The deep nature of reality by Héctor Daniel Gianni

Dear Dr. Gianni,

Your highly original treatise was most absorbing. I am a science writer, and my work preparing texts for publication has bred a broad perspective in me - one that also takes into account the interaction of Mind and Cosmos, as is the case with you.

Mind defines the Observer's 'patch of reality' at any given moment, and continues to do so throughout evolution.

Even if we could describe the quantum world in perfect mathematical language, we would still have only described some small part of our Cosmos perfectly; and we would still be involved in our distinctive human Cosmos ... one that displays a continuous correlation between Bit and It over the course of evolution.

As you can probably tell, this is one of the strands of my essay - which I think you would find very interesting. I hope you will have a chance to read it.

All the best,

John

(jselye@gmail.com)

Hello, Héctor

A very interesting essay. The main task of the contest FQXi-depth new ideas. You bring forth new ideas. But the real mystery is the mystery of reality "generating structures." If we "grab" (understand) "generating structure" we "grasp" the mystery (nature) of the time and information. If we split the "generating structure" (which physicists do in their experiments and theories, "guessing the equation "), the mystery of time is not disclosed. "Protean nature" (a metaphor matter) need to catch small "network", a form which tells us the goddess forms - Eydoteya. Excellent rating. Look, comment on my essay and fair vote. We can understand each other as a lyricist lyrics. I wish you success and respect, Vladimir

Hello Héctor,

Thank you for your invitation to read and comment on your essay. Even though your English made it hard going, I believe I got the gist of it, and because I think I understand where you're coming from, I will make a few constructive observations.

1. We all use time whether we know how to describe it or not, indeed, we have no choice because the period between something being in one place and then another, i.e. the result of motion, would make no sense without our ability to appreciation that that period has elapsed. At this basic level, appreciating the passage of time is distinctly intuitive, in other words it is something automatic and not under our direct control. This intuition is evolved in us as it is evolved in other animals. Apart from people who take drugs which interfere with their perception of time, most people experience this intuition in much the same way. I can not say how lower animals appreciate the passage of time at the intuitive level, but I have no reason to believe it is significantly different to ours. The fact that dogs can catch a ball better than we can suggest that their appreciation of time is more accurate if not different.

2. The notions of "day", "hour", etc, and any other non-intuitive period of time is a conceptual quality, that is to say, an abstraction, generalization, and information about time which is not time, just a means to its description. We must differentiate between conceptual-time and intuitive-time because conceptual-time varies greatly even between people, that's why we have calendars, and of course lower animals are unlikely to debate such conceptions at all. Now, you differentiate between "psychological present" and "physical present", but that's only two out of three distinct conceptions of time, so I think you need to show that you have taken all three conceptions into account.

3. You speak of continuous motion within continuous space as not needing time, but this doesn't explain the conservation of energy, and especially the relationship between energy and kinetic energy. I don't know if you subscribe to the notion that energy must be conserved, or not, because you do not speak of it, but if you do you have a big job ahead of you describing the means to the conservation of energy without bringing time back in one way, shape or form. Plus, those who believe that time is something, and something continuous, can not separate one point in time from another, and so they must consider a block-universe where objects exists in past, present and future concurrently. When people believe that space is something, and something continuous, they too have trouble separating one place from another, and that means something can be in more than one place at the same time.

I do not subscribe to continuous space or continuous time, and I say that time is a function of the elements of gravity, which constitutes space, and so "force" and "field" are also discrete; and in that I have a big job ahead of me describing the conservation of energy.

Good luck with your essay, and the job ahead of you.

Regards.

Zoran.

Dear Dr Gianni and David Reid

In my essay I deal with time, which seems to be an area of focus for you. I hope you find it interesting, in that I locate the initiator of time as the action of a global principle that is not time related. You may find the essay rather abstract, but one would expect this, given the need to step outside empiricism.

Unfortunately, given the page limit I was unable to do more than provide the bare bones (and could not, within the essay constraints talk about our local time or experiential time). The rest will be contained in a nearly completed work, "The Armchair Universe" (working title). I would be very keen to receive feedback on this essay, especially as it relates to time.

Stephen Anastasi.

Dear Héctor,

As I promised in my Essay page, I have read your Essay which I have found enjoyable and a bit provocative. I have also found interesting your rational demonstration which should prove that with the clock one measures motion rather than time. On the other and, by setting c=1, time and motion, in the sense of travelling in space, become the same thing. In any case, I enjoyed in reading your Essay, thus, I am going to give you a high rate.

Cheers,

Ch.

Hi Héctor,

In your essay, you say that time is a useful concept that early humans created, with the "day" being an example of a time concept created by humans.

You say time can't be sensed or described like gravity and inertia can be sensed and described, because time doesn't really exist. You say that a lot of confusion would be avoided if we realised that time is actually motion. You discuss factors like temperature that affect motion.

You say that there is a psychological present separate from the physical present, and say that the psychological present is approximately one second behind the physical present or "now" .

But I think that time (properly understood) DOES exist. In my essay I contend that "laws of nature" represent static information category relationships: they do not represent nature actively performing mathematical calculations, so laws of nature do not represent change in numerical information. I argue that time and change of number is injected via quantum decoherence. In other words "time...unfolds...[and] the unique actual physical outcome...unfolds in an unpredictable way as time progresses" (physicist George Ellis).

I am sorry that I cannot agree with you. Best wishes,

Lorraine

(I have also posted the above comment on my essay forum)

Héctor,

I found your essay much in keeping to the findings that time is relative to the existence of motion. I would like to run some questions by you via email. What is your email address? My email address is msm@physicsofdestiny.com

Regards,

Manuel

Dear Hector

WE HAVE 2 DIFFERENT KINDS OF SYMMETRY: DISCRETE AND CONTINUOUS.

BASIC DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM

DISCRETE SYMMETRY IS STATIC SYMMETRY(REFLECTIONS,PARITY,ETC). NOT DEMANDING MOTION,CHANGE IN TIME

CONTINUOUS SYMMETRY IS DYNAMIC, DEMANDING MOTION(ROTATIONS,TRANSLATIONS,SHIFTS,ETC) CHANGE IN TIME.

THE MOTION SUPPOSED TO BE DIFFERENT VELOCITY (FROM SMALL TO RELATIVISTIC)

WHEN WE GOING TO RELATIVISTIC VELOCITY OBJEKT GET DIFFERENT LORENTCIAN DEFORMATION AND CONTINUOUS SYMMETRY LOST ITS SENSE.WE GET SOME KIND SELF-REJECTION OF CONTINOUS SYMMETRY.

DOES DISCRETE SYMMETRY ONLY REAL SYMMETRY?

Yuri

Dear Hector,

Thanks for you kind comments on my essay and I have down loaded your essay and shortly post my comments on it in your thread.

With my best whishes'

Sreenath

Hector,

It was absolutely wonderful to read you essay. My last two essays have developed this and it's implications but I was beginning to think I was on my own and going crazy! I've often quoted Einstein's;

"There is no such a thing as an empty space without field. Space-time does not claim existence on its own, but only as a structural quality of the field."

Currently I describe that 'motion' as what turns a simple rotating dipole into a double helix, and show it's power.

The importance of this thesis can't be overstated. I propose that the great "simple idea" we've all been blind about is that, contrary to all current theory (including even interpretation of Einstein!) 'TIME' itself does not change or 'dilate,' only the emitted 'signals', physical motions of some 'thing' in motion, are effected, compressed or contracted, and they are not 'time'!

Thank you and very well done for your essay on this massively important subject. A top mark from me for sure. But how do we get more to throw off the blindness? I do hope you'll read (and score) my essay, which is entirely field and motion based, where the concept is developed to demonstrate it's power.

Congratulations, hold on for a big boost, and very best of luck in the run in.

Peter

Dear Hector,

Your essay contain bright ideas. You talk a lot about motion in your essay. If you see something and it disappears, has it moved? Or if something appear suddenly has it moved? That is, is moving from somewhere to nowhere a motion? If you say, No and the thing is no longer in its place, how can it not be motion? If you say, yes, then it means you don't have to know where something has gone or its new place before you say it has moved. You might find some quotes from Newton on motion in my essay interesting.

May all the best things come your way,

Akinbo

Dear Hector,

I didn't mean in that business sense of rating for I know that men of your sort are not interested in rating to your essay; but, however, it is my obligation to rate your essay because it is written with originality behind its back ground and I am doing injustice to my self if I don't rate your essay; it is in this sense I asked whether you are interested in rating my essay. Please be in touch in future too. I too have rated your essay more favorably.

Thanks for your response to my plea and wish you best of luck.

Sreenath

Dear Hector,

Interesting essay.

If we don't know what the absolute time is, we have clocks to synchronize our human activities. Atomic clocks are the most accurate time and frequency standards known.

I spent a lot of time understanding what the mesaurement of time means

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/math-ph/0510044

But on our topic of today I wrote

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1789

Time in quantum realm is weird.

Best wishes,

Michel