Essay Abstract

The pursuit of knowledge often leads downwards and outwards: towards the lowest-level phenomenon (fundamental) and the largest number of like-minds (intersubjectivity). According to this view, a scientific phenomenon is reduced to its lowest common denominator, and eventually leads to a consensus-like view. Yet this may not be the only set of paths to and from fundamental knowledge, as this implies an inherently reductionist approach to the creation and exploration of knowledge. In this essay, we will explore how fundamental levels of analysis relate to larger frameworks of knowledge and discovery. Rather than framing the fundamental as a mechanistic necessity or a lower-level enabler of emergence, I propose that an alternative (the nonlinear intercontextual view) leads to a number of important benefits. The proposed viewpoint allows for fundamental components of a body of knowledge to be identified and characterized in a broader historical, intellectual, and mechanistic context. This view can be distinguished from the intersubjective view of knowledge-sharing, which implies many implicit assumptions and encourages unnecessary constraints of thought. A nonlinear intercontextual view also provides a way to reconsider what constitutes a fundamental unit in a body of knowledge. This leads us to new conclusions about the underpinnings of our scientific fields, our theoretical assumptions, and a set of meta-fundamentals that can redefine the manner in which scientific knowledge is set forward into the world.

Author Bio

Bradly Alicea has a PhD from Michigan State University. He has published in multiple academic fields, and in venues including Nature Reviews Neuroscience, Stem Cells and Development, Biosystems, and Proceedings of Artificial Life. With interests spanning the biological, computational, and social sciences, he is currently Head Scientist and Founder of Orthogonal Research (http://orthogonal-research.weebly.com) and a Senior Contributor at the OpenWorm Foundation (http://openworm.org). Bradly is involved with Open Science initiatives such as community-building and the DevoWorm group (http://devoworm.weebly.com). Bradly is also the administrator of Synthetic Daisies blog. Please see Bradly's research website (http://bradly-alicea.weebly.com) or blog (http://syntheticdaisies.blogspot.com) for more information.

Download Essay PDF File

Mr. Alicea

Regarding: This interdependency can be seen in domains such as political and weather forecasting, where fundamental preconditions are used as statistical priors, and often constrain the range of possible solutions.

As a meteorologist I do not agree, because meteorological forecast is based on deterministic relations.

Regards,

Branko

    Dear Bradly John Alicea,

    In qualifying the aim of the 'What is Fundamental?' essay contest, Dr. Brendan Foster, the FQXi.org Science Projects Consultant wrote: "We invite interesting and compelling explorations, from detailed worked examples through thoughtful rumination, of the different levels at which nature can be described, and the relations between them.

    Real Nature has never had any abstract finite levels.

    I have concluded from my deep research that Nature must have devised the only permanent real structure of the Universe obtainable for the real Universe existed for millions of years before man and his finite complex informational systems ever appeared on earth. The real physical Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

    Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

    Dear Bradly John Alicea,

    In qualifying the aim of the 'What is Fundamental?' essay contest, Dr. Brendan Foster, the FQXi.org Science Projects Consultant wrote: "We invite interesting and compelling explorations, from detailed worked examples through thoughtful rumination, of the different levels at which nature can be described, and the relations between them.

    Real Nature has never had any abstract finite levels.

    I have concluded from my deep research that Nature must have devised the only permanent real structure of the Universe obtainable for the real Universe existed for millions of years before man and his finite complex informational systems ever appeared on earth. The real physical Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

    Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

    10 days later

    Hi Dr Bradly John Alicea,

    Wonderful pursuit towords..." According to this view, a scientific phenomenon is reduced to its lowest common denominator, and eventually leads to a consensus-like view" leading towards the meta-fundamental Dr Bradly John Alicea.............. very nice idea.... I highly appreciate your essay and hope for reciprocity.

    I request you please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

    Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :

    -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 GR on any condition

    -No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models

    -No many mini Bigbangs

    -No Missing Mass / Dark matter

    -No Dark energy

    -No Bigbang generated CMB detected

    -No Multi-verses

    Here:

    -Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies

    -Newton's Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way

    -All bodies dynamically moving

    -All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium

    -Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe

    -Single Universe no baby universes

    -Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only

    -Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..

    -UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass

    -Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step

    -Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering

    -21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet

    -Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy

    -Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.

    - Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true....Have a look at

    http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.html

    I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

    Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

    In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from "http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ "

    I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

    Best

    =snp

    Dear Fellow Essayists

    This will be my final plea for fair treatment.,

    FQXI is clearly seeking to find out if there is a fundamental REALITY.

    Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

    All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe must consist only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

    Only the truth can set you free.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

    10 days later

    Bradley - I think your essay would do well to be read aloud. I love the feel of the words you use - even as the meaning seems to drift and flow. I did, however, find it hard to find a coherence in your presentation. Perhaps we would benefit from a bit more inter contextual conversation. I also feel that your discussion of "meta-knowledge" could be taken a lot further - and would appreciate your opinion as to whether you find my essay useful in the regard.

    One additional reaction to your paragraph: "In the case of social or religious fundamentalism, the idea of building blocks can work the other way. Instead of building up from a few core attributes, fundamentalism isolates a few stereotyped beliefs or cultural practices and builds a self-reinforcing set of interactions. In social fundamentalism, core beliefs are selected and reinforced post hoc, resulting in a set of reconstituted building blocks. Yet rather than serving as the foundation for additional structure, fundamentalism simply collapses cultural practices and their background belief structure to the building blocks themselves."

    Would you agree this same danger exists in science as well? Avoiding this outcome requires humility and open-ness to ideas and evidence that one might initially find uncomfortable. In that way one is able to explore the intercontextual pathway to improved meta-knowledge.

    Cheers - George Gantz

    Respected prof Bradly John Alicea

    It is very nice alternative (the nonlinear intercontextual view).... "The proposed viewpoint allows for fundamental components of a body of knowledge to be identified and characterized in a broader historical, intellectual, and mechanistic context..... it is very useful... Best wishes to your essay sir... By the way....

    Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed................ yours is very nice essay best wishes .... I highly appreciate hope your essay ....You may please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance

    Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :

    -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 GR on any condition

    -No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models

    -No many mini Bigbangs

    -No Missing Mass / Dark matter

    -No Dark energy

    -No Bigbang generated CMB detected

    -No Multi-verses

    Here:

    -Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies

    -Newton's Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way

    -All bodies dynamically moving

    -All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium

    -Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe

    -Single Universe no baby universes

    -Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only

    -Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..

    -UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass

    -Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step

    -Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering

    -21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet

    -Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy

    -Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.

    - Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true....Have a look at

    http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.html

    I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information........

    Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.

    In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from "http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ "

    I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied

    Best

    =snp

    11 days later

    Dear Bradly

    If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please?

    A couple of days in and semblance of my essay taking form, however the house bound inactivity was wearing me. I had just the remedy, so took off for a solo sail across the bay. In the lea of cove, I had underestimated the open water wind strengths. My sail area overpowered. Ordinarily I would have reduced sail, but this day I felt differently. My contemplations were on the forces of nature, and I was ventured seaward increasingly amongst them. As the wind and the waves rose, my boat came under strain, but I was exhilarated. All the while I considered, how might I communicate the role of natural forces in understanding of the world around us. For they are surely it's central theme.

    Beyond my essay's introduction, I place a microscope on the subjects of universal complexity and natural forces. I do so within context that clock operation is driven by Quantum Mechanical forces (atomic and photonic), while clocks also serve measure of General Relativity's effects (spacetime, time dilation). In this respect clocks can be said to possess a split personality, giving them the distinction that they are simultaneously a study in QM, while GR is a study of clocks. The situation stands whereby we have two fundamental theories of the world, but just one world. And we have a singular device which serves study of both those fundamental theories. Two fundamental theories, but one device? Please join me in questioning this circumstance?

    My essay goes on to identify natural forces in their universal roles, how they motivate the building of and maintaining complex universal structures and processes. When we look at how star fusion processes sit within a "narrow range of sensitivity" that stars are neither led to explode nor collapse under gravity. We think how lucky we are that the universe is just so. We can also count our lucky stars that the fusion process that marks the birth of a star, also leads to an eruption of photons from its surface. for if they didn't then nebula gas accumulation wouldn't be halted and the star would again be led to collapse.

    Could a natural organisation principle have been responsible for fine tuning universal systems? Faced with how lucky we appear to have been, shouldn't we consider this possibility?

    For our luck surely didnt run out there, for these photons stream down on earth, liquifying oceans which drive geochemical processes that we "life" are reliant upon. The Earth is made up of elements that possess the chemical potentials that life is entirely dependent upon. Those chemical potentials are not expressed in the absence of water solvency. So again, how amazingly fortunate we are that these chemical potentials exist in the first instance, and additionally within an environment of abundant water solvency such as Earth, able to express these potentials.

    My essay is an attempt at something audacious. It questions the fundamental nature of the interaction between space and matter Guv = Tuv, and hypothesizes the equality between space curvature and atomic forces is due to common process. Space gives up an energy potential in exchange for atomic forces in a conversion process, which drives atomic activity. And furthermore, that Baryons only exist because this energy potential of space exists, and is available for exploitation. Baryon characteristics and behaviours, complexity of structure and process might then be explained in terms of being evolved and optimised for this purpose and existence. Removing need for so many layers of extraordinary luck to eventuate our own existence. It attempts an interpretation of the above mentioned stellar processes within these terms, but also extends much further. It shines a light on molecular structure that binds matter together, as potentially being an evolved agency that enhances rigidity and therefor persistence of universal system. We then turn a questioning mind towards Earths unlikely geochemical processes, (for which we living things owe so much) and look at its central theme and propensity for molecular rock forming processes. The existence of chemical potentials and their diverse range of molecular bond forming activities? The abundance of water solvent on Earth, for which many geochemical rock forming processes could not be expressed without? The question of a watery Earth? is then implicated as being part of an evolved system that arose for purpose and reason, alongside the same reason and purpose that molecular bonds and chemical process arose.

    By identifying process whereby atomic forces draw a potential from space, we have identified means for their perpetual action, and their ability to deliver perpetual work. Forces drive clocks and clock activity is shown by GR to dilate. My essay details the principle of force dilation and applies it to a universal mystery. My essay raises the possibility, that nature in possession of a natural energy potential, will spontaneously generate a circumstance of Darwinian emergence. It did so on Earth, and perhaps it did so within a wider scope. We learnt how biology generates intricate structure and complexity, and now we learn how it might apply for intricate structure and complexity within universal physical systems.

    To steal a phrase from my essay "A world product of evolved optimization".

    Best of luck for the conclusion of the contest

    Kind regards

    Steven Andresen

    Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin

    Dear Bradly,

    I highly appreciate your well-written essay in an effort to understand.

    It is so close to me.

    «A nonlinear intercontextual view also provides a way to reconsider what constitutes a fundamental unit in a body of knowledge. This leads us to new conclusions about the underpinnings of our scientific fields, our theoretical assumptions, and a set of meta-fundamentals that can redefine the manner in which scientific knowledge is set forward into the world».

    «Reductionism can occur in a wide variety of forms, from training regimens to experimental designs. Secondly, the discovery and acquisition of fundamental units result in the formation of building blocks, which are essential to perpetuating knowledge and operating on it in the world. Building blocks are usually classificatory in nature, although they can also be tied together as a series of theoretical statements. In any case, building blocks contribute to structure, which creates an activity or area of inquiry distinct from its fundamental antecedents».

    I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.

    Vladimir Fedorov

    https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080