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

Dear Antony,

Brilliant essay! Obviously, we cannot agree on everything but i see some similarity in our ideas.

First, KQID Qbit is (00,1,-1) which is singularity Qbit Multiverse in zeroth dimension at absolute zero temperature that computes and projects Einstein complex coordinates (Pythagoras complex triangles or Fu Xi's gua or Fibonacci numbers!) onto the 2D Minkowski Null geodesic and then instantaneously into the 3D in Lm, our Multiverse timeline to allows Existence to move around 360 degree and its arrows of time as you described below. As you also agree below, no information is ever deleted. See my essay Child of Qbit in time. I will rate your essay superb and hope you can do the same. Now my ranking is under the water. Hope you can help, if and only if, you think my essay should be ranked higher. KQID is the only theory out there that can calculate the dark energy of our Multiverse ≤10^-153Pm/Pv and the minimum bits as the lower bound ≥ 10^153 bits in our Multiverse. KQID is the only theory that I knows here that proves bit = it, and KQID calculates Sun lights into Sun bits; calculates electron, proton and neutron in terms of bits; set up equivalent principle of bits with energy and matter. Therefore, Wheeler's it from bit and bit from it. Correct me if I am wrong. Furthermore, KQID is the only theory in this universe has the mechanism on how Holographic Principle works. Also answer the mother of all questions, the why, how and what Existence. As you said in my blog the essay contains too much information. Thanks for visiting my blog and invited me to comment on your original and creative piece of work. I am envious of your high ranking and you deserve it and I shall raise it even higher. I hope you can help to raise mine if only you like my essay.

Pythagoras famously summarized: "All things are numbers." KQID rephrase it that all thing are one Qbit: Qbit is all things and all things are Qbit. Thus, Wheeler's it from bit and bit from it because bit = it.

You explained:

"Fibonacci numbers occur in mathematics as the sums of shallow diagonals in Pascal's triangle, they can be found in different ways in the sequence of binary strings, and are related to the Golden ratio. Every second Fibonacci number is the largest number in a Pythagorean triple.

can be written as a sum of Fibonacci numbers. 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..."

Yes, I agree. "Table 1. "Decay" from VFn to VFn-1 VFn-2 produces an increase of 1 suggesting an arrow of time."

Yes, similarly, this is KQID First Law: "But the sequence 10, 1 reproduces 1, so that information is never destroyed."

Thanks for your comment in my thread and brilliant and original contribution.

Best wishes,

Leo KoGuan

Dear Antony,

Thank You. Let us imagine a continuation of your n-dimensionality logical game. If rational n-dimensionality ( n = -1,0,1,2,3 and we assume that n is rational number ) is accepted ( i.e. there is a mathematical proof ) we can go further and we may admit a new kind of possible dimensionality, expressed by the square root - 1 and complex numbers ( why not ? Einstein and Hawking use the square root - 1 as an imaginary time / complex time variable u in physics ).Hence, new unexpected physical generalizations are deduced.

Best

Michael

Dear Antony:

I must say that you have lost me. You start from the point that the Fibonacci series begins with zero and one which are the two states of a classical bit. Fine. But what could possibly follow from that? I really do not get what you are saying.

Cheers

Olaf

Dear Antony,

Congratulations on a clever, novel approach and for an intriguing essay. My one worry is that, although you have a clever mathematical construct, is it really applicable to back holes. There are many more mathematical constructs than physical situations to be explained, and it is not easy to decide which are weeds. On the other hand, it was just such clever playing around with group theory that led to, say, prediction of particle multiplets and an empty hole awaiting the omega-minus particle. The proof of the pudding would be if you were able to make a prediction with this sort of sequencing.

Cheers,

Bill

Dear Olaf,

Yes 0 and 1 is the start, and in this case the zero applies to the singularity, as being 0-dimensional. Ten 1 apples to 1-dimensional space. That is the fundamental part. We can't be more fundamental than if talking about a singularity and zero dimensions. That's the bottom up part.

Then I looked from the top down from 3-dimensional space and imagined what happens to any given point in space time. Please not I'm dealing here with spatial dimensions not time.

As it says in the essay itself, I was envisaging what a point in 3D space does. It observes information and releases information too. All across full 3-dimensions. Tis is empirically known.

Then at or the event horizon a point might observe information outwards from the BH but not below it.

Likewise it can't release information outwards.

So there is a 2-dimensional area that information is both received and revealed.

Then once inside the BH there are two distinct pathways - one where information can only be revealed, the other only received and these are both 1-dimensional.

Then the singularity 0-dimensional, where not information can do anything.

So we have 0, 1, 1, 2, 3.

Te rest is in the essay including the negative part of the sequence.

Hope this clears up things?

Best wishes,

Antony

Antony,

I have read and rated your essay with great interests. Linking Fibonacci's bit with black hole information dynamics is a great idea.

Have you seen this recent paper about Graphene titled "Black Hole in a Pencil", http://news.sciencemag.org/2006/08/black-hole-pencil ? Perhaps some experiments can be proposed.

Brian

Dear Antony,

Yes, I would like to learn more of your theory. Please give me the link. Again fantastic work! I am happy to enter this contest, I am learning so many wonderful discoveries just from our 3 pounds brain and conversing with these great 3 pounders minds.

Best wishes,

Leo KoGuan

Hi Antony,

Sorry it took a while to reply. I have to translate the words into mathematics to understand them.

1. I'm not really sure what you mean by 3-dimensional information. Information is generally perceived to be numeric, i.e., independent of dimensionality. For example, if I communicate the statement 2 2 = 4, mathematical convention makes it unnecessary to answer which dimension the numbers live in. If I specify a dimensional context, e.g., I say "The natural numbers live on a 1-dimensional line," then I am mapping the geometry of the line to the continuum of dimensionless natural numbers. When we move up a dimension, to the 2-dimension plane of complex analysis with both real and imaginary lines, we get as a result both 3 and 4 dimensional analysis for free, because the complex plane is what mathematicians call algebraically closed. In other words, it allows 1 to 1 numerical mapping of every dimensionless point to every other point of the plane, sphere and four- dimensional hypersphere. So thinking it through, I guess you mean a bounded 3-dimensional ball of self interacting points? The BH event horizon, though, is still only 2-dimensional -- the surface of a ball -- so there is still the question of how, mechanically, to map your 3-dimensional information to the 2-dimensional surface, which is how the holographic principle (t'Hooft, Susskind) was born.

2. Maybe the foregoing is what you mean by "The astronaut can not receive information from inside the black hole. This is a point when information can only be BOTH received and revealed across 2-dimensions."?

3. "There ought to be a point, from a thought experiment point of view, where information can only be released, and deeper where it can only be received 1-dimensionally. Then at the singularity there are 0-dimensions." I can't get my mind around this -- relativity and Noether's theorem demand symmetry. That is why Hawking radiation was such a huge breakthrough in foundational terms -- the interaction of the BH with the outside world is no longer one-way, but allows information to escape via quantum uncertainty. The total evaporation of the BH should restore the total information "lost" behind the event horizon. So if any 0-D singularity ever existed, it would be annihilated (extinguished) in finite time. It couldn't be physical, therefore, and we would never know whether it existed or not.

4. "As mentioned the sequence allows 0 to be skipped over via -1, 1, 0, 1, 1 part via equivalence amongst other reasons." This would be more understandable in terms of complex analysis, where the unique point (0,0) allows a potential rotation in the plane with the result 0 0i. When one tries this with real analysis on the line R, "skipping over" a number looks too much like the famous cartoon where a theorist gets stuck and then declares, "Here a miracle occurs."

5. "The negative valued vertex is a quantum effect of the Black Hole that conserves space time between the black hole and the outside Universe." You explain that this makes the BH more stable. Before Hawking's result, most thought that this was the case -- everything goes in, nothing comes out. Even Hawking himself thought for years that thermal radiation (Hawking radiation) wouldn't allow the complete restoration of information going into the Black Hole. When one speaks of conservation of fundamental physical quantities -- mass/energy, angular momentum, time, what particle physicists call CPT conservation -- the symmetry has to be measured "backward and forward" to be physical. Time is the last mystery. The black hole you've described does not conserve time -- Hawking radiation does.

I am pleased to meet you, too -- all best in your research, and the contest!

Tom

Hi Antony,

My apology for not leaving a message behind when I reviewed and rated your essay highly on July 2. That was a hurried day for me to say the least. I am glad to see that my support of your essay, among many, helped you out in obtaining your much deserved rating.

I believe it was your statement, "Hence, it seems decay onward to 5-dimensions isn't favoured either symmetrically or asymmetrically, giving 3-dimensionality a limit in our reality and in information exchange." that resonated with me the most.

Best wishes and good luck,

Manuel