Dear Andrei,
You are doing a very deep critical analysis of modern science and its basic problems, giving a new conception whose ideas are aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in fundamental science. Today, the broadest competition of ideas is needed, especially in cosmology . I have only one wish: to expand the ontological foundation of your conception. I wish success in your further research!
Regards,
Vladimir
Hello dear Andrey
It's nice to see you here again and read your fascinating article. You are set on a critical audit of some basic methodological approaches that I just welcome. I am more impressed that you see the problem in its early origin, with which the majority of advanced scientists will be very diffecult to be agree themselves. This is really difficult to do from the psychological and purely human points of view. However, you are absolutely right here and I am completely with you. This will inevitably have to be done if we really want to have a truthful and reliable science. Approximately the same thought I'm trying to bring to the reader in my work that I hope you'll look.
My best wishes to you.
George Kirakosyan
Hello George,
Thank you for your positive estimate of my efforts, and I think that we do agree on the origin of modern fundamental science problems, which must be solved within a deeper insight in order to ensure further progress of fundamental knowledge.
Dear Andrei,
Here we are again all together.
I highly appreciate your beautifully written essay.
«the simplified abstract scheme of reality within the standard science paradigm cannot provide the consistent picture of "truly fundamental" reality». Great!
I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for your support of my ideas. Me too, I find a number of general correlations between our approaches (like the principles of causality and completeness), even though many technical details in your essay seem unclear to me. In any case, it is the search for such causally complete description of reality that alone can solve modern science problems and provide the truly, objectively fundamental picture of the world.
Dear Andrei
If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don't rate them at all. Infact I haven't issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to gain.
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 and my essay 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. And again, how lucky we are! for if they didn't then 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 attempt of 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 a 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 formation 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 chemistry processes arose.
By identifying atomic forces as having their origin in space, we have identified how they perpetually act, and deliver work products. 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 explain 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 Steven,
Thank you for your interest and communication. You're citing in your essay a number of general ideas, which are close to my own approach, such as complexity, "Darwinian" evolution, emergence, adaptability and (the necessity of) universality of truly fundamental knowledge. Their realisation in your description looks less clear to me and it was difficult to provide a correct total estimate (in any case, you have a nice score, which is close to saturation by the number of ratings). I leave it up to you the rating of my essay, while noting that it specifies a particular, provably universal realisation of the mentioned general principles.
Dear ANDREI P. KIRILYUK, I approve of what you have said in your essay and put 10, moreover, THE UNREDUCED dynamic reality - is a study in New Cartesian Physics is based on the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes. According to this principle, space is matter and matter is space that is moving. Look at my essay, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes. I hope you will not leave without attention to this principle and appreciate good New Cartesian Physics for his radicalism
Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.
Dear Boris,
Thank you for the high rating for my essay. After having a look at your work, I can say that I share the main points of your criticism of today's mainstream science framework and, similar to you, I appreciate major features of Cartesian approach and philosophy. However, I cannot say that I understand further details of the "new Cartesian physics" you propose, even though I do appreciate the general realistic character of this attempt. Therefore, I was unable to give any definite rating to your essay (as it relies essentially on those details), while noting also that it has a decent score of quasi-saturated level. It doesn't mean that your ideas seem totally wrong, and maybe further elaboration of the content and presentation could clarify the results for interested readers.
P.S. The above response to Boris is from me, Andrei Kirilyuk (some login uncertainty).
Thanks for his criticism of my essay. I understand that it was written poorly. Its main aim is to attract researchers to continue the theory of everything of Descartes' taking into account modern achievements in physics. The principle of identity of physical space and matter allows us to extend physics to living matter. For this we need to pay attention to the fact that matter within the body is the same as outside it. Our brain creates an image of the outside world not within themselves and in the space around themselves. This image of the outside world has an active nature, as it controls the body.
New Cartesian Physics needs your support to develop further. Visit my page and give there your assessment.FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich
I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko
