Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your comments.

About the history of thinking as I treat it in my essay, it is only indicating the short time that we are exploring sciences, it is not the main item of my entry.

Furthermore, I also indicate that this our "social memory3 in our emergent phenomenon Reality. So these memories are also emergent phenomena, originating from Total Simultaneity (and Total Consciousness) the Point Zero. These memories can change each moment the Point Zero of an agent changes (going into the future..which is a choice between an infinity of choices).

History, so, is for me just a moment that can change each new moment...

best reagrds

Wilhelmus

Dear Wanpeng,

Thank you for reading my essay.

I am familiar with the theory of the Lewandowski Group and Caro Rovelli. He argues that space-time is structurally somewhat similar to a fabric, it consists of a large number of very small fibres entangled in LOOPS. My perception of space-time-gravity is that it is an emergent phenomenon originating from Total Simultaneity. The seemingly Flow of time and space as an emergent conscious agent is experiencing is an illusion. It originates from time-space-gravity and dimensionless eternal Point

Regarding the connection that you are indicating to quantum-Planckian, it is indeed the Quantum length and time that are for me (as yet) the borders of our emerging phenomenon called reality. I argue that from an emergent phenomenon the Planck length and time cannot be reached and so they are the limits of our reality (illusion).

best regards

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Dear Wilhelmus,

Many thanks! Please explain what is the ontological structure of the «Point Zero?

Respectfully,

Vladim

Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde,

Doesn't "the real NOW (Point Zero in Total Simultaneity)" contradict to Einstein's Relativity of time and to the fatal so called BU (block universe), not to mention my suggestion:calculate as if there was an accepted natural zero of (elapsed) time?

Eckard

    Thank you for reading my essay Eckard.

    Einstein's relativity theory is a product of the emerged phenomenon called Reality. The real Now in my interpretation in Total Simultaneity. An emergent phenomenon and Total Simultaneity are totally separated entities. So, NO it is not contradicting Einstein. The Block universe is a totality of past, now and future model. So same interpretation.

    I will go read your essay tomorrow.

    best regards

    Wilhelmus

    Hi Wilhelmus,

    I propose a new interpretation of our Reality and the role of consciousness of agents. That would be great indeed.

    In 2009, when we met on LinkedIn this was already our discussion. Since then research in consciousness and its possible physical characteristics has improved, and I think it will improve more, but for now, it is still way ahead.

    Therefore, let me say something to your essay.

    I found it hard to read. It seems to me that you made it so dense because of the essay restrictions. And it is a difficult theme. I thought reading it, what is it to me? What can I do with it? How to make this practical applicable? I am an inventor and I always look for applications. And nothing came up. That is a pity for me. So I have to let it wonder through my mind. TS and Point Zero I like as idea. I will go through it a few times more and then I contact you by email. Thanks for your essay.

    Bests,

    Jos

      Thank you very much, Jos for trying to understand my essay.

      We both come from different worlds, you an inventor of practical things and me just a person being busy with thinking. But that means that both our activities are the same: THINKING.

      I am just giving another NEW interpretation of Physics which resolves a lot of problems they are having nowadays. It is very difficult to do so when you are not affiliated with an institution.

      If you have any specific problems to understand pls do not hesitate to ask me, I am always there for questions and critics.

      best regards

      Wilhelmus

      Dear Vladimir,

      Ontological means the metaphysical basis of "being".

      Being is a process that is time-related.

      In my perception, it is only the past that seems to be time-related and therefore NOT the dimensionless Point Zero.

      Ontology is a method of interpretation in our emerged phenomenon reality that leads to attempts to understanding "being".

      I hope this explains your question.

      best regards

      Wilhelmus

      Hi Wilhelmus,

      Thanks for your appreciation of mine. I've now finished you, 2nd time of asking! I did struggle a little to tie down you meaning at first, but we can think alike so once tuned in I followed your track. Nice to see read a different approach to mine but mutually consistent in so many ways.

      Do you really think we're 'at the beginning'? (p2) As theory is increasingly bogged down in a doctrinal rut, and the planet has growing issues I increasingly fear we may have had our time! But I'm an optimist so keep trying!

      I see you like Everitts "Many Worlds" theory. I confess I find it to etherial when we have practical matters to update. It apparently fell out of fashion due to it's lack of evidence and unfalsifiability, though you'll have seen I do agree the shared 'infinite sets' basis, though I certainly agree with Brouwer who we both cite, and importantly that so called 'collapse is CAUSAL caused by the interaction.

      I struggle to agree the comment you cite about 64 bit Quantum Computers, (partly as I've shown they're probably a pipedream as based on flawed assumptions! but you correctly point back to the Planck units.

      An all round 'well done'. Interesting and original. Good score coming, though I'll save it until I've read more essays. Congrats at your sojurn at No1. I'm a little envious as so few seem to be reading this year!

      Very best

      Peter

        • [deleted]

        • Post #20

        Dear Peter,

        I am NOT AT ALL a fan of Everetts MWI, on the contrary, I introduce a NEW Interpretation, the Total Simultaneity Interpretation (TSI).

        In TSI there are no more split-ups. ONE line is proceeding and te other from the split is turning back into Total Simultaneity.

        Perhaps it was a mistake to say that ALL future and past split-ups are ONE entity TS. It was just comparing Now we don't have any more split-up material realities to explain quantum physics...

        I hope you can understand it better now because this is really the essence of my thinking.

        There are more authors who don't understand this subject, so I think I will prepare an addendum and sent it to the participants of the contest. On the other side I don't know if they see it as "publicity" for my essay, so...

        Thanks for your attention

        Wilhelmus.

        Thank you Steve,

        Pls pay attention to the "Subjective Simultaneity Sphere"

        best regards

        Wilhelmus

        Dear Wilhelmus,

        Your essay is an outstanding analysis as it is with your essay at a past FQX contest. You have completely and qualitatively satisfied the topic of the competition, and therefore deserve a high score, 8. However, after so much of your engagement, I would expect some predictions, best if it is expressed by formulas .

        Having read my essay you will understand my analogy of writing an essay with a forecast of weather.

        It's okay to do a good weather analysis for needs outside the weather forecast, but the crown of a good weather analysis is a good weather forecast.

        After so much of your involvement, I would expect some predictions expressed by formulas. For me, every essay with predictions (formulas) is a challenge, and even if the formulas are insufficiently proven, I give extraordinary rate to those essays. Imagine, who would have known about Newton with his extraordinary analyzes if the analyzes were not followed by predictions.

        Regards Branko

        Thank you, dear Branco, for reading my participation,

        You ask to make "forecasts".(eventually with formula's

        I cannot. Why? First of all my maths is not sufficiently developed, and secondly making predictions in an emergent phenomenon (illusion) is a very difficult thing. Expectations yes because they are based on the past events, that are fluctuations inside our memories.

        I can try to make a prediction: IF we would be able to come closer to the Planck units of space and time, we would also approach our Point Zero (where our free will resides), and so be closer to the future of our life-lines. Not a bad future.

        Thanks

        Wilhelmus

          Comment on comment

          "First of all my maths is not sufficiently developed"

          This is not true for most contest participants but it is only necessary that they have not forgotten the logarithms. Unfortunately, even those who use the highest mathematics do not understand the role of logarithm, so they do not understand my essay.

          "making predictions in an emergent phenomenon (illusion) is a very difficult thing."

          That's true, that's why I worked on the prediction of primordial phenomena (Proton, neutron ...). That is to say, the simple truth is that one must first deal with simpler, then more complicated relationships.

          "I can try to make a prediction" . That is right. One philosopher has tried and calculated that we spend about 5g of mass on cognitive processes throughout our lives. The point is, he is neither a physicist nor a mathematician.

          Regards Branko

          7 days later

          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.

          Respected Wilhelmus de Wilde

          Please check my replies to your post on my essay

          Thank you for confirming your post which I posted on Mar. 6, 2020 @ 10:13

          My login failed and I got it back today....

          Best Regards

          =snp

          "... the past is a momentary deterministic written story in our memories and the future an indeterministic unknowable set of choices to be made by the partial consciousness of the emergent agent. ..." p. 1

          "... Essentially ALL physical theories are thought-models. ..." p. 6

          " ... If we could predict our whole life what would be the purpose of living it? ..." p. 8

          What precisely are choices? What precisely are thoughts?

          According to Steven Weinberg, "The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless."

          '"The First Three Minutes" by Steven Weinberg, 1993, Basic Books, p. 154

          Thank you David for your remarks.

          In my perception choices are not made in the past, the Now is an unreachable moment of the future but it is "here" where the choices are made through the partial consciousness of the agent. We are living in the past...

          Thoughts are an agent's. conscious experiences in the emerging flow of time. Thinking is becoming aware of one's consciousness, so is a meditation where we are trying to come free from the troubles that are consuming our pasts, we are trying to come closer to Total Simultaneity, the POINT Zero that contains the ALL.

          I don't fully agree with Steven Weinberg, because the more we "think" we understand the more we understand that this comprehension is only an infinite little part of ALL there is to understand. You become aware of the relativity of human life towards the whole shebang of our universe (micro and macro). It seems then pointless what your thoughts are adding, they are only a sparkle in infinity. But then I remember that an infinite line without a specific point is no more that specific line but becomes two lines. Then I think that even my minor thoughts, my whole life, is NOT wholly pointless, but is needed to bring two infinities together...

          just a thought

          Best regards

          Wilhelmus

          7 days later

          Dear Wilhelmus,

          You wrote a provocative and speculative, but also interesting and nice Essay. I have a lot of fun in writing it. In particular, I understood the meaning of "Total Simultaneity" which was not clear to me in your comments in my FQXi Essay page. I also agree with your conclusion that "Undecidability, Unaccountability and Unpredictability will always be an essential part of the freedom of our lives." I am going to give you a well deserved high score. Good luck in the Contest!

          Cheers, Ch.