Who Can Claim Ownership of the Term Energy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Les Sleeth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the ownership and interpretation of the term "energy" across scientific and metaphysical contexts. Science defines energy as the capacity to do work, an abstract concept rooted in mathematical principles, while metaphysical perspectives attribute it to consciousness and the essence of life. Paul Davies' insights highlight the blurred lines between these interpretations, with historical references to Aristotle's concept of energeia emphasizing movement and change. The debate underscores the complexity of defining energy, suggesting that no single discipline can claim definitive authority over its meaning.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the scientific definition of energy as the capacity to do work.
  • Familiarity with Aristotle's concepts of energeia and potentiality.
  • Knowledge of the historical evolution of the term energy in physics.
  • Awareness of metaphysical interpretations of energy in relation to consciousness and existence.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the historical development of energy concepts in classical mechanics.
  • Explore Aristotle's philosophy, particularly his notions of potentiality and actuality.
  • Investigate modern interpretations of energy in metaphysics and spirituality.
  • Examine scientific studies on brain activity post-cardiac arrest and their implications for consciousness.
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, physicists, metaphysicists, and anyone interested in the intersection of science and spirituality regarding the concept of energy.

  • #31
Originally posted by Zantra
And what about the subconscious mind? The same concepts do not always apply there, yet it manfests itsself through the conscious mind. Certain things are hard coded into the brain and reside in the subconcious. Certainly base insticts reside there. And does MRI show those responses? As they are hard coded responses and do not require a great deal of "thinking" or electrical activity in the brain, as they are genetic responses to certain things, such as hunger, fear, jealousy, and anger.

these "hard-coded" instincts are still observable in the brain.


What if the base insticts, particularly related to death, were either masked by the higher brain functions in repsonse to death, or so low, that it was practically undetectable?

well, an interesting theory. but flawed in many areas. first, and most obvious, is that no observations would be possible. second, it makes no predictions. third, it describes nothing. (yet, anyways)

but i doubt that this scenerio is possible. our instruments are very sensitive and would pick up almost any activity in the brain. it would have to be incredibly low (or high) for it to be completely undetectable.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I'm back. Alittle disappointed to see this tread only 3 pages long. It must have been later than I realized.

Another thought about life violating the 2nd law. I've read that pound for pound the human body radiates more energy that the sun. Even a blade of grass takes raw disorganized energy in the form of sunlight and CO2 and organizes into incredable complex organizations of matter with high energy levels.
With this in mind and the intuitive sense that the mind is not wholly contained within the electrochemical processes of the physical brain, I cannot help but believe that there is some life force, energy, spirit, soul, or essence that lives on beyound the physical death of the body. Where it goes and what happens to it is uknown and open for everyone to decide what to believe for themselves.
Another question that comes to mind as I write is what is it about a living body that changes or leaves that is becomes once again a "vat" of inert chemicals? Death itself is just as mysterious and unknown as life.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
500
Views
94K
  • · Replies 212 ·
8
Replies
212
Views
45K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K