jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (92 posts)

intelligent energy

  1. qwark profile image62
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Can life evolve into massless, pure, intelligent energy? Explain your answer pls.

    1. Arthur Fontes profile image89
      Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      What is intelligence? A very abstract concept in and of itself very difficult to measure or define.

      What is mass?  We know that everything is made up of atoms which are in constant motion. Does mass exist or are we all and everything we know massless energy?

      1. qwark profile image62
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Arthur:
        Intelligence in this instance is "consciousness."
        Mass = what it is referred to in Einsteins e=mc2

        1. Arthur Fontes profile image89
          Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Let me ask you a question.  Do you know the answers and are just refusing to enlighten the rest of us or are you sincerely asking the question?

          1. qwark profile image62
            qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Arthur:
            Why would you ask that question? That would be like asking me what caused the "big bang."
            No one knows or can know at this point in human evolution, yet the question will be asked until someone can eh?
            Isn't curiosity the essence of human learning? I think it is.
            Is the forum used to provide discussion of the unknown?
            Must one have the answer to pose a question on the forum?
            I, personally,like to pose question which might, just might inspire thought and possibilities.
            Is that wrong?
            If it is to you, I respectfully submit that you are not human.
            OK/...thanks for questioning...:-)



            .

            1. ediggity profile image60
              ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Your question will only make sense to people who don't understand what energy is or how it is applied.  That way you can philosophize proven science, and know one will know the difference.

            2. Arthur Fontes profile image89
              Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              qwark  I like questions in fact I question everything.  Questions are easy answers are not.  I have read some of your hubs and find we ask similar questions about similar things in life.  Sometimes people post questions just to criticize those that take the time to respond.  I do not think anyone can answer the question is there intelligent energy the only answers you are going to receive will be simple conjecture.

              1. qwark profile image62
                qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Arthur:
                Thanks for responding.
                I try to offer "food-for-thought."
                If my questions, produce only opinion, so be it. Yesterdays science fiction is todays reality.
                I pay no attention to those who's replies are ignorantly inane.
                I enjoy "hubbing" with those who try to understand and offer challenging responses..don't you?

                1. Arthur Fontes profile image89
                  Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I appreciate all intelligent conversation.  I read your hub.
                  Have you studied Buddhism?

                  1. qwark profile image62
                    qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Arthur:
                    I have spent over 20 yrs studying anthropology and the evolution of all of man's religious inclinations. All are based upon ignorance. Ignorance engenders fear...fear casues the creation of superstition...and all of man's god's have been the result of man's insecurities. His imagination is unbounded..and it continues today...but then that is not the subject of this "forum" hub eh?...
                    Again, thanks for asking.

    2. profile image61
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Strictly speaking, there is Kinetic energy (energy in motion) and Potential energy (stored energy). All objects that are massless always travel at the speed of light.

      Doesn't look to promising.

      1. ediggity profile image60
        ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Your examples are for objects in motion. Again, have fun learning about U.

    3. profile image0
      sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Like to exist as pure conscience?

      1. Arthur Fontes profile image89
        Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Sounds like Buddhism.

      2. qwark profile image62
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Sandra:
        Did you mean pure consciousness?
        If that's what you meant...yes consider it.

        1. profile image0
          sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, that is what I meant. 

          Probably so.  If it made its way in, then I suppose it has to make its way out. 

          Not sure if it just disappears...

          1. qwark profile image62
            qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            SAndra: Pls read my response to Arthur..thnk about it and respond

    4. profile image0
      cosetteposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      sure, why not.

      we become more and more technologically advanced and need to use our bodies less and less. well, not me, but they are out there.

      you know those troglobytes that live deep in caves under the earth? or those strange blind fish that live deep in the darkest recesses of the ocean? they don't even have eyes anymore because they don't need them down there where they are. if earth survives before the Sun supernovaes, man could evolve into some creature that doesn't need his body at all, eventually becoming massless, pure, intelligent energy.

      1. qwark profile image62
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Colette:
        Thank you!
        At last I have found a person who can understand the potent powers of limitless evolution.

        1. sooner than later profile image60
          sooner than laterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          now if only you could live the 97.658 trillion years to see it happen.

        2. profile image0
          cosetteposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          it's cosette, actually, after that character in Les Miserables. smile

          it just makes sense to me. let's go pick out a china pattern wink

          1. qwark profile image62
            qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Cosette:
            My apologies...:-)

          2. Arthur Fontes profile image89
            Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I just finished Les Mis the book good choice of screen name.

      2. qwark profile image62
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        colette:
        Now consider the same question I asked Sandra.

    5. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      No.

      Reason: humankind had evolved to energy, it would still be a mass of energy, just simply having no shell. Your individual body would no longer be necessary.

      Should humankind evolve to that point, there would be no reason to not draw the conclusion that sustained life could exist in that form. But, for now is only conjecture, nothing based on fact, in our reality.

      Oh, btw- just the topic alone, made me think of the Movie Powder. It's about a very unique young man.

      1. qwark profile image62
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Cagsil:
        Powder! One of my favorite movies
        Can you imagine much older forms of "consciousness" having evolved elsewhere in the our universe or beyond that, somewhere far beyond the limits of what we term "our" universe and having existed long enuf to have outlived a need for protoplasmic mass and exists as just 'energy?"

    6. profile image0
      Will Bensonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Anything is possible until it's proven otherwise. I don't see how evolution could produce such a leap since Darwin's survival of the fittest requires physical genetics (DNA) to function in the culling process.

      To make a jump from a physical entity to a pure energy entity would require something other than evolution as we know it. But, there may be undiscovered ways to evolve also. Who knows?

      Great question by the way and some great discussion also.

  2. ediggity profile image60
    ediggityposted 7 years ago

    What kind of energy?

    1. skyfire profile image73
      skyfireposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Gravity, it pulls you down.

      1. ediggity profile image60
        ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        But gravity already exists.

      2. profile image61
        (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Actually, it doesn't. We are all in freefall and the earths surface is accelerating up towards us. That is what you "feel" on the bottom of your feet while standing.

        1. skyfire profile image73
          skyfireposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          You mean to say, centripetal & centrifugal force ?

          1. ediggity profile image60
            ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I think he does, but he doesn't understand what he means. LOL

            1. profile image61
              (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              No I didn't, and yes I do, respectively.

          2. profile image61
            (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Nope. Those are pseudo-forces. I'm talking strictly about gravity and it's effect on us. We aren't being 'pulled down' towards the earths surface, that was Newton's error. Einstein came along and corrected Newton by postulating the equivalency between gravity and acceleration. He was right because his mathematics are dead accurate and Newtons were off.

            1. qwark profile image62
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Q:
              My question has nothing to do with earthly life and the simple physics we understand. My question has to do with the possiblity of life billions of years older than life on this planet and the effects of ubiquitous evolution on them...or "it."

              1. profile image61
                (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, I get that. But, the physical laws to overcome will still be here.

                1. qwark profile image62
                  qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Q
                  Absolutely not relative.

                  1. profile image61
                    (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Then, don't ask if you don't want answers.

            2. ediggity profile image60
              ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Gravity is the centripetal Force that keeps you and everything else from flying away on earth.  If the pull of Gravity (g) or (G) did not exist we would fly off of the earth because of angular momentum.  Show us the math that you obviously understand and speak of.

              1. profile image61
                (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Nope. Centripetal force is 'pseudo-force' required for accelerated motion that seeks the center of the curved path like a merry-go-round or a car going around a curve. Everything on earth is NOT in accelerated motion, many things are at rest.



                Gravity does not pull, that was Newtons error, action-at-a-distance. His calculations were close enough to put probes on Saturn or a man on the moon, but were not accurate. 



                Sure.

                G^mn=-(8pG/c^2)T^mn

                The matter/energy is on one side of the equations and is equivalent with spacetime geometry on the other side.

                1. ediggity profile image60
                  ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes, everything on earth can be considered to be in motion.  Try looking from space down to earth, or from an airplane.  Even if you do consider things at rest it is negligible compared to the force of gravity.

                  I still say gravity pulls.  If there were a hole to the other side of the earth would you not continue to fall until the center?

                  Lastly, that equation lets you calculate space time intervals between two points.  The Theory of General Relativity must use velocities close to or at the speed of light, and gravitational fields that are larger than those on earth to be accurate.

                  TGR and Newton's Laws can be both be argued correct so you win, because you understand them both and have chosen a side.

                  1. profile image61
                    (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    No, many things are at rest, they are not in motion. Who cares about looking down from space, irrelevant.



                    That's fine, but you would be wrong.



                    What does that have to do with anything?



                    Totally wrong. I already explained that to you.



                    Nope. GR is accurate, Newtons laws are not. Simple really.

        2. ediggity profile image60
          ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          LOL, this is very funny.

          1. profile image61
            (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            And, accurate.

            1. ediggity profile image60
              ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Hold your computer in front of you with your arms extended, let go, and witness the effects of gravity "accelerating up".LOL

    2. qwark profile image62
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      ediggity:
      the kind of energy Einstein had in mind when he created the equation: e=mc2....take it from there.

      1. skyfire profile image73
        skyfireposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        That is summation of all energy. Not just intelligent energy.

        1. qwark profile image62
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          ediggity:
          Try to understand the question.
          The concept is not difficult.
          Altho it may be for you. I have to consider that..:-)

          1. ediggity profile image60
            ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I think it may be the other way around.  Everything you've stated already exists, except for the evolution part.  Have fun trying to understand energy. LOL.

      2. ediggity profile image60
        ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        This already exists also.  When you die, your body decomposes, and energy transfers from one form to the next.

  3. skyfire profile image73
    skyfireposted 7 years ago

    Imagination for energy without body is nice. I can think of this as anime/manga story and it's worth to sell.

  4. skyfire profile image73
    skyfireposted 7 years ago

    Well gravity is intelligent it thinks about pulling you down big_smile

  5. qwark profile image62
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    For those of you who would like to seriously consider my forum post, I have written a "hub" I titled; "The Reward." If you have the time and inclination, read it. My question may become less of an enigma for ya...it may cause you to consider the possibility...:-)

  6. sooner than later profile image60
    sooner than laterposted 7 years ago

    It is said that the Lord is so bright that one can not look upon Him. Moses became luminesant after spending time with God atop the mountain. I think thats what you are getting at. You are looking for God still.

    1. qwark profile image62
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Sooner:
      I know you won't, but if you want to know why I ask these questions...read my "hub;" "The Reward."

      1. sooner than later profile image60
        sooner than laterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        no, I'd read it. Post me a link please. I'm asking, so its not spamming for those who would normally whine. Sooner.

        1. qwark profile image62
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Sooner:
          Just click Qwarks hubs....then read.

  7. sooner than later profile image60
    sooner than laterposted 7 years ago

    What makes your story faith based is one sentence in your hub. Actually one word. Why men like Dawkins are much more successful at making 'believers' out of what I would call 'nothing' at all is the fact that they don't use words like this. If you want to be successful at promoting your religion you will learn how to never ever use sentences or words such as this.

    "With the passage of aeons of time, somehow, intelligent life emerged and flourished."

    Your writing is beautiful, just take out the "somehow". Then backtrack your education and see how much science has to use the word. Its amazing really. Dawkins would never use that word and thats why he could sell ice to an Eskimo.

  8. qwark profile image62
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Arthur:
    What are your thoughts about "evolution?"

    1. Arthur Fontes profile image89
      Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I have never seen evidence to prove it to me.  I finished the book Evolution A Theory in Crisis about three months ago and it put a lot of doubts in my head.  All my life I believed in evolution now I have many questions.  I am not saying I do not believe I am saying I do not know.  This was the first question I posed in these forums and almost got my heart ripped out by the answers i received.  Evolution is a tough subject on hubpages.

      1. qwark profile image62
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Arthur:
        If you have been studying the subjct "evolution," you know that "micro" evolution has been proved. Simple life mutates, adjusts, adapts and evolves new species very rapidly. In fact so quickly they their evolution can be empirically proved. Complex life? Observable evolutionary changes take hundreds of thousands of years...Macro evolution has not yet been proved, but given time and effort it will be.
        if it is proved beyond a doubt, do you think that it has boundaries?...in any manner or form?

        1. sooner than later profile image60
          sooner than laterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          haha cool

        2. Arthur Fontes profile image89
          Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          If evolution is proven then I see no way to tell how far we will evolve the sky is the limit.

          1. qwark profile image62
            qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            ArthurI just posted a reply on your question about nations going bust.
            What I'm referring to in ref to the limits of the processes of evolution have nothing to do with conemporary man's shallow and infantile thoughts about religous belief
            Do you think that as time passes and man's mental powers increase there can be a slow and gradual diminution of the need for a protoplasmic mass to do its bidding?

            1. profile image0
              sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              So you are talking about just being a brain.  A literal blob? lol  Sure, why not.

              1. qwark profile image62
                qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Sandra:
                Not at all.
                The brain has mass.
                I am infering naught but pure, conscious energy.

                1. profile image0
                  sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  That's what I already suggested.  Yes, sure why not. smile

                  1. qwark profile image62
                    qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Sandra:
                    No you mentioned a "blob."
                    Energy exists but not as discernable blobs.....'
                    Do you think that enuf time has elapsed in the creation of "our" universe" for that possibility to become a reality?

          2. sooner than later profile image60
            sooner than laterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Need to see some proof. Evolution has been using the words "proof" and "fact" since 20 min after it was conjured up. "Fact, man evolved from Ape" wait "fact, man and ape evolved from squirrel like animal". "Proof, lizard fossile found with wings" wait "Proof, China's archeologists tampered with the fossile and carved wings into the stone."

            God can't even laugh at the circus.

  9. sooner than later profile image60
    sooner than laterposted 7 years ago

    Gosh, lets all grab a latte and speak as intellectuals. This is deep people

    1. profile image0
      cosetteposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      oh boy haha! big_smile

  10. profile image0
    cosetteposted 7 years ago

    that's ok. smile

    what question. sorry i must have missed that.

    1. qwark profile image62
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Cosette:
      Scroll back up to my response to Sandra.

      1. profile image0
        cosetteposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        thanks. i always liked the story of cosette and Jean Valjean.





        'k.

  11. qwark profile image62
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Knowing that our universe is approx 13 billion yrs old..and life appeared about 4 billion yrs ago on planet earth, do you think that the possibility exists that enuf time has elapsed for evolution to have created conscious, free roaming, living forms of energy?

    1. sooner than later profile image60
      sooner than laterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well by my standards there's a simple math equation really. and see its going to take a few more of these delightful lattes and hundreds more hours of supreme intellectual gatherings before you can get out of me, see. <-- insert I'm so smart dialect.

  12. qwark profile image62
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Ihave to go to the gym...bbl.

  13. sooner than later profile image60
    sooner than laterposted 7 years ago

    this thread has 'slap fish' written all over it.

  14. Cagsil profile image60
    Cagsilposted 7 years ago

    You would be, with your question, trying to define, "GOD" in some way, shape or form. To simply say that consciousness exists as energy, in and of, itself.

    This type of thinking, might lead one to believe in God. However, consciousness is a sense, incorporated into free will thought. Without consciousness, we as a race(humans) would not be able to tell that we were alive.

    Life wouldn't have any meaning whatsoever without consciousness.

  15. itcoll profile image60
    itcollposted 7 years ago

    i do not think it is possible.

    1. qwark profile image62
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Itcoli"
      Why?

  16. wingedcentaur profile image83
    wingedcentaurposted 6 years ago

    Good Day qwark

    Though this topic is inactive I thought I'd weigh in anyway. Myabe we can start it back up again. In any event I think it might be a good idea in addressing a question like this, is to start with the evidence we have in front of us. Its thin but we do have some evidence.

    You have asked if life can evolve into intelligent, formless energy. The first thing we might do, for efficiency, is to define and even limit the scope of inquiry -- at least to begin with. Can we stipulate that we will only consider human beings?

    First of all, I gather you would have us understand evolution as possibly moving from one level involving the physical to a higher plane in which we will thus become liberated from our bodies. And this formless state of intelligent energy would represent a relative apex of our development. If we're agreed about what the question is let's proceed.

    If we start with the evidence we have -- and presuming we all subscribe to the idea of evolution -- we notice, that the roughly two million year period of becoming us featured our increasing intelligence closely corresponding to or correlating to the increased delicatification (I just invented the word 'delicatification') of our bodies.

    That is to say that as we got smarter our bodies, yes, got "weaker," but more importantly, remolded on a sleeker, slimmer, less robust, yet in some ways more versatile basis. We lost our claws, fangs, heavy hair covering, some of our musculature and physical strength. We also created tools and this meant that we didn't have to apply as much muscle power directly to the land to feed ourselves and make a livelihood.

    Now, I assume this process of the increasing delicatification of the body along with the increasing intelligence of our species, that occurred over a two million year period, takes us closer to that state of formless pure intellect that you suppose, yes? This would have to mean that over time the body becomes less and less and less emphasized as the intelligence (first in terms of brain size, then perhaps transcending this into storage of its capacity in the electrical impulses that travel back and forth between neurons along synapses) becomes more and more and more emphasized.

    In theory, I suppose this might be possible provided that the increasing delicatification of the body always occurs as a consequence of our constantly increasing intelligence, which relieves the body of more and more of its necessary usefulness and purpose for existing. The body becomes smaller and smaller, and more and more delicate until it ceases to manifest because our consciousnesses have absolutely no further use for it.

 
working