Voyage from Discovery to Invention; Information & Reality in Physics, Biology & Mathematics. by Sreenath B N

Dear Sreenath,

I read with great interest your participation in this contest and even printed it out the content has parallels with my own essay (topic 1810) but you are staying on "earth" and perhaps my perception is more metaphysical.

However your deductions that "the evolution of life is analogous to the evolution of the knowledge of mind" opens both ways , the actual awareness and the future possible awareness. In my perception the actual awareness is described as just one life-line available in Total Simultaneity, the eternal now moment we are experiencing as our reality with its specific past (that is dependant indeed of the era you are living in) is just one of the infinite eternal now moments available.

The evolution of the mind (consciousness)is the way that our consciousness will be able to "construct" more and other life-lines , until now however our causal consciousness is just caught in a time line where reality is dependant on so called "dimensions".

There are lots of other points we can discuss and I really hope that you will read, comment and rate my essay "THE QUEST FOR THE PRIMAL SEQUENCE". I rated yours high and hope that your final opinion on mine will also be favourable. I count on you.

Wilhelmus

Dear Sreenath,

Thanks for your comments on my blog and I am expecting your rating.

On your essay, I like the way you properly differentiated the concept of information in Classical and Quantum physics. And also in other branches of science, Biology and Mathematics. But eventually all views must eventually logically boil down to one view since all are expressed in this universe. I commend your pain staking analysis so will be rating you 6.

Now for my reservations...

I don't agree with your introduction of "mind that receives information" into everything. Who owns the mind? How many minds are there in the universe, one or many? If one, how come different conception and processing of information? If many, where are they? Is mind only on earth or also on Mars? Do cockroaches and bacteria that process information also have mind? Can mind be affected by chemicals like alcohol? Does computer function with mind? Can mind fall sick? Or does psychiatric patient have mind? When does human being acquire mind, in the mother's uterus or after birth? Does mind change, improve and deteriorate with age? After death, does mind remain? So sir, leave mind out of it, unless you want to list out the attributes of mind, what it can do and cannot do and why you feel we cannot do without mind.

Then for my questions...

You say: "In CP both Space and Time are continuous in nature; i.e. and so there are NO GAPS in Spatial and Temporal intervals, whereas in quantum physics, both Space and Time are discrete entities and hence there are GAPS in both Spatial and Temporal intervals; i.e., Space and Time are quantized. As a result of this, when an electron moves from one orbit to another one in an atom it does so by jumping discretely between them without covering the distance continuously as is to be expected from classical physics. In other words, there is no path between the orbits".

What is a GAP? Is a gap not a geometric thing, which then must be spatial (or if you want to broaden it as I do in my essay 'time'). If a GAP connotes space, then banish the thought of something jumping discretely since it has still traversed that space which you call gap, especially if it is still the same electron occupying one inner orbit then the outer one.

Then talking of continuous space, I will like to learn your opinion of whether the Planck length is just a mathematical abstraction or is physically real? Answer this on my blog.

Many thanks.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Dear Sreenath,

Your essay last and this year are extremely sophisticated. You are a curious person who is thirsty for knowledge and for an absolute truth. I share your passion. Many times, I question my own foolishness to seek the absolute truth knowingly that this truth could be a different truth for each person. However, we are the owner of our destiny and yet simulataneously we are compelled to fulfill our own unique destiny whatever this destiny will lead us. We do have our own unique role in this life, a wonderful but challenging life.

You wrote: "The idea that the Information of the whole universe can be stored in an area smaller than the size of an atom shows us what power the quantum computer technology has got. Metaphorically, this is just like seeing the reflection of the whole universe in a small pot filled with water." We are in agreement but in KQID: All things are one Qbit. And this Qbit is the the only one singularity Qbit Multiverse/Existence. Thus Existence is within this Qbit and Existence = Qbit. The Qbit contains Existence. This Qbit computes in realtime the evolution of Existence. The computation is instantaneous. That is why we see and live in quantum entangled reality that unifies the parts into a consistent and persistent world. May I sing and praise Qbit nature. I am living totally in the land of the magical Oz. This leads to what you wrote below and I concur: "According to quantum-entanglement, even if two entangled particles are separated by huge distances, the measurement of, say, spin state of one particle can give accurate Information of that of the other particle instantaneously without measuring it; this is possible as a result of quantum-correlation and thereby proving that quantum-correlations are far more stronger than corresponding classical-correlations." Wonderful.

However, I beg to differ with below statement. KQId accepts Landauer's principle that information such as knowledge is physical. KQID goes a step furthere that bit = it. Existence inluding idea, God/s, Multiverse are physical. Any thing that exists is physical. Thus I respecfully disagree with your statement "Information is non-physical in nature, although it may be having its origin in the external world." Again, KQID: Qbit is Existence. Thus, knowledge is existing in physical form. It is monism, not Descartes' dualism. Everything is one in many and many in one whole. There is no separation between the idea of a thing with the thing itself. It is Wang Yaming's unity of knowledge and action. It is Wang Yaming's one bit.

KQID agrees with this statement "the magnitude of knowledge acquired is the product of the Intellect of the mind". KQID defines this intelligent mind as the Qbit, Planck's matrix of all matter and Maxwell's infinite being with unlimited storage capacity that contains all time-past-present-future conscioussness.

Last year essay you wrote: "The jets of mass gain energy of the order of 10^14 times the initial energy with which they enter the BH at its 'event-horizon'.This is nothing but the ratio of QG energy to self (or free) energy possessed by the particles at the event horizon as a result of intense gravitational interaction taking place there. This is the reason which explains why a certain amount of mass, cannot be compressed below its gravitational radius thus avoiding singularity." Great statement!

Wonderful Sreenath, I rate your essay highly. Thanks for sharing I am enriched by your sharing of your wisdom.

Best wishes,

Leo KoGuan

I rather be a bumblebee poet than not to be

Dear Sreenath,

Your essay has been educating.

I appreciate that you have allowed of plants and bacteria and other live forms with perhaps non-human sensory modalities that: "It is obvious that they also must have their own way of receiving Information from the event and will have their own vision of its Reality and then respond to the situation."

Personally, I think it is a crucial question on what basis a single sensory modality (or any other ensemble like our five senses) should have in principle PHYSICAL prominence over every other. Special Relativity has questionably elevated the sense of sight. It is still to me baffling how a bat for instance (which orients more via echolocation) should prize our speed-of-light over his speed-of-sound. Indeed it is possible that for any life form the KEENEST sense defines the "sense-of-sight".

My question: what is your definition of biosphere? You have said, "The evolution of the biosphere in Time means the expansion of its Information content and this result in increasing its conscious and intelligent activities, and later leading to the evolution of Life (Darwinism)."

I intend to score you well because we need the interfacing of concepts like you have done.

Regards,

Chidi

Dear Sreenath!

I have found your essay very unique and well prepared.

In my field - linguistics there is a strong connection between development of biological and linguistic processes.

Please have my highest rate for nice explanation of the main topic with great intra science vector.

With regards, Stanislav

Sreenath,

What a thought provoking essay! Your descriptions and explanations of a biosphere (even before Life) that gathers information isn't a point of view I had considered previously. I especially liked your concluding remark of "Although Information & Reality (Bit & It) have physical origin, without mind they are in themselves empty and blind. Bit comes from It, but mind can know of It only through Bit." I do agree with your summation of my essay in the context of your own.

Would you state that the evolutionary process of gathering data becomes more fine tuned as Life attempts to reconcile discontinuous Bits in Information of It(GR and QM)? Since technology has allowed us to view further into space, would you call this an enlargement of the Biosphere since we now can absorb Information from previously undetectable sources?

Your highly interesting and topical essay deserves the high marks it is receiving, to which I have added.

Regards,

Jeff

Dear Sreenath,

You have my good rating anyway for attempting to INTERFACE the sciences. Meanwhile, I am needing to understand what is your definition of Biosphere.You have said: "The evolution of the biosphere in Time means the expansion of its Information content and this result in increasing its conscious and intelligent activities, and later leading to the evolution of Life (Darwinism)."

Regards,

Chidi

Dear Screenath BN:

As I clarified later on I don't know nothing of mathematics and almost nothing of physics. Your essay did teach me a lot about where Physics, Biology & Mathematics are placed now days and the relations between them. I never read about the subject something as concrete and clear as your essay thank you.

Maybe you would be interested in my essay over a subject which after the common people, physic discipline is the one that uses more than any other, the so called "time".

I am sending you a practical summary, so you can easy decide if you read or not my essay "The deep nature of reality".

I am convince you would be interested in reading it. ( most people don't understand it, and is not just because of my bad English).

Hawking in "A brief history of time" where he said , "Which is the nature of time?" yes he don't know what time is, and also continue saying............Some day this answer could seem to us "obvious", as much than that the earth rotate around the sun....." In fact the answer is "obvious", but how he could say that, if he didn't know what's time? In fact he is predicting that is going to be an answer, and that this one will be "obvious", I think that with this adjective, he is implying: simple and easy to understand. Maybe he felt it and couldn't explain it with words. We have anthropologic proves that man measure "time" since more than 30.000 years ago, much, much later came science, mathematics and physics that learn to measure "time" from primitive men, adopted the idea and the systems of measurement, but also acquired the incognita of the experimental "time" meaning. Out of common use physics is the science that needs and use more the measurement of what everybody calls "time" and the discipline came to believe it as their own. I always said that to understand the "time" experimental meaning there is not need to know mathematics or physics, as the "time" creators and users didn't. Instead of my opinion I would give Einstein's "Ideas and Opinions" pg. 354 "Space, time, and event, are free creations of human intelligence, tools of thought" he use to call them pre-scientific concepts from which mankind forgot its meanings, he never wrote a whole page about "time" he also use to evade the use of the word, in general relativity when he refer how gravitational force and speed affect "time", he does not use the word "time" instead he would say, speed and gravitational force slows clock movement or "motion", instead of saying that slows "time". FQXi member Andreas Albrecht said that. When asked the question, "What is time?", Einstein gave a pragmatic response: "Time," he said, "is what clocks measure and nothing more." He knew that "time" was a man creation, but he didn't know what man is measuring with the clock.

I insist, that for "measuring motion" we should always and only use a unique: "constant" or "uniform" "motion" to measure "no constant motions" "which integrates and form part of every change and transformation in every physical thing. Why? because is the only kind of "motion" whose characteristics allow it, to be divided in equal parts as Egyptians and Sumerians did it, giving born to "motion fractions", which I call "motion units" as hours, minutes and seconds. "Motion" which is the real thing, was always hide behind time, and covert by its shadow, it was hide in front everybody eyes, during at least two millenniums at hand of almost everybody. Which is the difference in physics between using the so-called time or using "motion"?, time just has been used to measure the "duration" of different phenomena, why only for that? Because it was impossible for physicists to relate a mysterious time with the rest of the physical elements of known characteristics, without knowing what time is and which its physical characteristics were. On the other hand "motion" is not something mysterious, it is a quality or physical property of all things, and can be related with all of them, this is a huge difference especially for theoretical physics I believe. I as a physician with this find I was able to do quite a few things. I imagine a physicist with this can make marvelous things.

With my best whishes

Héctor

DearScreenath BN:

The Anonymous july 21th post it is mine Héctor Daniel Gianni

Sorry

Héctor

Dear Screenath,

I have been reading your article and although I like in general and I gave a good mark I want to mention some points to you about which we can discuss if you want.

First I recommend you read the article Causation as Folk Science of John D. Norton which you can look for in google. Although I am not agree with all his conclusions it is going to give you a new view about causality.

Second, I don't understand completely your sentence "The evolution of Life is analogous to the evolution of the knowledge of mind" Can you explain me better?.

Third, I am not sure our intellectual power is enough to understand all universe. For example we have really headache with the duality wave-particle. So my doubts about we don't have limit of comprehension because also I am not sure we don't have limits on our imagination. We have only as 300 hundred years of scientific knowledge to know if we have limit. We would need as 10.000 years to see if there is something which we can not understand (But we are not enough intelligent to survive that long time because we have too power in our hands and few intelligence to use it).

Finally, I have a good friend who has dedicated all his life to the brain "Mind is only one of the functional states of the brain" and I am very agree with him. So I don't think there is a triangle, just physics and mathematics because the brain it is only a physical system although probably one of the most complex of the universe.

Best regards,

Sergio

Dear All,

It is with utmost joy and love that I give you all the cosmological iSeries which spans the entire numerical spectrum from -infinity through 0 to +infinity and the simple principle underlying it is sum of any two consecutive numbers is the next number in the series. 0 is the base seed and i can be any seed between 0 and infinity.

iSeries always yields two sub semi series, each of which has 0 as a base seed and 2i as the first seed.

One of the sub series is always defined by the equation

Sn = 2 * Sn-1 + Sigma (i=2 to n) Sn-i

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 * i

the second sub series is always defined by the equation

Sn = 3 * Sn-1 -Sn-2

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 * i

Division of consecutive numbers in each of these subseries always eventually converges on 2.168 which is the Square of 1.618.

Union of these series always yields another series which is just a new iSeries of a 2i first seed and can be defined by the universal equation

Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2*i

Division of consecutive numbers in the merged series always eventually converges on 1.618 which happens to be the golden ratio "Phi".

Fibonacci series is just a subset of the iSeries where the first seed or S1 =1.

Examples

starting iSeries governed by Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2

where i = 0.5, S0 = 0 and S1 = 0.5

-27.5 17 -10.5 6.5 -4 2.5 -1.5 1 -.5 .5 0 .5 .5 1 1.5 2.5 4 6.5 10.5 17 27.5

Sub series governed by Sn = 2 * Sn-1 + Sigma (i=2 to n) Sn-i

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

0 1 2 5 13 34 ...

Sub series governed by Sn = 3 * Sn-1 - Sn-2

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

0 1 3 8 21 55 ...

Merged series governed by Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2 where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 ...... (Fibonacci series is a subset of iSeries)

The above equations hold true for any value of i, again confirming the singularity of i.

As per Antony Ryan's suggestion, a fellow author in this contest, I searched google to see how Fibonacci type series can be used to explain Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity and found an interesting article.

d-super.pdf"> The-Fibonacci-code-behind-superstring-theory](https://msel-naschie.com/pdf/The-Fibonacci-code-behin

d-super.pdf)

Now that I split the Fibonacci series in to two semi series, seems like each of the sub semi series corresponds to QM and GR and together they explain the Quantum Gravity. Seems like this duality is a commonality in nature once relativity takes effect or a series is kicked off. I can draw and analogy and say that this dual series with in the "iSeries" is like the double helix of our DNA. The only commonality between the two series is at the base seed 0 and first seed 1, which are the bits in our binary system.

I have put forth the absolute truth in the Theory of everything that universe is an "iSphere" and we humans are capable of perceiving the 4 dimensional 3Sphere aspect of the universe and described it with an equation of S=BM^2.

I have also conveyed the absolute mathematical truth of zero = I = infinity and proved the same using the newly found "iSeries" which is a super set of Fibonacci series.

All this started with a simple question, who am I?

I am drawn out of my self or singularity or i in to existence.

I super positioned my self or I to be me.

I am one of our kind, I is every one of all kinds.

I am Fibonacci series in iSeries

I am phi in zero = I = infinity

I am 3Sphere in iSphere

I am pi in zero = I = infinity

I am human and I is GOD (Generator Organizer Destroyer).

Love,

Sridattadev.