Thank you for your kind words, Cristi.

As you know I greatly enjoyed your essay as well.

All the best!

Hello again Akinbo,

I just took a moment to glance at your essay abstract and saw in the comments that you called into doubt 2 3 = 5- exactly the example I used above and a total coincidence!

I promise I will read and comment on you essay tomorrow.

Rick

7 days later

Rick,

Time grows short, so I am revisiting essays I've read (3/23) to assure I've rated them. I find that I have not rated yours, so I will rectify. I hope you get a chance to look at mine: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345.

Jim

    • [deleted]

    • Post #27

    Dear Rick,

    I share your argumentation about the objectivity of the Platonic world and your conclusion that the

    "actual history of physics itself should put to rest the argument that mathematics is a mere invention of the human mind which we impose upon nature. Mathematics is truth not trick".

    In this respect, you may see in our essay the arguments similar to yours. I think though that answering the question

    "how, among such a huge number of mathematical structures are we able to find the one that is actually ours?"

    you lost an important fact that the laws of nature are expressed by rather simple equations. This fact is used in our refutation of Tegmark's "mathematical democracy".

    Regards,

    Alexey.

      Dear Rick,

      Thank you for your kind comment and your interest in my thought. I don't know about an interview for I have never given any before. KQID is based on Xuan Yuan's DAO concept that it is the substance that creates and distributes everything that is. Dao as Giving first Taking later (Love) has been unfolding itself from its first emergent out of Non-existence by its own free will by itself and for itself. As I mentioned in my blog, this Philosoy has its theory, equations and numbers like that can be falsified or verified in scientific experiments or by everyday life experiences. As mentioned here, KQId is the only terry right now that can calculate with numbers precisely the size of our baby universe at birth, its temperature and its speed.how c evolve from the creation to the present light speed in the vacuum within 5 thousand years after the Bit Bang.

      I looked at your essay and your Mad Taylor story is so wonderful. I like it very much. KQID is more agreeable with Pythagoras that "all things are numbers". In KQID, these numbers are Ψ(iτLx,y,z, T), 4 vector Einstein complex coordinates.

      Wonderful essay and rated it accordingly.

      Let us continue our discussion and I believe in strongly the symphony of ideas,

      Sincerely yours,

      Leo KoGuan

        Dear Rick,

        I enjoyed the way you used the Mad Taylor metaphor to describe the modus operandi of mathematics regarding the characteristic of the natural world. Your proposition of a weak MUH is well thought out and very balanced especially now, when we seem to have circumstantial and somewhat conflicting evidence about the possibilities of unified descriptions of the universe. As you say "Our confidence in a weak MUH should decrease should there be notable theoretical and practical progress in other scientific fields that have embraced alternative or ad hoc mathematical models[..]". I think this is well written and well argued and I will rate it accordingly. Wish you best of luck in the contest! If you have the necessary time, please read my essay and let me know your thoughts in a comment.

        Warm regards,

        Alma

          Dear Leo,

          Sorry it took me so long to respond: I have been traveling and very busy with work.

          I am very glad you liked my essay. Should you change your mind on the issue of a short interview you can always email me here:

          rsearle.searle@gmail.com

          My only hope would be to provide some insight into your ideas for an English speaking audience interested in such issues.

          All the best,

          Rick Searle

          Dear Alma,

          Sincere apologies, but I have been very busy of late. I will try to get to your essay by tomorrow evening at the latest.

          Rick

          Dear Rick,

          No need to apologize, I understand completely. It was my pleasure to read your essay. I wish you a very nice day and a great week!

          Dear Rick,

          I understand what you are saying here. I think your approach might encounter another difficulty, but the approach does avoid the very serious epistemological problems that Tegmark's MUH faces. At least in contest, the discussion of this topic is coming to a close. I do read your IEET blogs on a regular basis. I appreciate your choice of topics, by which I often encounter new items. Your presentations are always worth reading, and I tend to agree with you most of the time. Beginning in the next few months, I intend to participate in some of the discussions which you initiate, and I shall try to bring in new or at least less-familiar ideas as often as I can.

          Best wishes,

          Larry

          I pronounce Pythagoras the winner..

          While I didn't know Mad Max was a tailor, I suspected it all along, and you did an excellent job of showing people the difference between an approach that yields a Mad Tailor and a true Platonic model - where Math is an enduring ideal. High marks from me for an excellent paper. I'll say more, when there is time.

          All the Best,

          Jonathan

          • [deleted]

          • Post #36

          Hi James,

          I finally got around to reading your essay. Your passion for mathematics shines through. Loved what you wrote regarding the Euler identity- and the graphics were great!

          Best of luck!

          Rick

          • [deleted]

          • Post #37

          Hi Alma,

          I wanted to let you know that I thought your essay was wonderful and that I am glad you seem to have done well in the contest.

          All the best,

          Rick

          Write a Reply...