Yes, the universe has mechanical properties, but calling the universe a mechanism is like calling an orange an apple because they’re both similarly shaped. I have a hard time seeing the ocean as a machine. Or even a mind, as a machine, with all is capacity to forget and remember
Conversation
it’s own “parts.” Machines don’t lose parts when they forget, but minds do (lose bits of information).
2
3
A system composed of pieces, operating together, according to a set of rules, could be called a “machine”.
We don’t know all the rules or all the pieces of the Universe machine though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
1
1
A machine needs to be put together by someone external to it; it doesn’t form itself from the inside-out like our universe does.
Thinking about the universe as a machine is rooted in the biblical myth of creation, which most touters of the mechanical view tend to ridicule.
1
1
Actually, no. Quantum physics seems to indicate we’re in a “virtual” reality, and if it’s virtual, there’s a “layer up” and that indicates something created this layer ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Just because the judgmental daddy god of monotheistic fame is BS doesn’t mean there’s no creator.
2
Quote Tweet
If you’re not already familiar with the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser, I highly suggest you become familiar: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-c
Simply put, at the quantum level, time appears to be non-linear.
This is still hotly debated, and “time” may not exist, but yeah, fun times 
Show this thread
1
"the implication of this fine and indeed brave conclusion is that the universe is a mental construct displayed on the screen of perception"
It's beautiful to see modern science heading towards the same realizations about reality they had in ancient India:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(rel
I have yet to find a piece of a universe (like a cog in a machine). A piece implies divisibility. It’s all one. ☯️
Creationism suffers from infinite regress. Who/what created the creator, etc?
If we see ourselves as creators, we can see discovery as an act of creation.
2
3
Whether you go with creationism (of whatever flavor) or science (big bang), there’s no helping running up against Aristotle’s “Unmoved Mover”…the options appear to be “there wasn’t one” (Hawking/Hartle) and “it exists a level up” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
As for the machine bit…
2
Show replies