the possibilities which you see before you in the mirror.

[GoodTaste]

When we say we are a pile of atoms, we do not mean we are merely a pile of atoms, because a pile of atoms which is not repeated from one to the other might well have the possibilities which you see before you in the mirror.
Source: Richard Feynman Six Easy Pieces Essentials of Physics Explained by Its Most Brilliant Teacher (p.21)

The part "the possibilities which you see before you in the mirror" is puzzling to me.

Because what I see before me in the mirror is the image of a human being (or the God's image if you'd like), I guess the part might mean "the possibilities of being human beings". It does indeed seem to hold water. The problem is that we humans have a pile of atoms that is repeated (see how bases in our DNA repeat themselves-the atoms that constitute the bases have to repeat themselves as well), yet Feynman already gives the premise of "because a pile of atoms which is not repeated from one to the other...".

So I could not figure out what exactly "which you see before you in the mirror" means.

What does it mean?

 

[Tarheel]

Two things. One, you can't separate that phrase from the rest of the sentence and count on it making sense. Two, that book might have "Easy" in the title, but don't count on us mere mortals being able to help you much.


Thanks to @emsr2d2

 

[emsr2d2]

... you can't separate that phrase from the rest of the sentence and counting up looking sense.

@Tarheel What does the underlined part mean?

 

[Tarheel]

@emsr2d2 I was using the voice feature and wasn't careful enough about checking to make sure it said what it was supposed to.

 

[jutfrank]

Feynmann is saying that we are not merely a pile of atoms repeated from one to the other—we're much more than that.

The problem is that we humans have a pile of atoms that is repeated (see how bases in our DNA repeat themselves-the atoms that constitute the bases have to repeat themselves as well), yet Feynman already gives the premise of "because a pile of atoms which is not repeated from one to the other...".

This is the bit you're getting wrong.

 

[GoodTaste]

Feynmann is saying that we are not merely a pile of atoms repeated from one to the other—we're much more than that.

Does "repeated from one to the other" mean "repeated from one pile to the other pile (of atoms)"?

 

[jutfrank]

Give me a bit of time to read the wider context of the chapter and I'll get back to you in half an hour or so when I understand it better ...

 

[jutfrank]

Does "repeated from one to the other" mean "repeated from one pile to the other pile (of atoms)"?

No, it's the arrangement of atoms that is not repeated in us humans, unlike in a piece of steel where the arrangement is repeated.

Here's the whole paragraph for the benefit of anyone interested in this:

If a piece of steel or a piece of salt, consisting of atoms one next to the other, can have such interesting properties; if water—which is nothing but these little blobs, mile upon mile of the same thing over the earth—can form waves and foam, and make rushing noises and strange patterns as it
runs over cement; if all of this, all the life of a stream of water, can be nothing but a pile of atoms, how much more is possible? If instead of arranging the atoms in some definite pattern, again and again repeated, on and on, or even forming little lumps of complexity like the odor of violets, we make an arrangement which is always different from place to place, with different kinds of atoms arranged in many ways, continually changing, not repeating, how much more marvelously is it possible that this thing might behave? Is it possible that that “thing” walking back and forth in front of you, talking to you, is a great glob of these atoms in a very complex arrangement, such that the sheer complexity of it staggers the imagination as to what it can do? When we say we are a pile of atoms, we do not mean we are merely a pile of atoms, because a pile of atoms which is not repeated from one to the other might well have the possibilities which you see before you in the mirror.

 

[Tarheel]

@GoodTaste Do you see how the additional context @jutfrank provided greatly improves understanding?