From non-sentient stardust to home sapiens sapiens by Aron Barco and Yafet Sanchez Sanchez

Dear Drs. Aron Barco and Yafet Sanchez Sanchez [,

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 Barco,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent on Cognitive sciences and AI. Some of the good words I am quoting below...

1. Perhaps if we program a weak AI with enough conditionals (if A then B), it could learn how to respond to all inferential connections that govern our use of language.

2. The first may be called doxastic intentionality, as it is related to what one thinks there is. It is the kind of intentionality demonstrated by a cat meowing next to its food bowl; that is, it is explained in terms of directness or inclination towards objects.

3. Our conclusion is not that mathematical laws give rise to our intentions, but actually the other way around -- sapient creatures intentionally develop mathematical laws to express the non-intentional parts which compose the natural mechanisms governing the universe.

Though not related to your subject, here I am also proposing a fundamental property of Universe. It is reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe. As you are interested in fundamental questions , I request you to please have a look on my essay with a different type of fundamental ideology...

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

Hi Barco/Sanchez

I think you are correct in identifying the two questions that are necessary for solving the issue of human intentionality. The two questions suggested by you parallels the latter two of the three phase transitions suggested in the essay of Mohapatra.

Although the domain of extrinsic intelligence (Constitutional nation state) may be far removed from that of intrinsic intelligence (brains), there may be some minor commonalities between the two that allows my essay to also suggest a possible solution.

In order to do this, Sentience is being understood as Constitutional Democracy and Normativity is being understood as the technological prowess of the nation state. If that is assumed to be true, then the nine stage model in my essaycould offer a way to solve the sentience and normativity problems in two stages. First, there is a seven stage model within the nine stages (fourth and seventh levels are dropped) that creates Constitutional Democracy (parallels sentience) and then the two dropped levels are added back to the model to create the technological prowess of the nation state (parallels normativity).

I really liked your essay. I am rating it highly. Perhaps, I should also clarify that I expect the brain to be completely different from the Constitutional nation state in almost all respects other than what is discussed above.

Hi Aron,

I finally got to your sane essay. Sorry it took me so long.

"Our conclusion is not that mathematical laws give rise to our intentions, but actually the other way around" Yes, Yes, Yes!

One of the questions that needs to be answered is: "How can non-linguistic abilities constitute linguistic ones?" My essay goes into the linguistic aspects of Choice vs. Determinist..... Linguistic quicksand.

Take a look at my essay....I think you will like it.

Your essay is terribly underrated by this community...I will do my best to rectify it.

Thanks

Don Limuti

PS: If you have any interest in gravity check out:

http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/1188/1163

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

Dear Yafet,

I'm glad you liked my essay; thanks for responding.

Quoting Weckbach, Godel's conclusion is not mathematically formalizable, serving as an argument against "the complete formalizability of all that exists."

You read Godel's theorem as saying that mathematics is more than formalization... I confess to not knowing how to interpret that. I could make a guess, but as I am sure you prefer an informed answer, I would suggest that you ask Stefan Weckbach this question, as he is more capable than I on this subject.

Having just read your essay (which is excellent) it is Gadamer's split between subjective and objective that I attempt to solve with the physical field of consciousness. The split has occasionally been healed through religious and/or psychedelic experiences, but never treated physically to my knowledge. The nature of self-awareness will always be a mystery, but I propose that the field possessing self-awareness couples to the real world and thus becomes part of the real physical world.

I like that you say "expressions of laws do not directly cause anything, mathematical or otherwise. What causes the sun to rise every morning are natural mechanisms, not our laws; these are just human heuristic artifacts...", and (later on) "are not created in a historical vacuum."

I generally agree with your conclusion, and offer the consciousness field as a solution to your problem #1, and, interacting with a sufficient neural net plus history, to problem #2.

I realize that more details of the physical field are required to be taken seriously and plan to provide those details in future.

Thank you for reading and commenting and participating in this contest.

My best wishes,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

PS. As I have been working with a friend who has now spent several years working on singularities in general relativity, I would be interested in your recent thesis. If it is not on arXiv, could you point me to it. Thanks.

Hi Yafet

Thanks for reviewing my essay. Appreciate your effort. I have responded to your queries on my page. The four steps mentioned there can also be understood as : 1 Personal space 2. Social space 3. Political space 4. Economic space.

Basically, the third step (political space) parallels sentience in intrinsic intelligence and fourth step (economic space) parallels linguistic capability of intrinsic intelligence. Of course, it goes without saying that the nation state does not become 'sentient' in any sense of that word. I am speaking merely of a structural parallel with the earlier intelligence level. The two intelligence levels are probably different in every other way.

I expect the brain to be modeled differently from the nation state because of its bio-chemical underpinnings, which are completely absent at the social/political/economic level. We will definitely need a new model for explaining the functioning of the brain. Hope I am making sense!

Cheers, Willy