Dear Luca,

I see we have similar ideas on the nature of time (the past is factual, the future is possible). I find this same kind of time structure both in math/logic and in physics, though I consider these two time flows as only similar but independent of each other. More precisely I consider this time structure of physics as a result of the time structure of consciousness. I explained this in details, and how it gives a coherent interpretation of quantum physics, in my essay.

You ask "How is evolution possible despite the increase of entropy?". There is no mystery here: entropy is continuously created on Earth but then moved away and "accumulated" as infrared radiation in the intergalactic space.

I also added your essay to the list of interesting essays in my review.

    Dear Sylvain,

    Thanks for your reply. You are of course right. The earth is an open system, where free energy from the sun enters the system and high entropic energy in form of the infrared removed from the system. The entropy in this system is decreasing. For closed system evolution might be explained by out of the equilibrium states. This is done by Prigogine. The claim here is that the informational relationships of multilevel system would make the creation of complex structures possible despite (or even because) the entropy is increasing.

    As for the time structure: If it is true, that the time structure is a precondition of objective experience and even of logic, it is questionable if we can express the time structure in a clear language. Von Weizsäcker approaches the problem from three sides:

    1. The time structure is used to show derive irreversibility from reversible dynamics. And possibly to derive tense logic as logic of time events and possibly the structure of quantum mechanics.

    2. From the physical theory he shows that the time structure can be found phenomenologically in our world: The factual past as documents in the present or in our memories as far our cognition is objective describable. And the open future as evolutonary process.

    3. Philosophically as the becoming of timely structures from eternal ideas (eidos). See also my comment in Aleksandar Mikovics forum.

    Dear Luca Valeri

    About time it is written a lot of in this contest, for instance Smolin said that logic does not exist without time.

    I am not sure if you want to tell that quantum logic is contradictory with our common logic, because superposition of spin exists. This is a discrete version of uncertainty principle, where infinity possibility exists. But, my opinion is that measurement is only realisation of our intention. Thus two spins exist in our head and only one is actualized by measurement. Thus, measurement is like a creation.

    Can you tell someting more about your quantum measurement in the last section, before I read something about Neumann measurement sheme?

    By chance you mentioned also colors in your comment. I also wrote about this. I suppose that three basic color qualia have something in common, thus that they are three options of one quale. Physiological measurement could tell something of this.

    Similarly as you I think that time is more basic than entropy. It is also connected with panpsichism and consciousness.

    BTW: Weizsacker explained, why space is three dimensional (3 basic SU(2) matrices etc.) Why this is not more often mentioned in books? Is it speculation?

    My essay

    Best regards

    Janko Kokosar

    "it is questionable if we can express the time structure in a clear language."

    As I mentioned, I distinguish 2 independent fundamental time structures: one at the foundation of mathematics, and one of consciousness. We are naturally familiar with the time structure of consciousness and its physical effect is known as the thermodynamic time arrow. Just because consciousness is not mathematical, it cannot be described in exact terms, so that in particular the time of consciousness cannot be described in exact terms either. Still I have an intuitive description in these words : it is the order relation of existence between conscious events, where A is before B if A exists for B ; though I only mean it as a fuzzy concept. I consider the concept of conscious (non-physical) memory, extended to the universal scale as collective memory (though it is largely hidden), as foundational for the interpretation of quantum physics and the thermodynamic time arrow (see my essay for details).

    However, since mathematics can be formalized and described in exact mathematical terms, I did find ways to precisely describe the time of mathematics that appears in the detailed study of the foundations of mathematics. As I found it, this time of mathematics does not appear as one concept or structure describing one aspect of the foundations (though the hierarchy of ordinals expresses much of it), but takes different forms that mirror and complete each other, between model theory and set theory. This network of aspects of the time of mathematics, is usually not explicitly explained and qualified as a time in the literature, but I see it as implicitly there, essential for the understanding of the main paradoxes of mathematical logic: Russell's paradox, Skolem's paradox and the Incompleteness theorem.

    a month later

    In case you didn't notice: I replied to you in my thread last week. Sorry to have not done it earlier.

    Write a Reply...