Duane Elgin

Ursula— If something is happening “spontaneously,” then it means that it is happening without any apparent external cause. Yet, in your description you say that “. . . all the prefabbed constraints in the system . . . are externally caused.”  If the constraints are “externally caused” as you say, then it is not, by definition, “happening sp…[Read more]

Ursula—If something is happening “spontaneously,” then it means that it is happening without any apparent external cause, so your description is not clear to me as you say that “. . . all the prefabbed constraints in the system . . . are externally caused.” In other words, why call something a “self”-organizing system if there is no “self” or c…[Read more]

If something is “spontaneously” self-organizing, then it is happening or arising without apparent external cause–it is “self-generated.” What is the “self” that is doing the “self”-organizing? 

Ursula–   While I don’t presume the following article and study “proves” the presence of a life-force that aids “matter” in its process of self-organization, it does seem suggestive of such a process. See the article in “Science Daily,” April 7, 2015 “New study hints at spontaneous appearance of primordial DNA”  The article states:  [Read more]

A fascinating speculation Karen. I will be interested to see what our physics friends have to say about your thoughts.   Also, I do not agree with Jon nor do I appreciate his way of imposing his conclusion on me.  “Duane, since you aren’t staying on any given topic, I’ll have to conclude that we agree that the Universe doesn’t meet the first cri…[Read more]

Ursula–There are empirical expressions of consciousness as well as matter.    I understand consciousness to be an invisible life-force and knowing capacity that permeates the entire universe. So-called “material” systems (strings of resonance?) are able to utilize this permeating knowing capacity in order to self-organize. As self-organizing mat…[Read more]

Ursula–There are empirical expressions of consciousness as well as matter.  I understand consciousness to be an invisible life-force and knowing capacity that permeates the entire universe. So-called “material” systems are able to utilize this permeating knowing capacity in order to self-organize. As self-organizing matter and consciousness co…[Read more]

If there is no agreed upon scientific meaning of the word “matter” then your question about differentiating “matter” from “consciousness” does not have meaning.

Ursula–I’m not sure what you mean by matter? Does your question include “dark matter” which is invisible but accounts for most of the matter in the universe? Does your question about matter also refer to the constituents of quarks and gluons? In turn, what are the constituents of quarks and gluons? Strings of resonance? It seems to me th…[Read more]

Ursula–I’m not sure what you mean by matter? Does your question include “dark matter” which is invisible but accounts for most of the matter in the universe? Does your question about matter also refer to the constituents of quarks and gluons? In turn, what are the constituents of quarks and gluons? Strings of resonance? It seems to me th…[Read more]

Hi Jonathan, Thanks for your wise reflections. My hope has been that Big History would be big enough to allow other paradigms–a living systems paradigm–to be considered. I see that this is not the case despite the catastrophic consequences for the Earth that are being fostered by the scientific–and social–paradigm of materialism. As you…[Read more]

Hi Jon,   Sorry for the delay in responding. I’m extremely busy with a number of projects and just don’t have time to respond to all of the discussions underway. Regarding the Scientific American article on the “living Galaxy” theme, I don’t have the online version and they charge a fee for it, so I only saw it in a hard copy some years ago. Here…[Read more]

Hi Jon, Sorry for the delay in responding. I’m extremely busy with a number of projects and just don’t have time to respond to all of the discussions underway. Regarding the Scientific American article on the “living Galaxy” theme, I don’t have the online version and they charge a fee for it, so I only saw it in a hard copy some years ago. Here…[Read more]

<p>Hi Karen,</p><p> </p><p>Welcome to this intense conversation! As Jon described, there are so many topics to which to reply, but there is one that, for me, is over-riding:   Were it not for the survival of human civilization (and the survival of roughly a quarter to half of all plant and animal species), I could easily let our many di…[Read more]

Thanks for your insightful comments Stephan. I think you point clearly to the difficulty of exploring the universe as a living system by trying to extrapolate from the biological processes in earth-based systems:

Trying to fit galactic activity into the biological idea of metabolism may miss what may be really going on at the galactic scale, which…

[Read more]

I’d like to bring empirical research into this conversation that gives a more complete explanation for why I regard the universe as a living system and, in John Wheeler’s phrase, as a “participatory universe.” This research involves both objective and subjective aspects of knowing. The conversation so far has focused only on the “scienti…[Read more]

I’d want to bring empirical research into this conversation that gives a more complete explanation for why I regard the universe as a living system and, in John Wheeler’s phrase, as a “participatory universe.” This research involves both objective and subjective aspects of knowing. The conversation so far has focused only on the “scient…[Read more]

I’d want to bring empirical research into this conversation that gives a more complete explanation for why I regard the universe as a living system and, in John Wheeler’s phrase, as a “participatory universe.” This research involves both objective and subjective aspects of knowing. The conversation so far has focused only on the “scient…[Read more]