For me it is Cellular Automata, and more precisely the Game of Life.

Imagine a giant Excel spreadsheet where the cells are randomly chosen to be either “alive” or “dead”. Each cell then follows a handful of simple rules.

For example, if a cell is “alive” but has less than 2 “alive” neighbors it “dies” by under-population. If the cell is “alive” and has more than three “alive” neighbors it “dies” from over-population, etc.

Then you sit back and just watch things play out. It turns out that these basic rules at the individual level lead to incredibly complex behaviors at the community level when you zoom out.

It kinda, sorta, maybe resembles… life.

There is colonization, reproduction, evolution, and sometimes even space flight!

  • Rick512@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The scale of the universe. It’s an incomprehensible amount of emptiness.

  • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Evolution as a concept; not just biological. The fact that you can explain the rise of complex systems with just three things - inheritance, mutation, selection. It’s so simple, yet so powerful.

    Perhaps not surprisingly it’s directly tied to what OP is talking about cellular automata.

  • MostlyLazy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Galaxies are not evenly distributed in space. Instead, when you look at the universe, galaxies are grouped in giant strings that look like a neural connections in a brain.

    • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It blew my mind when I learned that we’re in a relatively dark, empty part of space compared to what’s out there. It really put into perspective for me how difficult space travel will be for us as we continue to advance.

  • Lorax@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Symbiosis in nature….it always brings up feelings of awe and wonder for me. Especially in forests. The “wood-wide web” or “mycorrhizal network” being my latest obsession . The fact that the fungi joins the trees together through the roots to allow for exchange of nutrients, water, and chemical signals between plants. And then there’s the forest canopy, and the role it plays in keeping the forest healthy.

    Trees are awesome.

  • claycle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am focusing on the “blow my mind” part, rather than the “beautiful” part of your question, but I am certain many philosophically-minded people would consider the following “beautiful”.

    Peter Singer’s argument in “Famine, Affluence, and Morality (1972)” that you and most everyone you know are probably immoral or evil and you don’t even realize it. It really affected my ideas of how to strive to live.

    Here is a good video explaining the idea in detail, worth 30m of your time.

    Peter Singer - ordinary people are evil

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s an incredibly pessimistic way to view the world… I think it’s more accurate to say that people have the capacity for both good and evil. I’m not sure that you can say that “most everyone you know” are immoral or evil. That’s quite the claim.

      Though we would also have to explore what “immoral,” and “evil” actually mean. Am I immoral for purchasing and using a cell phone made with materials that were obtained through means that destroy lives and damage ecosystems?

      The modern world is far too complex and interconnected for people to avoid doing things that could be considered immoral or unethical.

      • claycle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s quite the claim.

        Yes, it is, and as explained in the video the original author (and also the person explaining it) admit it is quite a claim, then proceed to demonstrate the veracity of the claim. I suggest you grab a cup of jo, settle in, and watch it. It addresses the points you bring up directly.

        [EDIT: Re: Quite a Claim: Yes, and thus fitting the OP’s “mind-blowing” criteria for the thread :-)]

        The very short answer to “are you immoral for purchasing a cell phone” is “probably yes”.

        The proposition is not an easy one (it accepts it is extreme), but it is hard to deny when you march down the logic.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right. And it necessarily follows from that that all humans are therefore immoral. And if that’s the case, there is no longer any utility to the term “immoral.” It becomes a pointless exercise.

          • claycle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’ve committed reductio ad absurdum.

            Yes, most people are probably acting immorally and they are not even aware of it.

            That doesn’t mean it is a pointless exercise to identify the immoral behavior and strive to reduce or eliminate it, even if it is impossible to completely do so.

            • prole@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Not most people. Literally every person. Or maybe you could give me an example of a person that wouldn’t be considered immoral by your metric?

              • claycle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                You are (deliberately?) skipping over the part of awareness.

                Take for example a person who is aware that they cannot act morally when making seemingly normal, banal decisions. For example, they may be aware that when they choose to buy a shiny new cell phone when they have an older-but-still-perfectly-working model, they very likely doing something immoral. Because they are aware of the moral implications of their choice, they can choose hold-off buying a new phone for as long as possible (a morally-positive choice) and perhaps - going a step further - even using that money they would have spent on a new phone to help another person in need directly.

                Most people probably don’t contemplate the moral implications of the purchase of a new phone, this is true and I accept your position this. But it is clearly not “literally every person” as you have said, since it only takes a single person with awareness to disprove your statement. I am certain at least one such person exists (even if anecdotally), so I rely on the word “most” rather than “literally every”.

                • prole@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ok, but buying a cell phone isn’t the only potentially immoral choice made by people regularly, it’s just one example. Modern life is a minefield with this stuff, and I’m incapable of imagining a person in modern society who is capable of avoiding every single one of these pitfalls. Hell, it could probably be argued that even existing on this dying planet could be considered immoral or unethical. Again, maybe I’m wrong and you could think of one. Maybe some ascetic living on the street in India?

                  Also, I don’t really agree that awareness is even relevant. You can do immoral things without being aware that the thing you’re doing could be considered immoral. The thing itself is still immoral.

                  Which was kind of my point; that it’s impossible to avoid in a modern, interconnected world. I probably did a dozen immoral things before breakfast this morning.

  • fearout@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The concept of emergence blows my mind.

    We have this property in our universe where simple things with simple rules can create infinitely complex things and behaviours. A molecule of water can’t be wet, but water can. A single ant can’t really do anything by himself, but a colony with simple pheromone exchange mechanisms can assign jobs, regulate population, create huge anthills with vents, specialty rooms and highways.

    Nothing within a cell is “alive”, it’s just atoms and molecules, but the cell itself is. One cell cannot experience things, think, love, have hopes and dreams, or want to watch Netflix all day, but a human can.

    The fact that lots of tiny useless things governed by really simple rules can create this complexity in this world is breathtakingly beautiful.

    Kinda ties into your example :)

  • raubarno@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago
    1. Free software
    2. Group theory, Church notation and Lambda Calculus making many things in Math under one roof
    3. Design of CPU and Operating Systems. Both fields are made by geniuses.
  • art@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    BitTorrent. I only need to share a file once and it could potentially reach millions of people. It’s old tech now but it feels like magic to me.