Dear Than Tin,
Thank you for leaving such a thoughtful and beautifully written comment about my essay.
I think that the most important facet of unique is its completeness and the fact that it can only happens, once. This actually allows for more freedom of choice than one might expect. Instead of having to try to remember strings of facts and laws, one can relax knowing that whatever situation one is dealing with it will only happen once.
Joe
Hi Joe from Margriet O'Regan from DownUnder
Wow - I so love dissidents !!! folk who go against the mainstream!! A big thumbs up from me !! And yes the way in which 'information' is characterized these days is, I concur, pure 'codswallop' !!! But, hey, you don't win friends & influence people by calling them - or their work - names !!!
And very much to my own credit (false modesty has never been a virtue of mine !) instead of just wringing my hands & name-calling I knuckled down & figured out what is really - REALLY - going on in our universe. We not only communicate with one another with 'information' - written down (or even spoken) - in some kind of 'short-hand' symbolic form, but we actually think with some kind of shorthand units of information too.
This seemed quite self-evident to me, as well as how inadequate are the current 'models' of information in use today, so I just jolly well figured it out on my own - as related in my essay.
So yes. My own investigations have led me to conclude that 'information' is NOT digits - no kind nor amount of them (including any that can be extracted from quantum phenomena!), nor how algorithmically-well they may be massaged & shunted through any device that uses them.
Unequivocally they - digits - make for wonderful COUNTING & CALCULATING assistants, witness our own now many & various, most excellent, counting, calculating devices BUT according to my investigations real thinking is an entirely different phenomenon from mere counting, calculating & computing.
For which phenomenon - real thinking - real information is required.
My own investigations led me to discover what I have come to believe real information is & as it so transpires it turns out to be an especially innocuous - not to omit almost entirely overlooked & massively understudied - phenomenon, none other than the sum total of geometrical objects otherwise quite really & quite properly present here in our universe. Not digits.
One grade (the secondary one) of geometrical-cum-informational objects lavishly present here in our cosmos, is comprised of all the countless trillions & trillions of left-over bump-marks still remaining on all previously impacted solid objects here in our universe - that is to say, all of the left-over dents, scratches, scars, vibrations & residues (just the shapes of residues - not their content!) (really) existing here in the universe.
Examples of some real geometrical objects of this secondary class in their native state are all of the craters on the Moon. Note that these craters are - in & of themselves - just shapes - just geometrical objects. And the reason they are, also one & at the same time, informational objects too, can be seen by the fact that each 'tells a story' - each advertises (literally) some items of information on its back - each relates a tale of not only what created it but when, where & how fast & from what angle the impacting object descended onto the Moon's surface. Again, each literally carries some information on its back.
(Note : Not a digit in sight !!)
How we actually think - rather than just count, calculate & compute - with these strictly non-digital entities, specifically these geometrical-cum-informational objects, in precisely the way we do, please see my essay.
I did not make the distinction between computing with digits & real thinking with real information, sufficiently strongly in my essay.
This contest is such a wonderful 'sharing' - Wow - & open to amateurs like myself - Wow. How great is that !!! Thank you Foundational Questions Institute !!! What a great pleasure it has been to participate. What a joy to read, share & discuss with other entrants !!!
Margriet O'Regan
PS - If you like irreverent pokes at mainstream check out Bill Gaede on the net!!!
Joe,
I hadn't realised you'd had to deal with such a marathon after my June 3rd post. Sorry about that. But I have some good news to make you feel bitter. I've just checked and I hadn't rated your essay. As the only other one majoring on uniqueness how can I not love it? This is a once only ever rating that will prove the magical power of numbers by levitating you seamlessly up the batting order with no accelerative effect!
Very best wishes.
Peter
Dear Margriet,
Thank you ever so much for taking the time to read my essay and for taking the trouble to leave such an enormously helpful comment about it. I thought your essay was extremely well crafted and astonishingly relevant as to the Bit from it or It from bit competition topic.
I followed your advice and watched one of Bill Gaede's lectures on physics absurdity on YouTube. I intend to watch many more. Thank you for bringing Gaede to my attention.
Joe
Peter,
Thank you ever so much. I wonder what happened to Paul?
Joe
Hi joe, your essay and posts suggests some skepticism about theory. I agree we must not confuse reality with theory but without generalizing data, there would only be one experience after another and even less understanding.
Dear Joe,
I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.
I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.
You can find the latest version of my essay here:
http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-V1.1a.pdf
(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven't figured out a way to not make it do that).
May the best essays win!
Kind regards,
Paul Borrill
paul at borrill dot com
Gene,
Thank you for reading my essay and for taking the trouble to comment on it. I contend that reality does not need a theory in order for it to be real. I also contend that life is the absolute of understanding and each supposed individual life form can only acquire only the correct amount of understanding sufficient for it to exist as it does at its maximum operational efficiency. In other words, a real ant will always understand that it is a real ant and will always act accordingly. It is impossible for a real man to behave like a real man for every man only believes in the difference of abstraction. Man is the only animal that believes that having the ability to transmit and receive abstract information is more important than actually living.
Joe
Dr. Borrill,
Thank you for reading my essay and for taking the trouble to leave a comment about it.
Joe
Dear Joe,
Although the competition is over, But I think it is the most important to exchange our ideas.
I appreciate your point: "Information is always selective, subjective and sequential. Reality is not and cannot ever be selective subjective and sequential."
Best wishes,
Guo Chenxi
Guo Chenxi,
I truly appreciate your taking the time to read my essay and also for making such a positive comment about it.
Joe
