Dear Jonathan.
We meet again :) If you Think of the elephants, how do they communicate? How is the room defined?
Maybe this has been forgotten in QG frame?
Sheers
Ulla.
Dear Jonathan.
We meet again :) If you Think of the elephants, how do they communicate? How is the room defined?
Maybe this has been forgotten in QG frame?
Sheers
Ulla.
Dear Jonathan,
Good to see you again here. I thought I had written earlier on your essay, but I now see why I didn't. Our views are almost orthogonal, so it makes little sense for me to critique your essay. But it is good you present the Platonic view of math, as I try to present the Realist view of physics. Thus those who are undecided get a chance to ponder both views of reality.
There are some excellent essays (as usual) and I count yours as one of them. I particularly like the following:
"I'm sure nature is perfectly happy with processes taking more or fewer stages to complete, but the math itself dictates that certain patterns are more stable than others."
I think that works from both of our perspectives.
Best wishes to you, and as our mutual friend Ray Munroe used to say:
Have fun,
Edwin Eugene Klingman
Thanks greatly Ulla!
The elephants dance! And they talk over great distances in a low hum. The room is the entire universe. And people don't realize that primordial gravity waves are the deep low hum of the elephants. I'm glad you could come by.
I loved your essay.
All the Best,
Jonathan
Thanks so much Ed!
I will indeed have fun. And I feel well-qualified to critique your essay, so I have done so. I could do quite a credible job of presenting the realist view, I'll have you know, but I'm much happier reading what you have to say on that view of things. I never want to be accused of being a hard nosed realist.
All the Best,
Jonathan
Wow Thank You Vladimir,
I appreciate your good words and high regard. I don't think I've read your essay yet, so I'll wait to comment here until I do.
I wish you luck as well.
Regards,
Jonathan
Thanks to everyone who has come here..
I appreciate your interest in my ideas, and I am pleased that you have chosen to give me a high standing in this esteemed company. With so many distinguished professional scientists in this year's essay entrants, and with so many wonderful essays by amateurs and retired pros, I am privileged to be among you.
I will quietly read and grade a few more essays tonight, leaving brief or no comments, but I want to continue to show my support by giving my time to review your work.
Good luck to all.
Warm Regards,
Jonathan
Hi Jonathan,
A draft of my second paper on quantum correlations has been posted at sites.google.com/site/quantcorr. There is also a file with C functions for calculating correlations based on the "geometric probability" of crossing a threshold.
Cross posted on my blog under your thread.
Best wishes,
Colin
Thanks Colin..
I'll check that out.
JJD
Jonathan,
I did start to read your essay during the contest, but I did not comment or rate your essay (I never rate without comment). Your paper seems to be all about mathematic's relationship with the universe and not about existence of life or intelligence. I felt it was off-topic. As an essay, it is well written and clear. You try to present your ideas to a general science readership and do not require reference to other papers to understand your essay. I would have given it a "6". Readable counts for a lot with me.
All the best,
Jeff
Thanks Jeff,
I also value readability highly, in FQXi contests. Some folks seem to feel that only correct assertions or reasonable conclusions are worthy of credit, but I found quite a few essays I thought were wrong-headed or off-topic, and yet were sufficiently well-written to make me think - and thus require some acknowledgement by according them points in the rating. I didn't give out any ones this time, and I even gave Joe Fisher a 5 - though I don't agree with much he says - because his writing has continued to improve.
I will go back and read your essay, even though it won't count toward your score or my popularity, because I value your opinion.
All the Best,
Jonathan
Jonathan,
I don't know if I would give Joe Fisher a "5", but he does add something to the contest. He has a throw all the concepts in science into a blender and make it into art style of writing like Jackson Pulluk (sp?) did for painting.
I did see many math as a bases for the Universe essays, so maybe I was off-topic.
Jeff