouska then, too, could not have been born.

    … and it continues on like that …
    Last edited by Jundo; 10-22-2023 at 06:29 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  2. #2
    Thank you Jundo, I like pondering such questions, too.

    Seeing my existence as the proof of there being something that guided my development,
    or just action and reaction in a complex manner doing what it does?

    When I am looking at it from the perspective of now, this human being in all it’s complexity,
    it feels like the old proof of the existence of god. This complex thing needs to have some guidance, thought or creator.

    When I am looking at if from the perspective of some quantum fluctuation, plopping this universe into existence and then just this energy becoming a elementary particle, this particle becoming a more complex assembly, an atom, aggregating and forming a fusion reactor (sun), producing heavy elements, molecules, life -
    it feels like a natural process that produced what he have now.

    I believe in the methods and models of science, knowing that they are just that - models.
    So my tendency is to view this question from the 2nd perspective, I mentioned.
    Not looking back and assuming that the "is condition" holds the reason for it's origin.
    Physical time (space-time), whatever that is (the difference/development between different arrangements of energy and matter, I guess) is moving in one direction. Forward.

    Of course, we need to live our lives as responsible, compassionate and thoughtful, as we can,
    but we also need to understand that we are not as important and special to the universe, as we’d like to think.
    On the timescale of the universe, it is just an eye blink ago, that we thought the solar system, circling around us, is just there for us.
    We’re not the center of the universe, either.

    A wonderful development and rare chance, that lead to this, but it had immeasurable times (there was no time, before the universe plopped into existence) to form, too.
    Life, this self organizing, self replicating, dissipative non balanced thing - everything moves towards a state of balance and equilibrium, of even distribution, just life goes the other way of aggregating and building, of consuming energy to counter equilibrium.
    From prokaryotes to us being self conscious and pondering existence.
    What a huge responsibility for us not to mess it up.

    The next galaxy is 2.5 million lightyears away, so it is not very likely that we get to know all the other conscious life in form of quivering blobs or floating particle clouds or self conscious whole planets (taken from Stanislaw Lem, too).

    Sorry for running long,
    I wasn't able to display my shortcomings shorter.

    Of course just my 2 cents.
    Gassho,
    Kotei.

    義道 冴庭 / Gidō Kotei.
    Being a novice priest doesn't mean my writing about the Dharma is more substantial than yours. Actually, it might well be the other way round.

  3. #3
    The essay is awe-inspiring. I'm so small, the planet is so small, while being huge to us, yet it's amazing that we're here at all, contemplating our existence.

    Gassho, Onkai
    Sat lah
    美道 Bidou Beautiful Way
    恩海 Onkai Merciful/Kind Ocean

    I have a lot to learn; take anything I say that sounds like teaching with a grain of salt.

  4. #4
    Interesting essay, I did get a bit overwhelmed by the amount of "yous" in some paragraphs . I'll have to digest and probably reread it again. Also the contemplation on the nature of the universe is always so fantastic and rich

    Thanks

    Gasshō
    SatToday
    Bernal
    Last edited by nalber3; 06-15-2023 at 01:26 PM.

  5. #5
    Someone asked me if my "hunch" must always fall outside of science and the scientific method. I think that it could come within science and the scientific method eventually.

    It is science as its central premise can be posited, experienced and tested for. First, you can consciously experience your own experience of existence, so that fact is fundamental to all science (without that ability, even science would be impossible as there would be no conscious scientists.) Second, it must be a given that every necessary cause for your existence happened or you would not be present and considering the problem. Third, we can pencil in the mathematical likelihood of that occurring, among all theoretically possible alternative outcomes, as measured a moment after the Big Bang or at any point in time after. Fourth, we can posit that, given the strange result, such an outcome was possible but, when measured from any point prior to its happening, most extremely unlikely. Fifth, we can then posit that the outcome either was simply brute fact or, possibly, that there is an as yet unknown mechanism which could bring about the unusual result. Sixth, we can consider what kind of mechanism that might be, and finally, we can consider whether we can test for it. If we can test for it, it is science.

    Furthermore, it is "science" in the sense that the view challenges a premise on which science rests, namely that there is nothing special or strange about our having been born at the tail end of such a long and tangled chain of a prior factors. The fact of our being the only or relatively rare outcome able to consciously consider its own outcome is what makes the problem unusual, calling for special explanation beyond simply "that's what happened" or "something had to happen, so might as well be that."

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    Last edited by Jundo; 06-20-2023 at 02:56 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  6. #6
    Thank you Jundo

    Just catching up on some reading! Random or directed - this place, whatever this place is, is amazing! The threads upon which our individual existences hang are incredibly thin. It can get pretty weird though can't it, I mean, I once wondered if I would be me (as I am now) if my parents had conceived me a day later than they did????

    Gassho, Tokan

    satlah
    平道 島看 Heidou Tokan (Balanced Way Island Nurse)
    I enjoy learning from everyone, I simply hope to be a friend along the way

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokan View Post
    Thank you Jundo

    Just catching up on some reading! Random or directed - this place, whatever this place is, is amazing! The threads upon which our individual existences hang are incredibly thin. It can get pretty weird though can't it, I mean, I once wondered if I would be me (as I am now) if my parents had conceived me a day later than they did????

    Gassho, Tokan

    satlah
    Or if they had never met ... or there was no planet earth ...
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  8. #8
    Perhaps the best argument against the simulation hypothesis is that the simulation would be programmed so no one or nothing in the simulation could figure it out.

    Gassho,
    Ryūmon (Kirk)
    Sat
    流文

    I know nothing.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryumon View Post
    Perhaps the best argument against the simulation hypothesis is that the simulation would be programmed so no one or nothing in the simulation could figure it out.

    Gassho,
    Ryūmon (Kirk)
    Sat
    Unless it is either a mathematically imperfect simulation, or the game was to figure it out, or figuring it out is not harmful to the simulation. For example, we know that movies are movies, and video games are video games, yet we still enjoy them.

    I am not saying that the foregoing is the actual situation, but merely offering a challenge to the conclusiveness of your assertion.

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Unless it is either a mathematically imperfect simulation, or the game was to figure it out, or figuring it out is not harmful to the simulation. For example, we know that movies are movies, and video games are video games, yet we still enjoy them.
    But we don't know that a dream is a dream, at least while we're dreaming.

    Gassho,

    Ryūmon (Kirk)

    sat
    流文

    I know nothing.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryumon View Post
    But we don't know that a dream is a dream, at least while we're dreaming.

    Gassho,

    Ryūmon (Kirk)

    sat
    There is lucid dreaming where one recognizes that they are in a dream. Again, not saying that applies here, just pointing out an exception.

    Gassho J
    Stlah
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryumon View Post
    Perhaps the best argument against the simulation hypothesis is that the simulation would be programmed so no one or nothing in the simulation could figure it out.
    Or that those, steering the simulation will immediately remove the one, figuring it out, from it. Until they, themself find out they are trapped in one.
    And all this for a marketing company, trying to eliminate the need for opinion polls: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacron-3

    Gassho,
    Kotei sat/lah today.

    義道 冴庭 / Gidō Kotei.
    Being a novice priest doesn't mean my writing about the Dharma is more substantial than yours. Actually, it might well be the other way round.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Kotei View Post
    Or that those, steering the simulation will immediately remove the one, figuring it out, from it. Until they, themself find out they are trapped in one.
    And all this for a marketing company, trying to eliminate the need for opinion polls: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacron-3

    Gassho,
    Kotei sat/lah today.
    Not only have I never heard of that novel, but I had never heard of the Fassbinder adaptation of it. Since it was made for TV, it probably didn’t circulate in cinemas at all. (Though Berlin Alexanderplatz was also made for TV, and was shown in cinemas.) i’ll have to try to find this.

    Gassho,
    Ryūmon (Kirk)
    Sat
    流文

    I know nothing.

  14. #14
    Berlin Alexanderplatz
    I remember sitting in a cinema for the 15 hour film (booked into an art theatre as a binge marathon.) Like the universe, it seemed to go on for billions of years, had characters coming in and out, a complicated and tangled plot with no clear direction or ending in sight ...

    ... all of which opinion, I not admit, was due not to the film, but to my being too young, too uneducated about its origins and too uncultured in my taste and sensibilities to appreciate it ...

    ... also perhaps like our human experience of the universe now!

    Yes, maybe the universe has been made as a mini-series by a German avant-garde director, and we just cannot appreciate it yet. That would explain a lot.

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    I remember sitting in a cinema for the 15 hour film (booked into an art theatre as a binge marathon.) Like the universe, it seemed to go on for billions of years, had characters coming in and out, a complicated and tangled plot with no clear direction or ending in sight ...

    ... all of which opinion, I not admit, was due not to the film, but to my being too young, too uneducated about its origins and too uncultured in my taste and sensibilities to appreciate it ...

    ... also perhaps like our human experience of the universe now!

    Yes, maybe the universe has been made as a mini-series by a German avant-garde director, and we just cannot appreciate it yet. That would explain a lot.

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    Oh, you're so wrong, Roshi. I saw it in a cinema in NYC when it was released, and it was a masterpiece. I attended an intimate presentation the previous evening with two of the actors, Gunther Lamprecht, who played the lead character Franz Biberkopf, and Hanna Schygulla. 22-year old me was so excited to be in the presence of Hanna Schygulla...

    I've since seen it as intended - as a TV series in multiple sittings - and it's still a masterpiece.

    I looked it up in the NYT. This article presages today's TV with the type of long-form series that are now the norm:

    https://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/10/a...sultPosition=4

    You don't have to blame capitalism to realize that films of this mind-bending length are impractical as theatrical ventures, but there is the possibility that in the not too distant future the home video market will make them seem a little less mad than they do today. A new kind of narrative cinema may be at hand. If that is true, then "Berlin Alexanderplatz" is its seminal work.


    Gassho,

    Ryūmon (Kirk)

    sat
    流文

    I know nothing.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryumon View Post
    Oh, you're so wrong, Roshi. I saw it in a cinema in NYC when it was released, and it was a masterpiece.
    Oh, I know. As I said, I was too young. I will rewatch the whole 15.5 hours.

    By the way, was there not a remake? I guess I should stick with Fassbinder.

    In fact, if there is a universal film director, I think it is more Fellini, the Fellini of La Strada. Or maybe a spaghetti western by Sergio Leone.

    Gassho, Jundo
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  17. #17
    Anyway, if you guys like these "further hunches," you should move on to the "even further hunches!" ...

    https://www.treeleaf.org/forums/show...urther-Hunches

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  18. #18
    Heady stuff. Yes indeed.

    I'll say this: the probability that the temperature in a room will be exactly 25 degree Celsius is: zero.

    Because "exactly 25" is a miracle: 25.0000000000000000000...

    A perfect, infinite streak of zeros. Thus is the weirdness of continuous probability distributions.

    However, if the room is heated from 24 degrees to 26, one of two miracles must have occurred: either the room was, for an instant, exactly 25 degrees; or the temperature "skipped" 25 somehow.

    We live in a quantized universe, though, wherein physical states cannot necessarily attain every real-number value or even every real-number value in some bounded interval of real numbers. So one could find flaws in my room temperature scenario. And things get messy: a room is big, and cannot be expected to have the same temperature everywhere. Heat rises, right?

    So, what's my point? Erm...well, events that seem unlikely, impossible, or miraculous, must inevitably occur throughout life, the universe, and everything as a matter of course (and in the course of matter). Whatever the exact temperature of a room is at a given moment, it's a value that has probability zero of occurring in the exact sense.

    I've always been a champion of anthropic principles of all stripes.

    That's not to say there isn't something mysterious underlying reality as we perceive it. Reality is big enough to accommodate both universes with gods and universes without gods (any "simulations" out there I include in the former category).

    Anyway, I find all these speculations concerning the true nature of reality and what it means for us to be "us" fascinating, and as the years go by I'm always tweaking my viewpoints.

    Yes, I need to get my profile set up, but this post is also a test to see that things are working.

    Joe

    st
    Last edited by Soothfast; 11-20-2023 at 06:51 AM.

  19. #19
    So, what's my point? Erm...well, events that seem unlikely, impossible, or miraculous, must inevitably occur throughout life, the universe, and everything as a matter of course (and in the course of matter). Whatever the exact temperature of a room is at a given moment, it's a value that has probability zero of occurring in the exact sense.
    The universe, if vast or infinite, may have passed through or reached permutations of "Joe Soothfast" any number of times, in any number of places. But you are not just any old "Joe Soothfast" somewhere, at some time, but this very specific self-experiencing "Joe Soothfast" in this place and point in time. We can ask why the universe needed any "Joe Soothfast" at all, even one. But, that said, if the universe had created some "Joe Soothfast" across the Galaxy, or some million years ago, or any other time and place but the one where you find yourself now, then in such case, seemingly, it would not do you (the one "Joe Soothfast" you should be concerned about) even a lick of good. Would any old "Joe Soothfast" actually be this here you too (an intriguing notion in its own right), or just your twin (thus doing you no good)?

    This is the Joe Soothfast, in this place and moment, that this Joe Soothfast should find puzzling.

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-21-2023 at 12:19 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  20. #20
    I am not saying that evolution, and good old Darwin, are wrong. Not at all, the evidence is too strong, the process visible before our eyes. But might the theory be a little bit incomplete? Might there be something more to the game
    I think that to show that the theory was incomplete, you would have to show that there is something that evolution cannot explain. At present I do not see that.

    What evidence is there that we move towards certain directions that is unexplained by evolution by natural selection (which is inherently messy but looks directional when viewd backwards) and random chance?

    I really like your writing above, Jundo, as it points to the unlikelihood of each of us being here, as well as the existence of giraffes in their exact form, and a number of other things. That really can lead to a sense of gratitude and wonder, but I am not sure it needs to invoke directionality beyond evolution + chance.

    As a Zen approach, mostly it is good to rest in the mystery of all, and not need to explain it. However, as a scientist, I do not currently see that there are broad patterns in the world's biology that are unexplainable.

    Would it even be possible to design an experiment to show that we move preferentially towards some outcomes rather than others? I suspect not because we would need a number of Earths to study and currently (as far as I know), we have n=1 for this study which is somewhat suboptimal. It would be possible to do with simulations, but the problem with those is that the mechanisms would involve coding what we already know. That does sometimes throw up interesting results, however, showing that certain outcomes do happen without being programmed, and trajectories tend in certain directions that might not appear obvious. That might, in real life, look like having direction without it actually being required.

    One thing we learn in science is the tendency of human brains to want to form patterns and find meaning, even where there is none. This is something we see during sitting, as our mind creates a narrative on top of what is essentially sense data, and it is especially keen on making the 'I' important. That does not mean that there isn't a pattern or meaning, but we have to be careful that it really is there and not what statisticians call a type I error (false positive).

    Anyway, huge apologies for length.

    Gassho
    Dr Kokuu
    -sattoday/kah-

  21. #21
    Hi Kokuu,

    I think that you have blinders on.

    If suddenly an elephant appears in the middle of Times Square, it seems that your attitude would be that an elephant has to be some place, so it might as well be there. After all, elephants wander and migrate here and there, it must simply have wandered over from Africa. That is also a perfectly natural explanation, fully in keeping with all known laws of the universe. However, instead, most scientists and other rational people would set to looking for the reasons by which the unlikely event happened, for example, that someone loaded it on a truck and left it there as a prank.

    If someone wins in a casino, time and time again, for 13.8 billion years of rolls and card hands, you could say that the winner is just very very lucky. After all, for any lottery, somebody can win, no matter how unlikely. Or, one might suspect that, perchance, the cards are loaded. After all, anyone can have a lucky night, but 13.8 billion years of lucky night is qualitatively different. We are not the winners of a single lottery, but an incredible series of lotteries after lotteries, each and all we had to win without a miss. To deny the possibility of loaded dice and weighted wheels is simply naive (and I would love to get you in a good poker game with my shady deck of cards.)

    Our existence has predictive power, to wit, if there is some as yet unknown event or property of the universe that was necessary to have happened with very specific conditions, or within very narrow parameters, were our birth to be possible, then we can predict ... and it will be demonstrated ... that just such an event with those specific conditions, and such property of the universe with those very narrow parameters did exist or occur in just such way. It might be that the event or property could have been countless other ways, but still, it will be found to be the one and precise way we selfishly need.

    There is a reason that the elephant is in Times Square, and it is not merely that it wandered here and there from Africa and just ended up there.

    Gassho, Jundo

    stlah
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-22-2023 at 04:28 PM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  22. #22
    If suddenly an elephant appears in the middle of Times Square, it seems that your attitude would be that an elephant has to be some place, so it might as well be there. After all, elephants wander and migrate here and there, it must simply have wandered over from Africa. That is also a perfectly natural explanation, fully in keeping with all known laws of the universe. However, instead, most scientists and other rational people would set to looking for the reasons by which the unlikely event happened, for example, that someone loaded it on a truck and left it there as a prank.
    Not at all. Clearly an elephant in Times Square would need an explanation.

    Can you explain what aspect of current existence would equate to an elephant in Times Square so I might be able to see better what you are pointing to?

    Looking backwards we see that everything has to be just like it is in order to get here. But is here an elephant in Times Square, or is it more like an elephant in the savannah, a natural outcome of evolution that could easily have ended up another way?

    Even with an elephant in the savannah it is fascinating to understand the precise causes and conditions over billions of years that ended up with it being there.

    The idea that everything is designed just perfectly so we can be and a slight change in the laws of physics would not allow it is called the 'fine tuning' argument. You can argue for or against it, and there are, I believe, physicists and philosophers on both sides. This is a neat summary (which you may already have read) of the arguments for and against:https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/

    However, in Zen terms, should we ignore the fact that we, and each and every creature and thing may be the unlikely product of a series of stochastic events? I don't think so. Each should be celebrated and venerated for its unique position at the end of a long chain of causality that has brought us to now.

    Gassho
    Kokuu
    -sattoday/lah-
    Last edited by Kokuu; 11-23-2023 at 09:49 AM.

  23. #23
    Hi Kokuu,

    Here is the elephant in the room that I feel you miss.

    You are correct in all regards: That the universe happened, and happened to have the conditions for life in general, for some planet or countless planets conducive to complex life spread through the cosmos (although, apparently, with a lot more space and planets in between not conducive to complex life), that some intelligent life may have appeared here and there ... All that is not very surprising, given that it is just the playing out of natural processes and chance. There is some intelligent life here and there in a vast universe, and maybe some of it is even Kokuu-ish now and then, when conditions for that happen to come together. It is just the elephant on the savannah. (Of course, the fact that there is such a universe at all, and such physical processes, to allow all that is itself pretty amazing, but let us take it all for granted and with a yawn.)

    My argument hinges on something different:

    Even yawning at the fact that there is some intelligent, sentient and self-reflective life somewhere, the fact that the question is being posed and reflected on by ... not just somebody somewhere, even by some Kokuu-ish Kokuu somewhere ... but you, yourself, here, now, in the one place and time you seemingly needed to be in order to do that (as opposed to some other guy or creature doing so somewhere else) ... ... All that is an especially strange phenomenon given that even ONE missed factor in 13.8 Billion years seemingly should have precluded such event. Granted, any creature reflecting on the chain of events to its birth would feel equally but (here is the kicker) they are not, and seemingly SHOULD NOT be you given all it apparently took for you to be doing so amid the specific conditions to let you do so, the product of precisely right events through the aeons. That is the elephant in Times Square. Seemingly, for one missed turn, the elephant should not be in Times Square at all, or if there is an elephant in Times Square, it should not be you.

    I think that you are misusing the Zen teachings that "each creature and thing" is sacred, special and the endpoint of a long chain of fantastic events. This is true. But they are not you and, seemingly (as we understand the seeming pachinco machine of our universe) seemingly should not include you at all (or, better said, the odds of it including you are infinitesimal, so infinitesimal that we had best consider a more likely set up.)

    To return to our elephant, a wandering herd of elephants, wandering here and there could have, purely by chance, wandered onto a drifting log or gotten caught in a tornado or stumbled into an airplane cargo hold with no special assistance, landed at JFK and one member (and, further, not just any member of the herd, but specifically, elephant you) may have wandered over to Times Square on its own. It is perfectly possible, and violates no natural laws. However, it seems much more likely that the elephant had a little help somewhere for there to be an elephant standing in Times Square, on top of which, said elephant is not just an elephant let alone a hippo, but elephant you.

    Likewise, in an infinite universe, there may be countless elephant-identical species and countless duplicates of Times Square. But they are not the one Times Square we are concerned with, namely, the one in the New York City on our planet, the only one we have here where we are. And those other elephants are not you, the one Kokuu elephant you should be concerned with. Yes, somebody else somewhere may be feeling how amazing it is that they exist, but the odds of such a somebody somewhere being you are ... ridiculously unlikely, i.e., every single right outcome, without a miss through every crossroads in every moment through billions of years unlikely.

    You are stubborn if you refuse to consider the existence of a possible mechanism which shortened the odds or assisted the outcome.

    I think you are like the blindman who, feeling parts of the elephant, misses the whole.

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-26-2023 at 05:08 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •