It from Δ-Logit by Vladimir I. Rogozhin

Vladimir,

I looked superficially all philosophical essays (my fault, becouse I have no skills for philosophy). But I think: philosophy, mathematic and physic ought to go hand in hand. Than I read again carefully your essay. I found it is in medias res. So that I want to write the article together with you (where, of course philosophical part will be yours).

I especially like and accept this:

The attempt of /ontological revolution/ of Einstein-Planck remained unfinished. Empiricism helps physicists, mathematicians are helped by going to the highest floors of abstraction. The peak of the age of /loss of certainty/ in physics is /string/ epic going on for more than forty years. Physicists have only recently started to delve into the essential foundations of their science , and very carefully. But whether mathematicians manage to /close physics?/ [12].

And this:

Overcoming the /crisis of representation and interpretation" of the fundamental sciences is only possible in the way of total ontological unification of matter at all levels of reality

good luck,

Branko

Dear Vladimir,

Your essay is very interesting. I like the idea. Will think more and read your other writings.

I agree absolutely with Alexander Zenkin. We should be able to explain any well-developed mathematical concepts in simply and clearly ways, such that they are understandable to any high school students. This is particularly true in the era that "the cognitive computer visualization of mathematical abstractions promises a revolution in scientific cognition". We should ask top mathematicians to teach college freshman classes every few years; writing educational books at the high school level is even better.

I love to hear Nikolai Noskov in the YouTube link you posted on my page, even I don't speak Russian. I have downloaded and read your essay several times so I understand it now. In contrast, it's easy to understand the messages in the songs you sent.

Brian

Interesting read. I added my rating

Dear Vladimir,

This is a very impressive philosophical essay with several deep thoughts that touch many aspects of my own essay, although the latter was written from a physical point of view. It seems to me that metaphysics is not so much different from physics as I thought before. I am still translating your ideas into my own (physical) language and this will take some more time.

For now, my congratulations to your important essay.

Best regards,

Walter

Vladimir

Your essay was a bit on the philosophical side for my tastes, however, I enjoyed it, especially the notion of ontological memory.

I was wondering: does ontological memory lives in subtime?

You can find the latest version of it here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven't figured out a way to not make it do that).

Ontological memory may be only indirectly accessible to us. Subtime appears to give it the kind of properties consistent with your description. My description: brief flashes of reality with long periods of darkness in between.

If I am only even a tiny bit right, I'm expect it will open up many philosophical questions.

I hope this leads to some even partial relief from the crisis of representation and interpretation in the fundamental sciences.

Let me know what you think.

Kind regards, Paul

"Information as a phenomenon of Ontological Memory in nature is multivalent in its manifestations at different levels of reality."

That uses all English words, but what on earth does that mean? Seems like a string of buzz words which happen to be in grammatical order. Much of the essay is like that. It's English, but Huh?? When I spend time to read these essays, I hope to learn something, but with sentences like the above, my eyes just glzze over, but this is one of the most highly community rated essays. I don't mean to be negative. Maybe other people are more technical than me, but I think I better represent the general layperson for whom this essay would have little interest or relevancy.

Dear Franklin,

Thank you very much for your comment and question!

In my essay I gave a link to my essay last year. I give it the essential justification of the fundamental structure of the world in the form of "Absolute generating structures." Matter is that from which all is born (Plato), "Ontological (structural) memory" is what generates and stores all. It is the very "structure" at every level of reality. What is the structure? The semantics of the concept gives us Eidos (the idea of) reality. In Russian semantics of the term "in-three-set" reveals the idea (eidos) of reality, its inner form. Therefore, the nature of the phenomenon (!) "Information" - the ontological (structural) memory of nature as a holistic process of generating, becomming and maintaining. The memory of the Universe sets its ontological algorithmic stores all the "codes" of the Universe, manifested in the form of "fundamental constants" and "coordinate system". To sum it up in our minds the deep structure of the archetypes of the world. In ancient times - a "three pillars", "three elephants", "three turtles" ... In the form of archetypal structure of the "sky" ("celestial law") appears "on the ground", i.e. in our minds, and eventually in science as the "laws of nature."

I apologize for the grammar in the English translation!

Best regards,

Vladimir

Best of Luck for the Magnificent Eight !

I am throught the 180 essays, all rated. For me 2/3 of them were poor and other 1/6 curious. The rest (1/6) have I rated over 4/10.

You are among the authors of the top essays from my sight - alphabetically :

Corda, D'Ariano, Maguire, Rogozhin, Singleton, Sreenath, Vaid, Vishwakarma,

and I hope one of you will be the winner. Vladimir, thanks for your rating

David