The How and The Why of Emergence and Intention by George Gantz

Yes, George, I totally agree with You. It is very important that Voevodsky deals profoundly with the foundations of mathematics.

You also do very great job of integrating science and religion on the portal The Swedenborg Center of Concord

Wonderful words and goals:

«Albert Einstein once wrote "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." This statement is at odds with the more common notions that science and religion are in opposition or that science and religion are completely independent and deal with totally distinct questions. However, it succinctly captures the basic ideas to be found in this Forum: That science is increasingly dealing with ineluctable limits that reach metaphysical and theological questions; That religion needs open inquiry and reasoning to remain viable as the source of transcendent insight rather than mere dogma; That human life has both physical and spiritual dimensions that we must cherish and explore as we seek to be truly whole.»

Here I think it is also important to recall Hegel's words: "An educated people without a metaphysics is like a richly decorated temple without a holy of holies."

I once again read the biography of Emanuel Swedenborg. He was a great man, scientist, philosopher!

I wish you success!

Sincerely,

Vladimir

Hi George,

I like your essay and I like your positive philosophy. It is a much welcome counterpoint to that of Mad Max and his Minions. I wish I could be as gracious as you are....but I need to say it as I feel it. I do think emotion is a part of the mix of reality and is a strong factor in "choice".

For example: I posted on one of the minions blogs "your emperor is totally nude (in Italian)". This minion was a determinist but his emotion (or greed) caused him to delete my post (followed by my score plummeting). Was his choice determined by mathematics?

Do take a look at my essay, before "they" remove this post.

Thank you for your comprehensive, readable, and joyful essay.

Don Limuti

Hi George,

I could use some of your level headedness.

Don Limuti

I like this one a lot George..

I strongly agree with your notion of Cosmic Intentionality, although we may differ about its origin. I greatly appreciate that you avoided the view of entropy as disorder entirely, and I think this added to the clarity of your presentation of entropy-related points. Tending toward greater homogeneity is a more useful metaphor. I like the focus on non-linear phenomena driving complexity, and on minimization strategies selecting for islands of order within the parameter space. It suggests that optimization problems found in the Calculus of Variations are a major part of the activity of living beings to maintain a livable state.

I disagree strongly with the notion of the 100 monkeys on typewriters; I don't think they could ever write Shakespeare, for the same reasons I spelled out to DeDeo regarding Borges' example with hexagonal rooms. One needs to also apply some condition of directionality, because a purely random sequence will not duplicate all of the elements of properly structured syntax - no matter how many trials there are. In my essay, I argue that what accomplishes this is non-associativity in higher-d Maths. I relate the Octonions to the Reflexive Universe idea of Arthur Young, as a way to explain the emergence of consciousness.

I'll continue below.

All the Best,

Jonathan

I like that you reject Reductionism as a default position..

I agree that bottom-up does not give the full picture, and that only a balance of top-down creativity with the bottom-up causality shows us the universe as it is. But my conversation with Tevian Dray at GR21 confirmed that there is a directional structuring in higher-dimensional Maths that even a lot of top experts fail to take into consideration. Arthur Young's work takes a process-theoretic view, and focuses on seven stage sequential evolution. This can be put into non-mathematical and personal terms, if the sequential levels of abstraction are strung into sentences.

One, open, as multiplicity and formless nothingness, finds peace in true relation and knows all as self.

A poem from the octonions... And I have several dozen more examples.

I like your inclusion of love and the notion it is universal. I think all living beings serve love on some level, but not all are aware of doing so; it appears that the ability to perceive and acknowledge love as a motivator is a hallmark of higher-evolved species and sentience. If one uses dictionary definitions, it is easy to show that even some rather barbaric acts satisfy the conditions of love service, but being conscious that love enters the picture seems to select for kindness over cruelty, as well as for cooperation.

So I find a lot to appreciate with this essay. While I am not in total agreement, you do hit the mark fairly often, and you are instructive about things that would otherwise be ignored - to our detriment. Thanks for sharing your insights.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Dear George Gantz,

Thank you for your lucid and upbeat essay. There are many things we agree upon and I am particularly intrigued by your perspective of whether intentionality can be recognized mathematically as a statistical anomaly (such as the group of monkeys on typewriters versus Shakespear himself). While I've heard this argument before, your essay has provided a perspective I did not have before. Thank you for that. I also wanted to let you know that I enjoyed your essay and have in the meantime, given it a rating too.

Regards,

Robert

Mr. George Gantz

Great conclusion!

This essay provided evidence that cosmic intentionality is a reasonable, consistent and complete inference about why the universe is the way it is. We can see that emergent processes exhibit intention, that systems are attracted to particular states while component units behave collaboratively in selecting those states, and that the entire process across and within levels is reciprocal. These qualities define the operative cosmic principle as love. We have the opportunity to embrace and reciprocate this love, with gratitude, joy and delight, and to believe that we are a meaningful part of a grand purpose.

However, where in our current standard model of the universe is the structure required to support cosmic intentionality? I think a greater structure is required to support your idea of a cosmic intention. At the risk of sounding self-promoting, my Reflective Field Theory may provide such a structure. At least, it provides a starting point and structure to expand your ideas. I think you would find my essay Our Emergent Universe interesting. You have my vote of a 10, great explanation of the issues. Philosophical questions need to be addressed like, "Exactly where and how do laws of nature exert influence and order?" I think my model points in the right direction. I would like to read your reaction.

Thank you, Graham

Hi George,

Having enjoyed your previous fqxi essay quite a lot (Lev said it should've taken the first place), we've been particularly looking forward to our exchange in this round. So, this is just a little reminder, since the time for that is coming to a close. In that regard, your questions above aren't quite clear to us. Please feel free to clarify them on our page.

Good luck!

Alexey.

Dear George Gantz

If you believed in the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes, then your essay would be even better. There is not movable a geometric space, and is movable physical space. These are different concepts.

I inform all the participants that use the online translator, therefore, my essay is written badly. I participate in the contest to familiarize English-speaking scientists with New Cartesian Physic, the basis of which the principle of identity of space and matter. Combining space and matter into a single essence, the New Cartesian Physic is able to integrate modern physics into a single theory. Let FQXi will be the starting point of this Association.

Don't let the New Cartesian Physic disappear! Do not ask for himself, but for Descartes.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential in understanding the world. To show potential in this essay I risked give "The way of the materialist explanation of the paranormal and the supernatural" - Is the name of my essay.

Visit my essay and you will find something in it about New Cartesian Physic. After you give a post in my topic, I shall do the same in your theme

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris

Dear George,

You are a poet, from the flock of starlings , the dancing waves and shimmering surfaces, the sunflower's artihmetic, also the 100 monkeys (I should take a minimum of hundredthousand) and the cause that makes a ball rolling, all these examples are an everyday beauty inviting us to like our life.

Then you continue indeed as a poet: "Galaxies emerge in a cosmic gravitational dance" their goal is to minimalise local entropy... that minimazes avaerage energy losses. But.... how did entropy get this height. Our perceptions of this reality indicate a certain "goal" like you indicate, but this also means that in an earlier point of the time dimension this goal has already been achieved...

Then you mention :"self-reflective conscious beings is the pursuit of science"

Here we are touching the essence "Consciousness" Here you indicate that consciousness is searching for the whatness. Maybe however it is the other way around and Consciousness is the origin of the emerged reality as we are aware of.

We humans are reciprocally connected, I fully agree with you, surely when you add : "a history of emergent threads weaving connections to all living things, to all times and places,and to the universe as a whole." This is the essental phrase for me in your beautiful written essay.

"Love flowing through the Universe" Our emergent reality has given us not only love but also hate and war. These two "feelings" are the origin of natures way to survive and its procreation. Reality is not only poetic dear George...but you are indeed a grandfather which I am not despite my four children and age of 71, and I think that that experience could make a man more optimistic.

You are ending with a question, the same question I am posing myself since years, this question has given me some answers that I am after the same search as yours am giving in my essay : The Purpose of Life".

I hope that you will find some emergeing time to read it, leave an esteemed comment and maybe a rating.

best regards and thanks for your essay.

Wilhelmus

Dear George Gantz,

Thanks for a wonderful essay. My eyes watered at your description of the starlings, and related it to your bicycle racing days. "Wild and crazy fun." Today my wild and crazy fun is mental, but you reminded me of my younger, physical, days of wild and crazy fun.

You place things in perspective. The "crucial difference between intentions and agency. Intentions are behaviors that can be observed. Agency is a quality that must be inferred." Perhaps a slight redefinition of "intention", but the point is that agency must be inferred. Your 'Shakespeare in the monkey gibberish' nicely illustrates that, "it is correspondingly impossible to determine if this universe was written by randomness or by intention." That is key. So how do we decide? I address that in my essay, which I hope you will read and comment on. I loved your "Hole at the Center of Creation", but this year you have surpassed yourself.

You have probably the best thought I have found in this contest:

"The universe has given us life, beauty, joy and self-reflective consciousness - it has loved us. In turn, it is possible for each of us to reciprocate this love."

It is reciprocal. Your grandson "loves the world ... and the world loves him back." And so for your new Colorado grandson (where my grandsons live.)

"Choose as you will, but I believe the Universe is meant to be lived in, to be explored, and to be loved."

Yours, in gratitude,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Dear George,

the topic left room for interpretations, you went for the cosmic scale. You argue clearly, why you prefer to see intention whenever you have the choice. Your essay is nice to read and comforting. I like your pictures, especially the flocking of birds! Myself, I went for the question whether goal-oriented behavior on macroscopic scales is at all compatible with "mindless mathematical laws" on microscopic scales. I answer this question positively and I wonder whether you'd find this conclusion comforting. I'm leaning towards the naturalist side, in particular methodologically, but I also find joy and delight in exploring the universe. We started with different questions and cover different aspects of the topic, but concerning the attitude resulting from the choices you offer at the end of your essay, we do not end up all that different.

Cheers, Stefan