sreenath.
Thank you for agreeing with me.
Joe
sreenath.
Thank you for agreeing with me.
Joe
Joe,
Advocates of the Anthropic Principle (AP) speak of the subatomic world which they can't see and quite often attribute the same subatomic attributes to the macro world. Not being a mathematician or a real scientist,I tend to agree with your thinking of uniqueness but are you just speaking of the macro world?
Being a humanities guy and a late science enthusiast, I attribute AP beliefs to man's anthropomorphic nature.
I enjoyed your essay, especially the passion of your beliefs.
Jim
Jim,
Thank you ever so much for reading my essay and understanding it. The real Universe is unique, once. Nobody (including me) fully understands unique, once. But whether it is a macro galaxy or an invisible particle, it can only be unique, once. I know it sounds nuts, but unique is not relative. Nature only delivers whole unique units such as a whole unique elephant or a whole unique star. Why man concentrates on the repeatable commonality of mathematics to try to define a unique system beats me.
Joe
Joe,
I typed in "God's thumb" and Google returned only 12,500 results. Fancy that, I was expecting a lot more.
Zoran.
Dear Joe,
You have write interesting essay in specific style. For my more important also that you want to be realist. As we known it is not so welcomed by majority of ultramodern scientists. But truth is not depend from quantity of adherents!
Check my work and you will find one supporter to your approach. I believe we can have many common points and we will cooperate.http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1804
Best wishes,
George
Hi Joe,
I agree that the Universe should happen once in one way. Rather than parallel Universes making a Multiverse I think ours must be infinitely large with finite observation points - which of course are all also unique.
Best wishes,
Antony
Joe,
My Dear, you didn't respond.
In worse case you can just tell - "sorry no time"!
George,
I posted my response on your essay's page. Please check there.
Joe
Dear Joe
Original approach, nicely written and pleasant to read. However, it does not resolve issues like clock synchronisation on satellites :). Your principle of one is actually the true statement by which I started (1=1) deriving principles of motion. Reading them you might recognize the underlying principle of infinite uniqueness, you write about, of elusive one, now and here, the dynamic space-time position in which all scalar operations are unchanged and reflected. The position where 1=1/1 (by any convention of writing, 1v=1s/1t), i.e. the dynamic position in which altered space, over the, for the same amount altered time measures unaltered speed of light, thus measuring linear flow of time and linear propagation of space (1=1n/1n).
Btw, I have toes as well, which are infinitely different from yours... but at the same time, I hope you'll agree with me, they are infinitely similar. I guess it make sense to search for the matrix of what makes toes - toes (yours or mine).
My essay is at the address
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1876
It would be nice to read your comment
best regards
Andrej
Jeo
Now its my turn to comment on you: every 'it' & 'bits' have single occurrences too!
Thanks
Dipak
Dipak,
You are correct. The real Universe is simple. One it, once, one bit, once.
Joe
Dear Joe,
I do agree with you that everything happens only once, although I derive this conclusion from KQID worldview that Existence including us, our God/s and our Multiverse happens only once every absolute digital time T ≤ 10^-1000 seconds. I do think that Information as bits are fiction but real. Fiction because we make it up, and it is real because as Landauer and experimentally proven that any deletion of bits produce heat or entropy. Thus, information is physical. I enjoyed reading your unconventional essay BITTERS and original creative idea. We are all the seekers of the truth, we shall discover it no matter where it is hiding, if necessary as usual we fictionalize it according to our own image as Protogoras's measurement. Please comment on my essay and rank it if you desire. Best wishes, Leo KoGuan
Your "only once" theory reminds me a bit of how chaos theorists tend to approach physics -- it reminds me a bit of Smolin's idea that physical laws merely arrive from repetitions of similar events. Good luck in the competition and thank you for reading my essay, I appreciate that you've given this a lot of thought and I will re-read again.
"Reality is always observable, objective and obvious, once" -- strikes me--is this how you resolve the measurement problem?
Cheers and good luck!
Jennifer
Dear Joe,
I liked your essay, very interesting.
I will have to read your essay again and post further comments about it. You said that reality is always observable, objective and obvious,once. I am not sure what to think about this but you did produce a nice article.
Beat of luck,
Salvish
Salvish,
Thank you for reading my essay and for your very gracious comment.
Joe
Hello Joe
How do you know your toe is not just part of a dream, or that you are caught in The Matrix with a digital toe? As such, the essay lacks foundation.
Stephen Anastasi
Stephen Anastasi
Reality does not need a foundation. Abstraction always need an abstract foundation. I know my toe is real and not a part of a dream because when I stub it against something solid, it hurts. I know it cannot be in a matrix because a matrix cannot replicate uniqueness. It can only obey a program.
Reality cannot be programmed.
Thank you for reading my essay and for leaving a comment.
Joe
Dear Joe, you have a unique style, only happened once. I believe I do have a mechanism that shows how our Existence happens once, never repeat itself. I know that you are busy with other things so if I may I bring it up to your attention that cited you with my comment to our kind and erudite fellow contestant Jonathan, and I wrote to him: "... We are living inside the long dead great man's thought as Lord Keynes pointed out. These among others are Keynes' idea that "demands create supplies" economic system that Bernanke, Obama, Abe and Wen Jiabao applied successfully in their resoective countries. But the greatest is Aristotle's Identity A = A. I myself wrote based on this premise with my KQID Ouroboros Equations of Existence: Ξ00☷ = ψτ(iLx,y,z, Lm) = KbΘln2 = hf = pc + mc^2 = p^2/2m + U(iLx,y,z) = 4πGρ- Kqid(ΑΘ-ΘS)gμν = (8πG/c^4)Tμν - Kqid(ΑΘ-ΘS)gμν = Τμν = E = A + S ⊆ T. I do said that A = A with so many equals signs (=) but if you look carefully I also said that A emerges out of 00 and furthermore the Existence like A=A is subset of or equal to absolute digital time T ≤ 10^-1000seconds that bags all Minkowski's events inside it and jump to the next Tn+1 and Tn+2 and so on following Feynman's sum over histories. Aristotle tried to demolish the sophist Protagoras out of the picture that everything is subject to man's measurement that miraculously reemerged in a new form as the Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation that is not surprisingly similar to Fu Xi's Yin-Yang Philosophy (Bohr's Yin-Yang logo) that everything is change or as Heraclitus put it " everything is in flux". Until Quantum Mechanics, we cannot build science out of A≠A, that A can be B or C or anything in quantum superposition. A = A is a fiction but real that is useful to science and progress for mankind. I am for it 100% however, it does not mean that it is the truth, the truth is as JOE FISHER put it: everything happens once, unique and it is not repeatable. This is because in order for Existence to exist it has to forever running away from its eternal nemesis Non-existence. In KQID, this Existence escapes barely as we must expect by T-step ≤ 10^-1000seconds. Due to space limitation I excluded one of the major explaination:1c. Moreover, the conscious and intelligent infinite being with unlimited storage capacity is behinds Existence. This infinite being is Planck's "matrix of all matter" and it is evolving at T ≤ 10^-1000 s. This means each T-moment, a unique Qbit emerges. Anything derived from this unique Qbit is necessarily unique. Then next T-moment, a new evolved Qbit reemerges. Similarly, all things derived from or emerged out of this new unique Qbit iare necessarily unique. As Kongzi and Heraclitus said that we can only step into a river once. Our Multiverse is flowing every absolute digital time T-step and each step is a unique Multiverse. We step into our Multiverse once every T-time present moment. In other words, in one second our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit has evolved at least 10^1000th generations and so do we, and at least 10^1000 all things are different from before and after. Thus, our block Multiverse is evolving at once every T-step ≤ 10^-1000 s. (Diagram 5) Therefore, All information is conserved or no new qbit is added within the T-moment and all matters are derived from this Qbit at Tn+x moment. During each T-moment, time is symmetry, thus it is conserved and reversible within this T-moment. One can go back in time backward and forward according to Law of nature. In this process, this infinite conscious and intelligent mind reunifies, reboots, reenergizes, retranslates, retransforms, renews and refreshes Existence. It collapse time-past-present-future into the NOW(00). Hence, KQID answers the most puzzling phenomena that is why the computer-like Multiverse does not crash like normal computers usually do. It is because the Qbit automatically maintains and reboots itself per T-moment ≤ 10^-1000s. That is why KQID concepts of the absolute digital time T is necessarily the fundamental feature of Existence, and how Existence escapes its fate of extinction from the ever powerful entropic dark forces and exists forever and ever in the light." Please let me know what you think and suggestion. Please comment and rate my essay if you have time. Thanks, Leo KoGuan
Hi Joe,
I have downloaded your essay, and I hope to get to it soon. Thanks for the kind comments on my page.
Jonathan
Hi Joe,
I still have not gotten to your essay, but your comments on my page prompt me to say more here. I acknowledge and agree with your uniqueness principle, insofar as we are talking about life in the world made of protons, neutrons, and electrons - the same basic stuff we are made of. While we may call other kinds exotic matter, to some extent 'normal' fermionic matter is more 'exotic' when considering the whole of the universe, as Physics now understands it.
But uniqueness and oneness are not the only archetypes that matter. I would say that uniqueness is absolutely necessary, and it is of course uniquely powerful among all the archetypes of form, but it does not tell the whole story - maybe something important that is often overlooked, but not everything. If we allow that in addition to uniqueness, completeness, nothingness, and enoughness or sufficiency are preserved, we can build a conceptual hierarchy to hold the fundamental forces of Physics. See my essay, from an earlier contest
In relation to this contest; it is especially important to see the role of a fifth quality or archetype which we can call agreement or equality, because this property is what maps information to form, or vice versa. I'm just observing that your main point is sort of like saying we can learn everything about Physics by studying Gravitation. Now if we really deeply understood Gravity, a lot of Physics we don't understand might fall into place, but studying the other forces is hardly a waste of time.
That's all for now, but I will comment once I get to read your essay.
All the Best,
Jonathan