Barber or not barber? by Domenico Oricchio

Dizhechko Semyonovich

Dear Dominico Oricchio, a hairdresser, is it not enough for you that a neocartesian generalization of modern physics has revealed a connection between the Lorentz factor and the probability density of atomic states, and also explained the formula of masses - energy of equivalence by the existence of pressure of the Universe on a corpuscle? Already these two facts are the greatest achievements of neocartesian physics, based on the identity of space and matter of Descartes. In order to continue to talk with you, you must show that you have acquired this identity and realized that space is matter, and it moves, since it is matter. And then we'll talk about the Dirac and Klein - Gordon equations. I think that this will not be soon. All the best to you!

Boris Dizhechko

Domenico Oricchio

I also think that this is sufficient both for me and for you.

Domenico

Jonathan Dickau

A bit of comedy perhaps?

That is not so bad. But it was too brief or inconclusive. Your essay is at least thought-provoking. You seem to be hinting at what Paola Zizzi calls para-consistent logic, and her research explains the emergence of spacetime in terms of logic gates, in a recent paper. You might want to check her work out. I will come back later, if I have something constructive to say.

Best,

Jonathan

Domenico Oricchio

Thank your for your comment, and constructive criticism: I will report to Kurt.

I am reading the Paola Zizzi - Computability at the Plank scale; it is interesting , from the abstract, the idea of computability but not decidable.

Domenico

Domenico Oricchio

Zizzi write a standard article, with many interesting consideration.

The absence of biunivocity between quantum calculus and real quantum system.

The idea of a fuzzyness of the space-time.

The inner observer has a paraconsisten logic, a logic without contradictions.

That the quantum calculus to the Plank scale lie a quantum algorithm.

The Deutsch idea that the physical law are quantum Turing machine in the space-time.

The quantum system use physical law for the evolution, so that each program is computable.

Here I read the interesting idea, that in the first Godel's incompleteness theorem is different in Plank scale: the theorems are proven but not observable as true, due to the internal non-observability of the truth value.

Results almost similar to mine, but with a superior quality of writing and depth.

Thanks for the reading suggestion

Domenico

Jonathan Dickau

I have found Paola's work inspirational...

I think she is under-appreciated, but has been a beacon of light for the quantum age. According to Seth Lloyd; it was she who first coined the term "It from qubit" that is now very popular, but the field has left her behind. Perhaps a few years from now, once they catch up, folks will learn she started out 25 years ahead of her time.

Not all of her work is spot-on, but there is great value in reading what she has set out, and using it as the basis for further reasoning. It makes me wish I knew more category theory, for one. But I think her 'sequent calculus' is a very apt way to describe quantum-mechanical interactions. One almost has to assume reality is inside-out, to get QM right, but using the right logic also works.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Dear Domenico,

I uploaded a new version of my essay, however, the title remained.

Wilhelmus de Wilde re-uploaded the file Wilde_THE_COMPLETELY_UNKNOW.pdf for the essay entitled "THE COMPLETELY UNKNOWN" on 2020-03-25 10:48:58 UTC.

IN MY ESSAY I argue that it will not only be Godel's Completeness Theorems that will be solved but also maybe the creation of Artificial Consciousness.

Thank you

Wilhelmus

pjackson

Domenico,

A great bit of light relief, thanks, but an interesting point, nice to see expressed. Of course I posit the exact opposite! That Aristotle needs updating now we know atoms ARE divisible, and quantum computers then won't prove Kurt wrong! I j hope you'll read & comment.

Thanks for yours, I think it deserves a rather higher score, but it's probably been hit with 1's as mine has. At least they can only do HALF the Boolean pair!

very best

Peter

Domenico Oricchio

Thanks for reading my essay.

Domenico

Michael muteru

hello there thanks for the dialogue. nice work there.i presume that's a new way of discourse.. wonderful old see and rate how anthropic bias ate into physics in my essay -https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3525.thanks

Domenico Oricchio

Thank you for reading my essay.

I am busy in these days, I will take - in the future - a day to read, vote and eventually comment every essay (if the essays are interesting).

Domenico

Jonathan Dickau

I am back to say thank you...

Your essay was enjoyable. I can't give you full credit because your English is too poor and your writing fragmented. But you get high marks for getting the right answer. Indeed; assigning probabilities in truth tables for all premises would allow a truer representation of reality. So you told the simple truth simply.

Quantum computing can or could do this. I am exploring a similar angle to develop subjective search and sort algorithms using the octonions. I'd rather meet R2-D2 and C3P0 one day, than have strong AI develop into strong arm robots like the Terminators. Avoiding that outcome calls for more subtlety of judgment I think, on the part of the machines we build.

Best,

Jonathan

Domenico Oricchio

Thank you for reading my essay, and for constructive criticism.

I was trying to play in language to solve the self-reference problem using quantum logic, quantum computer, but it seems that this is impossible with quantum logic; unless building particular logic gates.

Saluti

Domenico