Gene,

In some of my other essays I make a basic point about time, which runs significantly counter to most conventional thinking, that it is not the present moving from past to future, which physics distills to measures of duration, but the process by which future becomes past. For instance, rather than the earth traveling Newton's flow, or Einstein's dimension from yesterday to tomorrow, tomorrow becomes yesterday because the earth rotates. Now not only is spacetime based on measures of duration and so much of current cosmology, but history and thus civilization is based on that narrative vector, so I know I'm going against the flow with this. Yet if time is an effect of action, it explains alot. Rather than trying to figure out how to transition from a determined past to a probabilistic future and assuming the future must already be determined, since the laws of physics only yield one outcome of many possibilities, or taking the opposite tack and considering the past remains probabilistic and branches out into many worlds, with every option, we can just accept the fate of the cat is determined by actual actions and then recedes into the past.

Now this makes time an effect of action, similar to temperature. While we think of temperature as a cumulative effect, it is based on lots of individual actions. With time we measure lots of individual actions, but wonder what the universal rate is, ie, Newton's absolute flow. The problem is there really is just the cumulative effect of these separate actions. Thus it is like temperature, lots of particular actions adding up to a larger effect. One is rate of change and the other is level of activity, so time is to temperature, what frequency is to amplitude.

Now you may not agree with this, but suspend judgement while I tie it into our current discussion;

Cosmology is flat, as the positive curvature of gravitational contraction is balanced by the negative curvature of universal expansion. So where is the additional expansion for the universe to grow, if this effect is balanced by gravity? We can only measure the light of distant galaxies that hasn't been drawn into gravity wells, so it only travels the 'high ground' of 'expanded space,' not the gravitational 'low ground.' Not to mention that Big Bang theory says those distant galaxies will recede over time, but that implies the speed of light is not affected by this expansion, so it can't be a relativistic effect, since C is not maintained relative to this expanded space. Thus it's only increasing distance in terms of lightyears. Now we are at the center of our view of the universe, so it makes more sense that redshift is an optical effect and in essence is the cosmological constant to balance the effect of gravity and so explain why space is ultimately flat.

What this means, is that rather than the universe beginning 13.8 billion years ago, with all we have to explain, from how it began, to inflation, to dark energy, it is instead a cosmic convection cycle of expanding radiation and contracting mass.

Among other things, this goes to the relationship between energy and information, as well as past and future. Energy is that light expanding out, radiating away from old forms and eventually coalescing into new ones, as the information/structure becomes ever more dense and defined, eventually to break down and radiate away, or be shot out the galactic poles.

With gravity as an overall effect of energy coalescing into mass, rather then just a property of mass. This explains why the outer parts of galaxies spin as fast as the inner parts, since it is a vortex of the radiation, far out into intergalactic space starting the process and eventually falling into this whirlpool and why the outermost stars lack heavy elements.

Now I do get lots of grief for this and prefer not to dig the hole any deeper than necessary, so think of it as a form of story of how all the parts might fit together and not all the ways it conflicts with established models.

I put this up to show we are likely quite far apart on some fundamental ideas, but the quest is the same, to try and fit all the pieces together and not have too many imagined elements, such as multiverses, to explain it.

I think a big part of the strength of information as a field of study, is that our knowledge is expanding exponentially, yet when you look at how society functions, those controlling the energy, control the information. Bankers and oilmen tell politicians what to do.

Now a bunch of horses need my attention, because most of the other people are doing weekend stuff and I'm the designated worker.

Regards,

John M

Thanks John,

I appreciate the time taken for such a detailed and thorough response. We are, in many ways, on the same page with how society needs to change, to support human survival and the evolution or development of a better way. First we need to survive long enough for that positive change to happen, which is by no means automatic.

More later,

Jonathan

Jonathan,

That there are no 100 percent guarantees is a fact of nature and in some ways, is a good thing. That reset button is part of the process. It makes one go under the surface, so to speak. It makes you get into that sense of all. The spiritual DNA.

Regards,

John M

The present state of cosmology is very confused so no one has a basis to give you grief. The problems I see are: No one really knows what space and time are. We only can see 4% of what is apparently out there. We really don't know what dark matter and dark energy are. The standard model has three sets of particles, not one. Many believe in inflation but where.why does it stop? etc. etc.

I spent a serious amount of time on WMAP results and primordial nucleosynthesis and find both full of constants that they don't admit to.

I wrote a paper proposing a fundamental gravitational theory but no one seems to care.

    Gene,

    I originally got interested in physics as a way to make sense of how society functions, but then I found the rules of how society functions determine a lot of how physics as a field of study has evolved, what is understood and what can be discussed.

    There has to be that conceptual foundation and yet prior knowledge is necessarily more limited than current knowledge, so these rules and models get laid down and then become the filter through which subsequent information is processed. Then the better the models get, the longer their flaws go undetected and the more committed the society of physics gets to them. So the process then has to get that much further off the tracks before it breaks down enough to do a complete enough review. As I keep arguing, we need to think of time, not in terms of the point of the present 'moving' from past to future, but the physical dynamic turning future into past. While it seems simple enough, it does undermine the physical premise of spacetime, even if the math still works, so I may as well be talking another language.

    The math of epicycles worked quite well too, but the physical premise of giant cosmic gearwheels proved unnecessary.

    I would have to say up front that understanding gravity is beyond my paygrade, so I tend to avoid discussions of it, because as with most topics in physics, one could spend a lifetime trying to learn all the details. My personal view of gravity is that it is an effect of energy coalescing into mass and as such is part of the broad spectrum of causes, not one particular force. Much as releasing energy from mass creates expansion and pressure, be it nuclear, chemical, structural, entropy, etc, the amount of energy occupies more space relative to the equivalent amount of mass, so put it in reverse; How does the energy go from intergalactic light to the black hole of crushing pressure. I suspect it's lot of things, from magnetism, to momentum, to structural order, plus all those relations between radiation and subatomic particles we are only scratching the surface of, all working along the spectrum which relativity models as the geometric contraction of space.

    Then there is the topic of this contest, which is in physical terms, a very broad topic, as the diversity of the entries prove.

    Regards,

    John M

    Dear John!

    I liked your essay. It inevitably conveys essential well-formed thoughts which regard and can attract the interest of a broader audience. Your longer comments also are sympathetic for me, due to those also informatively express your wide-scale interest, knowledge and wisdom inside.

    I welcome too, your mentioning the top-down bottom up 'logic', due to it is vital to understand also for the complexity of energy/information transfer in an organism either realized and may be controlled voluntary, consciously or operating only behind naturally balanced.

    (Because I'm an IT expert therefore, this topdown problem much times turns up. When I was a young student in the University I had a heavy debate with my programmer teacher and I questioned: - How should be one able to sketch a plan of a program structurally well organized from top if he has nothing information which kind of basic elements are at his disposal from which he needs then build/write a concrete program? He answered me, that is not necessary to know when planning. I couldn't then agree, so I got fail '1'. Now, I can partially agree theoretically, due to a discretion of my insufficient information given in my question. I did not put there that clause - ... if I were the planner and the programmer in one.) I think, my teacher was partially right in his theoretical statement, and I failed my question. However I think, the fact remains that much problems are raised by this theoretical truth making which have been waving yet in the religious, political, scientific systems for governing successful group organizations. Surely, there need to be stratum of knowledge which ones should have to have to do their works at their proper places, not only for their self-interest but for a broader scale of goods and those works are can be structurally shared even so being been co-working. I think, a planner or leader need to know as much about the bottom up working of the system as how one be able to make a successful guiding plan from top to bottom. Otherwise one can plan system/systems which should work only from top to bottom governed albeit worked out by well-thought out planning systems somehow independent from or completely subordinating the bottom, so probably never fulfilling both can be balanced.

    You also mentioned my favourite viewpoint written in my essay pointing a comparison between a societal organization and a biological working of a human body.

    I think, this similitude as a Universal model is vital finally (or as a renewed starting point)to recognize, however that is also very essential to apprehend and re-consider: - What are our cells pays to each other for their co-working to keep a whole organism healthy? What if when a group of cells or some individual cells not in their right place try to gain dominion over a whole complex?

    At the moment albeit we should be at the start line to recognize the UNIVERSAL model, however until we do not apprehend that too, it is not a right goal (at least beyond reason to achieve ) to overcome ourselves! That is beyond reason to overcome a Universally and unconditionally given well-working, self-sustaining NATURE.

    All what any religious message could convey - The LIFE, THE EXISTENCE IS UNCONDITIONALLY GIVEN AND IMMORTAL! NOT ONLY THE SPIRITUAL BEINGNESS, THE FORMLESS SELF IS IMMORTAL, BUT THE WELL BALANCED NATURAL PHYSICALLY ARRANGED NATURE from its bottom to top IS IMMORTAL! At which apex can be the UNIVERSAL NATURALLY ORGANISED MAN, who is able to recognize, apprehend himself, and can keep governed his existence from top to bottom well balanced! IT NEED NOT TO BE PROVED only EXPERIENCED!

    The questions are not WHO is or WHO are the GODs! Whether he/she has male or female characteristic. Some religious interpretations really can be outdated and sometimes seriously goal oriented. But the real message behind unequivocal for every one of us!

    As Aristotle ever said, and I can agree - THE GOD is - the self-thinking thoughts what ability is inherently and also unconditionally given for the MAN!

    The utmost WISE one needs only to know - WHAT HE/SHE DOESN'T WANT TO KNOW and WHY!

    So, I agree, and liked! "...So if God is in charge, she apparently dosnċ…µt want to know everything..."

    I agree with you also the essential statements you exert such as are:

    "..Information is dynamically complex and complexity tends to become unstable beyond a certain level.."

    "..We frequently build out levels of complexity and then struggle to maintain them and manage their consequences..."

    However, I should be in disagreement with you some of your statements or at least the deduction you made, concerning the 'Absolute', 'Void has no form' and

    'We are fundamentally linear creatures.'

    "..So knowledge is a function of the detail .." I think, depending on how one conceptualize the details. But, in that meaning the Absolute - as the unconditional existence itself - doesn't depends on the details those (I agree) '..lost for the absolute.."

    "..The void has no form. Sorry Plato.."

    I have some questions for you to test and answer for yourself:

    Can you think on - nothing, no think, no thing, no signal, no noise - in the meantime you are inhabiting a form of your physical body? Try it! What can you sense, see when you contemplate the void? What does this experience mean for you?

    "..We are fundamentally linear creatures.." "..we are linear, object oriented thinkers, .."

    We are fundamentally NOT a linear creatures! Just you wrote much about the time flowing back and forth from past to future and backward too, and how " ..individual organisms die and pass on their genetic code.."

    Our present consciousness is conditioned to think that or so! I tried to give some mentioning in my essay - independently from our absolute existence -

    We are fundamentally not living in time! Our present consciousness however need to some pre / post processing not to act and react just-in time. However how much it can be artificially delayed and over loaded our natural electric body circuits or that can be substituted with some kind of else basic material... s it in question yet, I think running by some kind of experiments?

    "...while the larger reality is one of balance and process.." to understand where is the optimal boundary for us to know, what and why, and how to use it well. I hope at least, this is so, truly. :)

    Best of all,

    Valeria

      Valeria,

      I'm trying to read your essay, but you say a very lot. It is like being in a large and complex building with no floor plan. You need to both organize and edit much more. Each of us is a world unto ourselves and yet the lines of communication between each other are very limited. Writing is like a telegraph wire in a fiber optic age. As I point out, too much information starts to cancel out and become noise. Personally I have been working all morning and have to go to a memorial for an old co-worker this afternoon, so like all people, my time and attention is limited and I'm overwhelmed with too many things to do. Obviously you have many thoughts and ideas about how the world works, but you need to focus them somewhat. Yes, we are not linear, but we have to communicate both linearly and narratively. So you have to incorporate that non-linear thermal effect as a narrative arc and not just as a bunch of thoughts winding around each other.

      You have a lot to say, but keep in mind that life has spent billions of years creating this level of top down/bottom up complexity and we have just a few decades, if we are lucky, to figure it out. So I understand why you want to put so much into everything, but a lot of what nature does, is to organize and edit. George Gantz just submitted an interesting entry and while there are parts I don't quite agree with, given my thoughts on top down theology, it was a masterful job of presenting a complex reality in a way that another mind can absorb, without lots of loose ends that lead ones thinking onto other subjects, not following what you are trying to say. When I write something, I like to try and pretend I'm another person and read it through, to see if my mind will follow the logical thread to the end, or are there parts that are distracting. I try to cut out the parts that distract. If they are more important than your central thesis, then you need to write a on different topic. Focus, organize, edit.

      You do express a lot of interesting thoughts, so make them sit down and take their turn.

      Regards,

      John M

      Hi John,

      I think you identified a big problem going forward as getting everybody to recognize and act according to our "collective self interest". Re-using plastic bags, for example, is something I see in the city (and now do myself) that is an indication that people have a recognition of this principle although it might seem like (and probably is) a token gesture in the big picture.

      Your essay was a bit of a ramble, but a good read that resonates quite a bit with my thoughts.

      Best to you

      Colin

        Colin,

        Thanks. It's a matter of perspective. Life can seem to be a token gesture, if we box it up too much. In order to make sense of the little things, we need to keep them in the context of emblematic of bigger things, not just lost in the shuffle of bigger things. Holographic, as well as digital.

        I tried to stuff a lot in there, so it's nice to know it plays well.

        Regards,

        John M

        Very good, John. I love your concept of the "elemental self pushing out like a sprouting seed." I also like the way you summarize life as like a sentence, in which we must deal with the way we put things together between what came before and the punctuation at the end, and then go on to address the substance of the topic -- the nervous system of governance and circulatory system of economics that drive our daily lives and shape the future. I wonder, though, if you place too much stock in a "coronary" attack breaking down the system in which the rich and powerful become ever more so. You may be right, but that's not what happened five or six years ago and next time thrombosis strikes it might be too late for the masses.

          Walter,

          Thank you.

          You might say the response the last time amounted to a massive dose of adrenaline to get the system flowing again, but nothing was learned and it is doubtful enormous doses of credit will work as well another time. What is safe to say is that there will be significant questions raised as to whether we are on the right track and even Rupert Murdoch won't be able to control the editorializing. That is when the conversation will open up somewhat and new ideas will have at least a chance of being heard. The two economic observations I'm making, public banking and the fundamental nature of money, are being raised, with community and public banking initiatives growing at the grass roots and Ellen Brown's Public Banking Institute as a sort of clearing house and idea center for them. Also Modern Monetary Theory delves quite deeply into the roots and evolution of money and gives a somewhat different version than conventional economics, which naturally argues there is no other way than as it is treated in capitalism. Which is essentially as a replacement commodity, rather than the social contract which validates its function.

          While I conclude with the comments on economics, I also feel some of the other, more conceptual issues need to be addressed, as well. One point I didn't raise in this entry, but have in other contests and further up this thread, Apr. 13, 2014 @ 18:02 GMT, is the nature of time. That it is not the point of the present moving from past to future, but the changing configuration of what exists which turns future into past. While this might seem a bit abstract, given that human civilization is based on its various versions of history and thus the linear perception of time, understanding the underlaying physical dynamic might help us to somewhat unwind all these conflicting versions and arrive at that more agreeable place.

          Regards,

          John M

          Hi John.

          Not what I was expecting from the title but very interesting to read your point of view on the monetary system and religion. I fear the World's problems are too large for a change in banking to make that much difference. Though I have read and seen TV programmes about the success of micro-loans in India and elsewhere. Allowing small businesses to be started, that give employment and service to the community, improving the quality of life of more than just the recipient.

          The whole premise of the worlds economies is unsustainable. In my essay, yet to appear on the list, I include the idea that in the future rather than success being measured by economic growth it should be measured by the contentment, health, altruism, high culture and creativity of its people; as growth is ultimately unsustainable. Can societies be made future proof or do they have to fall so that new societies with different founding principles can arise? I don't know. We were requested to give an optimistic outlook, so I have. There are still guns, and walls, but no zombie apocalypse.

            Dear John!

            Thank you for your answer.

            I feel, you are right in that, my essay cannot so clear way convey information (as your essay is truly transparent), which logically drives one's attention on a thread. It can suggest certainly thinking on many threads in the meantime. However, my essay was specially focused, and organized. Covering topics arisen here at Fqxi's previous contests, and long run behind involving truly vast amount of background information compressed into the possible here given 9 pages. It was 'edited' by my interpretation, as far as I can understand and absolve those information - dealing with questions which are not necessarily thoughts of mine!!! Those are complex thoughts yes, however those are also present in our reality in one's or ones' minds, even at many levels of every one of us, and those thoughts have been running on many threads. And you are also right, those information may be very confusing, noisy, distracting, and probably open ended, with 'no ground floor', or eventually cancelled, as you pointed out.

            You are focusing on more concretely formed problems what urgent their resolution and stand near for the everyday thoughts. However, I felt writing my essay, quite because, I think those many threads of more complex thoughts I mentioned running yet parallel. May be focused, edited, 'hacked' or cancelled by one or ones (not necessarily personally by me).

            I exerted my best effort and capacity to attract and catalyse ones' attention who are disposing of the possibility to bring those threads on a harmonics what a normal original human body can endure, and digest. (involving myself too) Supposing we want to remain - human - as naturally and unconditionally given! (This latter is my thoughts, truly! And I think, it is a very clear message, I also focused on this conclusion in my essay and some of my comments put here.

            Thank you again for reading my essay.

            Valeria

            Georgina,

            Good to hear from you. They haven't been posting contest comments on the blog sidebar, so the two conversations haven't been entwined as in past years. Nor is there an overall contest comment thread, so it's harder to keep these contest conversations easily in view. Oh well.

            An interesting article on MMT is in this month's New Inquiry. In some ways, microfinance is just turning into a way to further drain value out of ever poorer people. Like many things, it's a two edged sword. There really should be a broad conversation over the physics of finance and money, but obviously the best financed schools of thought are those supporting the money as personal property side of the coin and not as broad social contract, but the success of this view appears to be leading to its undoing, along with a large chunk of society.

            Well, I have to go to work and I'm sure we will both be having some fun with these debates.

            Regards,

            John

            John,

            Your essay seems to have generated a lot of interest and discussion, too many for me to read them all. Seems I have missed out on some important expansion of the ideas in the essay. Its obviously a topic that many people feel strongly about and I expect especially Americans, given the recent severe financial woes of the country.

            Good Luck, Georgina

            Thanks, Georgina.

            Some of it's been discussions I've started on other's threads as well. While it concludes on a financial note, I suspect some of the more controversial ideas are developed before that.

            Given they made it pretty clear the winners will be chosen from FQXI members, I simply set out to stir up as much controversy as possible, rather than appeal to any particular group. It is an interesting topic from my perspective though, as I mostly became attracted to physics in the first place as a way to make sense of cultural and social complexities and views. I think that a lot of people generally operate from within those models, so what I try to say mostly comes across as a foreign language. Even though it may seem logical to me, I do have a fairly good grasp of many of those cultural memes, at least the western ones, to know how simply different some of what I propose does sound. In fact, it seems to resonate best to those who tend toward an eastern, spiritually dualistic view, from a fairly modern western perspective. I think the true easterners approach these ideas from a much more cultural set of ingrained beliefs and so still might see it as a foreigner trying to speak the language. Since much of it comes from my own personal experiences of dealing with life and nature, along with a fair amount, but not what would be considered extensive reading, it is what it is.

            Regards,

            John

            Valeria,

            We have to express the world the way we see it. You are you and you probably have a better memory than I. One of the reasons I have to focus and edit as much as I do, is because I am someone who does get distracted easily. Personally I mostly work outside, with horses and tend to view reality as much thermodynamically, as narratively. I just know language is a linear medium. Of course, it is old fashioned and now people use visual communications much more. Best of luck!

            Regards,

            John

            Letslink UK Local Exchange Trading and Complementary Currencies Development Agency Have you come across this scheme?

            Wikipedia local exchange trading system. Quote:" A number of people have problems adjusting to the different ways of operating using a LETSystem. A conventional national currency is generally hard to earn, but easy to spend. To date LETSystems are comparatively easy to earn, but harder to spend." Wikipedia Local exchange trading system. That might be a good thing because there seems to be an addiction to consumption which is unsustainable.

            Quote:"LETSystems often have all of the problems confronting any voluntary, not-for-profit, non governmental, community based organisation. LETS organisers often complain of being overworked, and may suffer burnout. Many schemes have ceased operation as a result."Wikipedia Local exchange trading system. That is something that would need addressing if their use is to be sustained and proliferated.

            Wikipedia Local currency Found this interesting as although I knew of the transition town movement I did not know that some towns have associated local monetary systems. Also a long long list of benefits. I like this idea-Quote: "4.The Fureai kippu system in Japan issues credits in exchange for assistance to senior citizens. Family members living far from their parents can earn credits by offering assistance to the elderly in their local community. The credits can then be transferred to their parents and redeemed by them for local assistance."Wikipedia Local currency. What a good idea.

            Dear John!

            Thanks again for your answer.

            Yes, I agree basically with you! We can express thoughts about our reality on ways we are just experiencing it, mainly by sensual ways through an actual genetic make up arrangements - you probably call individual I'm. However, much depends on our previous personal experiences somehow stored we call - memory. Also much depends on what our actual conditioned thoughts allow to apprehend. The latter generally means the actual mutual memory complex sometimes called social or group memory - noosphere. Furthermore, also much depends on the environment in which one actually lives. Also those thoughts are present non-locally and non-linearly which are not yet coherently probed, tested, but we call - future or probabilities. All incorporates I think, structurally, but factually neither in space nor time, but somehow there are things (e.g. sensing time and changeable environment/places artificially created or not) for us by some ones who are intentionally trying to steer the - larger reality processes. We should call - history.

            What is the long time/short time, genetic, visual memory? How are our experiences both individual and collective stored? How far can those be got back and expressed by and through a naturally built organism? Or how far can our memory be bettered even substituted with synthetics to have bigger capacity, quicker etc.? (likened to as Turil said a kind of heterogeneous even extra or ultra terrestrial database). All revolves around in our presently seen reality - That is a huge topics, truly.

            I think, my memory not better than you! Just, I have else capabilities 'riding' on the - threads -. I know much less about the thermodynamics, physics than you could express and quite clearly formulate here. Yes, I can understand too, riding a horse naturally requires to see straightforward and suggests very straight goal orientation. I've never ride a horse seriously, only tried it unhandy, they did with me what they wanted. They had known I was not not a satisfactory partner to steer them. I highly appreciate the horses they are very clever sensitive beings, close friends to man, I like them.

            However, I got a thinking ability to oversee complex processes and putting the pieces into places where those better should fit by my right feeling. Albeit the processes can run parallel (as far as you wrote ..we have developed as physical organisms with very distinct information processing functions..and seeing same world severally expressed) even so I can keep my focus on a main thread. Probably this capability is required to do my profession when planning and creating a computer program.

            I'd like to say too. Overseeing how a complex natural (or else) organism should work and applying that model for our societal complex organism betterment as you likened to - ...are government as society's central nervous system and finance as its economic circulation system - I think, an ageless trial experiment just in time running on many threads for even I truly hope the main thread goal is - let there be balanced.

            You are just focusing on, quite straightforwardly and goal oriented, which is absolutely right in place and have crucial importance! How 'banking' or monetary system need to be 'edited', or should be put into an else context which better fit to a working of a healthy economical and ecological organism.

            Perhaps, there is nobody at the moment giving the right answers and resolutions - How to substitute the money driven inventive presently exorbitant technological, technocratic development, as a blood vessel conveying proprietary laws, for domination over the natural law for every living being. The government unfortunately does what some ones finance - perhaps this kind of neural network system also need to be put into a right context, and cured.

            Albeit the bottom up thinking and forces are growing even so the processes are controlled and planned yet from top to bottom. There are also much implication yet to be re-considered about the spiritual beingness too. We tend to think yet the spirit over the matter or backward - however, both need to be in balance.

            I wish good luck for everyone of us.

            Kind regards,

            Valeria