The Galaxy Insight: 'The Universe is in Some Deep Sense Tied to Homo Sapiens'

R

RJM

God Feeds the Ravens
Veteran Member
Messages
12,243
Reaction score
4,195
Points
108
Is this of interest to anyone else? Anyway, it seems to be an interesting channel.

The Galaxy Insight –“The Universe is in Some Deep Sense Tied to Homo Sapiens”
Posted on Jun 30, 2020 in Astrophysics, Cosmology, Physics, Science, Universe

“Today I think we are beginning to suspect that man is not a tiny cog that doesn’t really make much difference to the running of the huge machine, but rather that there is a much more intimate tie between man and the universe than we heretofore suspected. The physical world is in some deep sense tied to the human being. Being homo sapiens, we live on an island –the universe–surrounded by a sea of ignorance. As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance. But, of all obstacles to a thoroughly penetrating account of existence, none looms up more dismayingly than ‘time.’

“Explain time? Not without explaining existence. Explain existence? Not without explaining time. To uncover the deep and hidden connection between time and existence, to close on itself our quartet of questions, is a task for the future.

“Is the very mechanism for the universe to come into being meaningless or unworkable, or both unless the universe is guaranteed to produce life, consciousness and observership somewhere and for some little time in its history-to-be? The quantum principle shows that there is a sense in which what the observer will do in the future defines what happens in the past—even in a past so remote that life did not then exist, and shows even more, that ‘observership’ is a prerequisite for any useful version of ‘reality’. The universe is a totality in which what happens ‘now’ gives reality to what happened ‘then,’ perhaps even determines what happened then ...” etc
 
Last edited:
Our perceptions of the universe are limited to what our human senses can perceive. Our science and x-ray telescopes and colliders etc, are extensions of our human senses. If our 'homo sapiens' perception of the universe is limited to what our senses can perceive, does that mean the universe is limited to/by our limited perception?

The part of the universe that 'reveals' itself to us, is all the universe we ever will be able to perceive -- even in theory. But that does not limit the universe to our measurement/perception? There are paradoxes around time etc, that concern our ability to perceive?

So is it the job of science to insist such things do not/ cannot exist? Isn't it beyond the remit of popular media scientists to insist so? Because man's perception is limited to his senses (to nature) does not require that the universe should limit itself to what man is able to perceive?

In this I include all of the spectacular scientific advances that man has made and the instruments and colliders and the wonderful telescopes; I do not deny those at all, but they remain extensions of homo sapiens senses.

So by limiting the universe even in principle to what man is able to perceive, there's a bit of mission creep? A bit of scientific humility may be in order? Imo.
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to let you know I'm following the argument.
I'm put in mind immediately of Blake's observation of the Universe in a grain of sand, in that everything implies everything else.
It could be a matter of which side of the elephant you're currently on.
Right now I've been thinking about complexity theory as a bottom up, self organizing universe, which seems to make a great deal of sense, especially in the light of scientific thought, and the ideas of Taoism and Buddhism.
I realize of course that this might conflict with a top-down theory of the universe such as I find in the Abrahamic religions.
 
So far as I grasp, the universe will always reveal and conceal as it reveals. It is the nature of our dualistic era we find ourselves in at this level of reality. there IS a WHOLE, but we ain't it. We only perceive the finite, therefore, as we improve and increase our ability to see more, always a great thing, it can never be the whole, so there is concealment. This is not a reflection on the universe, it is a reflection of our for now finiteness.

From the article
Our observations, he suggests, might actually contribute to the creation of physical reality. To Wheeler we are not simply bystanders on a cosmic stage; we are shapers and creators living in a participatory universe.

SS says
Very Kabbalistic! We are definitely in a participatory universe, the Mind of God is real, even if unseeable. Well, I mean, that's what I'ma going with for now.
 
Last edited:
Nasruddin said:
I'm put in mind immediately of Blake's observation of the Universe in a grain of sand, in that everything implies everything else.
Click to expand...
Nasruddin you bring up a great point. The idea of holons, parts having the entire whole in them and fractals, repeats of wholes. Helmut Koester's idea. I was just reading this today in Colin A. Low's very interesting and well done book "The Hermetic Kabbalah." Now, Leonora Leet has observed something exquisite that the infinite is inherently within the finite, the example being the Pythagorean diagonal of a square with sides equal to 1. The square root of 2 is literally infinite... And it is the ONLY basis which gives the square growth! Blake is exactly right. In every grain of sand, the universe really does exist, astonishingly enough...fun stuff to think on eh?
Leet's book "Universal Kabbalah" is the singular most astonishing, masterful book on Kabbalah in print. Not an easy read by any means, but then reality ain't easy ya know what I mean?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top