Quote: "... every program that flows through the hardware of

a computer is deterministic"

Yes, but COMPUTER VIRUS has a difference with being goal directed and replicating.

    Thanks for reading, Shaikh. I'll swing by and read your essay.

    Even if a virus program encodes the goal of replicating itself, I don't think it is running on random bits or anything like that. A computer virus, along with its infected host, still follows a deterministic process, albeit not the same process had the original program not been infected with the virus... so I'm not sure it this consideration you've brought up leads to anything different in terms of what the short essay was considering.

    Jon

    Greetings, Jon. "What is emergence? Could the crossover point when something "emerges" correspond to the point when a system become more easily understood and predicted with a higher-level model than a more detailed model?" In terms of first-order logic, one might say that a theory "emerges" from another theory when its logical consistency can be proved in terms of a more powerful theory, e.g., proving that Peano Arithmetic is logically consistent under the assumption that Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory is logically consistent. If a computer operator system A can be successfully simulated by a more powerful computer operator system B, then one might say that system A "emerges" from system B when the simulation is being executed. One might define "emergence" from a bottom-up viewpoint or from a top-down viewpoint. One might say that the social sciences "emerge" from physics, chemistry, and biology, or that physics, chemistry, and biology "emerge" from the social sciences specialized to a narrower conceptual domain based upon more precise experiments than are possible in the social sciences. With regard to physics, Verlinde's ideas on emergent gravity might be worth considering.

    Erik Verlinde (University Amsterdam) Emergent Gravity and the Dark Universe, YouTube, 2016

    In the comments sections of my essay for this contest, I have posted some more comments related to your ideas. Also, for those who really believe in the Fredkin-Wolfram paradigm, it seems to me that at least 2 modifications to Einstein's field equations are necessary: one to prevent the endless expansion of the universe and another to prevent energy-density from becoming arbitrarily large.

    -- D. Brown

      Hi Jon,

      I enjoyed your essay and found a number of interesting things in it. I particularly liked:

      "If you're able to see the forest for the trees, or if you have access to the high-level programming language, you can interpret the system from the [top-down] view."

      And I very much liked,

      "I think humans are more like information systems than physical systems. After all our cells turn over so we aren't made of the same stuff we were just a short time ago."

      That interests me from two perspectives. First, a consciousness field is compatible with such cellular turnover. Second, I don't believe information exists other than as a change in physical structure, and your statement seems completely compatible with my view of information.

      And I think your focus on 'gliders' in 'The Game of Life' is an excellent toy model to debate the meaning of 'emergence'.

      Today's been a very very busy day, and the list of essays seems to never quit growing. I did watch the trailer and will watch it later!

      Best regards,

      Edwin Eugene Klingman

        Hello Jon

        I enjoyed reading your essay, but the concepts of up dow down up can be easily misunderstood, particularly when programs are interposed. Rather I will say I watched the trailer of the movie and liked its two main characters - the Woody Allenish protagonist with his sense of humor, and cellular automata (on an old Mac another nice element). In my Beautiful Universe Theory I propose a sort of universal physics based on one special type of CA

        More power to you.

        Best wishes

        Vladimir

          Dear Jonathan Khanlian,

          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

            Thanks for reading my essay, David. Very interesting thoughts there about how the word "emerge" could be used in a top-down sense. Maybe it would be useful if we had multiple versions of the word. Your simulation example seems like a computation with intent and purpose in what it is trying to show, where my example seems to be noting phenomena (e.g. Hey, I'll call this pattern "gliders" and think of it as an "object"!) that is a consequence of a computing system with no intent. It's funny that either way we are just talking about a deterministic computer program.

            I watched a little of Erik's video last night, but it was pretty late and the talk would have required a lot of googling for me. I'll try again when I get more energy, but I like the idea of time and space emerging from simpler concepts. And with regards to your thoughts on Wolfram/Fredkin-type models, it sounds like you are talking about getting rid of infinities?? If so, I agree. Please check out "Digital Physics" (the movie) if you get the chance; I tried to inject some fun into these topics.

            Thanks, Edwin (not "Eugene"), for reading my essay and watching my movie trailer! And thank you for correcting my quote without even noting it:) "Forest FOR the trees" not "Forest FROM the Trees".

            That first quote you liked is a point that Ray Kurzweil often brings up... and I do think it is compatible with your view that information needs a substrate/physical structure/hardware. And that thought about whether or not "gliders" should be considered emergent came from David Chalmers... God I steal all the best ideas... Luckily their recycled in an informal way, often with tweaks, which allows me to avoid litigation most of the time:)

            Please let me know what you think of the movie if you get a chance to watch it!

            Jon

            Whoops, my reply should say "That SECOND quote you liked is a point that Ray Kurzweil...". He likens us to the shape of a river, where the water molecules change constantly, but the meandering pattern evolves more slowly.

            Thanks, Vladimir! I will check out your FQXi essay and leave a comment, since it might be easier to get through that essay, than the longer essay on your website at the moment. I love Cellular Automaton (and even simpler models), so I look forward to seeing what your CA model is all about.

            If you don't get Amazon Prime in Tokyo, you can still find "Digital Physics" on iTunes and Vimeo to rent. There's plenty of Cellular Automaton and other trinkets in the movie to keep FQXi essay enthusiasts engaged...I hope:)

            Jon

            Joe, Are you a bot? :) I swear I read this exact comment under another essay forum. But I'll swing by and read your essay. Keep in mind, I don't like infinities, especially ones bigger than Aleph-Null, so I'm coming in with that bias...Fair warning :)

            Jon,

            You're a fun guy. Not at all 'stiff' like they said!

            Edwin Eugene Klingman

            Dear Jonathon,

            My essay proves that the real visible Universe was not created. This means that all of the Roman Catholic Popes who have ever lived were wrong about the accomplishments of an invisible God. The Roman Catholic Church has a nasty habit of executing heretics and destroying their writings. I am not a "bot".

            Joe Fisher, Realist

            Nice essay Khanlian,

            Your ideas and thinking are excellent for eg...

            ' By "top-down", I am referring to the notion of an agent with free-will that manipulates its environment in order to reach a desired goal. By "bottom-up", I am referring to a deterministic system that follows logic operations'

            A Good idea, I am probably referring to another deterministic system which tries to achieve goals! ................................. I want you to ask 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

              Ok, ok, Joe. You've passed the Turing Test; I don't think you're a bot anymore. I will try to take a look at your essay very soon. I will be on vacation for the next week, so my FQXi community engagement might be low, but I will check it out soon.

              Thanks,

              Jon

              Thanks for your thoughts, Satyavarapu (aka SNP.Gupta)

              I will be on vacation for the next week, so getting some time to read FQXi essays may be difficult. But I will try to check out your essay at some point soon.

              But in the meantime, I'll just ask: What is "dynamic" in your "Dynamic Universe Model"? Are the laws of of nature dynamic? I believe most models of the universe are implicitly "dynamic", in the sense that they evolve and change over time.

              Oh, and check out Digital Physics(the movie)!

              Thanks,

              Jon

              4 days later

              Hi Jon,

              A short, concise essay that is well-written. I share your views that things like free-will are illusions that have underlying them processes that are largely deterministic. However, there is a role for spontaneously occurring events without a cause and this when mixed with the largely deterministic processes may convey the impressions of free-will, etc.

              All the best in the competition.

              Regards,

              Akinbo

                I think I better rate your essay right away. Enjoy your vacation!