It’s Fibonacci’s Bit - Seeding the Universe with 0 and 1 by Antony Ryan

I was asked to comment on this essay. I am an informatics and software engineer by education and trade so this is outside of my normal scope of interest. With that said I think it was well written and your theory well stated. I am reminded of the solutions to AIDS protein configurations that were solved by the social gaming platform fold.it. I bring this up as it reinforces the theory that the universe doesn't do things on a whim. The protein uses as little energy as possible to exist and I believe that is a possible law of the universe. Your correlation to possibility of preserving information and mathematical balance only makes sense as why destroy the information? If this universe is trying to go back to zero then it would need a mechanism to do that and that mechanism would be as efficient as possible. Each of your possible "strangely diverse quantum like results" seem to each attempt a balance.

Again, this may be complete rubbish and below what you are used to. I wish you the best of luck.

Hi Antony,

Thanks for your comments over at my paper. I agree that our viewpoints are compatible, though each of us does have a somewhat different focus. I also found your paper very interesting and well-written.

I'm intrigued by the relation between your account and Causal Dynamical Triangulations (CDTs), which you mentioned above in the comments. Lately, Ambjorn and his co-workers have been connecting CDTs with Horava-Lifshitz gravity, which interests me because of the existence of a preferred frame in the latter, such a frame being consistent with the kind of large-scale nonlocality that I describe. (Indeed, Niayesh Afshordi has argued that something like his gravitational aether can be viewed as the low-energy limit of Horava-Lifshitz gravity.) This aspect of CDTs may be worth exploring as you develop your ideas further.

At any rate, good luck to you in the contest!

-Willard

Dear Antony

Very attractive when you compare with the story of "chicken and egg" because I also used to think like that, but I found a different result - more precisely.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

Dear Sir,

Many of your views in this essay has been discussed in our essay published on May 31 from a totally different perspective. You are welcome to visit us and comment on it.

In the field of science, the 19th century was one of experimentation, 20th century of excitement and 21st century of observation. Thus, it is no surprise that Wheeler was excited to find something he thought novel and was excited about it. But in hind sight, if we analyze his views minus excitement, we find a totally different story.

First: "everything we observe in the known Universe (the 'it') is less fundamental than the information that produces it (the 'bit')". Fundamental has been defined as of or relating to the foundation or base; elementary. Thus, the above statement means that the observable is nothing more than the sum total of ALL information (observation or reporting of the result of measurement) about the observable. Since every measurement measures only one aspect, how can we be sure that we have measured and correctly reported ALL aspects of something? Secondly, observation only reports the state and does not create or influence the state. The state can evolve in time independently. Thus, it is invariant to information or the absence of it. Information is the perception of the observer about the state of the observable in a universally communicable way. Hence the statement: "information that produces it" is not correct.

By definition, the first two numbers in the Fibonacci sequence are 0 and 1, and each subsequent number is the sum of the previous two. But what do 0 and 1represent? Number is a perceived property of substances by which we differentiate between similars. If there are no similars, it is one. If there are similars, it is many. Many can be 2,3,4,....n depending upon the sequence of perception. Zero represents the temporal absence at "here-now" of something that exists elsewhere. Only in this way, we can perceive the absence of something and label its number as zero. Thus, Wheeler's 0 and 1 represent the absence or presence of something or false and true about a statement. By themselves, they are meaningless. They acquire meaning only after they are associated with some observable. The concept was known as "ahoratra vaada" in ancient India and there is much literature on this subject. Nature functions in cycles and Fibonacci sequence is one such cycle.

As we have pointed out, observation is the reporting of a state of something at a given time. While the object evolves temporally, it the observation made at time t is "frozen" for use at other times when the state has changed further. Thus, information, which is the result of observation, is time invariant. The object, about which such information is obtained, is time variant. Hence the object cannot have information about itself. It is true that "no information from inside the black hole can be received"; but it due to our inability to measure in the first place. Without measurement, we cannot have information. Hence talking about its directionality is meaningless.

The concept of event horizon is based on false assumptions. A pulse of light evolves in time as a sphere and not as a circle. Hawking in his Brief history of Time has tricked everyone by first taking the Surface of Earth as 2-dimensional (which it is not) and then taking the example of a stone thrown into the surface of water. He added time as the third dimension (which it is not) before adding the third spatial direction as the fourth dimension. The circle formed on the surface of the water evolves in time as a bigger and bigger circle and not as a conic section. If you take the three spatial directions together, it will be an increasing sphere and not a time cone.

Direction has meaning only with reference to other objects, whereas dimension can be described without reference to other objects. Dimension of objects is the perception that differentiates the "internal structural space" from the "external relational space". Since such perception is mediated by electromagnetic interaction, where an electric field and a magnetic field move perpendicular to each other in a direction perpendicular to both, we have three mutually perpendicular directions. The talk of extra dimensions is non-sense. Even after more than a century, no one has any idea about it. When we talk about 1 or 2 dimensions, we really mean cross sections of a three dimensional object. Time does not satisfy this condition to be called a dimension. Yet, since space and time are infinite and co-exist independently as the base on which all transformations take place; we have to use unidirectional time to describe the state at any given moment.

There can be no negative direction for time or cause and effect. Consider an example:

A B → C D.

Here a force makes A interact with B to produce C and D. The same force doesn't act on C and D as they don't exist at that stage. If we change the direction of the force, B acts on A. Here only the direction of force and not the interval between the states before and after application of force (time) will change and the equation will be:

B A → C D and not B A ← C D.

Hence it does not affect causality.

Entropy is related to inertia. Elsewhere in these threads, we have discussed about it elaborately.

Let us apply our mind independently to everything that is told to us or are found in text books. Blind acceptance is superstition, which is harming the cause of science.

Regards,

basudeba

Antony,

Firts of all thank you for reading my essay.

I just read yours. ersonnally I like very much The spirals of nature and Leonard de Pise, (Fibonacci). One of the causes of the beauty of our perceptance of nature is given in this mathematical sequence. Again a sequence....

regarding the loss of information in Black Holes I tend to think like Abhay Ashtekar and Carlo Rovelli in their Loop Quantum Gravity perception. Their latest proposal tells us that in the heart of a black hole there is no singulairity (the same as my perception) but an entry to another dimension that can be the origin of a new universe. Infact they come almost to the same conlusion as I do , onlt my perception goes further because this "entrance" to another dimension (that I call Total Simultaneity) is everywhere . Indeed I do not believe in non dimensional points called "singularities". So when information enters a black hole it is not lost at all it just returns to its origins...

best regards

Wilhelmus

Good idea for use Fibonacci on the quantum cosmology.I am try it also on science forum

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/72326-did-the-universe-unwinded-by-fibonacci-sequence/

Hi Antony,

Thanks for your comment on my blog.

Your paper is very nice and that is no flattery. There may even be something hidden and very fundamental in your description of Fibonacci sequences.

But before I comment further, let me say I am still sceptical about the black hole idea, i.e. that all mass can be compressed to a point of "zero" dimension and the attribute of mass will still remain conserved with a surrounding event horizon.

I suspect that mass is a derived attribute of extension (space) and this is not impossible to be derived from a peculiar Fibonnaci sequence. Another clue that mass is not an absolute attribute is from cosmology. Was all the mass now present in the universe now, there at a beginning or has the universe's mass been increasing with its radius?

Let me leave that for now and comment on parts of your essay devoid of black holes...

You say: I suggest in this essay that the foundations for reality begin with emergence of 0 and 1 dimensionality at a singularity resulting in the Universe we live in and in which information is processed.

I agree perfectly with this, as you can see with the line of thought in my essay.

You say: Despite Wheeler's 0 and 1 being mainly symbolic, the basic idea of 0 and something as alternative answers to yes/no questions lends to information. Likewise, Fibonacci begins with something and nothing.

Again, I agree. If you see my reference to Julian Barbour's essay in previous year's essay, he argued that 0 and 1, though symbolic must stand for something that is real and has two alternative states, symbolized as 0 and 1.

You say: Fibonacci sequences appear in biological settings, in two

consecutive Fibonacci numbers, such as branching in trees [1], arrangement of leaves on a stem, the fruitlets of a pineapple [2], the flowering of artichoke, an uncurling fern and the arrangement of a pine cone [3]. The Fibonacci numbers are also found in the family tree of honeybees [4. Perhaps it isn't too much of a leap of faith to include reality's relationship with information, "It

from Bit", as another of Fibonacci's attributes.

Brilliant! Wheeler wished to derive mass from massless things, charge from chargeless things and field without field in his geometrodynamic scheme. The details are not yet worked out, but I suspect that similarly, monads and their ON (1) and OFF (0) may give rise to Fibonacci-like patterns that can cause annihilation of space between like patterns (attraction at a distance) or emergence of space (repulsion).

Best regards,

Akinbo

Thank you for reading my essay, I see that you appreciate my style: it is a satisfaction.

I read and score quickly the essays, I remain a dozen to read and score (I am busy in this moment).

I reread your article, that it is interesting (like many others this, and the others, year).

I am thinking that the dimension reduction near the singularity of the black hole (photon cannot leave the surface of the black hole: dimension 2) cannot be so abrupt, so that can be possible a continuous reduction of the dimension (with transcendetal number dimension); so that near the singularity must be a fractal photon path (used to measure the dimensionality): I think a foam of spherical curvature (like Swiss cheese), that deflect the photon path: an open-cell foam distant from singularity, and a closed-cell foam near the singularity, with the gravitational energy that produces balls of curvature.