Dear Don,

Thank you for your time in reading my essay and for your comments. Yes, your summary is spot on. Maxwell's Demon turns out to be a great example on how intentions manifest themselves in the physical world. Glad you liked the essay, it was a challenge to write.

Thank you for your link to your research work on dark energy. I will have a closer look at it as well as your FQXi essay too.

Regards,

Robert

Dear Robert,

I read with great interest your deep analytical essay with ideas and conclusions that will help us overcome the crisis of understanding in fundamental science. I believe that the modern crisis of understanding in fundamental knowledge is the crisis of ontology. It is especially important that you actualize the concept of "memory". I think that this concept is the central concept - noumenon ordering the picture of the world of the Information age. I give my highest rating. I invite you to read my ideas .

Best regards,

Vladimir

    Dear Vladimir,

    Thank you very much for your favorable comments on my essay. They are greatly appreciated. As regards your question about a more substantive definition of memory, I think we agree when you say that "Ontological (structural, cosmic) memory is something that generates, keeps, develops, transforms, directs everything". Personally, I did not delve any deeper than it being a simple physical state that persists with time. With this definition any physical object can be usurped as a device for memory. The real utility of it though is only realized when coupled with the ability to process information that it represents at a higher level of abstraction (the definiton of emergence). Thank you for your reference to your essay. I will take a more detailed look at it.

    Regards,

    Robert

    Hi Robert,

    FYI: Have you checked out Ines Samengo essay. She also has invoked Maxwell's demon as a prototypical "chooser". She has focused on the memory clearing as a fundamental part of the action.

    There is something here...I wish I could get a clearer picture of it. If you have any insights would you post on my blog.

    Thanks,

    Don Limuti

    Dear Don,

    Yes thank you, I have enjoyed reading Inés Samengo's essay too. She and I both have references from Charlie Bennett at the IBM Research Lab in Yorktown Heights, NY. I had the privilege of spending some time with him about 10 years ago and his thoughts on thermodynamic considerations of computations are very poignant for this contest. The highly original and complimentary essays by Natesh Ganesh and Erik Hoel make a strong case for what you are saying as well. I really enjoyed your summary that Maxwell's Demon can be considered a "prototype of intention", something we are invited to consider when following the reasoning of Sherlock Holmes, "...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". Perhaps we can ask if there are any systems in nature that separate thermal environments to produce heat gradients, that can be used for useful work. Thermonuclear reactions in stars come to mind as quintessential sources of heat gradients, but I will think about this some more in the spirit of what you are saying, that Maxwell's Demon may be trying to tell us more than we are currently seeing.

    Regards,

    Robert

    Dear Robert,

    Thank you for your comment on my essay.

    Indeed what I had to refer as "The collective NOW memory" is wht is available as information on our Subjective Simultaneity Sphere. It also means that it is available for ALL other SSS spheres of any form of consciousness. The center of an SSS is indeed an emerging physical point in our emerging reality with its restrictions of space and time.

    If we are expanding the radius of an SSS this new sphere can involve the whole "known" universe with all its known and also unknown (meaning the not yet interpreted and discovered data) information.

    This could mean that we are receiving at any NOW moment ALL information (on our SSS) about our specific emerging reality, in the middele ages the "interpretation" of that collective NOW moment was another one as the one we are receiving right NOW, becuse of lack of knowledge.

    When looking around in our emerging reality we become aware that only a little part of our consciouss companions are sharing the "knowledge" of the specific NOW we are experiencing.

    The accumulated "knowledge" (awareness) of ALL branches of science is available for ALL s data on their SSS. This also counts for the collective "history" of a specific NOW moment that includes the infinity of time before this NOW, only a little part of thsi is available as "knowledge" that we become consciouss of.

    You asked me the right question that I am still working on , thank you for that.That is why I like so much the FQXi contest , you are directly confronted with essential questions.

    I am going to read comment and rate your essay NOW.

    best regards

    Wilhelmus

    Dear Robert

    I like to mention some remarks on your very well written essay:

    * "The second LAW of Thermodynamics" is a "collective memory" of a past analysis in this specific NOW moment. In the next NOW moment it may be totally different. It may just be another interpretation of Maxwells Demon...

    * Consciousness may be the counterforce of entropy...

    * Any "limit" of minimal information (Landauer) is restricted in TIME. Time is an emergent phenomenon, so is information so are the receiving agents... Each NOW moment includes ALL information of its past.

    * AI is crated by emergent consciousness, so maybe it is a GOAL that is not only occupied by progeneration...but can be a means to overcome the restrictions of time and space and come closer to Total Simultaneity...

    * It sis no use I think to look for the announcer in the radio. Both the announcer and the radio are emergent phenomenae.

    I liked your essay very much, the above remarks are only thoughts that came up during reading, I wish you good luck in the contest, be prepared to receive negative ratings without any comment (I got 6 ones!!!)...

    best regards

    Wilhelmus

      Dear Wilhelmus,

      Thank you for taking the time to read and comment on my essay. I appreciate it. I enjoyed your thoughts and extra perspective that you have provided. You say "Time is an emergent phenomenon, so is information so are the receiving agents". This is a fascinating discussion since I agree with you on the information and receiving agents. What I would love to understand better is the concept of time being a realization of another, deeper process. For example, neutron decay really happens at the scale where quantum effects are substantial, and yet we can treat the elapsed time for such an event classically. I wonder if you have more thoughts on that? In any event, thank you again for your comments and I will reply to your post regarding your essay on your forum.

      Regards,

      Robert

      PS: From the rules of the contest, I understand there is a good probability that excessively low ratings without basis will be cancelled and removed from scores before the final decisions are made.

      Dear Robert,

      I like your essay, I even managed to learn something from it. I have a couple of questions for you. At the conclusion, you quote P. Anderson:

      " In fact, the more the elementary particle physicists tell us about the nature of the fundamental laws, the less relevance they seem to have to the very real problems of the rest of science, much less society."

      If it is so, what do you think is the value of the particle physics for the humanity?

      I appreciate the very end of your paper:

      " They leave thermodynamic trails which we can follow. Their ultimate progenitors however remain elusive. Until such time as intentions find a way to know themselves."

      Do you think they might to know themselves in scientific way?

      I will score your text soon.

      Cheers,

      Alexey.

        Dear Alexey,

        Thank you very much for your time in reading and commenting on my essay. As regards your two questions, the Anderson quote I interpret to mean that particle physics is specialized in the way it is investigated, with no direct analogues that can be directly applied to other branches of science. I do believe there is great value in understanding particle physics though, especially since the way much of how our society has been transformed from early pre-technology days, is mostly in thanks to serendipitous discoveries along the way.

        Your seconds question about intentions knowing themselves, I very much like to believe that is a worthwhile goal that is within the realm of physics - though perhaps not quite the physics we have been able to discover yet. Those are two wonderful questions and I can keep at them for hours.

        Regards,

        Robert

        Robert, let's ponder a bit about your answer on the value of the particle physics (PP). This is a typical answer we heard many times, but is it good? The answer points to byproducts of PP, not to its direct aims. That sort of answer implies that the direct aims do not have a sufficient value to humanity, doesn't it? Keeping in mind that there is no reason to expect more fruitful byproducts from PP than from any other branch of physics, high price of PP and complete silence about its direct value, what might be a reason for humanity to support it? What do you think?

        Dear Robert,

        (I post this also on my thread (like you do) for the continuity and the alerts we receive when a new post is added)

        As we ALL are emergent agents in this emergent relity it is also for me sometimes difficult not to fall in the pitfall of accepting reality as REAL. Also it is quite difficult to obtain an "exteriour" viewpoint...

        When we stay comparing an emergent reality with its Source (TS) I am inclined now to accept that any emerging reality (ER) that is "lived" by a consciouss agent is a singularity both in TS as in ER. The singularity in ER is the whole "memory" of the agent, that SEEMS to be a FLOWING experience for the agent. The singularity in TS is the Eternal Now Moment. The "FLOWING" experience needs the introduction of TIME (that does not exist in TS. So you could say that from the emergent singularity emerges the experience of TIME and its specific life-line.

        The emergent SSS that I described produces for each agent its own data, and like the ever changing colours on a soap bubble each moment these data change through emergent time. The SSS is though just a method to explain our experience of reality out of a singyularity...

        As I indicated TIME is a restriction needed for experience. As TS is a timeless Hilbert Space (complete set ?) of ALL ENM's of ALL consciousnes agents it is indeed the "Place" where everything is simultaneous...

        So...now for the neutron decay : The data leading to the outcome of these experiments are experiences from your consciousness from your past, so from the FLOW of your reality awareness, also these data (once on your emergent SSS) are compressed in the singularity that is the origin of your life-line. So it is not "netron decay really happenes" but "the neutron decay data really were projected data on your SSS in your past".

        Now you can say : Okay where is my free will ?

        As there is an infinity of your life-lines in TS, each ENM that stands for a specific one is the one that is realised in time restricted decisions you made.

        So as this speific life-line is compressed in the singularity of ER (entangled with Total Consciousness in TS) at each decision it can be imagined to jump to another ENM, so forming another new life-line. The last thought is a one that is restricted by Time and Space. So in TS there ARE already ALL life-lines available as probabilities, which means also the so-called NEW one that is realised by your decision in ER is already an ENM that is "lived" by another agent called Robert...This could mean that Free Will is our ability for consciousness in Emergent Reality (through entanglement with Total Consciousness in TS) to make INTERPRETATIONS that are leading to THINK and DECIDE. ALL these interpretations are in ONE singularity...

        I know it is difficult to imagine and leads to many other INTERPRETATIONS, but it is a beautifull thought that is connected with the beauty of the experience of music. The awareness of the FLOW of a piece of music that in fact is timeless.

        I thank you for every question asked, it makes me think, so if there are more don't hesitate.

        best regards

        Wilhemus

        Dear Alexey,

        To me the tremendous impact the scientific method has had on society over the past few centuries is a trend that keeps evolving. At the end of the 19th century, physicists were ready to declare they had discovered everything there is to know. Then the quantum revolution came (started). It took decades though afterwards before the fruits of some of those discoveries could be marketed (consumer electronics and computers). The same for relativity. It took more than a few decades before GPS systems were prototyped. So I am a proponent of this trend continuing. But we will most likely not see any direct, tangible benefits of current PP research for some time to come. Having said this though, even the most esoteric of physics research forms part of our global information infrastructure on which our entire livelihoods rest. It is also not an expensive endeavor when compared with other human "priorities" - defense and entertainment come to mind.

        Coming back to the focus of this contest, since aims and intentions manifest themselves quite profoundly in our local physical neighborhood, and yet none of our physics is geared to treat them, I believe hunting down the true origins of intent will be a worthwhile, fruitful and paradigm shifting endeavor. The question "why am I, me?" is not simple to answer, and yet I belive it has an answer that has some purchase in physics, just one we have no proficiency to handle yet.

        Thank you for this lively discussion.

        Regards,

        Robert

        Dear Robert,

        Thanks for the interesting discussion. I have just scored your essay.

        All the best,

        Alexey.

        Dear Robert,

        I very much enjoyed your essay.

        In your treatment of Maxwell's demon as "a situation that is laced with intent", you gather a number of well-known facts and weave them together in as succinct a presentation as I've ever seen, focused on entropy, the Landauer limit, from Schrödinger's 'aperiodic crystal' to Watson and Crick. A key observation:

        "there is always a thermodynamic cost of storing information and any information that has no predictive value for the future is superfluous and wasteful."

        You then apply this to the genome as a memory register of useful knowledge that has accumulated over time.

        I believe this also correlates strongly with your remark on my page about Chomsky, re: "the fundamental nature that language has on the structure of an individual brain." In The Automatic Theory of Physics [my ref 5] I develop Steven Grossberg's mathematical model of neural nets and show an example neural network for sequence detection, with the example sequence "j", "oo", "ss" = 'juice'. As you note this is a neural structure, and clearly the predictive value of language is exceedingly high.

        I have made new connections based on your essay and your comments on my page. FQXi annually opens a new gold mine. Thank you for participating and sharing your insight.

        My best regards,

        Edwin Eugene Klingman

          Dear Robert,

          you wrote an excellent essay! It gives me a lot of things I have to think about. I'll have to come back with questions, but right now I'm too tired. For the moment I just say: Good luck for the contest!

          Cheers, Stefan

            Dear Stefan,

            Thank you very much for your time. I greatly appreciate it. Best of luck to you too!

            Regards,

            Robert

            Dear Edwin,

            Thank you so much for your detailed comments, I really appreciate them. I likewise have enjoyed new perspectives on this topic thanks to your essay.

            Kind regards,

            Robert

            Hi dear Robert

            Your work seems to me deeply analytical where you try to represented mutual interconnections of the peculiarities of whole with the primordial bricks. I think this is the right and maybe only is a single way to solve actual questions in such character. For me also it is attractive that you have guiding by energetically aspects of study and judgement, that allows to use math opportunities. However I am some skeptical that the offered question can be solved at all and right now, even principality (not speaking about of practically.) I feel you also have finished in somewhat sadly note on this. Why it is so, you and me can understand this as there are not clarified yet much of fundamental questions, as the quantum-classical duality, the essence of elementary particles at all, as will as mystery of gravity, break of symmetry etc. Then I think that it is just not so serious try to explain how operated and taking the decision the human brain when we cannot yet to answer what kind of force pressed on us in the our chair. I think our efforts must be directed on these in first. I hope my work can be in your interest (there main things are in refs). Meantime I continue to read your attractive essay. Hope you will answer in my page and we will completed our impressions!

            Best wishes

              Dear George Kirakosyan,

              Thank you for pointing me to your essay. I have left you a comment on your forum in the meantime. Thank you also for your comments about my essay. I have taken the reductionistic approach to begin with, with the intention of identifying the interplay of higher level information flow (such as that which goal-oriented behavior requires) to try isolate the physical conditions absolutely necessary for a world with intention to exist in the first place. I appreciate your comments and would like to let you know I have also rated your essay in the meantime.

              Regards,

              Robert