It from Δ-Logit by Vladimir I. Rogozhin

Thanks again Vladimir,

I will try to get to your essay today, despite a heavy workload. And I appreciate the comparison to Descartes. It is an honor. Though not mentioned much in this contest, he may have been a forefather of "It from Bit" philosophy. Though 'Cogito Ergo Sum' is usually translated from the first person "I think therefore I Am," if translated from the impersonal perspective, it becomes "Thinking therefore Being" which is the same as "It from Bit."

This prompted me to coin the phrase "It computes, therefore It Is." I will comment on your essay after due diligence, and likely have many kind things to say. In the meanwhile...

Have Fun!

Jonathan

On a related note..

I have created a website: www.itcomputes.info where I will be collating information and making a page of links relating to 'It from Bit,' 'Digital Physics,' 'Mathematical universe hypothesis,' and related ideas pro and con. I will certainly have a lot of interesting content to feature after this contest, and we should keep in touch.

Regards,

Jonathan

Hi, Vladimir,

Your essay was very deep, and deserves to be expanded into a full-semester or even full-year course. (I noted that you also posted the article on the net as http://vixra.org/pdf/1301.0019v1.pdf.) Of course nine pages is restrictive (for example, each point of your conclusion could be further expanded into a separate chapter), and some of the comments seemed to reflect the disadvantages of trying to squeeze deep ideas into a short format, but you did a magnificent job of not only weaving various mathematical, philosophical and physical ideas into a fabric supporting your ideas, but also applying ideas from one field to another in novel ways. I found the essay very thought-provoking, which is what a good essay should be. (My rating reflects this impression, of course.) Bravo! Молодец!

Best, David

Vladimir

Are you V.V. Nalimov fan?

Yuri

Hello again Vladimir,

I want to let you know that I have read your essay. I'm afraid I found the formal, technical use of language a barrier to understanding much of it. Though I feel I have grasped your intentions, which are bold and forward thinking, with the help of your useful replies in this essay comments thread.I also have a better understanding of the relevance of URLs you posted on my essay thread. I too can see the importance of incorporating the 'mental reality' into physics. I think I will have to return to your essay to see if I find it more easily understood on a second reading before I vote. Regards, Georgina

Hello Vladimir,

I finished and greatly enjoyed your excellent essay. I think it took a while to get into its rhythm at the start, and that the abstract was a bit cluttered - trying to cram all the essential concepts from the essay into a small space. This makes it a little bit intimidating at the start, but it is a joy to read once you get into it.

Your knowledge of the Classics and Philosophy, and your ability to skillfully weave that into a tale about Information Physics, are impressive. I give (and gave) you high marks for a valuable contribution to our understanding. Perhaps the Delta logit will soon join the bit, qubit, and qutrit, as you suggest.

Well written, but certainly deep; you try to cram a lot into this essay's content, and that may be its main flaw. Perhaps with another page of content, or more, a better explanation of some concepts is possible. But I give you kudos.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

By the way...

I loved the linked material by and about Alexander Zenkin. I don't think I'd heard of him before, but certainly a character worth noting.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Dear Vladimir,

I'm sorry I have not had much time this past week.

Excellent essay, which is why I would like to ask you a little question:

In physics, or elsewhere, what you identify as 0 and 1, if you think that reality is based on information.

I was the last on the list. I thought if we reversed the order of the list I'd go first. With the note that you have given me I have no more chance to pursue that dream.

Thank you for understanding that this could be a great idea.

Indeed it is.

Yes, this world is written in the language of mathematics.

I agree with you for many of your assertions.

The opposites play a great role.

My rating for you is 10, with bonus of 3.

And good luck.

Please visit My essay.

Vladimir,

Thanks for replying to my questions.

There is another thing which is unclear to me. On page 4: "... the unity of physical (material) and ideal reality is shown in a single eidos, represented by a simple mathematical object and representing the fundamental physical principles." So as I see it, according to you we have a single mathematical object that represents both the essence (eidos) of reality AND the fundamental principles.

Usually, fundamental principles are represented by formulas, not objects. An object is a term of the mathematical language, a formula is a sentence of the mathematical language. E.g. Newtons principle "F = m*a" is a formula, not an object (term).

So my question is: have I understood it correctly that you want to represent fundamental principles by a single term? If so, isn't it then the case that you lose, that is, that you fail to represent the mathematical-logical structure of the fundamental principles?

I am interested in your view on the matter.

Best regards,

Marcoen

Dear Vladimir,

Your essay is too much philosophical for me. I do not feel quite comfortable with it. I know you have found a lot of philosophy also in my essay but mine seems to be much simpler.

However I would like to address your important statement: "there is a crisis of the ability (and desire!) of mathematicians to understand each other".

Mathematics is like music. It is an independent art usually cultivated usually without any conscious goal and driven by passion. There is a lot of different types of music. Musicians do not need to accept, understand or like all that stuff and they still create excellent pieces of art. They do not need to work together to create a one universal music style. It does not mean there is a crisis in music. There is a variety as never before. There is no crisis also in mathematics.

Quite different situation is in physics. Physics is closer to a craftsmanship than to an art (with no offence to physicists). It is usually practical or tries to be. The crisis in physics we know: QM and GR / the small and the big and nothing in between! And much more. The parts do not create a whole. So my proposal is to solve these troubles with physics using the geometry. The key is the one universal scale invariant metric (form!). But first of all we have to falsify that concept and carry out the spin experiment. Then we can possibly work out the practical physical math or give up.

Best regards and good luck!

Dear Sir,

This is our post to Dr. Wiliam Mc Harris in his thread. We thought it may be of interest to you.

Mathematics is the science of accumulation and reduction of similars or partly similars. The former is linear and the later non-linear. Because of the high degree of interdependence and interconnectedness, it is no surprise that everything in the Universe is mostly non-linear. The left hand sides of all equations depict free will, as we are free to chose or change the parameters. The equality sign depicts the special conditions necessary to start the interaction. The right hand side depicts determinism, as once the parameters and special conditions are determined, the results are always predictable. Hence, irrespective of whether the initial conditions could be precisely known or not, the results are always deterministic. Even the butterfly effect would be deterministic, if we could know the changing parameters at every non-linearity. Our inability to measure does not make it chaotic - "complex, even inexplicable behavior". Statistics only provides the minimal and maximal boundaries of the various classes of reactions, but never solutions to individual interactions or developmental chains. Your example of "the deer population in Northern Michigan", is related to the interdependence and interconnectedness of the eco system. Hence it is non-linear.

Infinities are like one - without similars. But whereas the dimensions of one are fully perceived, the dimensions of infinities are not perceptible. (We have shown in many threads here without contradiction that division by zero is not infinite, but leaves a number unchanged.) We do not know the beginning or end of space (interval of objects) or time (interval of events). Hence all mathematics involving infinities are void. But they co-exist with all others - every object or event exists in space and time. Length contraction is apparent to the observer due to Doppler shift and Time dilation is apparent due to changing velocity of light in mediums with different refractive index like those of our atmosphere and outer space.

Your example of the computation of evolutionary sequence of random numbers omits an important fact. Numbers are the inherent properties of everything by which we differentiate between similars. If there are no similars, then it is one; otherwise many. Many can be 2,3,...n depending upon the sequence of perceptions leading to that number. Often it happens so fast that we do not realize it. But once the perception of many is registered in our mind, it remains as a concept in our memory and we can perceive it even without any objects. When you use "a pseudorandom number generator to generate programs consisting of (almost) random sequences of numbers", you do just that through "comparison and exchange instructions". You develop these by "inserting random minor variations, corresponding to asexual mutations; second, by 'mating' parent programs to create a child program, i.e., by splicing parts of programs together, hoping that useful instructions from each parent occasionally will be inherited and become concentrated" and repeat it "thousands upon thousands of time" till the concept covers the desired number sequences. Danny Hillis missed this reasoning. Hence he erroneously thought "evolution can produce something as simple as a sorting program which is fundamentally incomprehensible". After all, computers are GIGO. Brain and Mind are not redundant.

Much has been talked about sensory perception and memory consolidation as composed of an initial set of feature filters followed by a special class of mathematical transformations which represent the sensory inputs generating interacting wave-fronts over the entire sensory cortical area - the so-called holographic processes. It can explain the almost infinite memory. Since a hologram retains the complete details at every point of its image plane, even if a small portion of it is exposed for reconstruction, we get the entire scene, though the quality is impaired. Yet, unlike an optical hologram, the neural hologram is formed by very low frequency post-synaptic potentials providing a low information processing capacity to the neural system. Further, the distributed memory mechanisms are not recorded randomly over the entire brain matter, as there seems to be preferred locations in the brain for each sensory input.

The impulses from the various sensory apparatus are carried upwards in the dorsal column or in the anterio-lateral spinothalamic tract to the thalamus, which relays it to the cerebral cortex for its perception. At any moment, our sense organs are bombarded by a multitude of stimuli. But only one of them is given a clear channel to go up to the thalamus and then to the cerebral cortex at any instant, so that like photographic frames, we perceive one frame at an instant. Unlike the sensory apparatuses that are subject specific, this happens for all types of impulses. The agency that determines this subject neutral channel, is called mind, which is powered by the heart and lungs. Thus, after the heart stops beating, mind stops its work.

However, both for consolidation and retrieval of sensory information, the holographic model requires a coherent source which literally 'illuminates' the object or the object-projected sensory information. This may be a small source available at the site of sensory repository. For retrieval of the previously consolidated information, the same source again becomes necessary. Since the brain receives enormous information that is present for the whole life, such source should always be illuminating the required area in the brain where the sensory information is stored. Even in dream state, this source must be active, as here also local memory retrieval and experience takes place. This source is the Consciousness.

Regards,

mbasudeba@gmail.com