Dear Gavin,

Thank you for commenting on my essay.

I really enjoyed reading yours. We seem to share the same simple logic in the way we try to describe the Universe. I also think that one should take a bottom up approach and not the opposite.

I like your quote:

"In fact, true nothingness by its very definition should have no limit or boundary, or else it would be something rather than nothing!"

All the best,

Patrick

    Gavin -

    Thanks for a very interesting essay! I was struck by the similarities between your "dimension of constructiveness" and the cosmic intentionality I discuss in The How and The Why of Emergence and Intention. Your allusion to our experience of flow is also, I think, an important clue to the functioning of the universe.

    The question of something from nothing is an interesting paradox, one which I explored in the prior FQXi contest (The Hole at the Center of Creation). Nothing is as troublesome a concept as infinity. Even to mention nothing is to imply that it is something (if only the abstract null set - which is, even then, a set).

    You stated - "I don't think it is necessary to delve more deeply into what the nature of this state of decision-making would be, as it would be rather speculative to do so." I think this is actually the heart of the matter. Either there is decision-making (intention) or there is not (randomness). We may not be able to observe the difference - but the it makes all the difference in how we perceive the world and how we live in it.

    Sincere regards - George Gantz

      Dear Vladimir

      Thank you for your comments. I think we are very much in agreement.

      Best wishes

      Gavin

      Thanks for your comments Patrick.

      I read in one of the other essays that if the problem doesn't make sense, one should expand the available set of factors until it does. With foundational problems, I think starting from the cosmic origin gives us the best chance of including all relevant factors. And therefore, we are likely on the right track.

      Best wishes

      Gavin

      Hi George

      Glad yo got to read my essay. We seem to be thinking along the same lines...

      In what essay contest was your essay "The Hole at the centre of Creation"? i would like to read it.

      True, the question of what consciousness IS, is in a way the heart of the matter. It was really just a bit much to bite off in a 5000 word essay so I sidestepped the issue.

      Best regards

      Gavin

      Dear Gavin.

      I propose that many foundational problems would be better approached by starting at the origin of the universe and finding a process that results in our observed reality. As a part of this process, we would need to be open to questioning our assumptions.

      This is indeed true, but also very difficult. When we change one small detail the whole frame will be changed too, so we end up with the plethora of theories we see today.

      Cheers, Ulla.

        Agreed Ulla. It's a big metaphysical guessing-game.

        Gavin

        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

        Write a Reply...