Nice work Georgina.

An interesting and fun to read essay. I especially liked the part about object information not being stored as a single bundle of information, but rather as a web of connections and relationships. That is something I learned but neglected to mention in my essay, which you are invited to read and comment on. Your opinion is always most welcome, and this year's topic and essays recommend a cross-disciplinary analysis of such things, which both you and I provide. I wish you good luck in the contest.

All the Best,

Jonathan

    Hello Georgina,

    I have read with allowances for your analytical essay written lively figurative language. World contests FQXi - it contests new fundamental ideas, new deep meanings and new concepts. In your essay deep analysis in the basic strategy of Descartes's method of doubt, given new ideas, images and conclusions.

    Perfect conclusion: «The material world is not static but in constant activity. Forming a cycle. Information can direct the formation of structures and configurations of matter and the structure and configuration of matter provides both forces and information for further change. The forces drive change, (they make change happen), and the information directs what change can occur, producing a new output structure or configuration. »

    Constructive ways to the truth may be different. One of them said Alexander Zenkin in the article "Science counterrevolution in mathematics":

    «The truth should be drawn with the help of the cognitive computer visualization technology and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators in the form of color-musical cognitive images of its immanent essence.» Http :/ / www.ccas. ru/alexzen/papers/ng-02/contr_rev.htm

    Do you agree with Alexander Zenkin?

    And the second question: Why the picture of the world of physicists poorer meanings than the picture of the world lyricists? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3ho31QhjsY

    I'll put a rating of "happy nine" ...

    Please read my essay. I think we are the same in the spirit of our research.

    Best regards,

    Vladimir

      Dear Georgina and All,

      I am attaching the iDNASeries.bmp that I have envisioned and how it shows the DNA structure in its sequence.

      I give you all a 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.

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

      The-Fibonacci-code-behind-superstringtheory

      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 from a basic singularity. The only commonality between the two series is at the base seed 0 (singularity) and first seed 1, which are the bits in our binary system.

      Its also interesting to see the singularity is in the base seed of zero and how it is all pervasive all through out the DNA structure in the attached image. I have been telling that I is that nothing which dwells in everything and this DNA structure seems to prove that notion. Singularity is right with in the duality. Absolute is right with in the relativity. This proves that both of these states of singularity and duality are interconnected and are the source of life.

      Love,

      Sridattadev.Attachment #1: 4_iDNASeries.bmp

      Ms. Parry,

      I thought your essay was splendid. It held my interest from the first word to the last. Will you please allow this decrepit old realist to make a comment about it without becoming unduly upset?

      You wrote: "It is wrong to think that the task of the physicist is to find out how nature is."

      It is not wrong, it is totally impossible for any physicist to find out anything about nature for as I have pointed out in my essay BITTERS, nature is unique, once.

      Each real snowflake is unique, once. Each real molecule of each real snowflake is unique, once. The only question Wheeler ought to have asked was;

      Is the real Universe simple? Yes

      Is the abstract universe simple? No.

      Is real unique, once simple? Yes

      Is abstract quantum theory simple? No.

      I do wish you the best of luck in the contest.

      Joe

        Hi Georgina,

        Good to see you in another contest. I like your latest essay, very readable and informative.

        1. Perhaps it should have been titled "Everything About Information"

        2. I think it is the only essay that mentions the concept of noise at all. Shannon's mission for the phone company was to get information out of noise. If we look at the entries in this contest many of the entries are informational some are ... well .....noisy. Check my essay out and tell me if it is ... well.... noisy :)

        Giving you the best mark, And wishing you the best recovery.

        Don Limuti

          Dear Joe,

          thank you so much for reading my essay and for your kind words and good wishes.

          You have quoted me quoting Niels Bohr. I thought he had an interesting perspective on what physics is all about.

          I look forward to reading your essay soon. Fortunately we have been given a little more time. Till then, all the best, Georgina

          Hi Don,

          thank you very much. It is really good to hear that you liked the essay.

          Re 1. yes its a broad and interesting topic so lots of ideas to choose from but there's lots more that I could have written about. Maybe "information in a nutshell" would have worked. I did not just want to talk about perception and write something very similar to my usual old hobby horse so I had fun exploring the territory a bit.

          Re 2. Interesting that noise has had little mention in the other essays. I will read your essay, with pleasure, and let you know how I got on with it.

          Thank you very much for your good wishes. Georgina

          Good to see you back online Georgina.

          I for one was beginning to worry, as you'd mentioned health problems. I hope you are doing better, and I am glad your essay is doing well. Fine work, one more time.

          Have Fun!

          Jonathan

          Hello Vladimir,

          thank you so much for your positive feedback on my essay. Thanks too for your questions which I do not know if I can answer satisfactorily.

          I'm not quite sure what is meant by cognitive computer visualization technology. Or colour -musical cognitive images. Thanks for the link.It is quite a long article which I have only taken a quick look at. Certainly visual presentation of information can be helpful for cognition but I am not convinced that if everyone reports seeing the same thing it is the truth. Think of the illusionists performance as an argument against that.

          I do think visualizations are a very good way of presenting complex information in a way that is easily understood; Especially for very large data sets.The same would apply to mathematical abstractions, if it is possible to illustrate them. It can also bring out relationships and correlations that might not be obvious in raw data or a particular mathematical presentation. I think the colour and forms interest the mind which has evolved to make sense of complex visual information. I like very much the site Information is beautiful

          Re your second question, thanks again for the link. What a beautiful expressive voice. The words of a lyricist often speak to the mind of the listener about human emotions which he/she is then able to feel. Though, as I write about in the essay, it is the -observer who creates the meaning- in his/her image reality. For some people, no doubt, beautiful lyrics do not convey emotional feeling even when in their own mother tongue. In the same way some people find beauty in mathematics, and the mathematics of physics, but others do not. The logical mind and the emotional mind are different facets of being human and meaning can be found by both.

          Yes, I will endevour to read your essay too. Regards, Georgina.

          Vladimir,

          Yes I could cry, it is a very sad but beautiful poem.

          From http://lyricstranslate.com

          With the same anguish my days flash past, Monotonous/dreary as they were, As if roses are dropping their petals, And nightingales are dying.

          And she is also sorrowful, The Love that has guided me And envenomed blood Runs under her satin-like skin.

          And if I am in this world, It is for the only dream I have, That we both, like blind children, Will go to the mountain ridge

          There, where there are only reveries, In the world of the whitest clouds, To seek for faded roses, And listen to the dead nightingales.

          Author's comment:

          The lyrics is the poem by a Russian poet and translator Nikolay Gumilev (1886 - 1921)http://lyricstranslate.com One line is slightly changed: Gumilev has it as "There, where only goats are roaming" instead of "There, where there are only reveries"

          Hi Jonathan,

          thank you for reading my essay and your kind comments. I really appreciate them. I've been working my way down the comments left.

          I will read yours too, so don't worry that I haven't got to it yet. Fortunately we have been given a bit more time.

          Hi Georgina

          Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html)

          said: "It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the relationship. And example of this is the Schrodinger equation and the Heisenberg formulation of quantum mechanics. I don't know why that is - it remains a mystery, but it was something I learned from experience. There is always another way to say the same thing that doesn't look at all like the way you said it before. I don't know what the reason for this is. I think it is somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature."

          I too believe in the simplicity of nature, and I am glad that Richard Feynman, a Nobel-winning famous physicist, also believe in the same thing I do, but I had come to my belief long before I knew about that particular statement.

          The belief that "Nature is simple" is however being expressed differently in my essay "Analogical Engine" linked to http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865 .

          Specifically though, I said "Planck constant is the Mother of All Dualities" and I put it schematically as: wave-particle ~ quantum-classical ~ gene-protein ~ analogy- reasoning ~ linear-nonlinear ~ connected-notconnected ~ computable-notcomputable ~ mind-body ~ Bit-It ~ variation-selection ~ freedom-determinism ... and so on.

          Taken two at a time, it can be read as "what quantum is to classical" is similar to (~) "what wave is to particle." You can choose any two from among the multitudes that can be found in our discourses.

          I could have put Schrodinger wave ontology-Heisenberg particle ontology duality in the list had it comes to my mind!

          Since "Nature is Analogical", we are free to probe nature in so many different ways. And you have touched some corners of it.

          Good luck,

          Than Tin

          Hello Georgina,

          Thank you for your the answers to my comment very valuable for me! Also a big thank you for visiting my forum and give your comment!

          In the russian version of the paper by Alexander Zenkin slightly different phrase: «The truth should be drawn and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators». I think that this phrase has a broader meaning. When I make a reference to this idea A.Zenkin, I primarily mean the idea of Kant's concept-figure synthesis.

          Many thanks for the link to the full text of the romance Nikolai Gumilev.. I always listen to it when I need to recharge the spirit... The last sentence is very interesting!

          Yes, physics and poetry must work together to come to a unified picture of the world, rich in all the meanings of being. Matter physicists is to acquire soul. Contest FQXi helps with that!

          Best regards,

          Vladimir

          Self-aware Universe ... Matter of physicists is to acquire soul ...

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpnvu392xDM

          Georgina,

          I've been waiting with baited breath for the comments you promised. But I know you'll be as buried in essay as me. I also note I hadn't rated yours so if you just felt a little hike that was me. You well also have read mine and, not being familiar with the subtleties of Bell's theorem, missed it's value. If so there's now a more detailed explanation on the blog. The result is NO spookyness or faster than light QM nonsense! Most heads will go straight back in the sand as usual I expect, but many have resonated as you'll see in the blog.

          Anyway this little nudge is because, being passed over from 7th twice in a row, I'd rather like to finish higher this year so need the points! It's been called 'wonderful' and 'ground breaking'! which I obviously think is very perceptive! but I do hope you like it.

          Very best wishes in the run in.

          Peter

            Can I have something about information from Georgina on my blog? A comment will be appreciated, especially as we have some agreement on the existence/non-existence information.

            Best regards,

            Akinbo

            Peter,

            I will read it. I read the abstract and thought this is something for later as I could see from that that I would find it hard work, as you had said I would. Glad to hear you are getting some good responses. No doubt the scores will change a lot in the last few days of voting as they have in previous contests. I have only voted for a few essays so far, the ones I could make my mind up easily about. I'm not going to ignore yours. Don't worry. Georgina

            Hello Georgina

            Hoping you are feeling better. I found your essay to be readable (mostly) and a nice walk through some foundational matters. Some thoughts:

            You said:

            According to Niels Bohr, "there is no quantum world. There is only an abstract quantum physical description. It is wrong to think that the task of the physicist is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what we can say about nature"

            How one (ie. Bohr) can 'say about nature' when one cannot say how nature is, seems self-defeating to me.

            Anyway...

            Barbour: 'So a direct correlation between macroscopic observed reality and theoretical quantum realm should not be expected.'

            I would have thought that the aim of a model of physical reality is exactly that the model has a strong correspondence to our apparent reality, and so at least in theory should be able to describe the macroscopic world.

            Your thoughts? (you might post on my essay page that you have responded, and I will have another look).

            Best wishes

            Stephen Anastasi

              Hello Stephen,

              Re Niels Bohr's words: I think it is possible to talk about something that is related to the function of the natural world without being an accurate portrait of it. Probabilities do become very accurate when very large samples are taken, the bigger the sample the more accurate. That is something about nature but it isn't a description of how nature is at any one time. I don't think that therefore we should say probabilities are not realistic. They have at least a quasi reality.

              Re Julian Barbour's words I agree with him because the two are very different "realms". The observed reality is described as space-time but the theoretical quantum realm is not in space-time but a theoretical space over time. The results of lots of experimental outcomes amalgamated into 'a picture' of what might be rather than what is. Well that's my naive understanding.

              I have just read Ken Wharton's essay and he describes a way in which some of the problems of incompatibility of QM and observed space-time could be overcome.A good read. Apparent reality is in my opinion only one part of reality and the underlying reality that produces potential sensory data together with observer selection gives the observed outcomes. I included a diagram setting out that explanatory framework as part of my essay last year contest, there is a high resolution version in that essays discussion thread.

              Thank you very much for reading my essay, your feedback and your interesting question.

              Thanks Georgina

              Is quasi-reality, reality? I suppose one could say, 'There exists a probability that...' but to me this would be a statement found in a possible ontology, rather than an actual ontology (see my essay . In this sense the reality is only a possible reality that has no proper existence.

              Interesting.

              Stephen.