Knowing One from the Other by Jonathan J. Dickau

Jonathan!

I start to read your site. Very interesting!

Hi Jonathan,

Very interesting and fun essay. I think, were there not such a strict page limit, it would have been interesting to see a deeper study of material v. information from the standpoint of culture. I think that there may be some insights lurking there into how we reach conclusions, particularly in science.

Your points about mathematics are similar to those made by a colleague of mine. He always says that it is about as close to the Platonic ideal as one can get. I guess I just have always seen it in a reverse sort of way, but it doesn't necessarily mean I'm right. I tend to think, though, that while it is clear that some mathematics is clearly "discovered" (counting, arithmetic, apparently even simple algebra according to a recent study of babies), some is "invented" in the sense that a set of logical rules are set down and followed to their conclusion where the rules themselves may have been slightly arbitrary.

Ian

Hi Jonathan,

really liked it. I think yours is the most 'focused on the question' essay I have read so far. Although there is a lot of different ideas in there from child development, to culture, language and fractal forms and platonic ideals the relevance to the question is clear throughout. So in reply, no I don't think it is noisy. You did a really good job of examining the question from many angles and the dance analogy works very well.I especially liked the way you assigned roles to different aspects of physics, not forgetting energy as director.

I did think when I got to concluding remarks I had nearly reached then end but it seems you still had much more to say and were maybe holding back the best till last.Wishing you the best luck, your essay deserves to do very well.

Hi dear Jonathan,

I have just read your intriguing Essay as I promised you in my Essay page. I find that it is very well written and beautiful. I like your comparing the wave/particle duality with the it/bit duality. Your statement that there are very young children behaving like "little scientists" can be adapted to my little son David, who will be 3 years old on next September. I am always surprised about the number of questions that he currently asks to me and about is reasoning. Last week, my wife told him: "Hey David, look, an aeroplane is leaving!" Then David replied her: "Mum, aeroplane does not leave, aeroplane takes off!" I completely agree with your point of view that we must look upon the basic science issues with child-like eyes again. Science is a play for me, and this is the reason because it is also my job. Do you think that your statement "Determining unambiguously whether a system is creating information or is created by information is thus virtually impossible - as the two modes are so deeply intertwined" is compatible with my one "Information tells physics how to work. Physics tells information how to flow"?. I find compatibility when you also claims that "It is presumed there can be no "It" beyond the Planck density, but clearly the primal basis of information can and must still be well-defined - even in the matter- free regime of the Planck era - for the universe to exist. So information reigns supreme, in the universe before matter appears." Does this imply a breakdown of the it/bit duality in the Primordial Era? In any case, this is an excellent Essay which gave me lots of fun. Therefore, I am going to give you a high score.

Cheers and have fun,

Ch.

Dear Jonathan,

Pardon my starting another thread as this matter is unrelated to your essay.

Is it being implied by the relational view of space and as suggested by Mach's principle that what decides whether a centrifugal force would act between two bodies in *constant relation*, would not be the bodies themselves, since they are at fixed distance to each other, nor the space in which they are located since it is a nothing, but by a distant sub-atomic particle light-years away in one of the fixed stars in whose reference frame the *constantly related* bodies are in circular motion?

NOTE THAT in no other frame can circular motion between the bodies be described in this circumstance except in the 'observing' sub-atomic particle.

Regards,

Akinbo

*I will come back here for answer.

Hello Jonathan,

Thanks for the reference to Arthur Young - I am working out the details of the correlation between Mind and Cosmos at this time, and I will definitely read Young a little later. I think you'll find that I've cleared the ground for this next phase in my essay. I very much look forward to hearing your comments soon!

Best Regards,

John.

Hi Jonathan,

I enjoyed reading your essay, it is nicely written and well reasonned.

Also, thank you for posting the extract from Feynman's lecture above.

"I think it is somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature"

I can't agree more and I boldly propose that Time=(Length)2 and

Mass=(Length)2/Time=Dimensionless

and therefore Energy = 1/(Length)2.

Cheers,

Patrick

Dear Jonathan,

Congratulations for your excellent essay. I enjoyed reading it.

Your statement on p. 9: "Physics should admit the possibility for unobserved realities that serve to generate what is observed" puts a link to my essay.

Indeed; I bypass the question "It from Bit or Bit from It?" by treating matter ("mass") and information ("g-information") as interrelated constituent elements of nature. I show how the introduction of the quantity "g-information" in physics can explain the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravitation.

I postulate that any material object manifests itself in space by emitting - at a rate proportional to its rest mass - "informatons": entities that run away with the speed of light carrying information about the position and the state of movement of the emitter. I identify the expanding cloud of informatons generated by a material object as its gravitational field, and I explain the gravitational force as a reaction of an object on the disturbance of the characteristic symmetry of its "own" field by the flux of informatons generated by other objects.

May I invite you to go through my essay?

I wish you all the best in the contest.

All the best,

Antoine.

Jonathan,

"While it is quite clear that information of some nature does give rise to the universe of form, thus fulfilling Wheeler's vision of "It from Bit," this does not prevent "Bit from It" modalities from unfolding at the same time. So indeed they are both true outlooks, but the meaning of the story can only be seen by considering the interplay of the two - a Cosmic Dance."

I think your essay is sort of a Cosmic Dance, perhaps a waltz that smoothly glides us through the mysterious question we encounter.

I deal with the same issues but with more of a two-step, for example, saying consciousness is not possible -- without religion, sorcery or metaphysics -- at the time of the BB and not until 1 billion years later, being without a body.

There is poetry to your ancient tale and meaning in your words. I hope that "It's Great to be the King" does as well in your eyes.

Jim

Dear Jonathan,

I haven't heard from you regarding your comments on my essay in my thread. So, please, do the same and inform me in order to rate your elegantly written essay.

Best wishes,

Sreenath