Dear Sreenath,

Thank you very much for your kind and insightful comment. One thing is clear that a new physical picture of the world of the information age with the deepest meanings can be constructed only together - physicists and lyrics. It is obvious that this model should be a model "self-aware Universe" (V.Nalimov), in which "Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into being.» (John A. Wheeler). This will be the model that David Gross called a "common framework structure." http://expert.ru/expert/2013/06/iz-chego-sostoit-prostranstvo-vremya/

It will serve as a "framework", "foundation" and "frame" of knowledge for all of his "stories."

I'm sure you carefully read your essay in the coming days and will give my fair comment.

All the best,

Vladimir

Dear Vladimir,

Beautiful essay! I agree with you that it is important to overcome the "crisis of representation and interpretation". While, as you pointed out citing Galileo, math is the language in which we can read the big book of Nature, the exponential growth of mathematics made virtually impossible, or at least "unproductive" to pause and really grasp the meaning of the equations. Probably this is combined with a postmodern tendency to avoid interpretations in physics, and pictures in math (see this). I salute your efforts, and I think you may be interested in the writings of a philosopher who was concerned with related problems: here, here, and more you can find here.

Best regards,

Cristi Stoica

    Dear Cristi,

    Thank you very much for your kind and insightful comments and for your reference. Absolutely right V.Arnold: «Unfortunately, I cannot deny the culpability of the mathematical community in the present aversion of the society and of the governments toward mathematics and the mathematical education.» ... «In the middle of the twentieth century a strong mafia of left-brained mathematicians succeeded in eliminating all geometry from the mathematical education (first in France and later in most other countries), replacing the study of all content in mathematics by the training in formal proofs and the manipulation of abstract notions. Of course, all the geometry, and, consequently, all relations with the real world and other sciences have been eliminated from the mathematics teaching. »

    It is clear that the methods of teaching mathematics should be changed - this is required by the modern information revolution. You are given a link to a very interesting study Mihai Drãgãnescu: «L'Universalité Ontologique de l'Information», as well as his other studies. Reading them will require additional time, but I looked at links - it's very interesting! I will read your essay with great pleasure that in the near future, and will also write a comment. Title of your essay is very intriguing.

    With best wishes and regards,

    Vladimir

    Vladimir,

    Given the time, I would like to hear your views on my essay, "It's Good to be King"

    JIm

    Jim,

    I am sure to read your essay and give a comment. Sorry, have not had time.

    I will add to my previous answer.

    John Templeton spoke of the need modern interpretation of Scripture. I think this applies especially to the idea of the Trinity and of the commandment "In the beginning was the Logos ..." in its original Greek spelling: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος ... Logos geraklitovom I understand in the sense of a "celestial law", which runs cosmos. This saying of Scripture I interpreted as a Super Axiom. The idea of the Trinity and the logic of the Trinity, more extensive than in the embodiment mathematics B.Raushenbah eventually led to the idea of the trinity of the absolute (unconditioned) of the states of matter (the absolute form of existence) and triune space 9 measurements (absolute). As a result, a simple mathematical eidos was born, representing the idea of the trinity of absolute states of matter: absolute rest absolute movement absolute becoming. Physics shattered world, but it must be seen and understood as a whole. In order to be considered very fast, we must first understand and see the whole. Need a "generalized framework structure" as a foundation, frame and carcass of knowledge (David Gross). And I drew a structure and ontologically grounded. On this I have written in an essay FQXi 2012.

    Regards,

    Vladimir

    Dear Vladimir,

    Your essay is worth reading.

    I am not sure that there is a crisis in physics and in mathematics. There is a plethora of useful concepts and symbols to approach the real world and, according to Wheeler, we are participating in this creation.

    I am not familiar with the representation you are talking about: 'Δ-Logit', I understand that there is a triangle in the Δ-Logit, there is the it, and what is the Log?

    May be you can have a look if the 'triangle' O, 1 and \infty may be useful here.

    The latter triple rigidifies the Riemann sphere to create the structure of 'dessins d'enfants'.

    http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1789

    Best wishes,

    Michel

      Dear Michel,

      Thank you very much for reading my essay, your profound and important comment for me. Physicists and mathematicians themselves say about the conceptual crisis of physics and mathematics. Take "The Trouble with Physics" Lee Smolin and "Mathematics: the loss of certainty" Morris Kline.

      "Delta-logit" is the Logos It (the form), or in fact - representant dialectical increment of the material structure as a whole (information matter energy).

      I am happy to read it carefully in the near future your essay.

      Best wishes,

      Vladimir

      Dear Vladimir,

      Yes, you're absolutely right. I think the problems with the physics appeared in connection with the unsolved problem of the foundations of mathematics that mathematicians and philosophers decide for over a hundred years. Some say that it is - a perennial problem. I do not agree with this statement. The result of this development the fundamental sign systems: physics mathematics today - it's science ontologically unfounded! This is nonsense. I think from here stems and modern problems of physics ("The Trouble with Physics ...").

      Yes, I, too, English is very weak and I also use GOOGLE. The Academy of Foreign Trade studied French and Arabic. Yes, the problem of translations of articles of physicists from different countries it relevant. Of course, you have a very interesting biography and knowledge of Russian would help you to know more, including articles of physicists from Russia. Unfortunately many of them do not participate in the cotests FQXi.

      I wish you every success,

      Vladimir

      Hello Manuel,

      Thank you very much for your kind comment! Today, I also read your essay and also will appreciate it.

      Best regards,

      Vladimir

      Hello Vladimir -

      I believe we're on a similar track - at least, that we're both concerned with unification of the field of observation - which naturally means including information in it.

      I myself describe a cosmic paradigm of correlated energy vortices that include the evolving observer while describing a quantum/classical world correlation. The evolving observer, I show, is the missing link in many of our quests. I think it is this that impels Physics' expansion into Bio- and Neuro-Physics.

      We are continually realizing that the Cosmos is fine-tuned to develop life.

      You might be interested to see how I treat this argument, and - like you, I believe - how I expand the definitions of It and Bit far beyond those signified by Wheeler. I'm sure you'll find the resulting structure useful.

      I totally empathize with your point of view, and have rated essay; I hope you will find something of interest in mine ...

      All the best in the competition,

      John.

      Dear Vladimir,

      At the bottom of Zenkin's interview

      http://www.ccas.ru/alexzen/papers/ng-02/contr_rev.htm

      there is

      "Drawing is a very useful tool against the uncertainty of words" - Leibniz.

      Of course, this is exactly what Grothendieck did with his 'dessins d'enfants'.

      And as I said in the post on your webpage, the underlying triangle O,1,\infty possibly relates to your cognitive triangle Δ-Logit.

      I fully agree with Zonkin's view. I appreciate very much what Vladimir Arnold did for science (including a lot of geometrical ideas and drawings). I am not so surprised that he wrote

      "the possessing a large influence mafia of "left-hemispheric mathematicians" has managed to eliminate the geometry from the mathematical education (at first in France, and then also in other countries), by replacing all informal part of this discipline by training in a formal manipulation by abstract concepts"

      For many reasons, I really believe that 'the crisis in physics' will start unveil by the use of these dessins.

      Your second question is much more difficult to answer. You know that Descartes studied music as well.

      Thank you very much for your very positive feedback and the high rate you gave me.

      Good luck for the final issue of the contest.

      Michel

      Hello John,

      Thank you very much for reading my essay and your profound comment. I'm sure in the coming days will read your essay and fairly valued.

      Best regards,

      Vladimir

      Hello Vladimir,

      Great essay! I'm so glad I read yours. I loved your quote of John Wheeler, "We can well believe that we will first understand how simple the universe is when we will recognize how strange it is." I had not run across that one, but I think that it is true.

      I also think you hit the nail on the head regarding, "Physicists have only recently started to delve into the essential foundations of their science - and very carefully." That's why I think it's a good thing that there are some groups out there asking the questions and there are individuals outside the area of physics, but deeply interested in the subject, that are beginning and continuing to push the envelope. If the answers were limited to our current thinking, we'd already have them. We have to stretch out thinking outside the current comfort zone, despite the fact that when we do, there are those who object.

      I also think you made a couple of profound observations in your conclusions. One of them was, "Reality and its phenomena at all levels of existence is the dialectic of "coincidence of opposites." How true.

      And your conclusion that, "New physics of the information age is a New natural philosophy with the new "mathematics principia", new fundamental "la structure - mère". Understanding mind overcomes the ontological gaps in the grounds of basic sign systems - mathematics and physics" is precisely on point.

      Thank you, and I look forward to looking at your website; perhaps we can correspond in the future.

      Best,

      Ralph

      P. S. You mentioned in your kind comments to me about you and your daughter's birthday. I noted with interest that the date of your essay, June 5th, is my oldest son's birthday . . .

        Hello Ralph,

        Thank you very much for reading my essay, your kind comment and a deep appreciation!

        Philosopher Merab Mamardashvili said a good idea: «The understanding of the laws of the World is simultaneously part of the World, which laws are understood.» A clear means "seize the structure." It is the "Structure - Mother" (in the spirit N.Burbaki - «La Structure-Mère). Then begin the "new physics" and "new mathematics " as a "General Theory of Structures» with the new "mathematics principia", understanding the problem "Elements of Geometry", the very foundation of mathematics as "the language of Nature."

        Yes, I too hope for our future cooperation.

        I wish your children and family all the best!

        Best regards,

        Vladimir

        Vladimir,

        If I remember Alexei Losev in his fundamental collection first showed that Ancient Greek Classical dialectika and vulgar Soviet interpretation of it are very different things. There are speaking differently different schools of philosophical interpretation of Greeks legacy in Europe ( having 1500 years tradition of interpretation and translation from the Greeks ). Losev used just only very limited selection of German, French and English literature for his review. Thus, it could be very difficult to make any generalizations on particular subject without systematic historiography in different languages. Generally speaking, I have some doubts ( sorry, it could be very subjective and not popular ) on ' development of Physics of information ' based on popular Wheeler delusion. It is taking problem seriously, but not solution.

        with the best wishes

        Michael

          Hello Michael,

          I am very glad to see you on my forum and read your important comment for me. I fully agree with you. Moreover, it takes a new look at the whole dialectic, from Heraclitus to the idea of ​​a "coincidence of opposites", and in particular, on "opposites". One of phenomenology little need to "dig" to the farthest depths of meaning of being.

          With the best wishes,

          Vladimir

          Dear Vladimir,

          I have read your essay several times but I find it very difficult to grasp, even in broad lines.

          1) page 1: "mathematics and physics have one foundation". But currently, the foundation of mathematics - at least, the most widely accepted one - is Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, which has nothing to do with the physical world. And the foundations of physics (ZF) - at least currently - are general relativity and the standard model, which have nothing to do with ZF. So how do I have to understand that statement? Or are you referring to other (new) mathematics and physics, which are based on one foundation?

          2) page 6: "Kant's categorical imperative moves into the area of practical ontology ..." Kant's categorical imperative is a maxim that can be used to decide whether an intended (human) action is good or not: this is ethics. I fail to see how this has anything to do with ontology, the study of the things that make up the universe. The quote from Umov isn't helpful, I still don't see it. Could you explain that one to me?

          Best of luck with the contest,

          Marcoen

          Dear Macroen,

          Thank you very much for your comment. Excellent questions.

          1.Yes, the foundation of physics and mathematics should be one - "the missing structure" (Umberto Eco «La struttura assente»). I introduced her option and ontologically grounded in the previous essay - is "absolute generating structure." http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1362

          It can be understood as a "generalized framework structure."

          2.In the journal "Uspekhi" was an article K.V.Kopeykina "" Soul "of the atoms and the" atoms "of the soul: Wolfgang Ernst Pauli, Carl Jung and the" three great problems of physics »http://ufn.ru/tribune / trib151208.pdf

          Introduction to the physical picture of the world the concept of "ontological memory" as a central category thereby bringing the matter to the "soul" and hence consciousness and ethics. The world model for physicists and poets should be and can be only one - a "model of self-aware of the Universe" (Basil Nalimov) http://philosophy.ru/iphras/library/zizin.html

          It is a model of the world, which was the dream poet Alexander Vvedenskii (1930):

          «Не разглядеть нам мир подробно

          Ничтожно все и дробно

          Печаль меня от этого всего берет».

          Today it is necessary to introduce new concepts. It is aimed at the contest. Thank FQXi!

          Best of luck with the contest,

          Vladimir

            Vladimir,

            I read your essay and I gave it a very high rating of 9.

            Quoting you: "Total ontological unification of matter at all levels of reality as a whole, its "grasp" of its dialectical structure, space dimensionality and structure of the language of nature " Such unifcation is acheivable with the physical model of Model Mechanics.

            Good luck with your entry.

            Regards,

            Ken Seto