Dear Tejinder Singh,

I really like your essay, it was great fun to read! I am also sympathetic to your conclusion that laws and things ultimately become the same. Perhaps one can also say, in favor of this view, that our intuitive picture of what a "thing" is becomes more and more inapplicable as we go down the "vertical fundamental", similarly as you describe in IV.

Good luck with your essay!

Best wishes,

Markus

    Dear Kamal,

    Thank you for reading my essay, and for drawing my attention to your work.

    Best wishes,

    Tejinder

    Dear Steve,

    Greetings, and thank you for your kind remarks.

    Best regards,

    Tejinder

    Dear Luca,

    Thanks so much for your kind and insightful remarks, and for telling me about the work of von Weizsacker, which I will surely look up.

    Thank you also for telling me about the ideas in your essay, which I am now reading.

    My best wishes,

    Tejinder

    Dear Markus,

    Thank you so much for your kind appreciation.

    I like your emphasis that

    "our intuitive picture of what a "thing" is becomes more and more inapplicable as we go down the "vertical fundamental" ".

    Indeed, I agree with you, and perhaps this has interesting philosophical implications!

    Kind regards,

    Tejinder

    Dear Tejinder

    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 telling me about your essay. But honestly, this barter thing, ``you read and rate my essay, and I will do the same for yours'', makes me uneasy :-) I am not for it. We read, comment and/or rate those essays where we have something useful and

      interesting to say.

      My best wishes to you in this contest,

      Tejinder

      Dear Tejinder,

      I enjoyed reading your essay. You beautifully discuss the nature of consciousness and the connections between the physical and biological domains. I however find that the reductionist layers of reality as you discuss may not be able to fully grasp the intangible nature of consciousness. You may also have alluded to this vaguely by referring to "the consciousness seems confined to the spatially localised body". The complexity and dynamical systems of the biological world cannot be simply entertained by a confined mathematically consistent basis, an exercise of human imagination. The interrelatedness of macromolecular scaffolding and functionality of biological systems would need another level of framework beyond these confines. I will add that the complete comprehension of consciousness will entail a deeper journey into the worlds of biological and physical evolutions. I believe they intricately co-exist, co-evolve and are co-dependent to define what we term "fundamentalness/absoluteness/consciousness".

      Best regards,

      Anil

        Tejendra, further to Anil's comments above,duality is part of life itself. The connect between QM and gravity bothers me too! Artificial Intelligence is nothing but intelligence itself as it deals with communication with aliens who may have followed a different route to understanding the nature.Whatever little i know of cosmology and particle Physics0, these two stands apart as two pillars at the ends. What lies in between remains poorly understood. Just shows how difficult it is to have a singlr theory to explain every thing in nature. The essays by Karen and you are ontop of lsit with the community of authros. However, i feel the scenario in nature permits us to look at our basic concepts and revise them as inadequate if we wish to work towardss a single theory for everything. To me estalished scientific methodolgy as eveloved thus far may not provide us the way to follow. Nature desires simplcity and humility to explore it rather than complicated assumptions and postulates. Complexity can only be handled with simplification rahter than further complexity!Human bias is our wrost enemy and we need to become selfless and free thinkers

          Dear Anil,

          Thank you for your valuable comments. I respect your differing views on matters related to consciousness.

          Kind regards,

          Tejinder

          • [deleted]

          Hi Singh,

          I fully enjoyed the way you put things together it and I think further words are useless.

          Rate it accordingly.

          If you would have the pleasure for a short axiomatic approach of the subject, I will appreciate your opinion.

          Silviu

            Dear Silviu,

            Thank you for reading my essay, and kindly drawing my attention to your essay, which I am now reading.

            Best wishes,

            Tejinder

            Dear Stefan,

            Thank you. The addendum, which you posted above, definitely helped. I had read your essay earlier a couple of times. Your essay shows great intellectual depth. I do not seem to have anything useful to add, so I have not commented on your page.

            My best wishes for your success in this contest.

            Tejinder

            Dear Tejinder, thank you for reading my essay and the addendum. I know it takes some time and energy to delf into many different essays and hence ideas in such a short time, so thank you again for having done this.

            Best wishes,

            Stefan Weckbach

            I have posted a personal message at your e-mail Id re. consciousness and have posted some recent investigations that show that cosmic consciousness exist independently of human consciousness. However, the latter does get affected by the former, thereby implying the role it plays in affecting human consciousness at the individual level. You and i have difference of opinion in this respect. Let us hope things will become clearer as the subject in under scientific investigation. I have strong belief that we humans being part of Nature's evolution do get affected by cosmic consciousness weather we like it or not. Logic that nature followed in evolution of the universe, earth as planet of Sun the star and placement of human being at the appropriate time is definetly a super intelligence and thus a matter which can be better understood by invoking what is called Artificial Intelligence studies involving means of communications!

            Dear Professor Singh,

            I just wanted to let you know that because you were one of my very first rating attempts, I graded your excellent essay too low. I was mostly way too focused on my own "Does it answer this year's FQXi question?" criterion. I emailed FQXi and asked them to either let me change your score or change it for me, but I never received a response. I am still hoping they fixed it. I assume there's some way to check who scored what, but I've never looked it up. I consciously try to pay as little attention to the ratings as I possibly can; personal contribution and mutual support (!) I think are what really count in the end.

            I am still reading your essay, and your intriguing paper on noncommutative spacetime! The paper is straightforward quantum stuff, accessible with some effort, but your essay is such a wonderfully different and clearly cogent perspective that I truly want to understand it. I am frustrated that my usually decently good "seeing it like the other person sees it" brain function kind of went south on me for that one.

            In any case, I hope all goes well for you, both in the FQXi contest and in your physics theory development. Physics needs more such diverse, new-perspective approaches!

            Cheers,

            Terry

              Tejinder,

              It must be fascinating to consider such philosophical questions, especially for someone with "research interests in quantum gravity .. and the problem of time in quantum theory."

              For my essay I tried to point out /propose "what" it is that is fundamental, and although there is some philosophy involved in the approach, well, I guess it isn't as fun to read.

              I am surprisingly in strong agreement with your statement "..laws and things become more and more like each other, until deepest down, they become one and the same." This is certainly true, because at the a-priori level, at which all the fundamentals of physics must come together in unison, things are just too small to be directly observed. (..with the possible exception of the neutrino.)

              I hope to hear more about your research interests..

              Wayne Lundberg

              https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3092