Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to find that my views have crystallized, and that I can now move forward with growing confidence. I cannot exactly say who in the course of the competition was most inspiring - probably it was the continuous back and forth between so many of us. In this case, we should all be grateful to each other.

If I may, I'd like to express some of my newer conclusions - by themselves, so to speak, and independently of the logic that justifies them; the logic is, of course, outlined in my essay.

I now see the Cosmos as founded upon positive-negative charges: It is a binary structure and process that acquires its most elemental dimensional definition with the appearance of Hydrogen - one proton, one electron.

There is no other interaction so fundamental and all-pervasive as this binary phenomenon: Its continuance produces our elements - which are the array of all possible inorganic variants.

Once there exists a great enough correlation between protons and electrons - that is, once there are a great many Hydrogen atoms, and a great many other types of atoms as well - the continuing Cosmic binary process arranges them all into a new platform: Life.

This phenomenon is quite simply inherent to a Cosmos that has reached a certain volume of particles; and like the Cosmos from which it evolves, life behaves as a binary process.

Life therefore evolves not only by the chance events of natural selection, but also by the chance interactions of its underlying binary elements.

This means that ultimately, DNA behaves as does the atom - each is a particle defined by, and interacting within, its distinct Vortex - or 'platform'.

However, as the cosmic system expands, simple sensory activity is transformed into a third platform, one that is correlated with the Organic and Inorganic phenomena already in existence: This is the Sensory-Cognitive platform.

Most significantly, the development of Sensory-Cognition into a distinct platform, or Vortex, is the event that is responsible for creating (on Earth) the Human Species - in whom the mind has acquired the dexterity to focus upon itself.

Humans affect, and are affected by, the binary field of Sensory-Cognition: We can ask specific questions and enunciate specific answers - and we can also step back and contextualize our conclusions: That is to say, we can move beyond the specific, and create what might be termed 'Unified Binary Fields' - in the same way that the forces acting upon the Cosmos, and holding the whole structure together, simultaneously act upon its individual particles, giving them their motion and structure.

The mind mimics the Cosmos - or more exactly, it is correlated with it.

Thus, it transpires that the role of chance decreases with evolution, because this dual activity (by which we 'particularize' binary elements, while also unifying them into fields) clearly increases our control over the foundational binary process itself.

This in turn signifies that we are evolving, as life in general has always done, towards a new interaction with the Cosmos.

Clearly, the Cosmos is participatory to a far greater degree than Wheeler imagined - with the evolution of the observer continuously re-defining the system.

You might recall the logic by which these conclusions were originally reached in my essay, and the more detailed structure that I also outline there. These elements still hold; the details stated here simply put the paradigm into a sharper focus, I believe.

With many thanks and best wishes,

John

jselye@gmail.com

Dear Hector,

Thank you for inviting me to read your essay. If I understand your main premise, it is that we are actually measuring the 'motion' of objects within the universe rather than actually measuring 'time' itself. This is a very deep, fundamental concept. After all, if suddenly, everything in the universe completely froze into complete and utter stillness, what 'time' would it be? There would be no such thing as 'time' if NOTHING WHATSOEVER MOVED. So I think you have made an extremely interesting observation.

I hope I have understood you correctly. If not, please clarify it for me. I admire your thinking and appreciate the fact that you wrote on a deep and complex subject what is for you, a second language.

I wish you the best in the future.

Sincerely,

Ralph

Dear Waldo:

You understood, but if you want to clarified the subject a little more.a) you should forget about "time" this is now just a word without definition or empiric meaning that came to us from primitive men, has not physical existence. What primitive men and us do is just with "constant" "uniform" "regular" motion, which was celestial motions, or now clocks, we do measure all "NO constant" movements which are part and integrates every change and transformation (impossible without motion) of ourselves or of things that surround us. As Einstein said space, time, event are just men creation and tools of thought. We should always remember that "constant" motion means motion always at the same speed, "uniform" with no change, this kind of motion characterize the sun, or the hour hand of our clock. I we read with atention more than once the essay, we will find out new things. Thank you for reading it, and I am glad you enjoy it.

Best whishes

Héctor

Hi Héctor,

I see you didn't understand my comment above. When I initially tried to read your essay the link didn't work to download the PDF.

I was trying to help as I thought it would mean nobody could read it. Glad it works now!

Nice essay - I rate it highly now. I like your points on observation. Please take a look at mine if you get the chance.

Best wishes,

Antony

Dear Dr Gianni

I read with great interest you post on my essay and also your contribution to this contest.

It seems we have a lot of perceptions in common regarding time, if you attentively have read my essay (topic 1810) you could have perceived that I am introducing the "Eternal Now" which solves one of the problems of continuity.

And also we agree upon that time is just a clockwork with reference of the human being, I am explaining this by saying : "the reference of reference is consciousness"

I am an "old" architectural engineer and like you I do not understand too much of mathematics , but for a "real" understanding it is my opinion that no formula's are needed.

I liked very much your approach and gave it a good rating , which I hope you did mine and if not pls do so), if you are interested my former essays (topic 913 and 1370) were published (also in print) in the "Journal of Consciousness Exploration and Research" Vol 3 No 10 (2012) as : "FOUNDATION OD REALITY : TOTAL SIMULTANEITY" and "A METAPHYSICAL CONCEPT OF CONSCIOUSNESS" (http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/264 (and 265) , there is also an article of Massimo Cocchi which may interest you : "Possible Roles of Cell Membrane & Cytoskeleton in Quantum Aspect of Psychiatry".

best regards

Wilhelmus

Dear hector,

We are at the end of this essay contest.

In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.

Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.

eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.

And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.

Good luck to the winners,

And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.

Amazigh H.

I rated your essay.

Please visit My essay.

Dear Héctor,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay 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).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com