The Intention to Exist by John O. Campbell

Dear John Campbell

you were doing great until you brought in Dawkin's gene-based view of biology. The business of personifying genes as if they are autonomous agents is kinda weird, it simply ignores the multilevel nature of selection in real biological systems, and it is based on ignoring the understanding of evo-devo and epigenetics that has been garnered in the last 20 years, as set out for example in the books by Denis Noble, Andreas Wagner, and the book by Oyama, Griffiths, and Gray on developmental systems theory site.

Your paper does not need this gene centric view, and would be stronger without it. The rest of the argument is spot on.

Regards

George Ellis

Dear John Campbell,

I enjoyed reading your essay, and found your ideas to be very interesting and thought provoking.

I - perhaps only through misunderstanding - believe that you do not define existence explicitly. This - to me - seems quite problematic, it is then the claim that biological life requires purpose - that is to say, that purpose is inherent to life - or that existence in a metaphysical sense relies on purpose.

This second claim is quite similar to one of the possibilities I present in my essay -http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2828. I hope that you find the time to read it, and discuss these ideas.

Regards,

Attay.

Dear Researcher John O. Campbell,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Nice essay Campbell,

Your ideas and thinking are very nice.....

1. In this essay I suggest that intentionality is a prerequisite for existence This intention to exist is not an abstract or metaphysical intentionality, it comes complete with the physical machinery necessary to make intentions manifest.

2. Only recently has natural selection been given a rigorous mathematical description (1; 2). Perhaps surprisingly this mathematics is not specific to natural selection, it does not specify DNA or any other specifics of biology, it describes a general algorithm which when followed explores and tests the space of possibilities and selects knowledge required to construct new forms capable of existence.

3. It has long seemed obvious to many observers that nature's many wondrous designs must imply a creator. Darwin demonstrated that the process of creation might be a bottom-up rather than a top-down process.

etc...

.....................

To go into deep... I don't know the theories of Philosophy. But any way I request you to have a look at my essay (Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe) please. In this essay it is discussed about the Universe, as though Universe is having a mind .

For your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results. Here in Dynamic Universe Model Space is Space and time is time in cosmology level or in any level. In the classical general relativity, space and time are convertible in to each other.

Many papers and books on Dynamic Universe Model were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example 'Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary' (1994) , 'Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe', About "SITA" simulations, 'Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required', "New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations", "Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background", "Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.", in 2015 'Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, 'Explaining Pioneer anomaly', 'Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets', 'Observation of super luminal neutrinos', 'Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up', "Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto" etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe.

With axioms like... No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

Have a look at my essay on Dynamic Universe Model and its blog also where all my books and papers are available for free downloading...

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

Best wishes to your essay.

For your blessings please................

=snp. gupta

John -

I was initially put off by your title, since "intending to exist" struck me as a meaningless phrase. But I find your essay gives a remarkably coherent account of what you mean by it, and you show convincingly how it may apply over the whole range of natural science. And like you, I have a sense that the word "existence" points to something very "rare and fragile" that we all too easily take for granted - something that happens very differently in the realms of physics, biology and human interaction, but is in each case far more complex and finely-tuned in its functioning than we often suppose.

Your interpretation of natural selection in terms of Bayesian inference is very interesting, and certainly seems to open up a connection with recent discussion of the foundations of QM - e.g. Chris Fuchs et al, more than Zurek (whose "Darwinism" is in name only).

I'm also intrigued by your brief review of neural-based behavior, which I haven't studied at all... but it clearly makes sense that even our perceptual systems operate by continually updating projections of what's likely to happen in the given situation.

Friston's principle is also new to me and quite interesting. But above all, I appreciate your appreciation of Darwin's achievement, which really was unique in the history of science.

I hope you'll find time to look at my essay comparing the basic recursive processes of quantum measurement, biological reproduction and human communication. Like you, my main interest is in working out a generalized concept of evolution by natural selection. For me though, the key point is that while the nature of inheritance is quite clear and simple in biology, both in physics and in human evolution a different kind of process is at work, that's much harder for us to conceptualize.

In all three cases there's a process that selectively passes on information. But where biology can do this by physically replicating data built into molecular structure, the other two systems have a more basic task - that of reproducing contexts in which data becomes meaningfully definable, measurable and communicable in the first place. But since I imagine this sort of process still falls within the purview of your inferential modus operandi, I would very much appreciate your comments.

Thanks - Conrad

John,

An interesting and well-thought-out read. You say that existence is a rare and fragile state requiring both design and intention. You don't mention Dawkins in your abstract so I'm assuming his reference was describing a passing phase that you probably should have described as such. You seem to be saying that the design came before intention could begin: "near the beginnings of life, genetic machinery began operating ... each variant expressing an intention to exist."

I'm not sure where mindless math laws enter in the picture. Like you, I feel the design comes first enabling the intention of agents. I see the role of entropy in all things and specifically wonder if it is a goal for the animate and the inanimate like Jeremy England's theory based of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

I would be interested in your thoughts on my essay.

Jim Hoover

John O. Campbell,

Your essay was very interesting. However, I think you should have qualified your use of the term 'existence'. Mathematics also exists. You might find my model of a Binary Reflective Field as an 'inferential system' interesting. If interested, see my essay Our Emergent Universe. I would be interested in your reaction. I gave your essay a 10. Thank you and good luck with your essay, Graham W. Cookson

Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris