Re: Mind's Eye Instinct for survival

All matter is made up of atoms. All atoms have internal motion and internal forces keeping them together. It is these internal forces and motions that give an energy component to all matter. You can look on matter as condensed energy just like water droplets are condensed water vapor. I have never heard of negative space. Stars are filled with energy...shown by the light and heat they emit and radiate. 

On Saturday, December 1, 2012 2:40:25 PM UTC+1, rigsy03 wrote:

Not all matter is energy, is it? What about "inert", negative space,
the pause etc. Aren't stars dead? I really should study the universe
as I don't know very much about space and the cosmos so forgive my
ignorance.

On Nov 30, 10:53 am, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Heh except of course that when it comes right down to it.energy is matter
> and matter is energy.
>
>
>
> On Friday, 30 November 2012 11:22:14 UTC, andrew vecsey wrote:
>
> > The paradoxical dilemma of who created the creator can be circumnavigated
> > by the possibility that the original creator was not matter, but energy.
> > Just like thinking of anything is much faster and much easier than building
> > it, it becomes conceivable that energy patterns could have evolved in a
> > random chance way and finely tuned by selective processes to reach
> > intelligence similar to how most scientists believe that patterns of atoms
> > and molecules evolved to form intelligent life.
>
> > Energy patterns could have evolved to a point that they manipulated atoms
> > to desired patterns and forms to code the information required for life and
> > to allow them to evolve on their own to complex intelligent beings able to
> > wonder at and eventually to solve the riddle of where they came from, where
> > they are going and why they are alive. Meaning and purpose could then be
> > given to our fleeting moment of existence.
>
> >  On Thursday, November 29, 2012 7:55:05 PM UTC+1, archytas wrote:
>
> >> .......  All we have in respect of this is to posit
> >> creation, begging the question of what created that in an infinite
> >> regress.  .....We might get to an intelligent state in which creation
> >> myths are replaced by something more plausible and Truth comes closer.
>
> >> On 29 Nov, 01:41, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Neil , even after re-transposition how long could the brain live
> >> > --1000 years , 10000years or maybe as long as the universe ,but
> >> > ultimately it will die or be destroyed at the end - time of the
> >> > universe. What survives is the Truth behind life and nothing else.
>
> >> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:33 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > What survives is the gene - subject to mutations etc.  We are already
> >> > > 'Borg' in the sense of mass assimilation.  One's mind could be
> >> > > transposed to another substrate (nearish future) - our bodies are
> >> > > currently replaced every 5 years or so- and the new substrate could
> >> > > have nanobots that would allow minds to outlive Lee's 'hope'.  Such
> >> > > substrated minds might link in super-intelligence and be able to re-
> >> > > transfer into more human-like bodies they learned to make.  This
> >> would
> >> > > be a time beyond singularity.  We don't know what such intelligence
> >> > > might invent or even discover - perhaps such intelligence would
> >> > > discover we are not as alone as we think.  Being human or human being
> >> > > might be as irrelevant as a mitochondria wanting to live free again.
> >> > > We might be free of the tiny machines (genes) so much part of our
> >> > > behaviour now.
>
> >> > > On 28 Nov, 14:40, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> T9   grrrrrrr
> >> > >> Allan
>
> >> > >> Matrix  **  th3 beginning light
> >> > >> On Nov 28, 2012 11:38 AM, "gabbydott" <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >> > Ah! That's the extended version of 'possibly maybe' then (my
> >> grammar and
> >> > >> > spelling checker suggests 10 instead of 'then' though)! :)
>
> >> > >> > 2012/11/28 James <ashkas...@gmail.com>
>
> >> > >> >> I am an aspect of what was, is, and will be, coextensively.
> >> Maybe.
>
> >> > >> >> On 11/27/2012 2:28 AM, RP Singh wrote:
>
> >> > >> >>> Attachment to life is the cause of the desire for immortality
> >> and the
> >> > >> >>> readiness to believe in an after-life or re-birth. It is an
> >> off-shoot of
> >> > >> >>> the instinct for survival.
>
> >> > >> >>> --
>
> >> > >> >> --
>
> >> > >> >  --
>
> >> > > --- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--