Dear Vladimir,

I read with great pleasure your charming essay, which shows an extraordinary interest in philosophy and science. I especially liked the references to Heraclitus, great pillar of the history of thought, whose fragments continue to stimulate my thinking and the human one in general. But I also particularly appreciated your remarks about Husserl, Whitehead, and Pavel Florensky, thinkers who have moved on the ridge between mathematics and philosophy and have expressed deep considerations on their relationships. It is regrettable that Florensky is not known and read as it deserves in some western countries! I also consider attractive your holistic approach to reality. I am very attracted by that view, but unfortunately I doubt that it is scientifically provable.

A relative limit of your essay is, in my humble opinion, that there is a difference between the first and the second part. The first is more structured and argued, while the last pages are more sketchy, perhaps because you talk about too many things together and you have to limit yourself to simple hints, to stay within the bounds of the contest rules. However, it is a fine contribution and a good read, for which I thank you!

Kind regards and my best wishes for all,

Giovanni

    Dear Giovanni,

    Thank you very much for your in-depth comprehensive commentary. The second part of my essay was done in abbreviated form, to enable the reader to carry out independently the ontological construction of the structure of the Universum generating process. I described in more detail the methodology of the ontological construction in the essay "The Formula of Justice: The OntoTopological Basis of Physica and Mathematica" (Contest FQXi 2015).

    In the final part of the essay, I presented concisely all my ideas on the problems of philosophy of consciousness, ontology, philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of physics. I consider the solution of the problem of ontological basification (foundation / justification ) of mathematics as the key problem for the whole system of fundamental knowledge, for overcoming the modern crisis of understanding.

    Your comment is very valuable to me also because you are deeply interested in the problems of the philosophy of mathematics.

    I wish success in the Contest!

    Yours faithfully,

    Vladimir

    It could be made here on FQXI in explaining to governments that it is a moral obligation to find now the best adapted global universal solutions.They shall listen if we are strond and together with a kind of sciences commission against these chaos and disorders.It can be made this liberation of funds for this solar system and harmonisation of this planet where all wins without exception.

    Hope that it will be made.

    All the best from belgium

    Vladimir,

    I wish this was not a contest, but a group project. You seem to be working around and near a core idea, but not fully there. I can now see that I was trying to find the same core, but from a very different direction. Perhaps together the sum would have been greater than the parts. Your breath of knowledge is remarkable and your writing is beautiful.

    I hope you do well in the contest.

    Sincerely,

    Jeff

      Jeff,

      Many thanks for the insightful and inspirational thought. I agree with you. I call this project for science - "global brainstorming". Brainstorming on collecting ideas to overcome the crisis in the foundations of "fundamental knowledge." The "arrow of knowledge" should be directed to the search for the "core of knowledge", its ontological structure. I see this as problem number 1 - the super hard problem of the ontological basification of mathematics (knowledge).

      Sincerely,

      Vladimir

      Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

      With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of high praise.

      You very correctly put questions and answer them.

      «What way should we choose for overcoming total crisis of understanding in fundamental science? It should be the way of metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the modified ontology.»

      «the understanding of world and worldview is the solution of the problem of ontological structure of space and creation of new model of basic ideality ("idea of ideas", "eidos of eidoses") establishing ontological framework, carcass and foundation of knowledge.»

      Great work.

      However, you have considered only one side of ideality - "idea of ideas", "eidos of eidoses".

      The second concept of ideality interests me most: the ontology of "the use of ideal and abstract properties of matter and fields," which is used, for example, to simplify physical models.

      The whole experience of mankind shows that there are no analogues for ideal and abstract properties of matter and fields, except for supernatural properties.

      Vladimir Voevodsky: «What we call crisis of the Russian science now isn't crisis only of the Russian science. There is a crisis of world science. Real progress will consist in very serious fight of science with religion which will end with their integration.»

      In my opinion, it is the widespread use of ideal and abstract properties of matter and fields, assuming their realizability in the universe, is a key mistake and the cause of the crisis in science.

      The whole experience of mankind shows that there are no analogues for ideal and abstract properties of matter and fields, except for supernatural properties.

      Werner Heisenberg wrote: «The physics of particles informs us, strictly speaking, on fundamental structures of the nature, but not on fundamental particles. These structures are much more abstract, than it seemed 50 years ago.»

      For example, problems in quantum mechanics associated with the use of ideal and abstract properties of the medium of propagation of light (empty space) that lead to the collapse of the wave function and singularity are known. As a consequence, false tasks are set for the development of normalizations and calibrations. All this leads to, in practice, fruitless attempts to answer the question about the causes of self-organization of matter.

      The introduction of nonlinear transformation of elements in the medium of a physical vacuum and a dissipative function leads to the use of the Mathieu causal equations for quantum parametric resonance and solitons, instead of causeless Schrödinger equations. The process of self-organization of matter are carried out according to the principles of the heat pump in parametric resonance and solitons, is a direct and simple answer to the questions of this contest.

      And how do you think, how relevant is the individual philosophical theme for the second part of the interpretation of ideality?

      I wish you success in the contest.

      Kind regards,

      Vladimir Fedorov

        Dear Vladimir,

        Many thanks for a deep and important comment.

        In my understanding, "Ideality" as an ontological foundation of fundamental physics is the ultimate (extreme, absolute) forms of existence of matter (absolute states): absolute rest (linear state, Сontinuum) + absolute motion (vortex state, Discretum) + absolute formation (wave state, Dis-Continuum). "Ideality" is that ultimate value to which the matter is directed, pushed by the "soul of matter" - the ontological (structural) memory (entelechy). Those. "Ideality" inside matter and outside matter, its ultimate goal. It is possible to imagine: ideality "holds" (embraces) and directs the development of matter from two strings. The concept of "field" appears as a generalizing concept of all three limiting states of matter.

        I am sure that the reason for understanding the crisis in fudamentalnoy science - it is a crisis of ontology and dialectics. There is a need for a deeper understanding of matter in the spirit of dialectics and ontology of Plato, and ultimately in "grasping" (understanding) the ontological (primordial) structure, and thus understanding "the self-organization of matter".

        Any physical theory that claims to be fundamental must have a solid ontological foundation. When creating a "fundamental theory", the "Occam's razor" should be extremely sharp. The current crisis is a conceptual crisis and its overcoming requires the introduction of not only new concepts - attractors, but also a radical revision and refinement of old concepts. Several fundamenoseological paradigms should work in fundamental physics, but the ontological basis must be one.

        Yours faithfully,

        Vladimir

        Dear Vladimir,

        I thank you for a great piece of philosophical work !

        Indeed the fundamental structures of our reality are all a question mark.

        We all are looking for the reference of reference but we cannot find any secure point in time or space, it is only the "self" nd even that is difficult to explain.

        I also tried in my participation to find this reference, the thing I found is maybe a direction towards and then I realised that also this road is hyperbolicly approaching this goal,, and wherever you are the distance seems still as great as in the beginning.

        I hope that after reading this little intro you will find some time to read my essay "The Purpose of Life", I await your esteemed comment and rating.

        best regards

        Wilhelmus

          Dear Wilhelmus,

          Thank you very much for reading my essay and meaningful evaluation. Yes, you are well expressed the thought and purpose of our quest to overcome the "understanding of the crisis," "interpretation of the crisis and of representation" in the "fundamental science»: "...any secure point in time or space, it is only the"self" nd even that is difficult to explain."

          I believe that there can only help the extremely constructive metaphysics:"An educated people without a metaphysics is like a richly decorated temple without a holy of holies." (G.W.F.Hegel)

          I immediately begin reading your essay.

          Best regards

          Vladimir

          Vladimir,

          Probably I understand your attitude to analytical Anglo - American tradition of philosophy of physics, however, "Hegel's Self - Consciousness as a goal" in some sense is analytic judgment. Unfortunately, Hegel was not able to create Kant's dream - Pure Metaphysics. Kant transcendental idealism and post - Kantian attempts ( Poincare, Einstein, quantum theorists, Gödel, Eddington, Milne, Bronstein, John Bell and today's holography theorists ) could be understood as attempts to establish idealistic foundations of physics. When physicists assume an existence of the first particle of the Universe they must assume an existence of mathematical rules for such particle deduced from some general metaphysics or MetaLife/Kant's Органон which existed always.

          Thus, metaphysics is metaphysics, but physics is merely physics. Because there is well established compatibility of Kantian idealism and contemporary physics , awareness of Kantian "unconscious" foundations represents may be the most productive way to physics unification.

          С самыми наилучшими пожеланиями

          Michael

            Michael,

            Thank you very much for your very important comment. I believe that today, for mathematics and physics, the problems of the philosophical foundations of "fundamental knowledge" have become extremely acute, especially for mathematics - "queen and maids of science". And here there are questions to philosophy itself, first of all ontology. The crisis of the foundations of knowledge pushes the need to deepen the ideas of both Kant and Hegel along the line of "conceptual-figural" synthesis ("schematism") with the goal of "grasping" ("осознание", "узревание") the eidos of the structure "a priori." Logos and Eidos should work together at the deepest essential level, taking into account all the accumulated knowledge.

            С самыми наилучшими пожеланиями,

            Vladimir

            Dear Vladimir,

            I've read and analysed your essay some time ago. I consider that it's very worthy and deep work deserving high assessment. Your conclusion concerning the crisis in fundamental science "It should be the way of metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the modified ontology" is rather topical and very important.

            My best regards,

            Vladimir

              Dear Vladimir,

              Thank you very much for your comments and appreciation of my ideas. The Contest FQXi is first of all new ideas, it is a global open brainstorm on contemporary fundamental issues and problems of Science and Humanity, the solution of which will help the more sustainable development of the system "Nature-Mankind". We, earthlings, see that this system is in a deep existential crisis, the origins of which are in the crisis of understanding in the fundamental science.

              Best regards,

              Vladimir

              Dear Vladimir,

              I am really impressed with your "method of ontological construction" as well with the idea of "ontological (structural, cosmic) memory." Indeed, a new deeper ontology is needed in order to overcome the "crisis of understanding." I think you are very right on this dealt. So, I see your essay as a high - valuable in this contest that deserves to high rating.

              Good wishes!

                Dear Vladimir,

                Thank you for your favorable comments and for your time in rating my essay about a week ago, where we discussed ontological memory in greater detail. I have enjoyed reading your essay too and would like to thank you for your detailed prose and thought provoking work. It is impressive how densely packed with meaning your sentences are. I wanted to let you know that I have in the meantime likewise returned your favor and have rated your contribution as well.

                Regards,

                Robert

                  Dear Vladimir

                  I very much enjoyed reading your essay. You have written very thoughtfully on the frontier and limits of scientific understanding, and where it bumps up against a metaphysical understanding of the world, for which we are in dire need of progressing.

                  Your suggestion that the fractured nature of our universal awareness is in part responsible for the disunity of human global societal affairs, is very interesting and thought provoking. And then you deliver the message that a complete metaphysical understanding of the natural world, will contribute greatly towards bringing peoples together. This is an extremely positive message and one that makes me want to be a contributor towards.

                  You have introduced me to poetic and philosophical ideas which I have not otherwise discovered. Thank you for opening my mind to new ideas and positive possibilities. I rate your opinions and work highly.

                  Steven Andresen

                  http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2890