Dear Tom, Understood what you meant. Thanks, you are very kind. Best, Leo

Leo,

The universal and timeless nature of KQID is illustrated by your ancient and modern connections. It gives credence to its continuity.

Jim

Dear Leo KoGuan,

As I noted in response to your gracious comment on my page, your Ouroboros equation is a mathematical Qingming Scroll representing universal observing, singing, dancing, and exchanging, as seen over and over in Suzhou festival scenes. Connecting key equations with trigrams is subtle and beautiful. Thank you for this perspective.

And for explaining how, over 5000 years ago, Fu Xi defined relationships between digital information and objects using eight trigrams. You observe in your comment to me that we differ on 'the bit'. I've studied your essay and I believe that you interpret information much as Lorraine Ford does in her essay, which is to say that it is not "information" until it is apprehended as knowledge. As is also clear from your comment to her above, you are comfortable with paradox.

Clearly we agree with Planck and each other on the key metaphysical principle, of conscious and intelligent mind behind existence. I represent this in my essay as primordial field, while you define Qbit as "an infinite being who has the whole consciousness of everything that is, was and will be." Our expressions of physics differ in terminology and interpretation of the key equations but our metaphysics differs little. You say "KQID describes our reality is deeply paradoxical in nature: fiction but real." This is a very interesting statement. I think I understand it, as it relates to the demonstrated reality that, "you are the hero of your own life and the owner of your own destiny ... hacking Existence's operating system according to your own desire."

Your "wave function of information in the form of consciousness" is also very interesting with respect to the wave function I propose in my previous FQXi essay. I am currently studying articles on 'horizons', trying to understand them better.

In summary, we could go through our essays equation by equation and find tremendous overlap, while the interpretations in terms of bits and forms would require extensive merging of vocabularies, as we currently differ in our understanding of key terms. It seems clear to me that the universe we see is a reflection of a metaphysics we share. Thank you for your hymn of praise. May you continue to explore, exploit and play in this magical world.

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Hello again Leo KoGuan,

I wanted to express my agreement with a comment you made on Tom Ray's essay page, that space lives within the realm of time. I observe that for anything to exist, it must possess the property of duration, which alone allows it to have action or to be detected within the material world, for some interval.

While a point or point-like object in space makes sense, a point in spacetime is a pure fiction because - having no extent in space or time - it does not actually exist. Minimally; we can use a 0-brane, which is like a point but exists for an instant. And once spacetime evolves a bit; time is like an ocean, because it holds all of space and all that is within space, which makes it like a mother. But I assert that; at the universe's inception, the role of time was masculine in the causality of spacetime structure.

That is; in order for time to be primal or encompassing, it had to first create the arena for the rest of the process to unfold in, which is traditionally a masculine role, because without time none of the rest could have a persistent existence. Perhaps time is the one who descended to the world of form, to play at becoming, before returning to oneness again - as in the ancient tale retold in my essay. But time is also the first broken symmetry, because it is only the positive evolutive direction which allows processes to unfold and evolution of form to occur.

However as spacetime evolves and the universe of form appears, unfolding the large and small structure of the cosmos, time becomes more and more like the great Mother in whom we all have our being.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

    Dear Armin,

    First, this is clear that our conversations purely for the sake of the truth nothing but the truth, not for the sake of higher rating since both you and I voted each other's essay.

    Thanks for your kind and thoughtful advice according to the "orthodox meme" that controlled unawares minds and the awaken minds as well that you asked me to clarify above.

    Second, I think you are the curious and open minded infinite being like me for whatever reason we are the winners of random genetic lottery that compells us to innovate and create and be the risk takers of our species to expand the boundary of the old to the new greener horizon. We are like those scout honeybees assigned by random genetics shuffling as their jobs to search for a new food source to extend their colony survival time beyond another long and bitter winter. The orthodox meme is pre-KQID and KQID is the new enlightened meme. If I may crow my meme to our Multiverse in my own song and Gangnam style dance like those excited scout bees who advertise their new finding of a new food source, food of new enlightened thought that can whether the bitter winter storm of a different kind like Nuclear Winter or the hot summer of the Green House Effect from our carbon emission or the Carson's Silent Spring or large meteors falling down from the sky etc.both from natural and manmade causes. Orthodox physics meme cannot solve these kind of organizational causes and responds. The orthodox meme like Descrates meme separates body and mind as dualism. This is true also from Newtonian, Mawellian, Einsteinian as well as Bohr's and Wheeler's meme. This meme prevails because it is useful for its moment. Yes, for this moment only. But this orthodox meme is under attact from all fronts from scout hosts who are championing other meme. Orthodox meme is running scare, because its time is running out as this forum is opened for business supported by some radical scout hosts to challenge the orthodox meme that the scout meme of the hosts are openly seaching for a better fresh meme for the survival of the collective hosts. The hosts are ruthlessly more than willing and able to get rid of their old and tired meme that is still clinging to its host for its survival. The time has come.

    Here comes a new fresh meme. KQID meme is monism that Existence is physical in the form of bits-waves function from just one Qbit. It is true: All things are one Qbit! It is a Pythagorean musical tunes in the forms of Einstein complex coordinates (ratios/numbers) This Qbit is one singularity Qbit Multiverse as the manifestation of our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit in KQID relativity as described in the mathematical relationships of ψτ(iLx,y,z, Lm) reality. Lord Keynes explained that his new economic meme was so simple that it can be made into a slogan that "demands create supplies" demolish the old Say's meme that "supplies create demands" that President Reagan tried to revive in his ruling banner of "Supply side" regime but failed. Our world is effectively governed by Keynes meme regime whether you are aware or unaware of it. As he said we all are controlled by long dead man's meme of Keynes, Aristotle, Heraclitus, Fu Xi, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Xuan Yuan, Kongzi, Yang Zhu, Einstein, Copenhagen, etc. Like Keynes meme, KQID meme will have to struggle through the orthodox meme that rejects the new for its own survival. This orthodox meme like Dawkins' selfish genes will replicate themselves from hosts to hosts. The hosts take the Dawkins selfish genes /meme like Mitochondria that cook Oxygen to power our actions, because this meme is proovenly good for the host. This meme survives in billion of years. It is true that the host has to escape from its orthodox meme kidnapper to adopt a new one. This is extremely difficult to do as Planck explained that any new paradigm in physics had to wait out until the old hosts of the old paradigm died out buried with their orthodox meme. The new paradigm meme has to live inside of the young hosts. The old meme fight with its red tooth and claws literally for its survival to stay in the host as the living not as the dead. That is why the orthodox meme controls the education of the young to ensure the orthodox meme is being taught. The meme guardians excludes all dangerous meme inside and outside of the school and country. It kills if it must. It does not normally kill because it is bad for its meme. We are witnessing orthodox meme causes conflicts all over the world. Wars are meme wars. We all know orthodox meme kill the non-believers and those who tried to escaoe from its strong meme grip in their minds are normally looking for trouble. For example, Smolin told us before that only string theorist could get academic jobs. This environment is bad for physics. Can you believe this could happen in physics, science for the truth? Furthermore, most hosts are mostly unaware that they are waging proxy wars on behalf of their orthodox meme. If they are aware of it, then they are waging wars consciously under the flag of their meme. They are the leaders who benefited from its power/authorithy, financially or simply humbly livelihood. They are proud to demoralize, defang and if necessary take out their opponents' life force. However, I believe KQID meme will run our world now or later because this meme is necessary to solve our current and near future intractable problems. Good idea like good food cannot be contained, it will spread out like wild fire. KQID meme offers a new enlightened operating system (OP) for everyone including aliens, cyborgs, robots etc. This OP will offer Guth's ultimate free-lunch economic system that everyone in which its citizen shall have free education, free health care and free material wealth. Yes, you don't need to work unless you want to. Because our work is our identity. Yes one wants to work for one's own identity and sanity like what we are doing now in this forum. Simply crazy. Do so much works for free and subjected oneself to humiliations and insults from bad as well as good meaning persons. Yes we do it because we must. We are the excited scout bees searching for a better pasture for the survival of our own species. We do it as our labors of love. We do it for ourselves as well as for our species. KQID meme is for our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit that means for ourselves as the Qbit and us are one. The Wang Yaming's unity of Giving first Taking later qbit.

    Amin.

    Yours truly,

    Leo KoGuan

    Dear Armin, Meme is simply KQID ψI( CTE), the bits-waves functions of consciousness (C), time (T) and energy (E). This meme ψI( CTE) is living in the i3D of time/space in Lm time of KQID relativity ψτ(iLx,y,z, Lm) Amen, Leo KoGuan

    Dear all.

    Wang Yaming's one bit

    Fu Xi heaven triagram ☰ as the element that are creative, innovative and proactive forces that gives A bits first, whereas the earth trigram ☷ as the element that are receptive, flowing and reactive forces that takes and converts A into S bits later to complete a cycle. The heaven ☰ is doing the first Giving and the earth ☷ is doing the first Taking: Existence emerges. The act of Giving is the beginning of the Taking and the act of Taking is completing the Giving. The Giving first and Taking later principle is the unity of Wang Yangming's one bit. The Giving and Taking collapse the bits-wave function of Giving and Taking. This collapse of the bits-waves function ψI(CTE) means the breaking of symmetry of the state of equilibrium before the Giving and the state of equilibrium before the Taking. This ψI(CTE) is bits-waves function of consciousness (C), time (T) and energy (E). This ψI(CTE) is one Qbit that can be many as our Multiverse ψτ( iLx,y,z, Lm) as long as it does not violate the conservation laws and ΔS = 0. The breaking of symmetry yield at least one or more bit/s as its manifestation of the creation and distribution of new bit/s. if the Giving and Taking do not yield any bit/s, then the act of Giving is not consummated by the act of Taking, thus, there is no collapse of the bits-waves function and no information gain. See excellent article on information gain hypothesis by Pfister and Wehner, arXiv:1210.0194v3. A bit means information gain. Information gain means the breaking of the symmetry from the act of Giving and Taking consummated in the meeting of the mind as well as the actual Exchange of equal value from the respective giver and taker. (jurisprudence of contract law). The act of Giving andTaking are aborted and not consummated without breaking the symmetry and hereby no information gains. This is the KQID simple mechanism of Creation and Distribution of Everything.

    Respectfully,

    Leo KoGuan

      Dear Sreenath, I will look at your essay soon. Thanks, Leo KoGuan

      Dear Leo KoGuan,

      Your perception and interpretation of "our" reality touches me.

      There are a lot of paralels with my own perception, only you add the eastern wisdom, while I start from the pre-socratic philosophers.

      When i am reading your KQID it is a vibration that touches me so I would like to ask you to read my earlier articles that are published in the Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, volume 3 Issue 10, november 2012 (in print) you can find it on the Web on http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/265 "A METAPHYSICAL CONCEPT OF CONSCIOUSNESS"

      and

      http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/264 "FOUNDATION OF REALITY: TOTAL SIMULTANEITY"

      Perhaps in the future we will be able to combine the east and the west...

      respectfully

      Wilhelmus

      Dear Wilhelmus,

      You are so kind!

      Yes, I will read and make comments on them. Yes, that would be my pleasure to work with you to combine the East and the West wisdoms into one comprehensive theory that can be falsified and verified, and more importantly that can save our species from extinction. And that can enhance and realize our Ancestor Qbit's dreams and aspirations. That is my dream. That is why I am participating in this FQXI great contest of ideas.

      Yours truly,

      Leo KoGuan

      Dear Leo KoGuan,

      You have made marvelous effort to explain whole of current physics, whether it is quantum physics or classical physics or cosmology on the basis of the concept of KQID and this KQID is having mythological and historical back ground in Chinese philosophy. I appreciate your imagination in this regard. However, I found one similarity in the three elements of Fu Xi heaven trigram (creative, innovative and proactive forces) and the Indian Trinity (3 Gods). These three Gods also do the same job as heaven trigram. The other factor that attracted me is the number 1.776 x 10^14 = A / S and this number is a dimensionless number and it appears in my work on quantum-gravity (QG) and this number, 1.776 x 10^14 = (pi/2) x (G bar / 2G); where G = Newton's gravitational constant = 6.67 x 10^-8 in CGS units, and G bar = 1.5 x 10^7 in CGS units. That is the value of G bar = 1 /G and G bar is the QG constant. You find this in my essay, in previous year's (2012) FQXI essay contest (Questioning the Foundations: Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?, Title of the Essay: The concept of Acceleration in the quantum world is Wrong).

      Thanking you for your very imaginative essay and please go through my essay and post your comments in my thread.

      All the best,

      Sreenath

        Dear Leo,

        I am very glad to see that you know that our conversation here transcends the bounds of this contest. In my opinion, the fact that authors must vote on each other's essays injects a large amount of politics: as a recipient of a compliment, one can not be sure if it is genuine or whether it is meant to just garner a high vote. And if you want to point out a problem in an essay you cannot be sure if this will the other person to retaliate by Down voting your essay. Last year I strongly criticized FQXi for this on their 2012 contest for this, but this year I'm just resigned that since this is their they, they can set the evaluation criteria however they fit, author voting seems to me like a highly misguided approach. You might wonder why I still participated. The answer is already contained in your comment above: when someone wants to introduce a new idea in science, then he will encounter a lot of resistance from people who want to hang on to the "orthodox meme", especially if the new idea is substantially different and the person comes from outside mainstream. For all the flaws with author voting, this contest is still one of the best ways for such people to expose others to their ideas, and it is still possible that useful exchanges and collaborations happen.

        But let me come back to your work: I agree that in science orthodox memes have a limited lifetime. In the western world, Aristotle's lasted for 2000 years until we had a understanding of what science is, Newton's lasted only about 225 years, and who knows how long the current one will last.

        Introducing a new idea is hard enough, but when the conceptual framework goes beyond science as understood by most of its practitioners it may well be impossible. I think that this independent of how much the proponent of the idea has achieved in other areas and how much money/influence/power that person yields.

        Not too long ago, the physics journals were flooded with glossy, pagelong advertisements for "null physics", a theory of everything by Terence Witt. Witt founded a biomedical company and then sold it for about $150M, so he had the resources to carry out a massive advertising campaign. He even became adjunct faculty at a Florida university (I suspect that he made a large donation to the University).

        However, his null physics does not seem to connect to what we already understand, and to my knowledge there is no experiment to test it. As a result, nobody in the physics community takes his theory seriously except when there is the influence of his money.

        I think a way that your situation is very different from his is that I perceive a strong motivation underneath to help people. You say that you want for people to identify with their work, but I think you mean that you want for people to identify with their passions. The reason I think this is because you gave the people who entered this contest as an example, but for (most of) the people participating here is not work, it is the pursuit of their passions. Like you, I think it is great for a person to have at least one passion. It fills life with purpose and meaning. When you pursue something with passion, it is no longer work. So I agree that just helping people to find their passions if they don't already have one is to help them. I can tell that you have a great passion about KQID, but my concern is that if your dream of its receiving scientific recognition and acceptance the way quantum theory and relativity are currently recognized is not realized, then the disappointment about that might also negatively impact your noble goal of helping people.

        Even in this essay contest, I can tell that if there is the prospect of a reward, some people will tell you what they think you want to hear instead of what they really think. I can only imagine that for someone in your position this is magnified manifold. You are obviously a very accomplished, smart and adroit person, but you are still only human. Your enthusiasm and passion for KQID may lead you to give more weight to believing those who think that by telling you that KQID is, say, on the same footing as quantum theory and relativity as a scientific theory, they may gain favors from you. I will give you my honest opinion, even though I think this may not be what you want to hear:

        In order for KQID to be accepted as a fundamental scientific theory of the world, two main requirements need to be met. First, it needs to mathematically connect to our existing theories. Historically, every new theory that came to be accepted by scientists could reproduce the old theories within their own more limited domains. Can you derive the Einstein Field equations or the standard model Lagrangians in the limit in which general relativity and the standard model, respectively? I understand that you see your equation as so much more fundamental that it transcends the field of physics, but if that is really the case, it should be possible to derive this in some limit. That is because if a new theory is inconsistent with an old theory in its domain and an experiment supports the old theory, the new theory will not be accepted. This brings me to the second requirement. You mention that KQID makes testable predictions, but it is not clear to me that the technology is quite there. Is there an experiment that can be done right now to test it? Note, that while it is good if a new theory produces known results, but it is much more compelling if the experiment tests something that has not been tested before, and for which the old theory gives a new prediction from the old one.

        Unless these two requirements are met, I think KQID will suffer the same fate as null physics. In your case I think that would be a pity because the central theme of the associated philosophy of helping people find and pursue their

        passions is something with which I find myself in complete agreement and think would be a valuable contribution to society. That's why I suggested that even though you see KQID as a total package, it might be better to separate out the physics part from the philosophical.

        All the best,

        Armin

        Dear Armin,

        Thanks for the honest advise that I know you are right. I plan to train new young scholars with my system, hopefully they will do well in their respective fields of specialization like physics, economics and law. I do things my own way, this will not change because I don't want to change my style. I let others be themselves and I genuinely respect them and believe they know what are good for them in the long run. If my theory is right and USEFUL in helping our species to survive, our species will find their ways to adopt the idea into their systems within the next 100 years or even longer. They may or may not acknowledge my contributions but ideas get their own ways to find receptive hosts. I do know for sure that my ideas have been very influential already at this moment and shall be even more so in some countries. Ideas ψI(CTE) as bits-waves function are alive embedded with consciousness, time and energy, not self-conscious like human being but in their own ways. Powerful Ideas contain powerful consciousness (C), time (T) and energy(E). KQID also describes Human being as idea/bits that cannot die because, not a single bit shall be deleted in our Multiverse. While alive physically, we are superb evolved being as the direct manifestation/incarnation of our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit. We are vulnerable yes, right now. But we shall live as long as we wish, we cannot die or be killed unless we want to by law. If we die by accident, we can be revived in better condition and form. In some cases, a society will refuse to allow us to die even if we want to or at least his/her memory with his/her idea like Xuan Yuan/Fu Xi/ Einstein/Jesus/ Mohammed/Kongzi/ Buddha/Brahma(idea), etc. simply because these ideas are useful for that society. If not the society of the living will kill those ideas by neglect. This is the law of nature. Those ideas will be in dormant until such time they are needed to rescue the living from a disaster. You see this drama unfolding under our noses everyday. Most people do not consciously aware even thrir own philosophy that govern their every yes and no answer to a challenge/opportunity because they do not need to know but they do know subconsciously that has evolved for billions years on earth or even trillions years in our Multiverse already according to KQID, and they are superb actors because they are our Ancestors Qbit in action. I do have a lot of faith in humanity because we are our Ancestor Qbit in action. Separation between ideas and man is very thin one, since We all are ideas.

        Thanks for your advice and asking stimulating questions as you are the seeker of our species,

        Leo KoGuan

        Professor KoGuan,

        Please forgive me. I am a decrepit old realist. I read your fine essay about the oriental abstract universe twice, may I please make a comment about it? You wrote; "Following Newton's idea of absolute time and space, KQID postulates the absolute digital time T and absolute digital length K L as follows:"

        As I have pointed out in my essay BITTERS: The real Universe only deals in absolutes. All information is abstract and all and every abstract part of information is excruciatingly difficult to understand. Information is always selective, subjective and sequential. Reality is not and cannot ever be selective subjective and sequential.

        One (1) real unique Universe can only be eternally occurring in one real here and now while perpetually traveling at one real "speed" of light through one real infinite dimension once. One is the absolute of everything. (1) is the absolute of number. Real is the absolute of being. Universe is the absolute of energy. Eternal is the absolute of duration. Occurring is the absolute of action. Here and now are absolutes of location and time. Perpetual is the absolute of ever. Traveling is the absolute of conveyance method. Light is the absolute of speed. Infinite dimension is the absolute of distance and once is the absolute of history.

        Can we Wheeler it sir?

        Is the real Universe simple? Yes.

        Is KQID simple? No.

        I do hope you have good fortune in the competition.

        Joe

        Dear Joe,

        I tried to relate KQID with your idea that everything happens once. At the bottom, everything is simple. We all know that even a simple living system like an amoeba or even our own cell is a complex piece of work that has evolved for billions of years on earth and if KQID is correct that it has evolved for trillions trillions years in our Multiverse. However, the mechanism of creating and distributing of this complex phenomena is simple at the bottom. It is based on what I defined as the Wang Yangming one bit of Giving first and Taking later as the unity of knowledge and action. I only say that KQID agrees with your idea that everything happens only once every absolute digital time T T≤10^-1000seconds. Each T contains all Minkowski events in our Multiverse. In analogy, one may compare it with our heart beat, each our heart beat is unique and only happens once for each beat. The beat itself is repeated if not this unit idea as the living dies. Because without exchanges of bits/ideas taking in the "good" fresh nutrient bits and getting rid of the "bad" waste bits, this living system dies. However, while alive this human lives beat by beat of his heart. Each beat is unique. Each embodies the whole human being with complex bits/atoms arrangements that combines the new and old bits. It is also like our breathing of air, each breath is unique and each breath creates and distribute a unique human being with difference bits arrangement that only happens once every breath. each breath renews and resynchronizes our living system. Each breath is the Giving first and Taking later complex activities. The mechanism of Giving and Taking is simple but the actual activities of Giving and Taking are complex. The process is simple but the outcome in the living is complex. We have known that complexities derived from simplicity.

        Joe, you are not "a decrepit old realist" but you are a great outside of the box thinker. You are a Greek Cynic and a great human being. It is my honor to converse with you. I hope my explanation above satisfies your realist self. I would like to think myself as a realistic dreamer. I believe you are a realistic dreamer because you are in this forum to enlighten all of us. Good work and good fight of ideas. I share your good fight. May you do well in this contest of ideas.

        Best wishes,

        Leo KoGuan

          Dear Leo KoGuan,

          Thanks for your response to my comments on your fine essay and I am eager to hear your full comments on my essay. I too would like to rate your imaginative and empirically minded essay with equal favor.

          sincerely,

          Sreenath

          Hello Leo KoGuan,

          Your theory sound interesting. Can you use KQID to answer these 4 questions:

          "If you wake up one morning and dip your hand in your pocket and 'detect' a million dollars, then on your way back from work, you dip your hand again and find that there is nothing there...

          1) Have you 'elicited' an information in the latter case?

          2) If you did not 'participate' by putting your 'detector' hand in your pocket, can you 'elicit' information?

          3) If the information is provided by the presence of the crisp notes ('its') you found in your pocket, can the absence of the notes, being an 'immaterial source' convey information?

          Finally, leaving for the moment what the terms mean and whether or not they can be discretely expressed in the way spin information is discretely expressed, e.g. by electrons

          4) Can the existence/non-existence of an 'it' be a binary choice, representable by 0 and 1?"

          Answers can be in binary form for brevity, i.e. YES = 1, NO = 0, e.g. 0-1-0-1.

          Best regards,

          Akinbo

            Honorable Professor KoGuan,

            I am deeply gratified by the exemplary graciousness of your reply to my comment. To know that you agree with me that my assessment of reality as being unique, once is extremely important to me. Respectfully sir, real unique, once cannot be complex and it cannot have evolved. Abstraction is not unique, which is why abstraction can appear more than once and only abstraction can evolve. The only thing the physicists appear to me to be doing is cannibalizing each other's quantum ideas.

            To all, I repost this comment here.

            Dear Carlo,

            You are my model in doing theoretical physics especially your relationship interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. You made a bold declaration: "I suggest that this incorrect notion is the notion of observer-independent state of a system (or observer-independent values of physical quantities). I reformulate the problem of the "interpretation of quantum mechanics" as the problem of deriving the formalism from a few simple physical postulates. I consider a reformulation of quantum mechanics in terms of information theory. All systems are assumed to be equivalent, there is no observer-observed distinction, and the theory describes only the information that systems have about each other; nevertheless, the theory is complete." arXiv:quant-ph/9609002v2 Magnifico! I salute you.

            I love and in full agreement with what you wrote below and I quote: "And Democritus uses then a powerful metaphor: like twenty letters of an alphabet can be combined in innumerable manners to give rise to comedies or tragedies, similarly the atoms can be combined in innumerable manners to give rise to the innumerable phenomena of the world....Not so after the discovery of quantum theory. If we measure the energy of a harmonic oscillator and we obtain the result that this is between E1 and E2, (in KQID E1 = A (pc) and E2 = S(mc^2)) then there is only a finite number of possible values that the energy can have. This is given by the area of the region of phase space included between the two surfaces E1 and E2, divided by the Planck constant.... The statue that Aristotle wants to be made of more than atoms, is indeed made by more than atoms: it is something that pertains to the interaction between the stone and brain of Aristotle, or ours....To go back to Democritus metaphor: atoms are like an alphabet, but an immense alphabet so rich to be capable of reading itself and thinking itself. With Democritus worlds: "The Universe is change, life is opinion that adapt it- self".

            KQID conceptualizes Erosverse interpretation that is similar to yours as quoted above except that KQID is based on transaction of Giving first Taking later to create and distribute Wang Yaming's bits that encompasses the relationships of core-self with self, family, community, mankind and Multiverse. In this worldview interpretation, Existence including our Multiverse, us and our God/s are properly pregnant within. In KQID, everything emerges from one singularity Qbit Multiverse that projects Einstein complex coordinates( Einstein triangles similar to Pythagorean triangles) on the event horizon of our Multiverse as Minkowski Null geodesics Lm in zeroth dimension that instantaneously project those coordinates in the bulk ψτ(iLx,y,z, Lm) as the KQID relativity Multiverse. In brief: All things are one Qbit. As a bonus, KQID calculates the dark energy of our Multiverse 1.523 x 10-153Pm/Pv. and how many bits are they in our Multiverse 6.3 x 10^153 bits. I believe the only theory out there that has done so.

            Other examples, pertaining to our universe: KQID estimates the first burst of the Bit Bang rather than the Big Bang, with the temperature of about 7.8 x10^126K within 1.43478x10^-147 seconds with the first wavelength λ of the Bit Bang = 1.43478x10^-147 s x c = 4.3x10^-139 meter. These numbers are far higher and lower than the existing standard model. KQID predicts and calculates when our universe will collapse, rather than forever expanding based on the existing model. KQID predicts that when A = S, our universe will inevitably start its contraction and acceleration into a Bit Crush, rather than a Big Crush, hundreds of trillion years sometimes later.

            Here is KQID Wang Yaming's one bit

            Fu Xi heaven triagram ☰ as the element that are creative, innovative and proactive forces that gives A bits first, whereas the earth trigram ☷ as the element that are receptive, flowing and reactive forces that takes and converts A into S bits later to complete a cycle. The heaven ☰ is doing the first Giving and the earth ☷ is doing the first Taking: Existence emerges. The act of Giving is the beginning of the Taking and the act of Taking is completing the Giving. The Giving first and Taking later principle is the unity of Wang Yangming's one bit. The Giving and Taking collapse the bits-wave function of Giving and Taking. This collapse of the bits-waves function ψI(CTE) means the breaking of symmetry of the state of equilibrium before the Giving and the state of equilibrium before the Taking. This ψI(CTE) is bits-waves function of consciousness (C), time (T) and energy (E). This ψI(CTE) is one Qbit that can be many as our Multiverse ψτ( iLx,y,z, Lm) as long as it does not violate the conservation laws and ΔS = 0. The breaking of symmetry yield at least one or more bit/s as its manifestation of the creation and distribution of new bit/s. if the Giving and Taking do not yield any bit/s, then the act of Giving is not consummated by the act of Taking, thus, there is no collapse of the bits-waves function and no information gain. See excellent article on information gain hypothesis by Pfister and Wehner, arXiv:1210.0194v3. A bit means information gain. Information gain means the breaking of the symmetry from the act of Giving and Taking consummated in the meeting of the mind as well as the actual Exchange of equal value from the respective giver and taker. (jurisprudence of contract law). The act of Giving andTaking are aborted and not consummated without breaking the symmetry and hereby no information gains. This is the KQID simple mechanism of Creation and Distribution of Everything. For example, the FAPAMA Qbit exchanges among the Giving first photons A and Taking later gravitons S that gives electron its mass and the interaction among photons A gives electron its activities. The interactions between electrons and protons/neutrons give rise to atoms, and so on.

            KQID FAPAMA Qbit unifies Democritus's bit/qbit worldview, Plato's Idea and Aristotle's form that you mentioned in your essay.

            Can you kindly comment on my relationships/transactional of Giving first Taking later principle as the origin of Existence as stated above?

            Thanks for your superb contribution in this forum and I rate it accordingly. If you have time please comment and rate my essay Child of Qbit in time.

            Thanks,

            Leo KoGuan

            view post as summary