It from Δ-Logit by Vladimir I. Rogozhin

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

I rated the essay to be 10 not because of the quality of the essay but of my respect to the contribution of Russian scientists as a whole, especially to Gorigory Perelman!

Dear Vladimir Rogozhin: I had to read your essay several times to understand it correctly. Being a well-written essay, the density of ideas stated; joined a very erudite historical hindsight, make this essay an example magnificent mathematical thinking not, but it draws conclusions and axioms, of great importance. I do not like the word philosophy, I prefer: well structured thinking, logic and axiomatic.

One of the important conclusions that you discussed is the concept of unitarity, in the sense that all physical phenomena, including space, time, and energy or mass, are actually manifestations of a single, fundamental entity, which takes into itself all physical characteristics, apparently manifested separately.

Indeed, as you noted repeatedly in his essay, a theory of unification, by pure logic requires: 1) A holistic principle of unitarity. 2) fundamental functional units not "divisible" most fundamental units. That is to say: There must be a minimum as Delta incremental, that is nothing, that there is a minimum length measurement of space-time-mass.

You remember in her essay the great thinkers of history, from ancient Greece, through Galileo, Kant, Boubarky. In this historical analysis mentions the importance of, for example, basic geometric forms: sphere, triangle, etc.. And here, here is where you absolutely right, as for example, the principle of holistic unitarity is manifest in the spins possible. That is: 1) The arithmetic average of the sum of the cosines of all nonzero spins, this arithmetic mean is very roughly squared (renormalization effects), the ratio of the mass of the Higgs boson mass and the value of the vacuum Higgs, that is:

SUM_spins_cos( cos(s))= Delta(s)

cos(s)= s/sqr[ s(s+1)]

Delta(s)= 2.8755503

( Delta(s)/4 )^2 = 0.5167993455

Vacuum Higgs value = 246.221202 Gev=V(H)

V(H) x ( Delta(s)/4 )^2 = 127.246 Gev ~ mh

Another example of principle of holistic unitarity

The tetrahedron: the angle formed by one side with a face.

This angle has the following property with respect to the spins of the graviton, the spin of the leptons, and the fractional electric charges.

cos(th1)= cos(54.73561031 degree) = cos( s= 1/2)

sin(th1) = cos( s= 2)

( cos(th1) )^2 = 1/3

( sin(th1) )^2 = 4/3 maximum value electric charge SU(5) unification

I think, humbly, that these two mathematical-physical examples, would be a small "translation" of the excellent and well-reasoned thoughts embodied in his magnificent essay. I'm sure it will be one of the winners of this contest. Greetings. Angel Garces Doz

Dear Vladimir,

Great reading, i agree with you on the whole. Many nice ideas that actually could shape future view on physics and philosophy.聽

Best wishes

Koorosh

Best of luck in the finals Vladimir.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

Vladimir,

Thanks for your kind message on my blog. Really glad you held on for a top 10 place. I'd felt 7th place had become my own after the last 2 years, but I have to say after being passed over twice I'm glad for an improvement. Now we find out if the judges really do support John Templeton's ideal of supporting exploration of advancements not doctrine. I think it's of rare value and well worth preserving.

My aim is only to try to explain and spread the simple logic of the unified 'discrete field' science which clearly better corresponds to nature than what we have now, though astonishingly proving the SR postulates without paradox via QM without wierdness. I see the problems as mainly;

1. It's initial unfamiliarity (as Feynman and others predicted)

2. The inertia of academia due to investment in doctrine (as Planck pointed out).

3. The stage of our intellectual development, so capacity to visualise dynamic evolutions. I see that as subversed by a swing too far to reliance on maths, and the lack of anywhere to 'hook' a new ontology to in our belief systems, which takes us back to No.1.

Do you think that's a fair assessment? In many ways this may be just a matter of presentation. But most importantly, do you have any assistance or ideas you can offer as one coming to the 'DFM' anew? (My last 2 essays are the precursers giving the fundamentals). This one really started as just a falsification exercise. It proved to have far more power that I ever imagined! All help and support welcomed, philosophically included.

Very best of luck in the judging.

Peter

Dear Vladimir,

As non-zero intervals of events is subjective, probability representation by ﾎ"-Logit is also subjective and thus dynamic analysis of sequence of data subjectively by Bayesian inference evolves observational reality, in that quantization of time is imperative.

With best regards,

Jayakar