Essay Abstract
This brief essay is a contribution to the 2017 edition of the FQXi Essay Contest on the theme "Wandering Towards a Goal - How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?". We explore the relationship between complexity and Physics through the prism of causality.
Author Bio
Physicist, software developer by day, gentleman scientist by night.
Hello Xavier,
I enjoyed your essay. I wanted to ask more detail about this: "
Despite our attempt to get rid of it, causality appears to be a Gordian Knote. As causality is embedded in Einstein's relativity but potentially irrelevant in quantum mechanics, we have to reconsider the foundations of Physics."
I was curious as to why you think causality is inherent to relativity? I ask because I know of the deflationary account of Bertrand Russell, who infamously said that causality doesn't exist. I think he proposed that theory while writing a book about relativity (or had recently) - so I was curious as to what made you say that causality is embedded in relativity? Is there some way causation is necessary for it, or can it be discarded as Russell suggested?
I'm interested in this because I also took a "causal approach" to the essay question in my own essay "Agents above, Atoms Below," so you might find it of intriguing.
Thanks so much for your time and your essay,
Erik P Hoel
Dear Xavier Derkx,
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 Derkx,
Your ideas and thinking are excellent like....
1. Complex systems are systems which "exhibit a distinctive property called emergence, roughly described by the common phrase 'the action of the whole is more than the sum of the parts
2. Physics, built on different principles:
• a thermodynamic arrow (i.e. the second principle of the thermodynamics) ;
• a quantum arrow (which manifests when the wave function collapse occurs) ;
• a cosmological arrow (the Universe is expanding) etc...
.............................. At this point I want you to ask you one question, you are considering only 40 percent of Galaxies which are redshifted. You are taking the Universe is only expanding.
Hence I request you to please have a look at my essay, where ...............reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc...just have a look at my essay... "Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe" where UGF (Universal Gravitational force) acting on each and every mass, will create a direction and purpose of movement.....
I think intension is inherited from Universe itself to all Biological systems
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
Hello Erik,
Thank you very much for your comment and sorry for the delayed answer.
I'm not familiar with Bertrand Russell's points of view, so I can only try to clarify what I meant:
In Einstein's relativity there is an absolute upper limit to speed (the speed of light in a vacuum c0). Let's consider two events E1 and E2, whose positions in space-time are (x1,t1) and (x2,t2), with x for the spatial position and t for the time position. E1 and E2 can only interact if the spatial distance (x1,x2) can be covered in the time interval (t1,t2) with a speed below c0. From the maths, the time interval (t1,t2) can either be positive or negative (i.e. going backward in time). But in order to be able to interpret that in Physics, we only consider the positive time intervals, because it respects the causality principle. A chronological time (which requires an absolute time where everyone shares the same 'clock') is then replaced by a causal one (with the concept of light cone). Enforcing the causality principle is mandatory in the frame of relativity. As far I understand, there is no such constraints in quantum mechanics.
I hope I have answered your question.
I am looking forward to reading your essay...
Best regards,
Xavier
Hello Joe,
Thank you for your comment.
"Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it."
I'm afraid you're confusing the complexity of the rules governing the Universe with the complexity of their manifestation. Extremely complex systems can produce a simple interface to interact with. For example, a smartphone has a simple interface which allows a 2-year old to use it. Nevertheless, the technology behind, in terms of micro-electronics (e.g. the CPU), space technologies (e.g. for the GPS) and computer sciences (e.g. network and software) is extremely complex. There is no needs to understand quantum mechanics or relativity, in which some part of this technology relies on, to use a smartphone. In computer sciences, such a principle is called "encapsulation". A unicellular body follows the same principle: it doesn't need and doesn't have the capacity to understand its environment. But, locally, the interface is simple enough to allow it to interact 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."
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean....
Good luck with your essay,
Xavier
Hello Gupta,
Thank you for your comment.
Here, I am not considering whether or not the whole Universe is expanding. My point is that there is an emerging order from the principle used: expansion implies there is a direction, a "before" and an "after". The question is: how is this direction from expansion linked to, for example, the direction from thermodynamics? Is one the consequence of the other? Are they just the manifestation of a more fundamental principle? etc.
Good luck with your essay,
Xavier
Xavier,
Great essay, lovely writing style and well argued points. Of course it helps that I agree and indeed invoke many in my own essay! Also a good length for this late stage in proceedings. I wonder if all should be shorter (though mine are crammed already!)
Have you thought of the hierarchical structures similarities to the layered structure of propositional dynamic logic (PDL) or modal 'quantum' logic. My essay last year identified an underlying structure, surprisingly consistent also with the rules of brackets in arithmetic. I extend that to the brain this year.
I also entirely agree and also invoke your; feedback and iterations of a causal loop. in deriving 'aims'.
You say; "A naive approach could be to regard both current frame theories (general relativity and quantum mechanics) as borderline cases of a base theory, along with the introduction of some scale effect" Maybe that's no so naive. It's not so far from what I do; resulting in compatible QM/SR with a classical mechanistic derivation of QM. Do look and see what you make of it (also at the video - see links in recent posts).
Very well done for yours. Score boost coming. I do hope you get to mine in time (but you can't rush reading it!)
Very best
Peter
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
Hello Peter,
Thank you very much for your comment and your appreciation of my contribution.
I have not thought of any specific type of logic while writing this essay, but I think that dynamic logic could be particularly relevant here.
I have started reading your essay. I have found it rather interesting so far, I should be able to finish by the vote deadline.
Best regards,
Xavier