You do an interesting analysis. Thank you for posting and rating. I confess I have given high scores for quality essays that do not fit my views. I remain partial to those essays that challenge me and teach me.

Darrell,

If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

Jim

8 days later

Dears Darrell and Tubal,

As I promised in my Essay page, I have read your beautiful and particular Essay. I had a lot of fun, and I think that it should deserve a better attention from the FQXi Community. Thus, I am going to give you an high score.

In particular, I think that the major issue raised by JA himself, by verbatim citing you "The continuous nature of the natural number system as opposed to the quantum discreteness of space and time" is also the core of the black hole information paradox that I discussed in my Essay. Your statements that "Space is not contiguous. Inside-space and outside-space are separated by time" and "Time is not continuous. Past-time and future-time are separated by space"are fascinating. I suggest you to attempt to implement them through a rigorous mathematics in future works.

Cheers,

Ch.

    Your concern for a rigorous mathematics is well founded. I have learned much from participating in this contest. Most of my learning has come from reviewing essays that successfully integrate common explanation with physical and mathematical rigor. Tubal remains a fun read and write for me, but I am learning better how to communicate my approach for imagining two temporal dimensions. Your kind words are a strong encouragement for me to continue my efforts. I look forward to reviewing your essay.

    4 days later

    Hello Darrell,

    Contests FQXi-is primarily a fundamental new ideas. You have an excellent essay, great ideas, great conclusions: «Does it mean science has successfully cornered the market on understanding? Or has human science gotten into a mathematical rut? It is true, further insights can be gleaned, even from within a rut. Maybe it is time for you to climb out of the rut and imagine new possibilities that challenge your foundations.

    ... Has human metaphysics gone amok? Or has human mathematics gone amok? You will figure it out in a bit.» I estimate the" happy nine ". Take a look and vote my essay ... I think we are close in spirit to the research.

    Good luck and best wishes,

    Vladimir

      Thank you for your kind and encouraging words. I look forward to reading your essay. -Darrell

      5 days later

      Dear Darrell,

      Nice essay and great way to make the subject interesting and engaging with aliens! I particularly like that you consider dimensions real in their own right. I think in that case you'd consider my essay possibly worth reading and relevant to yours.

      I think you deserve to have a higher mark, so I hope my rating has helped.

      Best wishes,

      Antony

        Dear Darrell -

        You cleverly point out all the pitfalls and paradoxes of trying to answer foundational questions; of course, evolution itself impels us to carry on ...

        My view is that we need to be able to think in physical (less-abstract) terms about these issues, and all our assumptions need to be revisited as well.

        The way you point out the malleability of our space-time coordinates is very interesting. I myself describe a cosmic paradigm of correlated energy vortices that include an evolving observer who occupies a 'Composite Zone' (space-time) within which his measurements are most viable. I see a lot of this in your treatment of space, time, gravity, and light.

        Another contestant wrote that a thought is a moment that incorporates past, present, and future; I show that since mind, organism, and cosmos are three energy vortices producing their own types of particles - past, present, and future are simply different locations in a system of correlated vortices. The past keeps coming back - while the future is never entirely unexpected. Strange as all this may sound - is it not fundamental to evolution?

        The narrow definition of Bit and It in Wheeler's concept needs to be expanded, a view I think is implicit in what you write - and ultimately Bit and It must be described as correlated.

        As for the questionable use of mathematics in discovering the cosmos - I ask: is not the historical expansion of mathematics into the field of reality a phenomenon that also precisely describes the evolution of the human mind within that field? In other words, we can't help it - we've got to figure it all out: we've conquered the planet, and now we have to conquer the cosmos .... but we must struggle to bring 'real' concepts back into physics - and as I say, this involves reconsidering all our assumptions.

        In conclusion, I agree with you that science moves much more slowly than common wisdom - I believe all discoveries were previously made (and a long time before) by artists, writers, and people living off the land.

        Someone told me that my own work is probably centuries ahead of its time ... strangely, I don't think he meant it as a compliment.

        It was illuminating to read your essay - I have rated it, of course - and I look forward to your views on my paper.

        All the best in the contest,

        John

        John, You've done some thinking in creating this response to my paper. I am not sure evolution is a be-all or end-all notion. Philosophical critiques of progress are abundant. How evolution relates to the second law of thermodynamics needs to be more deeply appreciated. As for conquering the earth, I am not sure the last battle has been waged. The earth may just eliminate us yet.

        I will read and rate your paper. I am expecting it to be an enjoyable and thought-provoking read, based on your comments here.

          Hello Darrell,

          Great fun to read! And not too many equations, which makes it for easy to follow.

          But I dont think binary information, will be a spurious basis for understanding existence. Suppose the binary information is existence/non-existence itself?

          Again I agree that dimensions must be taken as real in their own right. This much I discuss in my essay. I don't think we have any other areas of disagreement. A good rating from me.

          Best regards,

          Akinbo

          Thank you for your comments and brief critique. I will read and rate your essay before the deadline. -Darrell

          Dear Darrell,

          I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

          Regards and good luck in the contest,

          Sreenath BN.

          http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

          Hello Darrell,

          I now there are many pages to visit before we can finally rest - but i do look forward to hearing from you soon!

          John

          Hello Darrell,

          Please visit my forum and give your opinion on my essay and my ideas.

          Best regards,

          Vladimir

          Dear Darrell,

          An 'alien commentator" to express a third party observation, now that is a great approach! I wholeheartedly agree that it is about time we climb out of this rut we find ourselves in and consider new perspectives. Although you have a different approach to the essay topic than I do, I found your analogies inspiring and most worthy of merit.

          I wish you well in the competition.

          Regards,

          Manuel

            Dear Darrell,

            You trying to proof what, and to whom? We are living in some unprecedented period where the people (the majority of them) just don't want to use such ,,unnecessary trifle,, that is called ,,logic,,. And we need something beauty/mystery/unsolvable, around of which we can talk long-empty as much as we like it! That will nice, secure and happy for everybody! My dear! Your sarcasm just killing! That is way I am hurry to rate your work on ,,high,, core. Please just check my approach on this issue, Es text

            I understand your secret - you are working with own brain!

            Happy to meet you.

            Best wishes,

            George

            4 days later

            Darrell,

            Good for Tubal. You capture the perspective of scientists -- "each suspects the other is missing an important insight" and they "stovepipe" -- "correct from within their own discipline."

            Liked your play on the word "bit" at the end: "Has human metaphysics gone amok? Or has human mathematics gone amok? You will figure it out in a bit."

            I tend to criticize much of the same concepts, including "consciousness" determining reality and being present at the BB and the tendency to confuse behavioral characteristics of micro and macro objects in "It's Great to be the King."

            I would like your views on it.

            Thanks for an interesting read.

            Jim