Beyond information: A bit of meaning. by Olaf Dreyer

Sundance Bilson-Thompson

Hi Olaf,

I enjoyed the choice of examples in your essay, in particular that of the orchid and moth, and the fact that a solid as a representation of position doesn't require the external definition of a coordinate system. I'm not so sure that your example of a molecule being moved, while a large crystal remains unmoved was a good one though. A crystal lattice is in effect a single, albeit very large and hence massive, molecule. A small molecule moves more than a large crystal simply because its inertial mass is so small that a modest force will accelerate it noticeably. A large crystal will behave exactly the same way, but with an acceleration that is too small to notice. Perhaps it would have been better to refer to something like the fact that a single water molecule only behaves like a molecule, but several water molecules can form a liquid, a solid, or a gas, each with different emergent behaviours.

I very much liked your speculation about the role of different layers of reality inducting the randomness we observe in quantum mechanics. This is similar to some of my own speculations, that I hope we get to discuss sometime.

Regards,

Sundance

George Kirakosyan

Dear Olaf,

Your essay looks interesting to me because I find there weighty doubt that is - ,,Something goes wrong!,, I has invited you to dialog on this, to be decided together - what can be wrong and what will be right to do (see my post above). However you did not answer! (As well as not answering many of High Professionals!) I am asking myself; way this people saying ,,A,, but they do not want to continued and say ,,B,, and nexts also?

Now I am going rete your work on high score because you says ,,Something is wrong!,,

Best wishes,

George Kirakosyan

Dear Olaf,

Your essay looks interesting to me because I find there weighty doubt that is - ,,Something goes wrong!,, I has invited you to dialog on this matter, to be decided together - what can be wrong and what will be right to do (see my post above). However you did not answer! (As well as not answering to this matter many of High Professionals!) Then I am asking myself; way this people saying ,,A,, but they do not want to continue and to say ,,B,, and nexts too???

Now I am going rete your work on high score because you says honestly ,,Something is wrong!,,

Best wishes,

George Kirakosyan

Cristinel Stoica

Hi, votes are vanishing again.

James Hoover

Olaf,

I believe the essay networks have struck. Your essay deserves a better rating.

Jim

Olaf Dreyer

Dear Jim:

Thanks for that comment! The voting gets really chaotic just before the deadline.

All the best.

Olaf

Sean Gryb

Dear Olaf,

Thanks for the thought provoking essay!

I agree with you on Bit From It!

Hope you are doing well, and it is nice to see you in the competition.

Sean.

Manuel Morales

Olaf,

Sorry for not getting to your excellent essay earlier. But in hindsight, my high support of your essay at this late hour will hopefully hold up.

Cutting to the chase, here's what struck me the most about your essay. Your comment, "We have shown that meaning can be internal but it requires us to give up the idea that our world is pure information." which then led to your conclusion, "Our view of information suggests that there should be a new paradigm of computation that we might call emergent computation." is most profound. I find that dynamic evolution of emergent objects to be reflective of the findings of the recently concluded 12 year experiment I have concluded. So indeed, your assessment has empirical basis.

Well done!

Manuel

Olaf Dreyer

Dear Manuel:

Thank you for your support and the kind words!

I wish I did have more time to look at all the essays but other things kept me from doing that. I am definitely going to have a look at your essay.

All the best

Olaf

Manuel Morales

Hi Olaf,

With only 15 min. left to review and rate my essay, I can't help but wonder if you have reviewed it yet? Please advise.

Thanks,

Manuel

Vladimir Rogozhin

Dear Olaf,

The ideas of John Wheeler, "trouble with physics" and the contest itself FQXi make every researcher to "dig" deep into philosophy. John Wheeler left a good covenant: "Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers".

Very interesting essay, deep analysis to the essential spirit of Descartes, new ideas and eidoses, extremely important, profound conclusions:

«The narrow view of information that was introduced by Shannon served us well during the fast evolution of computer technology in the last _fty years but we think that we are now running up against its limitations. We have already hinted at how our new view of information can be used to see the measurement problem in quantum mechanics in a new light. Other possible applications include philosophy and computer science itself.»

«Our view of information suggests that there should be a new paradigm of computation that we might call emergent computation. This computation will consists of the dynamic evolution of emergent objects. The six characteristics that we have outlined in section III will be present here. In particular the computation will by necessity include random elements and be approximate. Two properties not shared with our current model of computation. The most important aspect of emergent computation will be that the meaning of the objects in the computation is completely internal.»

Best regards,

Vladimir

« Previous Page